MNZ survey

I suppose many of you received the MNZ survey of those who did but don't anymore, compete that is.
It is interesting to note the numbers from those who responded to the survey.
96.9% male
34% over 65 (the majority)
39% who competed in classic/historic events
77.7% held C1/2 licences but only 4.5% held R1/2 licences
The reasons for no longer competing were interesting
50% said the cost of competing
34% said the cost of entering
25% said the cost of the required safety equipment.
These last three tell us that some had more than one reason. Of course the safety equipment is a fixed cost once you have it but as most of you know its the add ons that occur every now and again that hurt.
Just as an aside I once added up the safety gear that we had for our Targa car and that came to around $10,000 without including any costs related to the running of the car.

The question that wasn't asked in the survey, was whether or not those who have elected to walk away, had any reservations or any dissatisfaction, as to the way MSNZ was run.

Maybe this also has something to do with it... From the HRC Newsletter receive today.

3rd May 2020

Tony Roberts, Chairman of the Historic Commission, today resigned from MSNZ citing disappointment and dissatisfaction with the direction Motorsport Management was taking.

Roberts said that the Historic Commission had questioned the process by which Motorsport House was being sold and then questioned the secretive process of the sale, but received no meaningful answers to their questions. Tony Roberts said that as a major asset of the member clubs, the constitution applied to the sale and the member clubs should have been involved in the decision to sell and that the sale process should have been transparent.

Without an auction, how do we know if the member clubs achieved the true value of the building he said? The building was sold for $1.3 when the Government valuation was $1.53 million.

Tony Roberts, who is also the President of the Historic Racing Club Inc, Chairman of NZ Historic Muscle & Saloon Cars and Chairman of the NZ F5000 Association and has been on the MSNZ Historic Commission for 20 years.

Roberts was the recipient of the prestigious MSNZ Ron Frost Award for his passion for Motorsport and the building of Hampton Downs Motorsport Park in 2011.

The fixed cost of safety gear isn't quite fixed, as those with competition seats belts know only too well. For a rarely used car, they still have to be replaced based on date, not usage.

For many, the demand that fire resistant underwear, socks, balaclava and boots, was mandatory, followed by HD demanding HANS type devices, was the last straw.

Based on race track accident statistics over the last 40 years, this wasn't justified as a compulsory, especially at National level, and should have remained an advisory.

ERC numbers alone have dropped 30%.

so what's going to happen in the future post covid, money will be tight, how on earth will rack tracks survive too?

I don't know how the survey was distributed. I assume it was sent to individuals who are on some MNZ database ie curent licence holders. Surely to have any validity it would have to include those who are no longer competing ie don't hold a current race licence.

It was indeed sent to those who had not renewed licences. I hadn't renewed mine from September 2016.

What also has to be taken into account is that many those of us of early baby boomer age, are now retired. Although there are quite a few over 65 and even over 70 and 75 competing, the numbers will drop off each year and possibly faster than new ones coming into a sport that has got progessively more expensive, especially over the last few years.

The MSNZ fees have rocketed far, far faster than the rate of inflation and extra demands on tracks hasn't helped.

As per the HRC newsletter with which I agree 100%:

"If MSNZ wants to truly work for the competitor and the future of the sport, there would be no $53 levy per competitor per race meeting, licences would be $25 instead of $200, permits would be $50 instead of $500. MSNZ has bloated over the years and it needs to downsize quickly, especially with the Covid 19 crisis."

The backbone of the sport has always been at club level, with a small pinnacle at the very top, but it appears that the lower echelons who can least afford it, have been paying for an unnecessary hierarchy and possibly subsiding the upper levels, not to mention regulations written to suit the upper echelons.

The race levies 'per driver' of $53 plus at HD, a H & S levy of $25 takes a huge chunk out of the race entry fees.

Add paramedics/ambulance, towing, radio hirage, even before track hire - which has also rocketed in recent years, and the cost to put on a meeting lands on a shrinking number of competitors.

