Concern is growing about the wide-ranging local repercussions of the new Setting of Speed Limits rule, rewritten in 2024 by former transport minister Simeon Brown. In particular, there are growing fears about what this means for children.
A key paradox of the new rule is that NZTA-controlled roads have the option to keep existing speeds, where they are working and have strong community support, or where land-use has changed.
However, most towns and cities are not so lucky: they are forced to reverse safe and survivable speeds introduced since 2020 in neighbourhoods and around schools. Even if they’re working. Even if communities asked for them and want to keep them.
What’s causing the greatest alarm is:
- the huge scale of these unilateral reversals (1500+ streets in Auckland alone, which is disproportionately impacted)
- the lack of regard for the evidence on safety and productivity, as well as other desired outcomes
- and the lack of opportunity for any community voice on the matter
And what’s increasingly getting headlines is the perverse fact that it’s happening not despite, but because of children.
As RNZ reported yesterday, school principals across Auckland are saying: this doesn’t make any sense.
Auckland (and its children) is taking the brunt of a weirdly written rule
The outsize impact on Auckland is not just Kafkaesque, as Connor wrote last week – it’s tragic. It’s only happening because Auckland Transport – following international and local evidence, including NZTA guidance, and working hand-in-hand with Council, Local Boards, public health experts, schools, and communities – simply said out loud that it aimed to improve safety for children. The most vulnerable people on the streets it oversees.
That speed management work won an international road safety award in late 2024. Now, it’s set to be undone in one fell swoop – even though, as AT’s CEO Dean Kimpton told a Council workshop yesterday, Auckland Transport itself opposes the reversals.
Of course AT needs to comply with the law. But it’s also clear – from that Council workshop, from recent council and local board meetings, and from the growing calls for help from worried schools and concerned communities – that this aspect of the new rule is flawed, troubling, and will cause harm. It also damages social licence and dampens trust in government.
What’s needed is a commonsense correction – and the new Minister of Transport, Chris Bishop, is in a perfect position to see and solve this situation, in a sensible way.
He’s already opened the way for discretion in rural communities, and can do the same for cities and towns.
It makes sense. After all, locals know their roads better than anyone, and local communities are telling the government they want more input into decision-making. So what better way for government to respond, than by simply making it easier for local views to be considered when setting speed limits?
What’s the issue?
The key problems are laid out in the judicial review (brought by the advocacy group Movement), which is currently awaiting a 9 April decision on interim relief (potentially, an injunction to pause the changes).
See also this excellent detailed letter to Auckland Transport from road safety and streets advocacy organisations including Brake New Zealand, Living Streets Aotearoa, All Aboard, and Bike Auckland. That letter was followed by a media release containing a clarion call for AT to defend its award-winning safe speeds programme from the rollbacks.
In a nutshell, the speed rule change disregards two important things: the evidence on speeds and road safety, and the duty to ensure a safe transport system in the public interest.
Moreover, the rule is inequitable: it prevents many communities from keeping current safe speeds, even if they want to. In particular, as the judicial review application argues, it “perversely and unreasonably” targets schools in urban areas, requiring reversal by July 2025 of any 30km/h areas enacted since January 1st 2020 on “specified roads”:
(a) a road—
(i) that is a local street (residential or neighbourhood street); and
(ii) for which the Agency (as RCA) or the territorial authority set a permanent speed limit of 30 km/h on or after 1 January 2020; and
(iii) the reason or one of the reasons for setting that speed limit was because there is a school in the area;
In the local context, Auckland Transport has interpreted this “school in the area” clause very liberally (and perhaps way too literally). As a result, it’s cast a very wide net that sweeps up a whole lot of unintended “by-catch” across the city.
As President of Living Streets Aotearoa, Tim Jones, says:
“The huge list of streets that will be made less safe tells me that our largest city – and in particular our children – are being punished just because Auckland Transport made such a strong case that streets where people live, work and go to school must be safe around the clock. This is globally embarrassing for our country, and for everyone involved in applying the rule at local and central government.”
What are some examples of the problem?
Yesterday’s RNZ report homes in on the impacts for schools in Blockhouse Bay, in Manurewa (which has ongoing issues with unsafe streets), and in Avondale.
There’s also been coverage of the impacts on Waterview, a small self-contained neighbourhood with a growing school bike train and many children who walk to school.
As the principal of Blockhouse Bay School, Neil Robinson, puts it, this is about ensuring survivable speeds across children’s routes to school, so that if the worst happens, it’s less harmful than it would be otherwise.
“It would be heartbreaking for anybody, including the driver, if a child got hit and they were going such a speed that it damaged the child in any way. I don’t think you’d ever get over that.”
“What [the speed reversals] will ultimately do I think, is put more and more kids into cars, and less and less walking and biking, because parents will be worried about their children being hurt on the roads.
“There’s real benefits to children walking or biking or bringing their scooters, we all know the benefits to their physical fitness and independence and things.”
