    |
 |
|
|
|
Otago Daily Times Editorial, Monday, 26-August 2002.
BIKERS ARE RIGHT:
Motorcyclists have every right to be growling about their increased ACC levy. Although most motorists accept that some way must be found to pay for the high costs of treating accident victims, it must also be a fair and equitable way.
While the ACC levy for motorists has also risen from July 1, motorcyclists must now pay much more - a disproportionate amount in relation to their numbers. Their annual registration fee of $275.05 includes an ACC levy of $211.65; the fee in total is about $70 more than car owners pay for 12 months registration and ACC.
The corporation's reported reason for its increased motorcycle levy, that motorcyclists are more likely to be injured in accidents and cost more to treat, does not bear scrutiny.
Under that line of argument, should we not increase the ACC levy for owners of cars that are smaller or have been adjudged less able to withstand accidents? Their drivers are also more likely to be injured and cost more to treat after an accident. What about other road users who are even less protected, such as cyclists or skateboarders, or even pedestrians? Should they also not be subject to road user charges and ACC levies?
And under ACC's argument, heavy trucks should pay a much smaller ACC levy because their operators are less likely to be injured, particularly if they are in a collision with a small car, cyclist or skateboarder.
Of course, none of these corollaries would be fair or legitimate because the initial reasoning is unsound and, as motorcyclists themselves have pointed out, they are a perversion of ACC's "no-fault" system. Under that system, it matters not one jot to ACC, as far as its levies are concerned, that nearly half of all accidents involving motorcyclists are caused by other vehicles. In addition, it seems unfair that accidents involving unregistered farm motorcycles on the road are lumped in with motorcycle accident statistics.
If ACC and the Government are interested in fairness, surely the levy should be spread evenly across all motorists, as used to happen a decade or so ago before motorcyclists were singled out. The difference would hardly be noticed by motorists, who would most likely have to pay less than $5 more a year. By penalising all motorcyclists, our registration fees structure fails to recognise the many benefits two wheels offer over four in terms of generally greater fuel economy, less pollution, taking up less space and creating less traffic congestion.
New Zealand has been praised for its "no-fault" ACC system, under which the injured receive free treatment whether or not they are at fault. The system has many advantages, not least that it allows us to escape the spiralling legal and insurance costs of personal accident liability seen in other countries. It is time, though, we really thought more deeply about who among road users should pay most for the ACC system.
If the levy system is to differentiate between road users, why not on the basis of behaviour? Rather than lumber one class of road users who are likely to be hurt more seriously in an accident, why not copy the insurance industry and increase the levy for those who the courts have shown cause injury accidents. Conversely, by way of a no-claims bonus, ACC could reward those who go accident-free. Accidents will always happen but if the consistently careless are made to pay through their pockets, they may have extra reason to improve the way they behave on the roads.