I have always campaigned for larger grids and copped a lot of flack from several quarters, including those more closely aligned to MSNZ, for drawing up a set of rules 25 years ago that encouraged participation rather than purity. My stance has never changed on that, but from the sidelines, I have seen some miserably small grids from several classes. Not cost effective, boring for spectators and track officials alike.

This may be repeating myself, yet again, but running a race meeting is a commercial undertaking, not a charity. If five drivers want the track to themselves and keep out those they don't agree with, that is fine, but if the cost of running the race meeting is $2500 per grid, (plus the levies), then those drivers should expect to pay the $500 plus levies - and that only lets the promoters break even on that grid - and not expect better supported classes to subsidise them.

MSNZ has had a monopoly and abused it to the extent that they have not stood by their own mission statement, of 'encouraging participation'.

Well said Ray. Bureaucracy is the bane of everything it touches.

MNZ has morphed out of the original body called Confederation of NZ Car Clubs. As others have said it better represents racing at national and international level than it does club level motor sport. What benefit is it to someone doing a club event that MNZ is affiliated to the FIA for instance? Maybe it is time that we have a two tier system of admin-one for club events and another for those who want to race at a national or higher level?

I see the AGM is coming up late May. Is there a list of remits anywhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rf84

MNZ has morphed out of the original body called Confederation of NZ Car Clubs. As others have said it better represents racing at national and international level than it does club level motor sport. What benefit is it to someone doing a club event that MNZ is affiliated to the FIA for instance? Maybe it is time that we have a two tier system of admin-one for club events and another for those who want to race at a national or higher level?

---

Agree - or, club level should almalgamate or form a branch of the Vintage Car Club... They seem to have a far better grasp of what their members want - and more importantly, need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rf84

MNZ has morphed out of the original body called Confederation of NZ Car Clubs. As others have said it better represents racing at national and international level than it does club level motor sport. What benefit is it to someone doing a club event that MNZ is affiliated to the FIA for instance? Maybe it is time that we have a two tier system of admin-one for club events and another for those who want to race at a national or higher level?

---

As I understand it motor racing can not legally take place unless under the jurisdiction of the FIA and as a result MSNZ holds the trump card. Speedway competition within NZ could provide an avenue and a legal argument towards a back door and the at very least a lever to open the door.

I first became involved with the original body as secretary of the NSSC over sixty years ago and have observed their operations closely ever since. The bureaucrat's tool has always been the constitution of the organisation and its slant restricting the voting rights of the individual members who finance what has become a very private setup. As it was and as I now presume it remains, an association of "clubs" rather than an association of "members", thus restricting the individual voting power of those who pay the money on which it floats.

In order to commence a serious discussion, it is essential that the exact current constitution is published here. I have been unable to find it anywhere on line. I have the original but there could have ben amendments, Can someone please oblige?

As you well know Trevor, as do many of those who have attended conference, 'one vote per club' totally overlooks the wishes of many larger clubs, with a very active membership (BMW would be a prime example) even though larger clubs were pouring in a lot more in the way of club levies.

When a 20 member club has the same voting power as a club with 400 members, the outcome is always going to be skewed. Attempts to get that changed have failed, as turkeys don't vote for Christmas. The only way to get that changed, would be for each large club to split into groups of 20, so you'd have BMW 01, BMW 02 etc., each with 1 vote, but running under the same overall club constitution.

That is why the MGCC Auckland - with over 400 members, pulled the plug on MSNZ membership. Only a small percentage of members held competition licences anyway, so there is now MG Motorsport, a small sub-section of the MGCC, who will be paying the annual levy.

In theory, yes, MSNZ control the sport, but if you built a private track, didn't bother with MSNZ, there is nothing stopping the owner of that track running whatever events it so desired. However, if you elect to hold a MSNZ licence, you are automatically hooked into the FIA.

It appears though, that over recent years, that MSNZ has assumed a life of its own, instead of supporting the clubs and more importantly, the club members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ERC

As you well know Trevor, as do many of those who have attended conference, 'one vote per club' totally overlooks the wishes of many larger clubs, with a very active membership (BMW would be a prime example) even though larger clubs were pouring in a lot more in the way of club levies.

