Anger at motorcycle club

The president of the Wanaka Motorcycle Club, Andi Delis, with his 650cc Suzuki adventure motorbike, which is about to get much more expensive to own. Photo by Marjorie Cook.
The president of the Wanaka Motorcycle Club, Andi Delis, with his 650cc Suzuki adventure motorbike, which is about to get much more expensive to own. Photo by Marjorie Cook.
Outrage over a proposed increase in motorcycle levies has prompted Wanaka Motorcycle Club members to write submissions in opposition and email them to at least 180 politicians.

The call for action was made by club president Andi Delis, a quantity surveyor who owns three motorcycles and expects to pay $2200 per annum to register them under the proposal.

"My 650cc is worth only marginally more than that so I cannot see how the running cost can be worth it anymore," he said.

Mr Delis has compiled a long email list of submission recipients and circulated it among the club's 60 members.

He told club members last week that "without spamming everyone's mail boxes, we need to take action".

The key people and organisations to receive the message were the Accident Compensation Corporation, Prime Minister John Key and the ACC Minister Nick Smith.

But Mr Delis has asked club members not to leave it to the "main three . . . as they may not make it through. Take it to our local Parliament members as well".

The increased levies would have serious consequences for everybody so it was worth complaining, he said.

Mr Delis plans to write a separate club submission soon but has already written a personal submission which says the Government is "wrongly targeting the victims" of accidents, rather than those who cause them.

"Most accidents are caused by car drivers on phones, not looking properly or being complacent.

The boy racers are a far bigger problem and there is nothing to penalise them in what they do, which is torment other road users."

Mr Delis says riding motorcycles may become uneconomical, leading to an increase in carbon footprints and traffic and parking congestion.

He also says some riders might choose not to register their motorbikes and view the risk of being ticketed as "a cheaper option".

He is concerned about the impact on the motorcycle industry and also says snowboarders, rugby players, skiers and people who play other contact or dangerous sports are not being asked to pay more in levies.

More older cars might also end up on the road, increasing congestion, pollution and the potential for accidents, he said.

 

Doesn't make sense

Surely in many cases it is the car driver, not the biker, who causes the accident which leaves the biker needing expensive treatment? The roads would almost certainly be safer (and ACC's costs lower) were there more bikes and fewer cars, and it is therefore surely more sensible to use the levy to encourage safer roads by "encouraging" rather than discouraging motorbike use. It may be the case that with larger sports bikes, a greater proportion of accidents are due to the rider - in which there could be an argument for scaling the levy for bikes approximately in line with the risk of a "biker-caused" accident on the type of bike in question. It is also surely the case that one owner can only ride one bike at a time, and their risk of being in an accident therefore does not rise with the number of bikes or other vehicles they own - the other vehicles are unlikely to cause accidents while they're sitting in the garage.
So how about basing the levy on the driver, and the most undesirable vehicle (where "undesirable" means "causing the greatest costs to society/ACC") they own/have access to? So if all you ever drove or rode was a moped or small motorbike, the levy you paid would be tiny or non-existent. If on the other hand you drove an environmentally heinous gas guzzler that was also statistically monstrously dangerous, you'd pay a small fortune in ACC levy. However, once you'd paid the levy on that vehicle, you'd be able to register further, safer, vehicles for no additional levy (as while you were driving them you'd be less likely to be causing harm than while driving the monster). Anyway, the main point is that the fact that motorcyclists end up requiring a lot of expensive treatment is in no way an indication that they are the cause of the problem. You need some far better statistics before you can start to claim that.