The parliamentary secretary in charge of road safety, Neil O’Keefe, said this week that there were two ways to achieve lower speeds in the suburbs: reduce the speed limit to 50km/h or enforce the existing limits. He thought the former was the way to go. He acknowledged that the police allow a 10km/h margin of error before booking people.
Mr O’Keefe has it only partly right. The speed limit should be reduce (ital) and (end ital) it should be enforced. Obviously, a little leeway should be allowed before police book motorists to account for small speedo errors and to discourage motorists gluing their eyes to the speedo instead of the road. But it would be better if the police viewed the leeway as a percentage (say 10 per cent), rather than an absolute 10km/h. Thus motorists could expect to be booked at 55km/h in suburban streets.
The case for a reduction is clear. Australia has one of the highest suburban limits in the world. Sixty-two per cent of Australians agree, according to a Federal Office of Road Safety survey. European countries that dropped the limit saw worthwhile reductions in road injuries. The minor loss of convenience is easily outweighed by considerations of safety and residential amenity.
The people most in favour of the same or a higher limit at those aged 15 to 24 … the very people involved in the highest proportion of accidents.
As limits are matters of local judgment, there is no compelling reason why the ACT need wait for a uniform change.