When a 20 member club has the same voting power as a club with 400 members, the outcome is always going to be skewed. Attempts to get that changed have failed, as turkeys don't vote for Christmas. The only way to get that changed, would be for each large club to split into groups of 20, so you'd have BMW 01, BMW 02 etc., each with 1 vote, but running under the same overall club constitution.

That is why the MGCC Auckland - with over 400 members, pulled the plug on MSNZ membership. Only a small percentage of members held competition licences anyway, so there is now MG Motorsport, a small sub-section of the MGCC, who will be paying the annual levy.

In theory, yes, MSNZ control the sport, but if you built a private track, didn't bother with MSNZ, there is nothing stopping the owner of that track running whatever events it so desired. `

It appears though, that over recent years, that MSNZ has assumed a life of its own, instead of supporting the clubs and more importantly, the club members.

---

I am quoting the above for the very good reason that it explains the exact situation I was well aware of, but had hoped could have improved somewhat over the last 5-6 years as a result of amendments to their book of sad songs. Unfortunately, as I stated, "it remains, an association of "clubs" rather than an association of members"

You point out "However, if you elect to hold a MSNZ licence, you are automatically hooked into the FIA". Currently what is the position if a license holder participates in Speedway, Gocarts, Stock Cars and the like. Can MSNZ wave a stick? Is there a hole in their monopoly which can be exploited?

I had a discussion with Peter Martin of Silver Fern and Targa ownership. In conjunction with some Australian event organisers they have established an alternate overseeing body, AASA. MSNZ thinks, or has endeavoured to convince NZ motorsport participants that they hold the controlling rights. That is being challenged, so perhaps there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
Silver Fern is not under an MSNZ permit.

I cannot see how the FIA or MNZ have exclusive rights to car racing. In the case of a club (or clubs) choosing to run events without a MNZ permit what action could they take against that club(s)?

Hi guys,

A few points:

The original survey came from HRC, not MSNZ, and was directed at those who had not competed at one of their events since 2017. I was a recipient of the survey email even though I still have a race licence. As HRC is primarily aimed at Historic and Classic cars and most people who own/race Historic and Classic cars are older themselves, it is no surprise that the majority of respondents are in the 61+ age group or that the largest class of events competed in are Historic/Classic events.

The MotorSport New Zealand website has a link to the constitution on it's website. It is an 18 page pdf document - the link is through the "About MotorSport NZ" option on the home page. Alternatively, this link should take you to it:
https://motorsport.org.nz/wp-content...8-71st-AGM.pdf

The MSNZ AGCM has been postponed. Here is a link to the news item on the MSNZ website: https://motorsport.org.nz/motorsport...rds-postponed/

As far as I am aware, remits were not published prior to the postponement being announced.

My club (Wellington Triumph Sports Car Club Inc.) has been sending a delegate to the AGCM for years - Ron Robertson in fact, who is also in the MG Car Club (Wellington Centre) and the MG Classic Racing Register. He is one of the people who organises the MG Classic at Manfeild every November so isn't there just to make up the numbers. In fact, at $250 for each delegate (and an additional $250 for each extra observer) it is unlikely that anyone is there merely to make up the numbers.
Anyway, my point on this matter is that Ron didn't think it was worth sending a delegate any more as delegates don't get to ultimately vote on a remit. Sure they all vote but the final result isn't guaranteed to get a remit through. It merely means that the Executive are aware of the feeling of the meeting when they subsequently decide on whether the remit becomes a manual amendment. This approach is defended by the point that the clubs voted for the members of the Executive to represent their views so therefore the members of the Executive can do the voting for them. Sort of like Parliament really.

On the question of what does MSNZ do - well, run an event where someone dies and (as long as you have followed the rules) MSNZ will provide legal representation to stop you going to prison. Hopefully. They certainly did in Queenstown a few years back.
I'm looking forward to AASA being tested in a similar way, not so much with someone dying but more with being tested when the brown stuff hits the fan.

Another thing that MSNZ does is provide Authority Cards so that cars with full cages can still get WOFs. I'm been told that the LVVTA and NZTA aren't interested in dealing with anyone else in this regard (that seems wrong when I think of drag cars driving round with roll cages, but anyway...) so I'm waiting to see how cars on Targa will fare in between stages.

