Thank goodness they did that ubi trial so we don't just have blanket rate increases. God forbid we jack the rates up for the unsafe riders and cut the good riders some slack...

Public meetings are fine when you live in Regina! I can't afford to take time off work and drive 400 kilometers each way to attend meetings. I would like to know why when my son in law in Alberta rides the same size bike as I do (102 cubic inch cruisers), we both have clean driving records, he pays $400.00 less than I do for insurance & plates. its time for private insurance in Saskatchewan.

General rate increases year after year has neither made drivers in Saskatchewan more responsible, nor safe. Saskatchewan roads and highways are even less safe than previous years, evidenced by fatality statistics, which continue to climb. How long must the people of this province bear the financial brunt of SGI’s inability to effectively initiate public policy that would make our streets and roads safer for everybody?

As to the rate review on motorcycles. These rate increases seem to be harsh and narrow of focus.

I am absolutely opposed to S.G.I.’s 2014 Rate Proposal!!I am concerned, and angry at Premier Wall, and the Provincial Government for permitting S.G.I. to continue to flagrantly ignoring investigation, and implementation, of a real and long term sustainable public policy that would end this continuous cycle of Autofund rate increases. The Saskatchewan Rate Review Panel (SRRP) has made numerous recommendations and suggestions in recent years regarding alternative courses of action to curb escalating accident levels, and injury, and fatality costs. These costs are a direct result of individuals high-risk driving behavior, not the general population. S.G.I.’s inability to effectively deal with this issue, and manage the Auto fund, means the burden then falls directly on the shoulders of Saskatchewan taxpayers, year after year!!!Issues Summary:SGI has simply refused to take alternative and appropriate action with respect to the root cause of rising Auto Fund costs, high-risk vehicle operators. Long term changes in public policy such as appropriate financial penalties, an effective revision of the operators license demerit/reward system, license suspension, criminal charges still appear absent from SGI’s proposal. In place of effective public policy focused on safety, driver behavior, financial stability and recovery focused directly towards offending individuals, we have SGI returning yet again to the same old practice of forcing the taxpayers of this province to bear the burden of SGI inability to manage, the Auto Fund effectively. 2) General rate increases year after year has neither made drivers in Saskatchewan more responsible, nor safe. Saskatchewan roads and highways are even less safe than previous years, evidenced by fatality statistics, which continue to climb. How long must the people of this province bear the financial brunt of SGI’s inability to effectively initiate public policy that would make our streets and roads safer for everybody??I have included for your consideration, what I believe to be a sound long term solution to the escalating accident, injury and death rates in this province. It is a behavior shaping, forward looking policy that puts consequences for behavior of high-risk motorists squarely on the shoulders of the individual where it belongs. This forward looking proposal mirrors policies and practices adopted in other jurisdictions and private enterprise. Strong public policy should reflect accountability and responsibility and not provide a masked socialist blanket, that protects offenders, and penalizes safety conscious taxpayers.R.A.G.E.'s Proposal (summary);License Demerits- Place financial demerits on high-risk drivers "driver's license" not the license plate, thereby initiating both an effective behavior shaping policy and a appropriately focused revenue stream.- Raise the dollar value on the demerit points to where they are more in line with to-days costs, and present a very real and effective consequence for high-risk driving behavior.- Extend the time-frame of demerit fees from a "one-time" cost, to multi-year financial demerit system, the time frame of which is commensurate with the severity of the offence. License Suspension- Reduce the number of driving infraction demerits an individual can accumulate on their driver's license before their license is suspended.- Demerits and fines associated with driving offence demerits must remain in effect through-out the term of suspension.Criminal Charges- Review the criteria for criminal charges related accidents, injury, and high-risk behavior causing death.Law Enforcement- Request law enforcement be more diligent in assessing fault and charging individuals "at the scene". According to law enforcement statisticians, police officers seldom assess fault, or charge individuals at the scene of an accident unless alcohol is involved. Conclusion:1. Penalties for high-risk behavior would be appropriately focused and provide a substantial revenue stream, relieving the burden on the taxpayer.2. Consequences of individual actions would be felt directly by, and only by the offending party.3. Effective consequences have the potential to shape public behavior, or remove the offending individual from the ability to initiate risk, thereby increasing safety, reducing accidents, injury and fatalities, and stem escalating Auto Fund costs.

