Northern toll road? No rego? Fines?

[Edbear]

Exactly how much damage does a bike do to our roads, dude?.

That's entirely NOT the point, is it?

"ACC is facing huge demand on resources and if you stop and think about the costs of an accident, and multiply that by the number of accidents you may get some idea.

I must also point out that recent months have done the biking community no favours at all in its cries for "fairer" levies. Far too many idiots are killing themselves and being caught doing ridiculous speeds and riding unwarranted/unregistered bikes.

The "problem" of what to do with the sheer number of idiot bikers is rather going to have the effect of a harder clamp down, not of seeing the authorities take us seriously! "

"That's your choice and you're obviously prepared to take the consequences. I would though, encourage you to be even-handed and take it to the muppets who are spoiling your arguments by riding stupidly and killing and maiming themselves to the point where you are likely to be rebuffed by TPTB based on the news in recent months. How many bikers have died or been seriously injured lately, NOT due to inattentive drivers? How many have hit the headlines by excesive speed or dangerous/inconsiderate riding? Far too many if we want to have any hope of convincing ACC we deserve lower fees!"

[Ocean1]

That's entirely NOT the point, is it?

No?

I'm not commenting on the fairness or otherwise of the ACC levy, but on the costs associated with motoring.

So if the ACC component of our registration fee is supposedly related to that cost centre then why isn’t the rest of it?

Again, how much does it cost to repair roads due to motorcycle traffic?

Or do they just want to both save the cake and eat it?

'Cause if that's OK then I'll be restructuring the standard terms and conditions for my business pretty much straight away.

[Edbear]

No?



So if the ACC component of our registration fee is supposedly related to that cost centre then why isn’t the rest of it?

Again, how much does it cost to repair roads due to motorcycle traffic?

Or do they just want to both save the cake and eat it?

'Cause if that's OK then I'll be restructuring the standard terms and conditions for my business pretty much straight away.

You obviously misunderstood. The costs were in relation to running our own vehicles and registration is part of that cost. Most here are disputing the ACC levy part of the registration fee, and it is this aspect that I was referring to.

[duckonin]

That's entirely NOT the point, is it?

"ACC is facing huge demand on resources and if you stop and think about the costs of an accident, and multiply that by the number of accidents you may get some idea.

I must also point out that recent months have done the biking community no favours at all in its cries for "fairer" levies. Far too many idiots are killing themselves and being caught doing ridiculous speeds and riding unwarranted/unregistered bikes.

The "problem" of what to do with the sheer number of idiot bikers is rather going to have the effect of a harder clamp down, not of seeing the authorities take us seriously! "

"That's your choice and you're obviously prepared to take the consequences. I would though, encourage you to be even-handed and take it to the muppets who are spoiling your arguments by riding stupidly and killing and maiming themselves to the point where you are likely to be rebuffed by TPTB based on the news in recent months. How many bikers have died or been seriously injured lately, NOT due to inattentive drivers? How many have hit the headlines by excesive speed or dangerous/inconsiderate riding? Far too many if we want to have any hope of convincing ACC we deserve lower fees!"

Gezze Ed didn't think the ACC could pull the wool over your eyes..Acc isn't a charity it is an accident compensator, and is not broke at all, the investments ACC has would make your eyes boggle, so if there is such HUGE demand on resources then they should call some of the dollars back home, but no they increase every persons costs instead simple for them it is a stroke of the pen, no need to consult us at all..

"Idiots killing them selves" nope one or two maybe but certainly not all were idiots..

why try and convince ACC to lower the fees for motorcyclists, it is never I repeat never going to happen as long as your arse points to the ground,..

Read more overseas newspapers Ed it may enlighten you, for when another country raises charges then a short while later the mutts here do the same, recently our GST went to 15% reason England got away with lifting their VAT to 20% some time back.

Motorcyclist are not as agressive as you have pointed out not by a long shot !! Enjoy your day..