I've got nothing against the AASA - in fact I'd be keen to use them if they can tick all the necessary boxes. But I also remember back in the 1990s when MSNZ (or MANZ as they were) threatened to cancel the competition licence of anyone who raced at a non-MANZ race meeting (specifically, Ohakea, which wasn't raced under MANZ regulations).

On the subject of other, existing, sanctioning bodies. MSNZ in the past have said that they hold the mandate for all motorsport activity in New Zealand and for the purposes of speedway and drag racing (and probably others that I'm not listing), MSNZ have delegated authority and responsibility for those to their respective sanctioning bodies.

Right, well that was longer than I expected -let me know if anything makes no sense.

As I understand it, motor racing in NZ was originally organised under the banner of the NZ Automobile Association, who were affiliated to the FIA. I have a suspicion that the AA did not in fact legally relinquish their position and simply transferred governance to the ANZCC, hence MSNZ. All of this ground was dug over some five years ago within another forum to no avail. Here lies an opportunity whereby this place could leave a mark.

A talented motor sport intheusiast who knows his way around exploring legal matters is called for. Not necessarily a qualified lawyer, but one who will take on the project of carefully investigating every legal aspect and carefully look for every possible loophole. As I pointed out years ago pizzzzing into the wind continues to blow back. LOL

However if the najority of those involved in motor racing are happy that they are getting value for money, so be it.

The FIA is not only a body involved with Motorsport, it has many other interests, and AA is still a member.
Who gave FIA any authority to e the "super body"? As far as I know they just took it on themselves, in the same way as MSNZ has, they don't have a right bestowed on them by anything other than folks being prepared to bend over and take it.
If what you have said above Alan Hyndman, why were a number of quite prominent drivers threatened with removal of licence for competing at Speedway events? Jim Richards for one.
I could quote many instances where what MSNZ dictates differs from FIA and even more from what other similar bodies around the world suggest, but as Trevor has said in his last paragraph above....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldfart

The FIA is not only a body involved with Motorsport, it has many other interests, and AA is still a member.
Who gave FIA any authority to e the "super body"? As far as I know they just took it on themselves, in the same way as MSNZ has, they don't have a right bestowed on them by anything other than folks being prepared to bend over and take it.
If what you have said above Alan Hyndman, why were a number of quite prominent drivers threatened with removal of licence for competing at Speedway events? Jim Richards for one.
I could quote many instances where what MSNZ dictates differs from FIA and even more from what other similar bodies around the world suggest, but as Trevor has said in his last paragraph above....

---

"and AA is still a member." Is this documented as a fact? If so where can I find the evidence? It could indicate the train of authority I had envisaged.

Thanks Alan. I had overlooked that it was an HRC Survey. (I seem to fill in so many surveys on line that I tend to forget who sent them!)

The bias towards classics and age isn't therefore surprising, but let's not overlook that HRC, or more specifically Chris Watson, (an unsung, forward looking hero if ever there was one), initiated the U2K Cup series that attracted a lot of new blood into racing, and many of those will have been HRC members. I have no idea how many of those have been put off by rising costs, but they certainly gained good support and had good grids. They also had a higher standard of driving and despite the negatives from some quarters that it would be 'hoons driving p*s boxes like dodgem cars', it was/is a good stepping stone.

Going back a few years Mike John, who initiated Targa NZ, had tremendous battles with MANZ and was on the verge of setting up an outlaw organisation. Pity that came to nothing, but the problem is that the tracks themselves seem to be tied into MSNZ. If say Pukekohe, Hampton Downs, Taupo and Manfield, banded together and pulled away from MSNZ and took the NI race members with them, then what?

All they'd lose would be the MSNZ so called Tier 1 series - and judging by the support that hasn't had over recent years, no great loss, except for the NZ GP maybe - and I'd be more than happy if that went to the South Island. If the South Island tracks also banded together, MSNZ would be stuffed. The only losers overall might be those with International aspirations, but in the overall scheme of things, they are relatively few. I'm sure Australia would be happy to adopt them.

