The government is moving into the implementation phase of its disastrous decision to reverse speed limit reductions across the country, in most cases regardless of whether communities want to do so.
In Auckland, it’s a Kafkaesque nightmare, with perverse outcomes all over the map.
Meanwhile, communities, schools, and councils across the motu are pushing back against the reversals, including current and former National Party MPs. That’s because these roads and streets were made safer in the first place because people wanted it. People from across the political spectrum oppose this move; everyone wants the people in their communities to be safe.
There are two glimmers of hope:
- the new Minister of Transport, Chris Bishop, appears to be walking back some automatic reversals, or at least allowing consultation. However, this has only come about when communities have stood up to oppose what is happening.
- a judicial review of the Setting of Speeds Rule is under way – if successful it may prevent a lot of harm from occurring. (You can find out more about the case here, and donate in support if you’d like to help).
We have a brief window of opportunity to do something about this. To stop the government cavalierly making our roads and streets more dangerous for everyone, and spending unnecessary millions to do so.
But it requires us to take action. So here are some ways you can help.

1. Write to your elected representatives
If you live in a community whose elected representatives have spoken out and opposed the speed increase, now’s the time to send them an e-mail in support.
And if they haven’t spoken up, now’s the time to send them an email asking them to!
Many councils around the country – and across the political spectrum – have come out in opposition to reversals of speed limit reductions. Many are incensed at how the rule forces them to reduce the scope of safe speeds around schools, in particular.
One recent example is New Plymouth, where Mayor Neil Holdom described the compulsory – and unfunded – government mandate to increase speed limits outside schools as “…ideologically driven nonsense. There is no scientific basis for these moves whatsoever.”
Here in Auckland, last June Auckland Council gained headlines for strongly opposing the new rule, with a 18-3 vote. They also voted 12-11 to oppose downgrading fulltime safe speed areas around schools to time-limited school-gate treatments.
But since then, a few Councillors seem to have lost their gumption – at last month’s Transport, Resilience, and Infrastructure Committee, a motion to oppose the speed reversals narrowly lost.
A little encouragement could move the dial back towards courage on behalf of our tamariki. Now’s the time for Councillors to hear from you on this issue you can find their details here.
Likewise, write to your electorate MP can be a strong voice on this – if you write and ask them. And that’s true regardless of what party they represent, because they ultimately represent the people in their electorate.
Many MPs, including from the National Party, have spoken up for safer streets in their communities, and can be reminded to oppose raising speeds around local schools. You can find information to contact MP’s here.
Additionally, write to the Minister of Transport, Chris Bishop, and associate Minister of Transport, James Meager, at:
Chris.Bishop@parliament.govt.nz
James.Meager@parliament.govt.nz
In any email, state clearly you want community consultation before any changes.
Some tips for e-mailing elected representatives:
- Be polite
- Speak about your local area, and your experiences – this could include mentioning particular dangerous roads, your local school and how children travel to it, the tangible differences that speed reductions have made
- Share personal stories about road safety that you feel comfortable telling
- Spell out your opposition to the reversions to higher speeds, and your support for permanent speed reductions
- Express your support for consultation on any reversals, to ensure communities get to have their say
- Remind them of the evidence that safe speeds work – because it’s the evidence we should be following
- Mention the judicial review, your support for it, and the fact it may make the speed reversals moot
2. Speak up in any consultations
While the speed limit increases on many many state highways and roads may not be consulted on, there are still a good number that are inviting public feedback. Note: anyone can provide feedback, regardless of where they live.
Consultation is open until 13th March for a number of State Highways around the country.
You can speak up on any aspect you choose. Most importantly, state your clear opposition to increasing speed.
Keep your submissions polite. If you live in the area, speak to that – and if you travel through regularly, speak to that. Refer to the wealth of evidence that shows lower speeds result in safer roads, greater social benefits, and higher productivity!
In Auckland, one of the State Highways open for consultation is a stretch of SH1, north of Warkworth. While thankfully the dangerous Dome Valley section looks to remain 80km/h, there is a stretch on the south that might revert back to 100km/h. Additionally, a 60km/h length of road around a roundabout built as part of the Pūhoi to Warkworth motorway will also revert to a higher speed, unless there is strong community support for keeping it at 60km/h.
3. Support the Judicial Review
On the 16th of January, the safe transport advocacy group and charitable trust Movement lodged a judicial review in the High Court, regarding former Minister of Transport Simeon Brown’s decision to adopt the new Setting of Speed Limits 2024 rule.
Briefly, and in part, the legal action is based on:
- the rule’s inconsistency with the the Minister’s objectives under the Land Transport Act, to “contributes to an integrated, safe, responsive, and sustainable transport system“
- the Minister ignoring and misconstruing evidence
- and predetermination of consultation processes
The case also makes the point that mandating reversions of safe speeds purely on the grounds they were designed to ensure children’s safe travel to school is “perverse and unreasonable.”
Movement is fundraising to support the legal action – you can donate here if you are able to. You can also encourage your local representatives and your own communities to get behind this legal action.

4. Contact the transport agencies, even if no consultation is occurring
While consultation is not open for many speed reversals on State Highways and local roads, that doesn’t mean you can’t send feedback.
You can email NZTA/Waka Kotahi at: speedmanagement@nzta.govt.nz
Or leave some feedback through their online form.
You can talk about any reversals occurring on state highways that are not being opened for consultation. Ask for consultation and state that you oppose the speed limit reversals.
For those in Auckland, take a look at Auckland Transport’s list of all the roads that will see their speed increased due to the governments speed rule. None of these are up for consultation, but that doesn’t mean you can’t write and share your thoughts.
You can see on this map what the end result will be. (Green lines are what will become 50km/h roads, purple lines will be variable i.e. time-limited speed limits, and the blue areas are schools).
Below you can see the big picture, and a few examples showing the absurdity.




