Gareth Morgan in the Herald on ACC levies for bikers

[Katman]

Give Motorcyclists the opportunity to upskill, improve accident statistics of 'self inflicted' incidents then if after say 5yrs plus? Then if there IS a proven need for intervention by an authority to improve that safety record. They can at least with a clear conscience say..."we gave you the chance"

Motorcyclists have had that opportunity for many years now.

They've just been too pig-headed to pay any heed to the critical nature of the situation we all face.

What makes you think they are any more open minded now?

[MrKiwi]

Apology then for the assumption...


You say most of this has been 'said before' but is useful in one thread.... so can we ask, if this has been voiced before, why are none of these concerns being 'openly' debated or investigated? Like I would, and guess most of us here; if presented with a healthy factual debate... (oh hang on this is KiwiBiker ) I feel there could be forward movement of some description. In the end according to the 'brief' MotoNZ is supposed to represent us, the Motorcyclist. At present it really does appear that, having been given the brief... it is being pursued 'in house'. Many of us out here also have decades of riding experience, and in other countries. Yet we are seemingly not expected/competent/viable enough to have input into our future?
No one from the 'pro hi vis' side of the arguement can show quantitative research that proves absolute hi-vis will indeed save lives, just like compulsory headlights 'reduced' fatal accidents. Qualitative research is simply based on 'personal perception/feelings', not on 'hard facts'.
My simple belief is this..... Education should come before Legislation....
Give Motorcyclists the opportunity to upskill, improve accident statistics of 'self inflicted' incidents then if after say 5yrs plus? Then if there IS a proven need for intervention by an authority to improve that safety record. They can at least with a clear conscience say..."we gave you the chance"

Right now how I would 'percieve' MotoNZ ACC etc is similar to the current Govt's thinking.... you voted us in, so you already accepted our policies (asset sales)
except we DIDNT vote MotoNZ in. I for one certainly do not accept this arguement 'for' over Hi-vis for a starter. it is not researched as a specific in the motorcycle environment, and to attempt to apply thinking that 'it can be seen roadside' when worn by road workers and emergency services, or even in my workplace (kiwirail) the wearer is 90% of the time either stationary, in a localalised situation or moving slowly. They are NOT moving at any real speed and changing 'location' rapidly or, merging into (blending) traffic or rapidly moving in and out of differing levels of light/shadow, colouring or 'background'.
When and I mean WHEN I see Quantitative statistical research performed on motorcycle specific hi-vis, conducted in 'real world' situations in all types of environments/weather/traffic levels/road and weather conditions which proves there is an even 20% improvement in accident figures or proven conspicuity? I will join the 'dayglo' club.

As an obvious question... if a high percentage of our 'accident' rate is 'self inflicted' (loss of control) with no other vehicle involved... how in any real conscience can a group who is to 'represent' motorcyclists NOT be yelling LOUD, proud and public-ally in the media for advanced training to be sanctioned, way before this 'political donkey' and hi vis IS a political vehicle. From my limited understanding the traditional view of Govt/Police is that advanced training creates overconfidence.... surely MotoNZ could be most excellently employed in getting THAT donkey to move its lazy arse in the right direction?

Yours (and I guess you can say a cynical A hole)
GW

I'm probably not going to be able to answer all the points you made, but here are some views from me..

The main issues raised by many riders, whether on this forum or elsewhere, are:
- increased rider skills where advanced rider training is critical (the Council does not buy into the view that advanced rider skills creates over confidence - how can it when one of the key advanced rider training skills is self awareness of your capabilities).
- better awareness and acceptance by riders that they need to look out for themselves and take ownership for their actions - at all times.
- need to improve roads, their design, construction and maintenance so that they cater also for bikes (noting roads are primarily built for trucks and cars).
- more across the board by riders to have and use the right protective gear (especially scooter riders and no offence to scooter riders but it does appear as a group of riders they typically use less protective gear)
- need to change the licencing and registration system for mopeds
- more awareness and tolerance from all road users that the road is a shared space (cuts both ways - personally some of my scariest moments have come from other bike riders but most come from bigger vehicles with more than two wheels)
- increased conspicuity of bikes and riders (and I'm not talking about high viz vest here although a lot of people say we should wear them but a lot of riders say to hell with that. I recently had to replace my jacket which was red and black but my only choice for the range I bought was black with a small amount of reflective material or one with lots of high viz day glow green. I couldn't bring myself to wear so much high viz so I got the black jacket. One of my best riding mates won't ride without high viz whereas I prefer to make my bike more conspicuous and ride like no-one sees me).

