Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 10 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3188 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

at a speed of 44 kilometres per hour. The same car travelling at 50 kilometres per hour would be able to stop. The probability of a person surviving a vehicle impact at 44 kilometres per hour can be as low as 30 per cent, as opposed to a 100 per cent survival rate if the vehicle had been travelling 10 kilometres per hour slower.

In Canberra most of our traffic accidents involve excessive speeding. A 1996 ABS survey found that 60 per cent of Canberra drivers regularly exceeded speed limits by over 10 kilometres per hour. It is also important to note, Mr Speaker, that over 40 per cent of traffic accidents in Canberra occur on residential streets. The statistics show that old people and young people are most at risk of injury or fatality. There is a general acknowledgment by road safety experts that lowering the speed limit will reduce the number and extent of road accidents, particularly those involving pedestrians and cyclists, and generally reduce the impacts of traffic on the safety and amenity of residential streets. It would also make on-road cycling more attractive as an alternative transport mode.

A reduction in the speed limit in residential areas is an ideal way to redress the imbalance between the interests of car drivers and those of other people who use roads and their surrounds; that is, people who live next to roads, children, pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users. We have to challenge the idea that roads are for cars only and everyone else should just get out of the way. Roads are part of our residential neighbourhoods. They are at present a dangerous part of our neighbourhood, and this Bill is attempting to reduce that danger. The drawbacks of a lower speed limit are minor. Studies have found that a lower speed limit hardly increases travel times, because most traffic delays are caused by traffic lights and busy arterial roads. There also could be marginal savings in fuel consumption.

Mr Speaker, it should be noted that there is already a significant level of community support for reduced speed limits. A Federal Office of Road Safety survey found that 62 per cent of Australians agree that the speed limit should be lowered. An NRMA survey found that 74 per cent of those polled supported a 50 kilometres per hour speed limit on local residential streets. Obviously, however, any reduction in the speed limit has to be accompanied by a broad educational campaign so that everyone is aware of the changes. It will require a shift in our driving culture. It will be necessary to have a campaign, not dissimilar to the drink-driving campaign, before drivers slow down in our residential areas. However, we believe that such a campaign must have legislative backing to be effective. Our Bill allows for an implementation period of up to six months before the new speed limit comes into effect, which would be sufficient time for such a campaign to be established.

The main issue in Australia now regarding reducing the speed limit seems to be one of generating the necessary political will to set a more appropriate traffic speed in residential areas. Unfortunately, up till now, most governments have been reluctant to confront the general public about this issue, even though the polling shows that there is a lot of support. We believe that this Assembly should show some leadership in this issue by passing this Bill. I commend it to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Mr Kaine) adjourned.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .