Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

VIC Are the RACV anti motorcycling or just ignorant about motorcycling? What about other autoclubs?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by robsalvv, Nov 11, 2011.

  1. Netriders, I'm keen to get some input about autoclubs and how they deal / relate / interact/ advocate / support / communicate with motorcyclists.

    I know that the RACWA and motorcycling have some kind of working relationship and that was on display over the weekend with the international perth road safety conference... but RACV is an entirely different story. Even more info about positive motorcycling connections displayed by the other autoclubs will be beneficial to shame the RACV into action.

    What also interesting is how auto clubs demonstrate their biases by their corporate policies... for example RACV sponsors ride to work and ride to school days, i.e., cycling. It has a guide on how to share the road with bicycles (truck, buses and trams too) but no guide on motorcycles... RACV even has a "how to get into cycling" page... but no motorcycling page... and it goes on and one. 15000+ hits on cycling matters on the RACV site, only some 400 about motorcycling.

    So you get my drift. Pro and anti motorcycle Stories & anecdotes, about your autoclub - especially RACV would be appreciated.

  2. the RACV originally was an association of both cars and motorcycles.
    in particular this bit.
    speaks volumes about their inception and how they have become non advocates for motorcyclists, hence abandoning their history and their goals.
  3. I have been a member of a several of car clubs that have invited motorcycle groups to their events (Triumph, BMW). Apart from the occasional grumble from stuffed shirts most car enthusiasts at least understand the attraction of bikes. Some of them are not well informed beyond what they read in the papers though, and think we are a bit mad.

    The Association of Motoring Clubs encourages motorcycle clubs to be involved, and will work for common interests (common interests tend to define along enthusiast vs non-enthusiast lines).

    I think RACV now mainly represents elements of the VicGov bureaucracy.
  4. I remember a couple of years ago an article in the RACV magazine explaining to those who were considering getting into riding as a cheaper and more convenient form of transport, how it is not so. It was written by a motorcyclist who, I thought, was looking for a pat on the head from the establishment for being a good boy. He explained how riding a motorcycling - I can't remember which bike he was referring to but insert a serious/enthusiast motorcycle, not a cheap transport motorcycle - was more expensive than driving a cheap commuter car.


    This is the only appearance of motorcycling in their magazine that I can recall (not that I'm an avid reader - I throw it away these days. But it does sometimes point out nice destinations I was unaware of.)
  5. It needs to be said, we can disparage old farts in Porsches :)-w) and pinhead ricers :)bolt:), but we need them on our side. They don't want their choices removed any more than we do. Some of them need educating, but it's the beige (that RACV represent) that are the real enemy.
    We should consider building a few bridges.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. I'd like to build some bridges - believe me, but I need to define the size of the problem. I have my own indications, but I'm hoping there will be more input from NR's.

    It's telling though, that the RACV don't think that they are anti motorcycling.
  7. Good point Titus, the real divide here is between those who see the road solely in functional terms, and those who also see it as a place of pleasure or passion.

    The beige think they get the second, because they "too" appreciate the odd Sunday drive (at half the speed limit, crossing the centre line on the corners, stopping suddenly out of distraction, holding others up because of their slow scared driving without the courtesy of ever pulling over which creates dangerous overtaking scenarios, etc etc). But really their perspective is purely functional, such that it makes sense for them to see the only other relevant value as maximum health and safety at the cost of all else.

    This is part of a greater philosophical issue that has been going on for a long time and, for instance, partly spawned existentialism, and inspired novels by Dostoevsky: function versus passion in how we conceive of good living.
  8. The RACV’S September 2011 Royal Auto magazine has Cycling on the cover with the headline “Life Cycle - Ride your way to work, health and happiness” page27.

    November 2011 Issue has a mountain biking piece on page 13 and a reformed hoon article on page 64. On page 65 there is a piece on a new research program by VicRoads the TAC and the RACV on young drivers. It will be interesting to see how many P platers perform self sabotage.


    It seems coincidental that this research comes about around the same time as the professor’s warped suggestion from the other thread.

  9. I don't know if it counts as it's overseas, but the UK's Institute of Advanced Motorists has a fully integrated motorcycle group, and motorcycling policies and motorcycle safety seem to get equal attention to car (and bus, truck and van) issues
  10. The RACV USED TO represent motorists, these days they are solely there to flog insurance, roadside assist and finance... this is why I refuse to give the bastards a cent of my money. Any body that purports to represent motorists and basically backs the current road safety initiatives has no credibility nor it's members interests at heart.
  11. Any more for any more? Any bouquets to give to your local auto club with respect to motorcycling? Any more buckets for RACV?

    - - -
    Tapatalking loud, saying somethin'
  12. The RACV doesn't consider itself a motoring organisation as such these days. It sees itself as a 'service" organisation. To see how they consider motorcycles read their submission to the Parliamentary Inquiry into motorcycle safety.

    The submission that had no input at all from any active motorcyclists.
  13. My take

    The RACQ has no interest in representing or assisting motorcyclists and would be happy for us all to disappear.

    In fairness though they don't seem completely dedicated to cars either.

    Their big focus these days seems to be on "green" bullshit, travel and insurance (and not paying out to Qld flood victims :furious: )
  14. All the RACV are interested in is sucking in money and occasionally giving something back if you pay them enough.... just look at the size of the ****ing RACV country club/golf course on the road into Healesville from Kinglake for instance. Nothing cheap about that joint. I dont pay roadside assistance for yuppies to ****ing play golf.
  15. Thanks guys.

    Tony, you might be interested to know that the RACV are wondering why motorcyclists consider them anti motorcycling and why their submission paper was viewed as anti motorcycling... such is their filtered view.

    I heard that the RACWA and the MRAWA cooperatively put on a bit of a safety conference in conjunction with the national road safety conference in Perth recently. Speaks volumes.
  16. Rob, are you in a position to name names (without risk to the innocent)?
    There is probably a diversity of views within RACV, but it's the public statements that matter.
  17. The RACV is a "club" in name, only. Sure, it has elections, but that's as far as it goes.

    Royal Auto is nothing more than a periodical that spruiks the products and services that the RACV sells, with about a dozen pages out of a hundred dedicated to actual motoring things.

    I have Roadside Assist, mainly because it's an insurance against our ever increasing high tech cars breaking down, plus I don't want to cop the wrath of my wife if she gets stranded somewhere.

    Its insurance products for motorcycles are up to double the cost for equivalent Swann Maxirider cover and its car insurance isn't any cheaper than say, AAMI or CGU.

    And all of the above pays for the club benefits that most of us cannot get to enjoy...
  18. From RACV site:
    What riles me is the claim (from RACV, government and the media) that RACV represents the views of the road-user public, by virtue of this farcical and dishonest use of the term 'membership'. It's a purchase, not a membership of a club/association run under those rules.

    There is an ethical tenet in journalism (here, in relation to 'fairness') that alternative points of view should be sought and allowed to be aired.

    In relation to road matters, RACV have become a mirror of bureaucratic policy in return for commercial advantage. It is unethical (although not illegal) for journalists to seek the views of a financially interested commercial enterprise when fulfilling the requirement for fairness in their reports. News outlets ought to be challenged to seek genuinely alternative views.
  19. NRMA in NSW is generally positive on motorcycling.

    Here is a good article on their site.


    NRMA the club, separated from NRMA insurance in a public float back 10 years ago, maybe that is the difference.
  20. there are some good things in that article I guess. There are a few things that show their ignorance as well. One of the things that annoys me a bit is this:

    Why must it be constantly viewed as a "sport"? I think this doesn't help us in terms of getting heard in regard to genuine road user issues. It's a "sport" if you start racing motorcycles, sure, but if it's your mode of transport?!?!