Safer Journeys for Motorcycling

[Brian407]

Brian, you're coming off as an arm-chair shot caller, identifying problems for other to solve, without specific solutions.

Not at all, i'm more than happy to roll the sleeves up and be involved, problem is that I havent yet seen anyone come up with a specific issue to confront, just lots of generalisations of 'wanting to be the masters of our own destiny' which we all know simply isnt achievable.

[Berries]

That's it in a nutshell. Specific issues vary between people. Some hate cheesecutters, others don't have a problem with wire rope barriers. Some think the ACC component should be the same for all road users, others think that there is an increased risk in riding on two wheels so why shouldn't there be a different levy? Some are ATGATT preachers, some even wear hi-viz. Others just want to ride.

As one of those "pricks who just wants to ride" as caseye so eloquently put it, I find it hard to think of an issue that would cause to me join in in a group protest.* I will ride around/deal with/get over roading issues like shit surfaces and wire rope, I will ignore ATGATT and hi-viz if ever legislated. I just want to ride, and at the moment I can't see anything on the horizon that will stop me doing so.



*Actually, if there is a ride to get shot of MotoNZ and get back my $30pa I might be tempted. Fucking pointless exercise that was/is.

[GrayWolf]

Your not even man enough to risk riding without rego. Why the hell should we listen to you.
You can file all the paper work you want. At the end of the day your investing in their ideas 100%.

In your words, If you can't complain if you don't vote......well you can't complain if your paying for someone to screw you either.

One thing that comes with age should be wisdom. 30yrs ago? I would have given much the same response as you. Now I realise that by seeming to 'toe the line' I can actualy gain more ground than being a direct rebel and chest poker of beaurocrats. At the end of the day, the Minister is a FIGUREHEAD, he takes the flack/glory/blame/fall/rise in profile.. but all the work is performed by the civil servants in the background. It is these 'grey men' that you are truly fighting, and they will hide behind or be obscured by the figurehead. THey are only going to respond to 'pressure' applied by either the minister, or 'public opinion/perception'. If you dont pay your rego and attack them? they have an instant 'out' for any discourse or negotiations.

So how does defiance of the law by one or two help the cause. Only thing that does is fatten the coffers of the consolidated fund. If you want to be taken seriously by 'the system' learn to work within it. Widespread civil disobediance... well thats another matter.

Agreed, I lived in the UK when the whole country reacted to the Poll Tax.. it took almost 2 years of pressure, mass I repeat MASS non payment, and in the end actual civil disruptions to alter the situation. I have mentioned before the "leg protector' bill introduced by Peter Bottomly (minister for transport in the UK) ONlY a concerted, research proven, with several pressure groups working together to overturn the proposal.

Okay, i get that, but I cant help wonder about how the message has been getting out to the hamlets and sheep stations. I'm aware of the fight because I spend a fair amount of time on the Internet (nature of my job until recently), but i'm also aware of many others who dont frequent the net, and are simply not aware that groups such as MAG, AAG, MSC, Bronz etc exist. How are you getting the message to those people.

I consider myself an average motorcyclist. I've been riding for almost 40 years, I read the newspaper most days, I listen to news as often as possible and I try to attend at least three rallies a year, finances permitting. I dont spend a lot of time at bike shops and dont subscribe to any bike mags. I read them when in waiting rooms, or when they're on the smoko room etc, but if it wasnt for the net, and the occasional story in a mag I wouldnt even be aware of the MSC, and I know plenty that arent.

My point is that maybe the message delivery system needs to be looked at, then the message itself needs looked at. Most people have little tolerance for long winded arguments in political speak, thats why the average man thinks that politicians are prats. If you have a 2 word message, use 5 words to get it across, not 200. You'll have lost most people at 20, and the majority of the remaining will give up at 50. Those die hards that stay till the last are already converted and theres nothing to be gained by trying to convince them. Underlying principle is KISS, and i'm sure you know what that means.