To answer Trevors query about AA and FIA https://www.aa.co.nz/about/events-affiliations/fia/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldfart

To answer Trevors query about AA and FIA https://www.aa.co.nz/about/events-affiliations/fia/

---

Thanks for that. In the interim I have ascertained that both MSNZ and the AA are separate members of the FIA and therefore there is no way of bringing the AA into any motor sport issue .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldfart

The FIA is not only a body involved with Motorsport, it has many other interests, and AA is still a member.
Who gave FIA any authority to e the "super body"? As far as I know they just took it on themselves, in the same way as MSNZ has, they don't have a right bestowed on them by anything other than folks being prepared to bend over and take it.
If what you have said above Alan Hyndman, why were a number of quite prominent drivers threatened with removal of licence for competing at Speedway events? Jim Richards for one.
I could quote many instances where what MSNZ dictates differs from FIA and even more from what other similar bodies around the world suggest, but as Trevor has said in his last paragraph above....

---

Hi Rhys,

I don't know the answer to that sorry. It's possible that someone at MANZ (as was) at the time got their nose out of joint and decided to push their weight around or mistakenly applied a rule that, in this case, should not have been applied.

A theory was posited to me earlier tonight that buried somewhere in NZ legislation there is the authority for the FIA or its nominated entity to run motor sport in New Zealand. I have long since lost the enthusiasm to read legislation to see if this is true but yes, so long as we keep belonging to the existing controlling body then the status quo remains.

Coincidentally, in the past 12 hours, a battle has erupted between the CEO of MSNZ and the President. I direct you to Mark Petch's Velocity News website for developments so far (emails have also been sent to clubs and licence holders by the look of it):

27 MSNZ clubs send a letter to the President Wayne Christie: https://www.velocitynews.co.nz/major...-in-the-works/

CEO Simon Baker states his position in having no confidence in the President: https://www.velocitynews.co.nz/baker-barks-back/

MSNZ President Wayne Christie responds (sorry, this is on Mail Chimp - maybe it is yet to be posted on Mark Petch's website): https://mailchi.mp/f012241ee979/boar...s?e=2e775e9fd6

There are undoubtedly many discussions on Facebook pages regarding this too.

Excuse my ignorance, but does anyone listed as a board member have an interest in motor sport?

So taking some of this one step further and assuming (probably incorrectly) that MNZ is the New Zealand representative for the FIA which is the "master" of all world wide motorsport surely MNZ should have issued a legal challenge to stop all those events which are run outside of their (MNZ) umbrella. I'm referring to the likes of Lemons, Targa and Silver Fern.
And what about the dirt track events that run at places like Waiuku, Meremere and Waihi Beach to name a few. These are referred to as "black tracks" in some circles and have been running for years without some top heavy organisation telling them what to do and how to do it and charging them a small fortune to do so. Just small groups doing their own thing without outside interference.
I do remember the days when MANZ licence holders were not allowed to compete in events not sanctioned by them with the threat of licence cancellation if we did.
It appears that this thread has opened a can of worms which was not my intention. All I was trying to do was get some comment on the reasons that others had stopped competing in events such as Targa which not too many years ago had over 200 entries and reserves and is of late down to around 50 competitors.

As Oldfart rightly put it in Post #18 previously who gave the FIA and therefore MNZ superpowers to control motorsport? They only have power because we give it to them. And as Trevor says in Post #17 if people are happy so be it. But it is apparent that a lot of people are not happy. As Allan Dick said in his Facebook "Classic Autonews" page this morning we have arrived at this situation as a result of the apathy of a lot of car club members.
There is a story about elephants kept in captivity in parts of Asia. Baby elephants are tethered with flimsy string. When a visitor pointed out that the string was totally inadequate to restrain a fully grown elephant and that they could very easily break the string and escape the elephant owner replies "Ah yes, but the elephant does not know that". We are like those elephants. We have been controlled so long by the IMAGINED powers of the controlling body that we don't even contemplate trying to break free.

