Editorial: Bikers should pay but let's be fair

OPINION: There's nothing like the feel of the wind on the face or the thrum of the tyres on the road to make a biker feel alive. There's nothing like the throb of 5000 engines to remind a politician of his mortality.

In the wake of Tuesday's "Bikoi" to Parliament, ACC Minister Nick Smith and Prime Minister John Key have become converts to the unfairness of the levy increases proposed by ACC to cover the increasing cost of motorbike injuries. Both say it is unlikely the proposed increases of up to $493.08 a motorcycle will be fully implemented.

The Key Government is nothing if not responsive to public opinion. However, the principle underpinning the proposed increases is sound.

Motorcycling is a dangerous activity. According to ACC, bikers are 16 times more likely to make an ACC claim than other road users. According to Dr Smith, compensation claims for motorcycle accidents have increased almost fivefold over the past decade. It is a decade during which there has been a massive increase in the number of large bikes ridden by older owners, and the change in the makeup of bike users is reflected in accident data.

Bikers dispute the way ACC and the minister interpret the statistics and point out that the official figures make no distinction between accidents caused by bikers and accidents involving bikers caused by other road users. They have a point.

However, there is no disputing the fact that a motorcyclist who hits a lamp-post with only clothing for protection is likely to do a great deal more damage to him or herself than the driver of a modern car equipped with crumple zones and airbags.

Motorcyclists should not be required to foot the bill for injuries caused by other road users, but they should collectively meet the costs of accidents for which they are responsible. It is not reasonable to expect those who use vehicles as a means of getting from one place to another to underwrite the expenses of those who use powerful motorbikes as recreational toys.

Some biker groups have argued that, if their premiums are risk-rated, so should be those of others who engage in risky activity, such as mountain climbers, rugby players and netballers. But there is a difference. Mountain climbers and sportspeople are engaging in activities that improve the general fitness of the population and provide a health benefit that offsets the cost of broken bones. Riding a motorbike is not an inherently healthy activity.

Motorcycle premiums should be increased; however, the increases should be fair. Surely it is not beyond the wit of ACC and biker organisations to establish the true cost of motorcycle accidents and to devise a formula that apportions cost according to responsibility?

Bikers should not have to bear the cost of crashes caused by careless motorists. But neither should they expect other road users to subsidise their pleasures.