I am absolutely opposed to S.G.I.’s 2014 Rate Proposal!! I am concerned, and angry at Premier Wall, and the Provincial Government for permitting S.G.I. to continue to flagrantly ignoring investigation, and implementation, of a real and long term sustainable public policy that would end this continuous cycle of Autofund rate increases. The Saskatchewan Rate Review Panel (SRRP) has made numerous recommendations and suggestions in recent years regarding alternative courses of action to curb escalating accident levels, and injury, and fatality costs. These costs are a direct result of individuals high-risk driving behavior, not the general population. S.G.I.’s inability to effectively deal with this issue, and manage the Auto fund, means the burden then falls directly on the shoulders of Saskatchewan taxpayers, year after year!!! Issues Summary: SGI has simply refused to take alternative and appropriate action with respect to the root cause of rising Auto Fund costs, high-risk vehicle operators. Long term changes in public policy such as appropriate financial penalties, an effective revision of the operators license demerit/reward system, license suspension, criminal charges still appear absent from SGI’s proposal. In place of effective public policy focused on safety, driver behavior, financial stability and recovery focused directly towards offending individuals, we have SGI returning yet again to the same old practice of forcing the taxpayers of this province to bear the burden of SGI inability to manage, the Auto Fund effectively. 2) General rate increases year after year has neither made drivers in Saskatchewan more responsible, nor safe. Saskatchewan roads and highways are even less safe than previous years, evidenced by fatality statistics, which continue to climb. How long must the people of this province bear the financial brunt of SGI’s inability to effectively initiate public policy that would make our streets and roads safer for everybody?? I have included for your consideration, what I believe to be a sound long term solution to the escalating accident, injury and death rates in this province. It is a behavior shaping, forward looking policy that puts consequences for behavior of high-risk motorists squarely on the shoulders of the individual where it belongs. This forward looking proposal mirrors policies and practices adopted in other jurisdictions and private enterprise. Strong public policy should reflect accountability and responsibility and not provide a masked socialist blanket, that protects offenders, and penalizes safety conscious taxpayers. License Demerits - Place financial demerits on high-risk drivers "driver's license" not the license plate, thereby initiating both an effective behavior shaping policy and a appropriately focused revenue stream. - Raise the dollar value on the demerit points to where they are more in line with to-days costs, and present a very real and effective consequence for high-risk driving behavior. - Extend the time-frame of demerit fees from a "one-time" cost, to multi-year financial demerit system, the time frame of which is commensurate with the severity of the offence. License Suspension - Reduce the number of driving infraction demerits an individual can accumulate on their driver's license before their license is suspended. - Demerits and fines associated with driving offence demerits must remain in effect through-out the term of suspension. Criminal Charges - Review the criteria for criminal charges related accidents, injury, and high-risk behavior causing death. Law Enforcement - Request law enforcement be more diligent in assessing fault and charging individuals "at the scene". According to law enforcement statisticians, police officers seldom assess fault, or charge individuals at the scene of an accident unless alcohol is involved. Conclusion: 1. Penalties for high-risk behavior would be appropriately focused and provide a substantial revenue stream, releaving the burden on the taxpayer. 2. Consequences of individual actions would be felt directly by, and only by the offending party. 3. Effective consequences have the potential to shape public behavior, or remove the offending individual from the ability to initiate risk, thereby increasing safety, reducing accidents, injury and fatalities, and stem escalating Auto Fund costs.  