It’s important to point out that the 30km/h zones have encouraged more children to walk and bike. The meager “variable” zones being imposed instead around schools only cover a very limited time and space at the school gate (150m in each direction). Which means the vast majority of children’s travels will become more dangerous, for more children.
As Christchurch councillor Sara Templeton pointed out yesterday, when urging her Council to hold off on ratifying the changes:
… most deaths around schools happened outside of drop-off and pick-up hours and children walked and biked to school and did not just “magically appear” 300 metres from the gate.
That’s backed up by Caroline Perry of Brake, The Road Safety Charity, who notes:
“Our work with schools highlighted numerous reasons why many want permanent safe speed areas, from split site schools with students that walk between them for classes, to schools with childcare centres or sports facilities in use at other times, and those with a Walking School Bus or Bike Train that begins more than 300m from the school gate.
The ‘variable’ speed limits being proposed restrict safe speeds to a limited time and space when we know that 85 percent of road casualties outside Auckland schools occur outside the proposed variable operating times.”
Who’s worried?
Lots of people! Communities all around the country are calling for greater consultation and consideration of the evidence, along with road safety experts and advocacy groups.
On the Auckland front, as well as the schools mentioned in the RNZ story, there’s a growing list of schools who’ve contacted the Minister and Auckland Transport asking for action. Likewise, more than one residents’ association is speaking up for safe speeds in their rohe.
Updated 21 March to add: the residents of John St in Ponsonby are appalled that their narrow street will revert to 50km/h speeds, which they fear will exacerbate constant rat-running and occasional speeding.
Trying to address the issue is already costing precious time and energy. Schools and other delegations are taking time out of their working and school days to talk to elected members. Councillors and Local Boards are sitting up and taking note. And, as of yesterday, it seems Auckland Council is considering writing to the Minister to ask for a pause on the local reversals.
The pressure is not just on the Minister, but has dogged the Prime Minister on his travels as well, with 1News reporting:
“Speaking to media in India, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was asked if the Government had underestimated that communities liked the lower speed limits.”
What are the options here?
It’s in the Minister’s hands. He’s already given the nod to NZTA to expand consultation on the roads they oversee. But at this point, local road-controlling organisations (i.e. councils, and Auckland Transport) are obliged to proceed with worrying changes that they and their communities disagree with.
In the words of Marie Guerreiro, Executive Director of All Aboard Aotearoa:
“The Minister needs to take ownership of his portfolio and allow for community input before any reversion to more dangerous speeds, and Aucklanders should expect no less than to have their voices heard.”
The Minister can step in to resolve this inequitable situation, and ensure the speed-setting rule gives all communities get a chance to be heard. He might also take the opportunity to reconsider the importance of taking evidence and data into account.
True, the outcome of the judicial review may force his hand – cue even more headlines! – especially if there’s a court-ordered pause in early April. But wouldn’t it be great to see a thoughtful and proactive response before it gets to that point? It would save a great deal of angst all round.
What can we do to help?
Basically, speak up!
- The Minister of Transport needs to hear from everyone who’ll be affected. You can contact him at Chris.Bishop@parliament.govt.nz (You can also write to the associate Minister James.Meager@parliament.govt.nz )
- You can also write to your electorate MP, and contact your local board, your councillor, and transport agency leadership, asking them to stand up on our behalf.
A short email is all it takes. Outline the problem, your concerns, share any personal stories, local examples, and local data (the Healthy Auckland Together scorecard is handy), and ask for a reasonable response before it’s too late.
Sooner is better than later. Regardless of the outcome of the judicial review, our streets need to be safe – and communities need to be heard. A wholesale, top-down reversal by government of a whole lot of thoughtful, evidence-based local speed limits just ain’t it.
Reach out and take action. Highly visible actions and conversations have helped raise awareness about the benefits of safe speeds around schools and in neighbourhoods. Consider what you can do with friends and neighbours to bring attention to the issue in your area.
Check out Connor’s guide here for more on what you can do and say to help right this wrong before it’s too late. We’re all in this one together, and we have much more in common than you might expect.
Header image: School children holding signs asking drivers to slow down, from an Auckland Transport pamphlet entitled “Speed at the School Gate”.
Processing...
What saddens me is the increasing number of people who don’t feel safe walking or cycling in our communities without wearing a hi-viz clothing. It is already known that the overuse of hi-viz clothing leads to people taking no notice of it when driving.
The issue is not people not being seen, it is drivers not looking properly and seeing what they expect to see, not necessarily what is there.
The speed limits were only the start of the process, as many of the residential streets are still built out like rural or suburban arterials.
We can’t pretend those streets are safe for anyone if people won’t even park a car on them for fear of collision. Berms and footpaths are preferred, even when there’s a hard shoulder.
Getting buy-in with safe on street parking, protected by the same traffic calming that benefits walkers and riders, could be a start.
just another stupid move by the current government along with the school lunch fiasco and now the sensuring of medical experts because the minister of health like fast food .Notably the same twerp is the minister is two of these cockups .