MSAC has begun work in most of these areas. Progress is not as fast as we would like. Dialogue with a wide range of riders could improve.

I would point out that our work on conspicuity is not about investigating high viz gear. It is about trying to understand what the options might be to have bikes, or riders or bikes and riders together more visible. The area we are looking into hinges on the notion an object is visible against a background when you know where that object is whereas something that is conspicuous stands out against the background when you are not looking for it. The brief for this project was quite clear that we want to explore a wide range of views on how to make the bike and rider more conspicuous and we were not interested in a narrow investigation centred only on conspicuous clothing.

Rider training is something as a Council we have discussed and have begun working with agencies to see if we can bring in new training opportunities to compliment those that already exist.

Work is well advanced but not yet completed on a guide for road controlling authorities on making our roads motorcycle friendly. This project has been slower than we would have liked.

Most of this work is on our website although the website has not been updated recently. This will change soon.

I accept that MSAC is not the flavour of the month for many riders. I allowed my name to go forward to be part of the Council because first and foremost I am a motorcyclists with a deep interest in road safety and secondly because while we could argue about whether we should or should not be giving up $30 a year per bike for the time being we are and I would rather be part of a rider council trying to influence how that money is spent than leave it up to just officials. I note the range of views expressed in this website and the tendency for some to aimlessly criticise those on the Council. I tend to ignore aimless criticism but I do take the time to consider well aimed criticism.

The reason I come onto this forum (which I have mentioned several times) is so I keep myself aware of views of a wider range of bikers than I normally communicate with. I'll keep doing that.

[GrayWolf]

Motorcyclists have had that opportunity for many years now.

They've just been too pig-headed to pay any heed to the critical nature of the situation we all face.

What makes you think they are any more open minded now?

Sometimes societies, groups, cultures have to reach the 'tipping' point before they will really accept the need to change. Just like the use of oil... we KNOW it's a finite rescource, they have said we have more than likely passed 'max production' ability and oil WILL become an ever increasing expensive commodity.... Yet what do we do (world wide) buy and by buying enable manufacturers to produce ever increasing high power, rather than using high economy technology.
Only when there is a finite oil crisis and its inevitable there are concequences in the immediate future, will man step up and alter the behaviour

Not really any different to 'motorcyclists' is it Kat? We are (maybe) approaching a tipping point.....

[Katman]

Not really any different to 'motorcyclists' is it Kat? We are (maybe) approaching a tipping point.....

I agree entirely (although I actually think we reached tipping point some time ago).

I sincerely hope that we will see a reversal from where motorcyclists have brought motorcycling to.

I suppose time will tell.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I'm probably not going to be able to answer all the points you made, but here are some views from me..

The main issues raised by many riders, whether on this forum or elsewhere, are:
- increased rider skills where advanced rider training is critical (the Council does not buy into the view that advanced rider skills creates over confidence - how can it when one of the key advanced rider training skills is self awareness of your capabilities).
- better awareness and acceptance by riders that they need to look out for themselves and take ownership for their actions - at all times.
- need to improve roads, their design, construction and maintenance so that they cater also for bikes (noting roads are primarily built for trucks and cars).
- more across the board by riders to have and use the right protective gear (especially scooter riders and no offence to scooter riders but it does appear as a group of riders they typically use less protective gear)
- need to change the licencing and registration system for mopeds
- more awareness and tolerance from all road users that the road is a shared space (cuts both ways - personally some of my scariest moments have come from other bike riders but most come from bigger vehicles with more than two wheels)
- increased conspicuity of bikes and riders (and I'm not talking about high viz vest here although a lot of people say we should wear them but a lot of riders say to hell with that. I recently had to replace my jacket which was red and black but my only choice for the range I bought was black with a small amount of reflective material or one with lots of high viz day glow green. I couldn't bring myself to wear so much high viz so I got the black jacket. One of my best riding mates won't ride without high viz whereas I prefer to make my bike more conspicuous and ride like no-one sees me).