Yes there has be a co-ordinated approach, but first you have to find what most people are willing to support, and most people dont become passionate about a cause until they can actually see how it will directly affect them, so far the arguements presented have been far too general for most people to grasp. Be specific, and confront issues one at a time.

I fully expect this post to be met with howls of dismissave indignace and 'yes but' reponses, but if thats all that happens, at least it's ensured that the issues are alive and still being talked about.

Yes BUT
Some of the biggest issues IS the approach towards meeting beaurocrats etc. Often (Using Stoney as a good example) It DOES need an up front/loud/almost belligerant or agressive stance to activate people. I dont think anyone can decry the end result of Stoney and Co's work if you look at the Bikehoi.. However, there also sometimes needs to be a 'handover'? to those who can 'talk quietly' and argue beaurocraticaly when the meeting with Polititions are no longer 'media obvious'. Polititions LOVE media exposure it's their meat and drink. So often when you watch these MP's at rallies, they say a lot of words, that sound good, sound as if they are actualy taking on board what you are saying. However if you listen carefully they say a lot of 'nothing'. (A classic example is the MP when they promise a return to 'good family value's' in their manifesto.... Really? Do they actualy spell out? what these values are? NO! They've said what you WANT to hear, traditional family values? Ask a Maori, an Indian Asian, A Chinese, English, Pakeha, Samoan.. they will all have a different idea on 'family values'. So the MP has in the listeners mind actualy promised you all the same thing, WITHOUT saying what he means). To return to my point, I watched the public meeting with interest, there were those 'on the steps' who did rally the crowd, who DID get the MP's and media to respond... There IMHO were also a few excellent but wasted rescources that day... Again IMO in particular, there was a gentleman in his 60's who was a school teacher and a motorcyclist of many years.. THIS is the sort of face you need to deal with the 'unseen' meetings. it's the face that the 'grey men/councillors etc' will respond to. BUt then the 'elder' of us will be seen as not 'proactive' not rebellious enough by the younger people. It is one of life lesson's.. when young everything is black and white, if it's wrong? Then fix it. As I got older, I started to see so many shades of grey in situations. Motorcycling has been untill the recent 'baby boomer' return to riding, a young man's domian in the majority. It is easy for polititian's to manipulate the situation by simply showing a 'rowdy gathering' of the' horrid bikie types', or the smashed up sprot bike with the racing suited rider lying smashed up..... Building public perception. However, have a grey haired quiet spoken articulate man/woman? There is no media milage to be gained, or public display to show...
Thats my idea's on this..... and I am simply voicing MY thoughts and I am neither decrying, targetting, or bellitling any person. I will say again those mentioned by name did a bloody good job rousing the 'masses' to protest.

[Brian407]

Totally agree, but perhaps I should clarify a little. My 5 words message approach is aimed at getting riders on board to support a message to the politicians. Your 60's something, articulate, school teacher talking to the Grey Men in suits, without media is absolutely the right way to get the message to the law makers. But first things first, and the first thing is to find an issue that all (or at least many) will support, and it's my belief that as of yet that issue hasnt been found, and Berries has highlighted that perfectly.

[NONONO]

How's this for short sharp and to the point;
"Riders Are Voters Too".
Got us nowhere because we could not get a consensus on how to use it or who controlled it. It also came with the MAG tag (although it was pushed out to any that would support it) and that was unacceptable to some.
It spoke to numbers. When we met with senior politicians they were quite concerned about the numbers we believed we could reach with such a message, we failed.
It also spoke to action, the doing, as Cas states. The act of making your vote count, again we failed.

KISS?
ACC hikes, No!
Motorcycle Safety Levy, No!
Motorcycle Safety Levy Establishment Committee, No!
How simple can it be?