Hello,

I skimmed through this rate proposal, it says that SGI is applying for a 2.7% or a 5.2% or a … % increase in rates.  http://www.saskratereview.ca/images/docs/sgi-2014/sgi-auto-fund-2014-rate-proposal-finaL.pdf

Hi, As a consumer of the only insurance legally available and mandatory in Saskatchewan for autos, namely SGI. I noticed that the rate increase this year would be on par with about 5 years of inflation. If thats what it takes to keep our cars insured, then so be it. I would like to know how efficiently SGI operates internally, I know damn well my insurance in Alberta was better and cheaper, and if I could go private, I would.

This seems like a lot of smoke and mirrors. A pat on the back with a "there, there" with one hand and the other picking our pockets telling us it's ok. It's like putting on a show just to pacify the people with the intent on doing very little. Then continuing with your original plans.

Why can't Saskatchewan have a proper setup for insuring more than one motorcycle? If a system could be put in to place where I can buy one plate, base the insurance off the more expensive bike and then have a small charge to add more bikes on that policy. I own a cruiser and a dual purpose dirt bike, only one would get ridden at a time, allow me to pull the plate off the cruiser and put it on the street legal dirt bike instead of having to insure both at the ridiculous rates they have become. As it is I'll be paying $1440 for insurance on a bike after max discount. If I insure my dirt bike it would be another $1100. I've had a clean driving record for the last 10 years, and the only item I had before that in the last 20 was a speeding ticket in a rental car that had no cruise and I was unfamiliar with. I can spec out a quote with comparable coverage in Alberta on my cruiser and instead of costing over $1400 it would be about $600 because of the low amount I ride. (I might be able to squeeze in 2-3000kms a year, usually much less)

Why even bother having the RR Panel is SGI does what it wants to anyone. It looks like a waste of time and money to fund an impotent group.

I see how your thinking is going. Hey Saskatchewan is booming in the oil industry. Yes there is a lot more money being made in Saskatchewan this is great. As a business owner I'm reaping the rewards of Saskatchewan's growth but this does not mean that everyone is making a lot of money and your constant rate increases make it harder and harder for the regular joe to afford a good car because their insurance per year would be to much for them too afford to plate. Same thing for us riders that fact I have a 2001 R1 that I paid $3000 for two years ago and with the increases since then my insurance for that bike is $2150 a year. That is insane. I don't believe there was that big of a loss in insurance paid out that you have to increase it so much. Your a bunch of greedy cows just looking to make a lot of money for yourselves and don't give a shit about the regular joe who struggles cause they have to pay insane insurance amounts. When a monthly income for a lot of people is 3000 and there rent is 1200 and then utilities insurance and food costs that person is broke and can not move forward in life cause it costs too much to live. Pull your head out of your ass and quit making it difficult for people to lead a normal life.

SGI isn't doing enough to make the roads safer (when it comes to motorcyclists, etc). I drive a car and I'm constantly cut off by vehicles because the drivers aren't following the rules (simple) of the road, now imagine driving a motorcycle and putting up with this type of b.s. We also need programs and training for new motorcyclists. There's nothing for them. And what about the folks who spend large amounts of money on gear (jackets, gloves, boots, pants, etc) for protection and to be seen (light colored gear) etc? I think there should of something for those folks as well. Asking for more money isn't going to solve the problem. You guys have lots of statistics and know what to do but aren't doing anything in regards to these stats and information.

I am really hoping that when SGI comes to the table this time, you will keep in mind the frequency and amounts of rate increases there have been, especially for Motorcyclist, in the past few years. For the first time it looks like SGI might make some changes, long overdue, to lower the accident rates for motorcycles. Shouldn't they wait and see what sort of difference these changes make before sticking their hands in our wallets yet again? Other changes that they can and should make, they haven't even tried yet. Why is it that we pay liability insurance on every vehicle we plate (for me this is at least 2 or 3 vehicles)? Shouldn't this be something that goes on our drivers license? I can only drive one vehicle at a time, I could only collect once if something happened, and yet I am paying 2- 3 times the personal liability every year. SGI desperately needs to sit up and listen to what the people are saying about how they do business. Grabbing for more money is not fixing the underlying issue, and yet for years now that has seemed to be all they were willing to do. It is time for an overhaul of how they do business. It is time for them to understand that the only fair way to set rates is to base them on the driver, not the type of vehicle they drive.