MSAC has begun work in most of these areas. Progress is not as fast as we would like. Dialogue with a wide range of riders could improve.

I would point out that our work on conspicuity is not about investigating high viz gear. It is about trying to understand what the options might be to have bikes, or riders or bikes and riders together more visible. The area we are looking into hinges on the notion an object is visible against a background when you know where that object is whereas something that is conspicuous stands out against the background when you are not looking for it. The brief for this project was quite clear that we want to explore a wide range of views on how to make the bike and rider more conspicuous and we were not interested in a narrow investigation centred only on conspicuous clothing.

Rider training is something as a Council we have discussed and have begun working with agencies to see if we can bring in new training opportunities to compliment those that already exist.

Work is well advanced but not yet completed on a guide for road controlling authorities on making our roads motorcycle friendly. This project has been slower than we would have liked.

Most of this work is on our website although the website has not been updated recently. This will change soon.

I accept that MSAC is not the flavour of the month for many riders. I allowed my name to go forward to be part of the Council because first and foremost I am a motorcyclists with a deep interest in road safety and secondly because while we could argue about whether we should or should not be giving up $30 a year per bike for the time being we are and I would rather be part of a rider council trying to influence how that money is spent than leave it up to just officials. I note the range of views expressed in this website and the tendency for some to aimlessly criticise those on the Council. I tend to ignore aimless criticism but I do take the time to consider well aimed criticism.

The reason I come onto this forum (which I have mentioned several times) is so I keep myself aware of views of a wider range of bikers than I normally communicate with. I'll keep doing that.

Well said 'that' man.

[Oscar]

Motorcyclists have had that opportunity for many years now.

They've just been too pig-headed to pay any heed to the critical nature of the situation we all face.

What makes you think they are any more open minded now?

"Motorcyclists" don't exist.
There's no such group.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Sometimes societies, groups, cultures have to reach the 'tipping' point before they will really accept the need to change. Just like the use of oil... we KNOW it's a finite rescource, they have said we have more than likely passed 'max production' ability and oil WILL become an ever increasing expensive commodity.... Yet what do we do (world wide) buy and by buying enable manufacturers to produce ever increasing high power, rather than using high economy technology.
Only when there is a finite oil crisis and its inevitable there are concequences in the immediate future, will man step up and alter the behaviour

Not really any different to 'motorcyclists' is it Kat? We are (maybe) approaching a tipping point.....

An incentive (by way of ACC levy discount) would make the difference

[GrayWolf]

I'm probably not going to be able to answer all the points you made, but here are some views from me..

The main issues raised by many riders, whether on this forum or elsewhere, are:
- increased rider skills where advanced rider training is critical (the Council does not buy into the view that advanced rider skills creates over confidence - how can it when one of the key advanced rider training skills is self awareness of your capabilities).
- better awareness and acceptance by riders that they need to look out for themselves and take ownership for their actions - at all times.
- need to improve roads, their design, construction and maintenance so that they cater also for bikes (noting roads are primarily built for trucks and cars).
Agreed to above, so the Council/MotoNZ etc will actively be seen advocating the cause for training? I'll repeat from my understanding its the Govt/Police that have taken the 'overconfidence' stance... surely here the council/MotoNZ can indeed advocate for improvement in this attitude?
- more across the board by riders to have and use the right protective gear (especially scooter riders and no offence to scooter riders but it does appear as a group of riders they typically use less protective gear)
- need to change the licencing and registration system for mopeds
I'd even go further and push for a stepped licence system similar to Europe, and remove the automatic right to a scooter from car drivers anyway. We are about to get the 'LAM's' bikes... so there is already the 'acceptance' for a power/weight system, a simple CC rating is not effective, my own bike is high CC 'low' power. I'd also agree 100% with applying 'pressure' even a (worthwhile) legal requirement, to get people wearing at least a minimum of correct gear, even on mopeds/scooters.