[Edbear]

Gezze Ed didn't think the ACC could pull the wool over your eyes..Acc isn't a charity it is an accident compensator, and is not broke at all, the investments ACC has would make your eyes boggle, so if there is such HUGE demand on resources then they should call some of the dollars back home, but no they increase every persons costs instead simple for them it is a stroke of the pen, no need to consult us at all..

"Idiots killing them selves" nope one or two maybe but certainly not all were idiots..

why try and convince ACC to lower the fees for motorcyclists, it is never I repeat never going to happen as long as your arse points to the ground,..

Read more overseas newspapers Ed it may enlighten you, for when another country raises charges then a short while later the mutts here do the same, recently our GST went to 15% reason England got away with lifting their VAT to 20% some time back.

Motorcyclist are not as agressive as you have pointed out not by a long shot !! Enjoy your day..

It's as always, a case of the few spoiling it for the many, though isn't it? Too many headlines lately, regardless of the percentage compared to the number of bikes on the road. It's the news headlines that catch the attention of both the powers that be and the general public.

You and I and most other bikers may be generally quiet and law-abiding, not drawing attention to ourselves, but that doesn't make the news, or get the attention of those who make the decisions. Now with the big beef being about the ACC levy, such headlines and incidents are not helping us are they?

[davereid]

It's as always, a case of the few spoiling it for the many, though isn't it? Too many headlines lately, regardless of the percentage compared to the number of bikes on the road. It's the news headlines that catch the attention of both the powers that be and the general public.

You and I and most other bikers may be generally quiet and law-abiding, not drawing attention to ourselves, but that doesn't make the news, or get the attention of those who make the decisions. Now with the big beef being about the ACC levy, such headlines and incidents are not helping us are they?

I think you are way off track Ed.

Some people are idiots regardless of what they ride or drive.

For my money, I think I drive carefully, albeit not particularly skillfully in and on all my vehicles.

When I choose a motorcycle instead of my V8, I don't become a worse person, or a worse driver.

All that happens is, that I become more vulnerable should I or another person make a mistake on the road.

ACC like to present this as "greater risk", and indeed it is. But the cause of this risk is vulnerability, not me suddenly becoming an risky driver.

And indeed, the motorcycle has a major redeeming feature, which is that even though I increase my vulnerability should anyone make a mistake, I also decrease the chances of me injuring an innocent person.

So for me the issue is do I want a system that penalises the vulnerable ?

I know that no matter what vulnerable person I eliminate, there will always be a next target.

So, I see then, that a system that identifies the vulnerable, and taxes them out of existence, is social engineering of the worst type.

There may be health and safety reasons to do it. They might even add up mathematically.

But my life is a rich place. Because of some of the things I do that are not best practice. In the transport world its my motorcycle that makes me rich, at the expense of being a poor safety choice.

I don't think that ACC have the right to socially engineer motorcycling out of existence. I want my kids and grandkids to live long lives.

But not by locking them in a cotton wool cell in the name of risk.

So no amount of math gives an insurance system designed to help the vulnerable, the right to become the tool of their elimination.

[Edbear]

I think you are way off track Ed.

...SNIP...So no amount of math gives an insurance system designed to help the vulnerable, the right to become the tool of their elimination.

No I think we're talking about two different perspectives. I agree completely that the original purpose of ACC was a "no fault" scheme where everyone had access to treatment and compensation regardless of status, as most people couldn't afford private insurance or to sue for compensation through the courts. Unlike an insurance company which may load premiums to risk, ACC was intended to be equitable to all.

I have commented from the first discussions on the increase in levy for motorcyclists that ACC were heading away from its initial purpose and becoming just as insurance companies loading the "premium" to the greatest cost, regardless of fault. Certainly, motorcycle related injuries may cost more than car related, or any other cause, but as you say, that is due to vulnerability, not fault. I still believe that the majority of injuries are not the rider's fault, and the blame may rest with the car driver or the road conditions. (My own accident was investigated and the result was the fault lay with the road condition, ie: oil, not on my driving or the condition of my van. Had I been on my bike, the injuries may well have been more serious).

What I am annoyed about, is the number of recent headlines where the biker was very much at fault either having an accident or speeding. This is what gets the attention of TPTB and hurts any case we as bikers may present against the levy. Yes, they may be a minority but isn't that usually the case where the general public suffer due to the actions of the few?

I don't agree with those who believe bike registration itself should be boycotted, but each person must make their own decision on that and be prepared to take the consequences.

[Ocean1]

You obviously misunderstood.

I asked a simple question, yet mistaking it for argument you can only suppose I've misunderstood?

Do try to stop being such an arrogant prick Ed. I'll ask it again, see if you can catch it this time.

If the ACC component of our registration fee is supposedly “user pays” then why isn’t the rest of it? Why isn’t the cost associated with general maintenance say, for example fuck all? Because that’s approximately what the motorcycle user’s share of the cost is.

Your turn, I’ll make it easy, choose one:
Because motorcycles really do inflict as much maintenance costs on roading infrastructure as cars and light trucks. What, with hundreds of kilometres of special motorcyclist-safe median barriers required every year and the compulsory fuel leak testing regime required of every road going vehicle at WOF time. Etc etc.

Because it was originally set up to be simple to administer in a computer-less age, same for everyone, and while it’s OK for changes in policy to INCREASE fees there’s no way in hell any road user fee is ever going to decrease for any reason whatsoever.

Because motorcycle ACC levies fit into a class of taxes which are either punitive or politically convenient and are often attempted to be “sold” as “user pays” as opposed to the more normal “wealth tax”.

[Edbear]

I asked a simple question, yet mistaking it for argument you can only suppose I've misunderstood?

Do try to stop being such an arrogant prick Ed. I'll ask it again, see if you can catch it this time.

”.

Not being arrogant, mate, I wasn't addressing the registration fee per se, only the ACC levy. I haven't looked at the overall fee structure and compared it with other road user fees. I said that the registration fee is a part of our motoring costs as vehicle owners and if anyone doesn't pay it they must accept the consequences.

There may be a lot of things we don't like or agree with and many costs and charges we believe are unfairly applied, but the fact is we live in a society which is governed by our peers and rules and regulations are set by discussion and agreement by elected representatives. All we can do as individuals is express our views or remove ourselves from society. Otherwise we can refuse to comply with the law and accept the consequences without complaint.

[duckonin]

[QUOTE

=Edbear;1129899393]It's as always, a case of the few spoiling it for the many, though isn't it?

You and I and most other bikers may be generally quiet and law-abiding, not drawing attention to ourselves, but that doesn't make the news, or get the attention of those who make the decisions. Now with the big beef being about the ACC levy, such headlines and incidents are not helping us are they?[/QUOTE]

Yes to the first Q Ed not sure how to do this multi thing so it is a 'no' to your 2nd Q. ACC really do not give a shit about what goes on and who gets killed ect ect, they are only trying to justifiy to the public WHY they are increasing the levies, they used the bikes as a smoke screen and at the end lo and behold my 4x4 and car got almost the same tax added to their rego...Gezzz 500 plus killed in car accidents per year how many injuries I wonder (cost's to ACC) rehabilitaion to those injured in cars trucks ect amount to way more than bikes ACC prattle on about how expensive it is to fix a "broken leg on a motorcyclist" but in reality a broken leg is a broken leg is it not? enjoy your night...

[miloking]

We can argue about it until we are blue in the face...true is ACC DOES NOT need more money now and didnt need them before levy increase, raised rego fees FOR ALL OF US (inlcuding deisels, 4x4s etc) are unfair at best and labeling them as daylight robbery isnt far off...

I say we need more bikes a) with rego on hold b) with dealer plates c) owners with multiple bikes sharing one plate on all of them etc.

What are they going to do...fine all bikes for no rego?
(Sadly even that is still cheaper option)