Why don't you change you name to Rubber Stamp Theatre? Every year is the same, people come, complain, you ignore them completely, and jack up our insurance rates - EVERY YEAR. This panel needs to be disbanded. Stop wasting people's time with your stupid unnecessary meetings. Also do not try to say you are not a Rubber Stamp Theatre after years of consistent increases in my insurance rates.

As a motorist and a motorcyclist, I find these rate hikes totally unacceptable. Again you are not listening to the people you asked to be on this panel. You seem to be merely doing all this for show, to say well we consulted with the public. if you are truly concerned about the well being of drivers in general, then listen and listen very carefully to the people who use the roadways daily for their advise. You will find nuggets of information and truth that will guide you to a responsible course of action. I am a very experienced driver and i'm sorry, 20% off my license isn't good enough. If you want to reward excellent drivers, then give them a deeper discount to show you are aware of their driving abilities. Now, attach rates to the driver not the vehicle. A car or motorcycle is not dangerous until the driver starts the engine. Reward/penalize the driver for their actions, not the vehicle, because the last time i checked a dealership lot was not the most dangerous place on earth. Why is it my motorcycle is costing me more to drive than my car? Please listen to these people on the panel. Thank you.

SGI rate increase needs to be refused. Last year SGI said there would be no rate increases for motorcycles and here we are looking at another rate increase. SGI needs to focus on the high-risk drivers in Saskatchewan and leave the good drivers - riders alone. A rate increase for all is not a solution to a problem that they are well aware off. The accidents of the few are being covered by everyone. The accidents of the few need to be covered more by those that cause the accidents and relieve the cost to all the good drivers in the province. Please refuse the rate increase for SGI.

Go after the shitty riders and drivers and not just do blanket increases every time!!!! Remember we are voters.

You know, after SaskPower and SGI get their rate approvals you should lock your doors for a while so I might be able to avoid going to the food bank!

It does seem the board is an impotent organization... SGI appears to do what it wants regardless of the situation. I do believe that members of RAGE are really getting upset with the extortion that is going on in this province.

As a motorist and a motorcyclist, I find these rate hikes totally unacceptable. Again you are not listening to the people you asked to be on this panel. You seem to be merely doing all this for show, to say well we consulted with the public. if you are truly concerned about the well being of drivers in general, then listen and listen very carefully to the people who use the roadways daily for their advise. You will find nuggets of information and truth that will guide you to a responsible course of action. I am a very experienced driver and i'm sorry, 20% off my license isn't good enough. If you want to reward excellent drivers, then give them a deeper discount to show you are aware of their driving abilities. Now, attach rates to the driver not the vehicle. A car or motorcycle is not dangerous until the driver starts the engine. Reward/penalize the driver for their actions, not the vehicle, because the last time i checked a dealership lot was not the most dangerous place on earth. Why is it my motorcycle is costing me more to drive than my car? Please listen to these people on the panel. Thank you.

