More ACC levies on registrations

[Ixion]

Are they though? The missus and I were actually discussing this last night after watching top-gear where they were talking about KNEE AIRBAGS (scary).

Id be very interested to know if the ratio of fatality versus non-fatality accidents is reducing. And for that matter, how overall accident rates are trending in relation to # of vehicles registered / kms travelled.

I actually suspect that the accident rate is actually increasing overall (this is supposition, not based on facts, as I am unsure where to find these sorts of stats).

And I suspect that a good portion of it will be due to increased traffic volumes AND peoples increased sense of 'safety' that seems to be getting pushed down peoples throats at present.

I have seen those stats, though I can't be arsed finding them again. Yes, you are correct on both counts. The number of fatalities has steady fallen, but the number of injuries (especially serious injury cases) has actually risen somewhat. A good part of the fall in fatalities is related to improvements (both in capability and in timeliness) of medical treatment (think air ambulances and the golden hour)

Total crashes are still trending upward. Severity of crashes is claimed to be falling, though I'm damned if I know how they'd measure that

[pixc]

I propose ... (waffle to follow..) I propose, that everytime you get an infringement, speeding, careless driving..what ever...not only do you get a fine...but somehow, its linked to your rego/ACC levies and that goes up. targeting higher risk folk. Maybe even linked to IRD and more of your pay gets allocated to ACC. The more infringements..the more you pay..after 5 years of behaving...rego comes down again. Told you I tend to waffle.

[Road Guardian]

Hmm, I like waffel, sorry wrong type of waffel

Seriously good point though, prob a better way would be to increase the ACC levies on those who cause accidents, that can be proven to be that persons fault.

I propose ... (waffle to follow..) I propose, that everytime you get an infringement, speeding, careless driving..what ever...not only do you get a fine...but somehow, its linked to your rego/ACC levies and that goes up. targeting higher risk folk. Maybe even linked to IRD and more of your pay gets allocated to ACC. The more infringements..the more you pay..after 5 years of behaving...rego comes down again. Told you I tend to waffle.

[Max Preload]

I propose ... (waffle to follow..) I propose, that everytime you get an infringement, speeding, careless driving..what ever...not only do you get a fine...but somehow, its linked to your rego/ACC levies and that goes up. targeting higher risk folk.

It should simply be linked to your license. As for 'speeding' causing it to go up, I strongly disagree (and I haven't had a speeding ticket in 7 or 8 years) . It would be much better to link it to the person at fault in any accident, injury or otherwise. It pisses me off that the penalties for actually crashing into someone else are so friggin' light compared to simply exceeding a purely arbitrary posted speed limit perfectly safely.

Of course, New Zealanders won't like that. They like the 'no-fault' system because they can continue to drive like the blind, incompetent fuckwits they are with no real repercussion.

Maybe even linked to IRD and more of your pay gets allocated to ACC. The more infringements..the more you pay..after 5 years of behaving...rego comes down again. Told you I tend to waffle.

That's the same thing as simply increasing ACC levies for shit drivers & riders.

[gixxer-king]

It should simply be linked to your license. As for 'speeding' causing it to go up, I strongly disagree (and I haven't had a speeding ticket in 7 or 8 years) . It would be much better to link it to the person at fault in any accident, injury or otherwise. It pisses me off that the penalties for actually crashing into someone else are so friggin' light compared to simply exceeding a purely arbitrary posted speed limit perfectly safely.

Of course, New Zealanders won't like that. They like the 'no-fault' system because they can continue to drive like the blind, incompetent fuckwits they are with no real repercussion.

That's the same thing as simply increasing ACC levies for shit drivers & riders.

Well your insurance sure rises if your a shit driver, heard of no claims? yea baby. But yea why not. in fact better yet, no speeding ticket but each offence doubles your rego, that'll have people slowing down quick.

[shingo]

Well your insurance sure rises if your a shit driver, heard of no claims? yea baby.

That's assuming they have insurance, and even then if the person who caused the accident is forced to pay up you'll probably only get a few bucks a week.

[homer]

private insurance is good provided the government acknowledge that you are taking a weight off the overcrowded public system by giving you a tax rebate on it ......... that's how it USED to be here in oz when i first arrived

then they took away the tax incentive and i [and hundreds like me]said ok you unfair, ungrateful scum and discontinued our private coverage .....
..... i mean DUH couldn't anyone with half a braincell have figured out what was going to happen??

oh yes - government - why did we expect sensible behaviour?!

anyway -
the public system teetered for several years

and for the past couple the govt has actually had to offer a cash incentive for peops to take out private cover

twits

i despair - i really do

failing to see the total point of taking pressure off the public sector ......oh i see so , my arguement about private patients getting treatment or sergery ahead of public customers maybe holds a lot of ground then .
i think if you pay for private health, then if you decide to use you private cover , then you dont get the service in a public facility.
if public are the only ones to provide then its tuff.
i think if you pay acc and private then yes you get a choice , but you decide.
if public have what you need , hey then you wait like the rest of us who pay acc .
not jump the que just cause you pay both.