What is horrifying is the social license that the government may be giving to drivers to choose speed over responsibility no matter what they may say about a ‘commitment’ to safety. Demanding a blanket speed limit of 50 km/h in spite of community decisions is contrary to true democracy. Review may be reasonable. A blanket is not.
I think AT should be slow walking the changes. As will be a waste as whenever councils are allowed to manage their own roads rather than central gov overreaching (seems more a rule than an exception), the limits will go straight back. And going slower means there is a higher chance of not having to spend a cent. Especially as this is unfunded. Central gov is not going to prosecute AT for going slow, as long as AT has plausible deniability. And the only reason to do this is to avoid prosecution from the AT perspective.
Minister of Transport sacrifices kids lives for votes.
Time to print put thousands of black stickers with a big number “3” on them to put over any reversed speed limit signs.
It is ghastly and makes no sense at all. It is hard to fathom that anyone in leadership would play any part in or support reversing safe speeds surrounding schools knowing that it will result in people – especially children- being killed. There is an easy fix so it is super important to write to the Minister. Thanks GA for clearly bringing together the concerns and what action to take.
This exercise has also revealed the elected reps who are completely clueless about the basics of road safety.
At the Waitematā Local Board meeting following Connor Sharp’s excellent presentation C&R’s Greg Moyle challenged the reported DSI of 11 over a 5 year period. He demanded Connor tell him where these deaths had happened as he “didn’t know about them” and found it hard to believe. His comments about one pedestrian fatality were offensive. He complained speed had been “pushed right down unnecessarily and it was just a matter of people driving to the conditions” . Moyle was unhappy about being “forced to drive 30km” on the way to the office. (he is also the transport lead)
C&R’s Sarah Trotman watered down City Vision’s recommended stand against the reversals because she was doubtful of the public support for the safe speed zones (despite Waitematā recording some of the highest levels of community support) and didn’t want to write to the Minister because “it would make it political” ie she supports the government policy.
Ghoulishly Maurice Williamson is going to be “Morris dancing around poles in Pakaranga Road ” when the speed reversal automatically happens there on Saturday.
He is more concerned about the mystical tradie driving through a safe speed zone at 5am as the reason to oppose permanent 30km/h around schools. He is happy to ignore the evidence and what council has heard directly from actual real live kids and school principals and neighborhood groups and residents associations and safety experts
I bet you had to wash your hands and face after sitting through that sort of talk.
Oh and he also threw in that the problem is peds and cyclist running red lights! ( but then this is the guy who says things like “no one rides on the Nelson st cycleway” while holding a cycle count report)
Sadly that kind of talk is far too common around the council table. They don’t care about the evidence.
Can we impose the same limit on shared paths?
I’ve had to start avoiding _footpaths_ near shared paths after being hit by a cyclist. Purewa bridge (at the intersection of Orakei and Ngapipi Road) is too dangerous now. Same with the North-western motorway shared path….
As a question, how do injury rates near schools vary across the time of day? A case can certainly be made for expanding the area/time zones around school — but instructing people to do 30 km/hr outside a school at 2 am in the morning is unnecessary.
The speed limits should not have been lowered in the first instance – total waste. There was a report a few years back (of course AT buried it) that the average speed around down town had dropped significantly and yet the number of accidents were increasing – total opposite to the narrative. Majority drive to the conditions, independent of speed limit – driver slower if more pedestrians around etc – we are not robots. Irresponsible drivers ignore this no matter what – like the women driving down Esmonde Road yesterday using her knees to steer as she text – can’t regular stupid – and why should the rest of us suffer because a small minority are stupid. I will be e-mailing Chris Bishop congratulating him on this change
Hopefully you never have to “suffer” someone you know being hit by a speeding vehicle.
Neither you nor the government seem to understand that productivity (journey time and congestion) has very little to do with speed limits and does not have a direct relation with safety. Logistics companies (who don’t all drive trucks themselves) have battened onto safe speed limits as a lobbying matter, but that has very little to do with urban safe speeds.
Knowing that residential street safe speed zones in Auckland made mention of schools in a general reason for setting 30 km/h limits in significant Low Traffic areas, the promoters of the new Speed Limits Rule clearly targeted all of those streets with the transitional rule – it can have been no accident in the wording of the Rule. The feeble variable speed 150 m from school gates Rule is no excuse for the clear expectation of death and serious injury arising from increased speed limits. The only saving grace is that many of those streets have low speeds even without the 30 km/h limit.
It takes a cold heart to hear principals and parents say safe speed zones are a good thing (for a whole lot of reasons that benefit everyone) but to still want the reversals on residential streets to go ahead knowing this will result in more road casualties and fewer kids walking and cycling to school.
All for what? So you can save a few seconds rat running?
It takes a cold heart to hear principals and parents say safe speed zones are a good thing (for a whole lot of reasons that benefit everyone) but to still want the reversals on residential streets to go ahead knowing this will result in more road casualties and fewer kids walking and cycling to school.
All for what? So you can save a few seconds rat running?