But as with all things the simple message often has deeper meaning. For example. ACC was and is being prepared for sale, Woodhouse was and has been dismantled. Some of us opposed the above, some thought it was a great idea, others cared less. It was and is all tied together. Consensus is never simple. We were all aware that the nonsense being put forward by Smith and Judge was just that, nonsense. We countered it with Professor Lamb's research, and a lot of our own (Bogan is the man)again we failed.
But, we have not given up as individuals, so if you got something, bring it on. Let's try again.

[Katman]

For us to gain the sympathetic (read concerned) ear of the politicians we need to gain far greater public support.

To gain public support we need to be seen as existing within the bounds expected by society.

We have much to clean up in our own back yard before we can hope for anyone to take us seriously.

[swbarnett]

Are you seriously suggesting you don't believe there's any need (or room) for improvement?

Yes and No.

I do agree that, as a group, we could do better. However, I don't believe it is within the realms of human nature for "us" to improve sufficiently to get the politicians off our backs. I think it would be far better to attack the prejudice than ourselves.

[swbarnett]

With the expectation that their very survival may depend on it ... I would think "Human nature" may have to adapt to different thinking ...

That's the problem. Human nature is to hold the "won't happen to me" attitude until it does. Because kids are no longer allowed to climb trees they still believe themselves to be invincible when they get on to motorised transport.

[Katman]

I do agree that, as a group, we could do better. However, I don't believe it is within the realms of human nature for "us" to improve sufficiently to get the politicians off our backs. I think it would be far better to attack the prejudice than ourselves.

So where exactly do you think the prejudice of the term 'temporary New Zealander' stemmed from?

[NONONO]

For us to gain the sympathetic (read concerned) ear of the politicians we need to gain far greater public support.

To gain public support we need to be seen as existing within the bounds expected by society.

We have much to clean up in our own back yard before we can hope for anyone to take us seriously.

Not again!
I exist within the bounds expected by society as you put it.
I ride LEGALLY, that is, I have a license, the bike's warranted.
I go even further, I have full insurance and keep the bike well serviced. My license is clean.
As far as I'm concerned that's enough.
You keep putting this CUOOBY argument in the wrong context.
Yes, no one wants to see bikers down, however that's a matter of safety and personal choice. If your argument held water then surely the awful number of fatalities over the Xmas period would warrant the raising of ACC levies on cars?
Becoming shiny, bright paragons of virtue will not change the governments attitude to bikers and motorcycling in general, in any way. Neither will it alter the public's perspective, they simply do not give a toss, it does not concern them. They are not bikers.
If, by any chance they did become interested, or the govt decided to act equitably (if we CUOOBY'd) such a change would be generational. By that time motorcycling will have changed way beyond what we understand it to be.
Your argument simply mirrors the one put forward by Smith and Judge, that the levy hikes are justified because it's our own fault. Only the remedy differs.

[Katman]

Your argument simply mirrors the one put forward by Smith and Judge, that the levy hikes are justified because it's our own fault. Only the remedy differs.

It's an argument supported by a far greater number than just Smith and Judge.

And the beauty of my remedy is that it doesn't cost us a cent.

[NONONO]

Worn down by persistence...you never answer the question, simply re state your position.
Anyway, FFS! Happy New Year Katman. Time for a ride before the rain starts again.

[swbarnett]

So where exactly do you think the prejudice of the term 'temporary New Zealander' stemmed from?

An emotional misinterpretation of the statistics. An inability to see past the few that get hurt to the many that go about their rides without incident on a regular basis.

[Katman]

An emotional misinterpretation of the statistics. An inability to see past the few that get hurt to the many that go about their rides without incident on a regular basis.

[Katman]

And the major problem with any of the motorcycling lobby groups that have appeared supposedly for our benefit is that they see anything resembling compromise as simply showing weakness.

The hard man biker approach is not going to win us any friends among those in power who could further our cause.

Perhaps forceful lobbying to improve the standard of motorcycle training in the country would go far further than our current bitching and moaning about everything and everyone other than ourselves.