I have the results of ERC (current competitors - includes several who are also Alfa Trofeo) who responded to a recent HRC Survey. This makes fairly interesting reading and I have slimmed down the wordy spreadsheet where I can, but the survey was mainly to establish who would return to competing at level 2 or when restrictions have been lifted and also asked a few pertinent questions about the sport. Bear in mind that the ERC season has now finished.

Fortunately, 50 responded and just some of the results:

10% have now decided to retire

Asked how many race meetings they do a year, less than 4, 5 - 7, 8 or more. (Not all answered this specific question as answers were extrapolated from other comments)

4 or less: 14%
5 - 7: 34%
8 or more: 6%

What are the major bars to competing - some answered to both:

Race entry fees (claimed to be $350 at HRC meetings): 48%

Other costs including MSNZ fees, H & S, COD, underwear etc.: 32%

Spectators

Don't care about spectators, just want to race: 22%

Spectator entry should be free: 32%

A significant number thought that MSNZ and the clubs should do more to promote the sport - one assumes that means via social media rather than expensive advertising.

There were several other issues and comments.

Unless it is infringing on individual's privacy would it be possible to publish some of those comments.

OK - just random comments on a variety of questions - note, these are mainly ERC/Trofeo answers but one or two do also compete in other series - not necessarily with the same car.

"Lower costs for participation. The attraction to any sport is action, that does not happen until the grids get closer to 30 cars each with close speed groups or handicapping to ensure a spectacle, not cars hitting each other, but lots of close racing and passing. The fees should be nominal to match costs associated with providing a safe and clean environment for spectating."

"I have no idea how you interest young people in Motorsport given that about 30 percent don't have licences , have zero interest in cars as something other than transport, have zero mechanical knowledge and have far more interest in things digital."

"Lesser costs will attract more participants. Additionally would like to see more accessible series as many involve far too high cost machinery. The health and safety measures and equipment quite often do not match the relative risk. For instance, I can refill a lawn mower, but I must suit up to refuel (including where the vehicle is not mid race, or has long since cooled to ambient temperatures experienced at a service station. There should be in some cases consideration given to some single day mid week races to increase participation at a lower cost. Tracks I believe are a relatively fixed cost, MSNZ is a relatively fixed cost. Therefore more people involved paying a lesser amount, is a much safer model than less persons with higher cost. Taking things out of reach of most will likely also take volunteers away too, as why should volunteers get involved whilst everyone else is being reimbursed."

"It's quite a jump going from never having raced to competing in first event. I do sometimes wonder if people believe that motor racing is more difficult/requires more skills than it does in reality. So possibly easing the introduction into motorsport might lower the barriers for some folk."

"Larger grids on track make exciting racing for competitors and supporters. Small grids mean less likely to enter. Also, keep cross-entry fees low/reasonable."

"For MSNZ to put more effort into supporting the bottom tier of racing or else the top will tumble.(Fees, Regulations etc)"

"We lose older drivers every year. To replace them, the sport and promoters must target the right potential new recruits - they are not teens but a few in their 20s and 30s with mechanical aptitude and more those in their 30s to 50s with money and time (no young children)"

"Have some old style meetings like Teams Relay."

"Less money spent on high level motorsport and promoting that, and make entries etc more affordable for the majority of drivers."

"Less bullshit from Motorsport NZ ie Why do we require date stamped underpants etc !!!! Totally not required when we have good race suits extra COSTS !!!!!"

"stop stiffing competitors with silly charges......$25 H+S Hampton Downs...we already sign a waiver..why did only 25 Escorts turn up at 50th HD...too much extra costs to run at one meet"

"A discount for any series event if the series provides a grid of more than twenty cars."

"Under No 10, I support the use of HANS devices but I think wearing a double layer suit, proper gloves and shoes should be sufficient rather than also having to wear full fireproof undergarments."

"The total cost of competing including the H & S & MSNZ levies make the cost of doing around 32 laps pretty expensive."

"Combined cost of entry and surcharges has doubled in the last 3 to 5 years. That is why most of us have greatly reduced our events per year."

"Total cost of sport so all of above - I reduce number of events entered to meet budget, but I will always compete in some."

"Arrows and Alfa. I like any meeting where there is at least 3 outings onto the track a day. Otherwise I get bored."