Good morning, I am concerned, and angry at Premier Wall, and the Provincial Government for permitting S.G.I. to continue to flagrantly ignoring investigation, and implementation, of a real and long term sustainable public policy that would end this continuous cycle of Autofund rate increases. The Saskatchewan Rate Review Panel (SRRP) has made numerous recommendations and suggestions in recent years regarding alternative courses of action to curb escalating accident levels, and injury, and fatality costs. These costs are a direct result of individuals high-risk driving behavior, not the general population. S.G.I.’s inability to effectively deal with this issue, and manage the Auto fund, means the burden then falls directly on the shoulders of Saskatchewan taxpayers, year after year!!! Issues Summary: SGI has simply refused to take alternative and appropriate action with respect to the root cause of rising Auto Fund costs, high-risk vehicle operators. Long term changes in public policy such as appropriate financial penalties, an effective revision of the operators license demerit/reward system, license suspension, criminal charges still appear absent from SGI’s proposal. In place of effective public policy focused on safety, driver behavior, financial stability and recovery focused directly towards offending individuals, we have SGI returning yet again to the same old practice of forcing the taxpayers of this province to bear the burden of SGI inability to manage, the Auto Fund effectively. 2) General rate increases year after year has neither made drivers in Saskatchewan more responsible, nor safe. Saskatchewan roads and highways are even less safe than previous years, evidenced by fatality statistics, which continue to climb. How long must the people of this province bear the financial brunt of SGI’s inability to effectively initiate public policy that would make our streets and roads safer for everybody?? I have included for your consideration, what I believe to be a sound long term solution to the escalating accident, injury and death rates in this province. It is a behavior shaping, forward looking policy that puts consequences for behavior of high-risk motorists squarely on the shoulders of the individual where it belongs. This forward looking proposal mirrors policies and practices adopted in other jurisdictions and private enterprise. Strong public policy should reflect accountability and responsibility and not provide a masked socialist blanket, that protects offenders, and penalizes safety conscious taxpayers. R.A.G.E.'s Proposal (summary); License Demerits - Place financial demerits on high-risk drivers "driver's license" not the license plate, thereby initiating both an effective behavior shaping policy and a appropriately focused revenue stream. - Raise the dollar value on the demerit points to where they are more in line with to-days costs, and present a very real and effective consequence for high-risk driving behavior. - Extend the time-frame of demerit fees from a "one-time" cost, to multi-year financial demerit system, the time frame of which is commensurate with the severity of the offence. License Suspension - Reduce the number of driving infraction demerits an individual can accumulate on their driver's license before their license is suspended. - Demerits and fines associated with driving offence demerits must remain in effect through-out the term of suspension. Criminal Charges - Review the criteria for criminal charges related accidents, injury, and high-risk behavior causing death. Law Enforcement - Request law enforcement be more diligent in assessing fault and charging individuals "at the scene". According to law enforcement statisticians, police officers seldom assess fault, or charge individuals at the scene of an accident unless alcohol is involved. Conclusion: 1. Penalties for high-risk behavior would be appropriately focused and provide a substantial revenue stream, releaving the burden on the taxpayer. 2. Consequences of individual actions would be felt directly by, and only by the offending party. 3. Effective consequences have the potential to shape public behavior, or remove the offending individual from the ability to initiate risk, thereby increasing safety, reducing accidents, injury and fatalities, and stem escalating Auto Fund costs. In addition, I feel there is inadequate training in the SGI driver's courses in regards to motorcycle awareness.  There is a great deal of time spent on watching out for pedal bikes and semis, but it's rare for motorcycles to be mentioned.  Also the handbook is very sparse with info on this front.  Drivers of all kinds need to be aware of motorcycles and how to share the road with them.  It's a two way street! :)

I can't believe that you are raising rates again, especially motorcycle rates. I've been riding bikes for almost 20 years, have never had an accident or made a claim on a bike, but in that time my rates have skyrocketed. On what planet is that fair, in any way, shape, or form? If anything, my personal rates should be going DOWN because I haven't cost you a dime in almost 20 years! If the auto fund is short of money, then it is way past time to make the bad drivers pay for their own mistakes! It's their fault that you need to make an increase, not mine! Why punish me???

I'm very displesed with the players in SGI and the rate increases that amount to over 90% in 6 years. There are two increases in fines for traffic violations, following too close and poor lane changes. It's still $500 for things like running stop signs, lights and yielding. $2500 for more serious motor vehicle offences. These should be increased and people who cause any serious accidents and these same people should pay out of their own pockets. Please quit passing down your losses to the motorcycle community to makeup, or open up the market to other agencies so at least we can have a choice on who is putting their hands in our pocket.

Once again I would like to voice my opposition to the proposed motorcycle rate increase along with the general increase. As an experienced driver with no insurance claims I am tired of my rates increasing year after year