"wear so much high viz so I got the black jacket. One of my best riding mates won't ride without high viz whereas I prefer to make my bike more conspicuous and ride like no-one sees me)."
Yes the 'hi brite' jackets are somewhat powerful, but as I said IF it is proven by real world statistics to really give a decent improvement? I'd 'man up' to wearing it.

MSAC has begun work in most of these areas. Progress is not as fast as we would like. Dialogue with a wide range of riders could improve.

I would point out that our work on conspicuity is not about investigating high viz gear. It is about trying to understand what the options might be to have bikes, or riders or bikes and riders together more visible. The area we are looking into hinges on the notion an object is visible against a background when you know where that object is whereas something that is conspicuous stands out against the background when you are not looking for it. The brief for this project was quite clear that we want to explore a wide range of views on how to make the bike and rider more conspicuous and we were not interested in a narrow investigation centred only on conspicuous clothing.

This is the statement that I know we are not going to agree on... it reads as.... we as the council have decided that conspicuity IS the answer, one way or another. And there's the 'rub' there isnt any factual research to substantiate the statement. It's on 'belief' (quantitative). You are correct that hi vis enables you to see an object but it has limited uses as I explained in an earlier post. I can assure you as a Locomotive Engineer, The thing that WORKS is the fact the Hi vis is basically static and we ARE looking for it. Its part of the expectation of trains, expect trains/workers/ etc at any time, even when they are NOT expected. I can also vouch that the concentration we have to use is higher than on the road especially in the urban network system.
Now here;s the 'anti' arguement,,,, if the average driver has the stereo going, the cell phone (remotely operated) YEH right, kids playing up, shopping list on their mind, shit day at work, going to an important meeting.. all the 'usual' things a motorist experiences? There is the 'hole' in the conspicuity arguement,,,, when driving a train rule 6 is often quoted.... driver distraction, no radio (apart from communication) no one in the cab, Concentration is expected to be completely on the task of driving, so the brain is not processing extemporaneous information already and has the reserve to process extra external stimuli. The average Motorist is driving on 'remote' as a brain function. I will assume you have read the research that the cerebellum has an amazing amount of input into learnt motor/cognitive behaviours, far beyond the basic motor skills it was traditionally thought to operate but its at a subconscious level. So most drivers ARE operating on 'remote', so why would the conspicuity etc suddenly snap them back into full attention?
So here's a wee thought... Hoodies... yup real good for peripheral vision as a driver, wonder what the reaction would be if car drivers were legislated to not have a hoodie up in the car? Probably the same reaction as there's been on cell phones. I bet you see plenty of them in use while driving the car. Really the conspicuity push is a parallel to the stopping wearing of a hoodie when driving the car....following the logic legislating Hoodies would also improve conspicuity, no? I'd bet if the numbers were calculated the amount of young(ish) (Yup i'd say we've all seen the 40'odd yr old driver wannabe sowl brutha wearing them) would be fairly equal to the amount of bike riders on the road.
Rider training is something as a Council we have discussed and have begun working with agencies to see if we can bring in new training opportunities to compliment those that already exist.

Work is well advanced but not yet completed on a guide for road controlling authorities on making our roads motorcycle friendly. This project has been slower than we would have liked.

Most of this work is on our website although the website has not been updated recently. This will change soon.
Thanks, will be good to see the advancements made on this.... especially if the council has taken on the wire median barrier issue as part of it

I accept that MSAC is not the flavour of the month for many riders. I allowed my name to go forward to be part of the Council because first and foremost I am a motorcyclists with a deep interest in road safety and secondly because while we could argue about whether we should or should not be giving up $30 a year per bike for the time being we are and I would rather be part of a rider council trying to influence how that money is spent than leave it up to just officials. I note the range of views expressed in this website and the tendency for some to aimlessly criticise those on the Council. I tend to ignore aimless criticism but I do take the time to consider well aimed criticism.
if I appear to be only critical? I wont apologise, but will say if i see something I agree to, I am equally as analytic and will put forwards the 'good oil' as well.

The reason I come onto this forum (which I have mentioned several times) is so I keep myself aware of views of a wider range of bikers than I normally communicate with. I'll keep doing that.

