This is an opinion piece development by Vinetta Plummer, Policy and Government Lead for Healthy Families Waitākere, West Auckland mum of two, community advocate, and school board member. Originally featured on Greater Auckland.
Written for Road Safety Week 2025, the post reflects on the government’s reversal of safer speed limits through a local, lived lens and explores how these changes undermine years of community-informed planning, raise serious equity concerns, and signal a broader pattern of rolling back evidence-based policy in favour of short-term economics. It asks: what do our transport decisions really say about who our cities are built for?
As a mum of two teens, I’ve spent plenty of time around schools during drop-off and pick-up. I’ve stood on school road patrol alongside young students, sometimes stepping in to deal with drivers so tamariki could simply cross the road safely. Now, as a Board of Trustees member at a school where the main entrance opens onto a busy road, reckless and thoughtless driving comes up in nearly every meeting. So does the question: how do we get people to think more carefully about the little ones just trying to get to class?
One thing is clear — when we slow down, we protect lives. When we prioritise safety over speed, our streets become more welcoming, not just for our kids, but for all of us. That’s why the recent law change reversing safer speed limits feels like more than just a transport decision. It feels like a statement about what — and who — we truly value.
That’s why Road Safety Week matters. It’s a powerful reminder of how precious life is — and how preventable many deaths and injuries on our roads are. But this year, this reminder is more necessary than ever. A recent law change is set to undo years of progress on safer streets — including outside our schools.
Earlier this year, the government introduced a new law requiring Waka Kotahi and councils to reverse most speed limit reductions made since 2020. That includes school zones, where permanent 30km/h limits will be replaced with temporary ones active only during pick-up and drop-off times. In Tāmaki Makarau Auckland, some limits will rise from 50 to 60km/h by mid-year. Implementing these changes will also cost up to $8.8 million in new signage — money that could be spent improving safety, not undermining it.
The rationale is that faster roads mean greater productivity – less time commuting means more time at work. But does this logic really hold up under scrutiny?
- Higher speeds can lead to more crashes and worse outcomes. Even small increases in average speed can cause disproportionate rises in deaths and serious injuries.
- Transport planner Bevan Woodward, part of the Movement alliance (including Grey Power, Living Streets Aotearoa, and the Cycling Action Network), disputes the productivity claim, pointing out that when crashes happen, they result in hours of road closures, a hidden cost rarely factored in. His view: the best way to ease congestion is to encourage mode shift – more people walking, biking and taking public transport. But that’s harder to achieve on roads with higher, more dangerous speeds.
- More cars travelling faster doesn’t mean fewer traffic jams. In fact, it can increase congestion and emissions, especially when active modes become less appealing or safe.
- The hyped productivity gains are slim – often just seconds saved per trip – while the costs of crashes, road repairs, signage updates, and emergency responses would offset those. Waka Kotahi’s own cost-benefit manual makes clear that safety gains often outweigh time savings.
This reversal also flies in the face of what years of community engagement and evidence-based policy have told us. Groups from Greater Auckland to Vision Zero advocates, school communities, public health organisations, and many local boards had worked together to design safer streets that reflect how people – especially tamariki, kaumātua, disabled people, and those walking, biking, or using public transport – actually move through their neighbourhoods. These efforts weren’t just box-ticking; they were grounded in evidence and guided by local voices calling for slower speeds to protect lives. Stripping back these changes dismisses the work of communities who have already spoken and undermines the principle of building streets that are safe for everyone – not just those behind the wheel.
And there’s an equity issue too: car-centric policy disproportionately impacts those without access to cars, who are more likely to be Māori, Pacific, disabled, young, or on lower incomes. In many neighbourhoods, especially in lower-income areas, people more often rely on walking, scootering, biking, or public transport to get around. These users are far more vulnerable in traffic, and increasing speed limits in such communities could further heightens the risk, especially where safe infrastructure is already lacking.
This law change is part of a broader pattern; one we’re seeing across a range of government decisions. A pattern of rolling back community-informed, evidence-based initiatives in favour of short-term economics is emerging – and road safety is just one casualty. It’s telling that this is happening even as Aotearoa is on track for its lowest road toll in a decade, much of it due to slower speeds.
Reevaluating policy is a good thing for democracy. But when change ignores lived experience, expert research, and community safety, who is that policy good for?
As we pop the hood on these speed limit reversals, the question isn’t just “Will I get there faster?” It’s: At what cost – and to whom? Speed limits aren’t just numbers on signs – they reflect what and who we prioritise. Slowing down in a school zone isn’t an inconvenience, it’s a signal that the safety of our tamariki matters more than shaving off a few seconds of your arrival time.