"Cost of levies as per option 4 plus additional MSNZ costs for LVVA cards etc. which seem to increase without any real explanation of why automated maintenance should be more costly than the manual processes that were replaced with a computer system for which yet another levy was charged."

What should be of concern to both the Series' organisers and promoters (and MSNZ) generally is the age breakdown of the 50 who responded.

Age 25-34 - 2%

Age 45-54 - 24%
Age 55-64 - 26%
Age 65+ - 48%

Thanks for that Ray. I agree with most of the statements. Targa which was the event I was mostly involved in is a classic example of serious cost escalation which has caused the entry numbers to tumble over the past few years,

One has to ask just exactly why have the costs escalated so much over the last 3-5 years? How are they justifying it?

- They aren't spending more ( or any!! ) on facility maintenance / upgrades than 5 years ago

- I don't know for a fact, but you can't tell me insurance costs have doubled in the last 3-5 years

- We don't get more races per meeting / laps per race, so no more laps per meeting that 10 years ago

From where I'm sitting, there is nothing that I can think of that can justify paying more than we were 10 years ago to enter a meeting ( save for inflation ).

The "safety" rules are totally over the top, especially when we have to sign a waiver, and even moreso when you look at scrutineering, what a total joke that is. You car can be a total death-trap, but if they are checking undies and socks that day, happy days. Like Allan said, the lengths you are forced to go to to put petrol in your car are another joke. Sure have a fire extinguisher at hand, but the rest is total BS. As is having to have any electrical equipment tested and tagged. That's why RCD's were invented. Test and tag is not a legal requirement as most people think, just another unnecessary expense. Whatever happened to personal responsibility??

What do you actually get for your H&S levy at HD? It honestly seems like they are charging you the "safety" levy so you can go out and buy all this extra "safety" paraphernalia to use!!

yes, just wait till they include the PPE gear..............

Interesting comments, and as usual, there are several factors.

Based only on the ERC responses, the biggest worry is the age of the participating drivers who responded. The chances are that in 4 or 5 years time, most of those over 65 will indeed have retired from racing.

I find the increased MSNZ fees somewhat difficult to justify, and they represent the single biggest increases in percentage terms, for the least amount of benefit.

Having been half owner of Chicane Racewear for 10 years, (and 40 years ago I worked for a company knitting and manufacturing Nomex underwear) the option initially, was a single layer suit plus fire resistant underwear. The other option was a double layer suit - or even a triple layer suit. Please note, there is a substantial difference between 'fire resistant' and 'fire proof'.

A long sleeved cotton tee shirt (or sweatshirt) or a woollen vest is fire resistant - but not fire proof. Your racesuit is also fire resistant, not fire proof. In the event of a fuel fire, your double layer racesuit is still only good for about 30 seconds, before you are likely to get seriously burned unless it is extinguished. That is going to be no different from a single layer suit and dated underwear, so I'm afraid that I can't believe that dated underwear was necessary.

Of far greater concern is that from my personal observation, the chance of a marshal getting to you trapped in your car in less than 30 seconds and extinguishing the flames, is about zero, unless you happen to stop alongside a marshal post that has rather more than one extinguisher...

Having said that, 'Motor Racing is Dangerous'. Always has been and always will be, but the amount of risk has to be calculated. Zero risk of death or serious injury is impossible, whether running soap box carts down hill or racing in F1.

Now in my mid 70's, I have lost count of the number of events I have attended as a spectator, competitor or official. From F1 races to club sprints, I'm pretty sure I must have witnessed a fair number of laps/runs and to date, I honestly can't recall a single event I was at where there has been a fatality and only a few with any serious injury.

i hope MNZ has put their hand in the kitty for sports funding as just promised by our fearless leader. should cut costs a lot

Two hundred drivers coughing up $25 PER MEETING at Hampton Downs = $5,000. (Not so long ago, that would have paid for the track hire). Seems that it is not only MSNZ who are ripping us off.

Please can someone tell me what safety precautions are NOT instigated if they have an entry of 50 drivers?

For those of you on Facebook. Take a look at Rob Scotts comments in the "Grey Roots" group.