Reducing speeds on our roads means hundreds and thousands of us over the years will get to keep living our possibly boring but definitely important lives, writes Jess Berentson-Shaw
Opinion: Speed reductions are about what we value most. Plain and simple.
My summer break (which feels too distant already) involved many of the Kiwi classics: some beautiful beaches, bogans in a campground, sunburnt kids, and inevitably some long hours driving between places. When we get back from these long drives I am always relieved. Thankful that there will be more trips to go on, friends to see and even work to do. Because life, with all its ups and downs and sometimes boring mundanity, is definitely worth living past the most recent road trip we take.
But every year many people don’t get to live past that trip. Over 300 mums, little kids, dads, grandparents, and partners have their lives stopped when they are driving, riding or walking on our streets and roads.
And during every holiday we hear the same thing about shifting our behaviour: “Pay more attention, put on our seat belts, don’t drive drunk or tired” and not much changes. The number of people’s lives brought to an end on our roads and streets has stayed much the same for 15 or so years.
Surely it's time to stop doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome? It is time to start doing the things that will actually make the biggest difference to reducing to zero the number of people killed on our streets and roads. And that is where speed reductions come in.
We have to calm the streets and roads (as well as other things)
At the start of the holidays I read an article on the lowering of the speed limit on a stretch of road between Blenheim and Nelson to 60km an hour. It was initially met with vocal (but not necessarily majority) opposition, however initial data shows that the speed change has coincided with a reduction in people being killed and seriously injured. It was a cool article to read. People in local and central government did a significant thing to take care of people's lives and it is working. It is one piece of data that reflects what the body of evidence has been clear on for some years: when people have to drive slower than what they do on many of our city streets and larger roads, people live.
So why is it proving troublesome?
Near the end of our holiday in Hawkes Bay I was chatting with a journo friend. She mentioned that people at Waka Kotahi were planning to lower the speed limit to 80km an hour on the Napier Taupō road. Some people, she said, including some leaders in local government, were strongly opposed to it. I asked why and she seemed to think that the lowering of the speed limit was being seen by some as a way to get out of doing major improvements to a vital road link for the region. This thinking is understandable: for people in regional New Zealand, the sense they are missing out on important investment to ensure their regions have the opportunity to thrive is a critical issue. She also said a lot of people just wanted to be able to drive 100km an hour.
Opposition to the lowering of speed limits looks similar in most places where speed limit changes are proposed: a small group of people strongly attached to the right to driving fast no matter what the risk to themselves or others, mixed in with some genuine concerns about change and progress and opportunity. That means it is possible to predict and plan for effective implementation of such changes.
Listening and being clear on what we value
It is critical that where speed limits are to be lowered (or indeed significant policy changes are made that will affect people’s day-to-day lives), the genuine concerns are listened to. People in urban centres and in rural and provisional areas need help through transport changes like these, because change raises fears. And that doesn't mean those fears should hinder an effective public policy that works to prioritise people’s lives. This is where values conversations can help communities if not reach agreement, then to be clearer on why it is happening this way. And we are seeing a clearer focus on the values driving the wider vision zero strategy, both from Transport Minister Michael Wood and from people doing research.
Speed reductions come down to what the collective “us” value most, and in this case that is protecting the lives of all of us who use streets and roads across our communities. Especially more vulnerable members of society like children. Lowering speed has been shown to save people’s lives. It doesn't mean that other things do not matter. However, for policy makers - the people who we ask to work on society’s behalf with our collective best interests at heart - acting as stewards and protectors and making pragmatic, considered decisions, some things will always matter more.
What about those people who are just ideologically opposed to such change? They are often vocal, represent a minority and sometimes have access to platforms and people in power. Vocal minority opposition can be a tricky issue to address in an environment where research, science and effective (often transformative) public policy has been highly polarised and politicised (with a capital P). Focusing efforts on appeasing such people often leads to poor public policy decisions.
However, understanding the minority and often ideologically driven position can help policy people better fight for the policies that work on the basis of what is of most value to people's wellbeing over the long term. And that is what is starting to happen with our road strategy.
We want and need the people in our government to value my life and your life more highly than anyone's desire to drive at some random historically set speed. We need them to value it more highly than people’s fear-driven response to something new. Reducing speeds on our streets and our roads means hundreds and thousands of us over the years will get to keep living our possibly boring but definitely important lives. It is a just and simple policy for all our benefit. It's not where we stop, but it is a start.