Again I will add a thank you, it cannot be easy to be constantly given negative feedback... but lets hope that there is the chance for KB per se, to be equally responsive with some positive feedback as well.....

[Voltaire]

"Motorcyclists" don't exist.
There's no such group.

Its almost like McCarthyism and ' Communists'......... 'motorcyclists....they work among you unseen.....'

[Katman]

"Motorcyclists" don't exist.
There's no such group.

I agree with you to a point.

But if we are going to sort our shit out we had better start working as some sort of group.

As a group we need to start ramming the message home to each other that road motorcycles are not toys and motorcycling is not a game.

If we sit back and allow that message to filter through to individuals in it's own sweet time we will find ourselves having run out of time.

[Scuba_Steve]

I agree with you to a point.

But if we are going to sort our shit out we had better start working as some sort of group.

As a group we need to start ramming the message home to each other that road motorcycles are not toys and motorcycling is not a game.

If we sit back and allow that message to filter through to individuals in it's own sweet time we will find ourselves having run out of time.

"ramming the message home" to a group that has a large percentage of rebels (with or without a cause)... umm

"ramming it home" may work for a few, but for the majority of bikers I'd say it's just piss them off & may have them rebelling against the message for no other reason than it's being rammed down their throats...
Discussion is a much better way to go for the majority of bikers, maybee thats why your message keeps failing. You keep trying to "ram" it down everyones throat.

[Katman]

Discussion is a much better way to go for the majority of bikers, maybee thats why your message keeps failing. You keep trying to "ram" it down everyones throat.

If you're going to hammer in a big nail you're better off using a big hammer.

[GrayWolf]

If you're going to hammer in a big nail you're better off using a big hammer.

That's what I tell the missus when she say's I've got a big arse.....

[GrayWolf]

I agree with you to a point.

But if we are going to sort our shit out we had better start working as some sort of group.

As a group we need to start ramming the message home to each other that road motorcycles are not toys and motorcycling is not a game.

If we sit back and allow that message to filter through to individuals in it's own sweet time we will find ourselves having run out of time.

"ramming the message home" to a group that has a large percentage of rebels (with or without a cause)... umm

"ramming it home" may work for a few, but for the majority of bikers I'd say it's just piss them off & may have them rebelling against the message for no other reason than it's being rammed down their throats...
Discussion is a much better way to go for the majority of bikers, maybee thats why your message keeps failing. You keep trying to "ram" it down everyones throat.

You both have a valid point, for pressing the message home hard, and that there is a high degree of 'rebel element' mentality in biking.
To my mind, and where I do have to agree 100% with Katman, is how bikes are perceived by the owners. In reality those who use bikes for 'everyday' transport are in a minority, even within a 'minority sub group'.... I've said this myself in other posts, bikes are now seen as luxury toys, hence the volume sales of 'crotch rockets'.. these are impractical, narrow focused, toys. Sprotbikes are Ego strokers pure and simple, for 99% of the purchasers. So how do you attempt to bring home a 'safety warning' on operating a fun toy? There I think is the $1m dollar question. Most riders are weekend warriors/sunday morning blast riders/ fair weather riders. How do you make the message 'serious' for these people? For me, (and other 365 riders) it already is, the bike is my ONLY transport.

[MrKiwi]

Again I will add a thank you, it cannot be easy to be constantly given negative feedback... but lets hope that there is the chance for KB per se, to be equally responsive with some positive feedback as well.....

Thanks for you reply - the Council should be open to constructive criticism which is what you did in your post, so thanks.

On conspicuity - no we have not decided it IS the answer but an analysis of the data (with caveats around the lack of total preciseness but the data is good enough to show the trend and relativity) shows that a lack of conspicuity contributes as a factor (small contribution to a main contribution) in about 60 to 65% of motorcycle crashes. Given this we decided that conspicuity as one factor is worth time and effort to better understand. It's not a silver bullet if fixed but it is a common enough factor to be worried about it. However, I accept there are a wide range of views and even getting people to agree to disagree is a better place to be at than ignoring it. Mostly we are keen to have an informed debate and discussion and not just rely on anecdotal views - a point you make well.

You raise an interesting point around hoodies (physical barriers that impair the breadth of view) and I have taken that on board. Cheers.