Note that NONE of these areas have been granted the option of formal public consultation and the first stage of increases on some urban connector roads are aimed to be completed by 30th March 2025 – so act quick!
EDITORS NOTE – Auckland Transport reached out to clarify that the ‘first stage’ of reversals to be done by 30th March only include some urban connector roads, whereas most will be done by July 1st. However that still does not address why AT have not exhausted all avenues of engagement with the new Minister in spending this money to reverse limits against community wishes, and Auckland Council who staunchly opposed the rule change last year.
Contact AT here and state your opposition to reversals. Ask them to advocate for community consultation, and to hold off implementation for a few more months. Why the rush? The legal deadline is 1st July 2025, NOT this self-imposed 30th March!
Additionally, you can use AT’s feedback tool to ask that speeds remain reduced on your specific local roads.
Talk about the desires of your local community. Reference the evidence that lower speeds result in safer roads. Keep any messages polite – good people at Auckland Transport worked hard on the prior safer speeds.
Remember, while the agencies have some wiggle room (which they don’t seem to be using), for now, they are legally mandated to do this. But that doesn’t mean they can’t take their time and exhaust all possibilities, before caving into what they know full well to be a dangerous demand.
5. Share evidence and persuasive examples, in every form and every forum you can
Since the previous Minister of Transport began this weird crusade, many good people have spoken up and shared evidence, experiences, and personal stories over the last year. It’s a lot, on top of our day jobs!
To all those with expertise and experience on the front lines of the road toll, those who work in road safety, policing, health, research, or anywhere that deals with the ramifications of our unsafe roads, to the researchers and journalists and bloggers who’ve continued to report on this, elevating the voices of people and communities, and pushing for evidence-based policy on road safety –
– thank you for your service, for speaking up, and for keeping doing so.
We know social license is not static. It takes work to develop, and it grows through conversations – while misinformation thrives in a vacuum. So it’s vital we share authoritative and persuasive voices, and evidence from both here and overseas, loudly and often. You never know when someone is hearing something for the first time.
Just from the last week alone, these great pieces deserve to be widely read. Let’s share them!
- A fantastically on-point satirical rant by Hayden Donnell in The Spinoff, entitled “Huge win: I can finally go back to hooning past schools at dangerous speeds”
- A piece by Prof Tim Welch on the financial cost of higher speeds
- A RNZ story about a retirement village in Horowhenua doing its darnedest to fight speed raises
- A report from the EU about the positive outcomes of safe speeds
Simeon Brown has badly misread the room on this. Chris Bishop has the opportunity to set this right and save face.
The decision to mandate blanket reversals of safe speed limits is one of the most un-evidenced and ideological decisions ever taken in this country. It will affect us all.
But it is a political choice. It can be roundly rejected in favour of evidence and common sense – if we all act now.
Thanks for putting this together. Very helpful!
Greater Auckland Blog readers – this is a CALL FOR ACTION
If you think kids wearing “slow down for me” on the side of the road is their job, not that of our Councils Transport Resilience and Infrastructure committee, then your job is done.
Lowest acceptable ACTION is to write an email to your Councillors and decision makers.
This is the make a difference moment.
Its worth recalling that the road code does not require you to drive any faster than you are comfortable with.
It reads, “You can drive at any speed under or equal to the limit…”, followed by many reasons to go slower.
It isn’t even civil disobedience to ignore the new limits and use your judgement.
Yes, you are absolutely correct except many people now abdicate speed control to the car’s cruise control system which they set to the posted limit (or a few clicks above). If they have a really good adaptive system it may slow or slam on the brakes when it sees an object the car could hit but none I have seen are smart enough to have any other reason to go slower than the set speed just for ‘comfort’s sake’; physical or mental.
Therefore limits must be set with safety OF THOSE EXTERNAL TO THE VEHICLE as the primary concern on the expectation that much of the traffic will drive at the set limit because that’s what the machine is set to do.
Simeon was such a twat. Not that I think Chris Bishop will be the messiah of urbanism and best practice, but at least he seems to be able to use his brain and see how cities in the 21st century operate in the developed world.
Thanks for the hat-tip to my graphic on safety effects of lower speeds, Connor! If you’d like to see the most recent version (with a few new sites), have a look at https://x.com/GKoorey/status/1884425663639339346 (there’s also a link in the followup comment about where to find the underlying data and stats)
Don’t want to discourage action.
Wrote my polite letter to local councillor – basically got told to stick it and write to the local MP as nothing to do with them, just following the law…
Man I hate being in a “blue and pink” ward/electorate.
Jeepers. Yeah I guess write to the MP’s too is the best option
You can also reply with a, ‘thanks for your reply, I feel you’re taking the easy way out on this, for a local councillor replying in such a deflective manner, especially in an election year speaks volumes to me’.
Far better option is just buying reflective stickers and putting them over the new signs. Takes 20 seconds, the stickers, and either the ability to climb a pole or a ladder depending on your fitness.
Personally, I’m for the current limits in general, and I think central gov should stop overreaching into local issues, both with this, and other stuff. But the speed limits are also not something I feel super passionately about, as I think it’s something that will switch with the next gov or rewrite of the plan.
If anyone is interested at repudiating the arguments, there is a piece just today (13 March) over at the BFD by Andrew Bydder (“When Staff Massage the Data”) in which he is arguing the council staff are ideologically “anti-car”. He is accusing the council staff have stacked the evidence for/against reverting the lowered speed limits towards the against side through bad mathematical models, manipulating public consultations to make it appear like the time savings are insignificant and the public doesn’t support the return of the higher speed limits.
What are your responses to Bydder’s accusation?