[KingJackaL]

Some good discussion here. Ixion, as well as asking how the fuel money is allocated (and I too would suspect a slush fund), it may be worth finding out how much the average driver claims per year (for each class of vehicle they track). That would be very valuable info, as you could compare that directly to the registration amounts for those classes.

Although, 'truck' has large difference in RUC with tonnage - does any of that go into ACC? I can't remember...

As for road toll stats robboh, NZ government departments post pretty much all their pertinent stats online these days. I think the key pages you'll be looking for are:

The 'Road Toll', updated often and comparing this year and last:
http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/research/toll.html
More detailed reports into crash stats (see yearly links in left nav - 2008 not compiled yet) - a LOT of detail in these:
http://www.transport.govt.nz/motor-v...zealand-index/
'Road Toll' over 5 years:
http://www.transport.govt.nz/road-toll1/

[Ocean1]

i think if you pay acc and private then yes you get a choice , but you decide.
if public have what you need , hey then you wait like the rest of us who pay acc .
not jump the que just cause you pay both.

You seem to think it's the same queue. It's not.

ACC fund only so much, if you don't meet the requirements for a certain procedure then you don't get it. Even if you do meet the criteria you may wait some time for the operation.

If you want it any other way the only alternative is to buy that procedure either directly or through private insurance. Those that choose to do so actually save ACC the total cost of the operation, in effect they've paid twice.

[KingJackaL]

Ooo, found some interesting stuff digging through the ACC site. Claim amounts by region (but not by vehicle class):
http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/acc-m...crash_injuries

Looks like they pay out a pretty regular amount. Slight trend upwards, which looks to me to be similar to inflation and population growth (it's not dramatic). Say maybe $320-$350M for this year (extrapolation). So yeah, that's like $100 per person (not per driver) in the country, so I see how fuel of $100, plus rego of $100 or $200 is certainly within the ballpark.

http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/acc-i...SS_WIM2_063133

Looks like males claim on average 3x as much as females! (I wouldn't have suspected that massive a disproportion)

And the most recent money data by vehicle type is here:
http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/acc-i...SS_WIM2_062809

Hmmpf. They haven't done it per population (num vehicles) though. *sigh*

It looks like all the relevant stats are online. Just none of them have been summarised such that the above questions can be easily answered. A night on a spreadsheet sifting through those reports would sort it though xD.

The only problems:
- the latest ACC data I can find is 2006 (through til mid 2007 I think?). They seem to be a year behind everyone else in publishing stats (this doesn't impress me at all).
- ACC stats are July 1 -> Jun 30, LTSA stats are Jan -> Jan.

So there will be some slight statistical munging, but you should be able to get a pretty accurate trend at the least.

[homer]

You seem to think it's the same queue. It's not.

ACC fund only so much, if you don't meet the requirements for a certain procedure then you don't get it. Even if you do meet the criteria you may wait some time for the operation.

If you want it any other way the only alternative is to buy that procedure either directly or through private insurance. Those that choose to do so actually save ACC the total cost of the operation, in effect they've paid twice.

yes and wheres the waiting list gone to , they get the treatment a lot sooner .
im saying that if you have private insurance and you choose to use it , then if the private company dosnt have the facilitys ,then you shouldnt get the treatment thru a public outfit.

[Ocean1]

yes and wheres the waiting list gone to , they get the treatment a lot sooner .
im saying that if you have private insurance and you choose to use it , then if the private company dosnt have the facilitys ,then you shouldnt get the treatment thru a public outfit.

In many cases the facilities and staff available to the private sector are exactly those the public system uses. If you halted all private work it would affect the public system waiting list not a jot. Actually, that's not true, the loss of private sector income would soon degrade the facilities and a lot more specialists would leave the country.

I've got a thesis on the subject around here somewhere, one of it's more surprising revelations is the extent of exactly the unrealistic attitudes and patient expectations evident in your post.

[scracha]

Looks like males claim on average 3x as much as females! (I wouldn't have suspected that massive a disproportion)

From my not so scientific observations I would say that's simply because roughly 3 out of 4 vehicles on the road are driven by males (heavy goods, tractors and when a family goes out somewhere it's normally the bloke doing the driving).

[Soul.Trader]

From my not so scientific observations I would say that's simply because roughly 3 out of 4 vehicles on the road are driven by males

I would be extraordinarily surprised if this were true. More likely, it's due to the well known fact that males have more car accidents, and are far more likely to participate in risky activities, both on and off the road. I know a lot of people have difficulty accepting the truth, but statistically women are much drivers than men, causing less damage and fewer injuries and deaths.

[scracha]

I would be extraordinarily surprised if this were true. More likely, it's due to the well known fact that males have more car accidents, and are far more likely to participate in risky activities, both on and off the road. I know a lot of people have difficulty accepting the truth, but statistically women are much drivers than men, causing less damage and fewer injuries and deaths.

I'm not saying men don't take more risks but the figures are very very skewed by the distance actually driven by the average male compared to females.

Take a look for yourself. Stand on any state highway and survey who's driving, there's more guys than gals driving. Now factor in the commercial drivers...there's by far much more males in vehicles at night than female. Driving heavy trucks through the night is a dangerous occupation. Just because you don't see all the guys on the road at night doesn't mean they're not there.