Land Transport NZ is now
part of the NZ Transport Agency
www.nzta.govt.nz
Accessibility | Help | Site index | Contact us
Summary of submissions
Executive summary
A total of 853 written submissions were received from a wide range of individuals and organisations. Many were from private individuals, but they also came from city, district, and regional councils, and from road safety consultants, traffic engineers, roading contractors, road transport operators, students, transport research organisations, psychologists, the motor vehicle industry, motorcyclists, cyclist groups, pedestrians, motoring clubs, the health sector, groups representing older people, government agencies, driving schools, community boards and groups, child safety groups, the alcohol industry, and many others.
Key consultation issues
A clear message from the consultation process was that the public wanted a higher level of road safety. Just over half of all respondents who commented on this agreed with the goal of achieving a level of safety in 2010 equivalent to where the safest countries in the world are now. There was also support for more ambitious goals such as matching the world's best countries, or trying to achieve a zero road toll.
When asked about the preferred option for achieving the goal, there was broad support for a mixed strategy combining enforcement, engineering and education elements. The public appeared concerned at the costs associated with engineering initiatives, and many considered more rigorous enforcement, and measures to improve unsafe driver attitudes and behaviours, to be preferable and less costly. Many individuals and organisations wanted education as a larger part of the mix than they perceived it to be from the strategy documents.
In response to the question about paying for the strategy, many people said that they were not prepared to pay anything over and above the current taxes on motorists, and that these taxes should be used on the roads rather than added to the Crown Account. Some wanted assurances that any additional monies raised for the Strategy's implementation would be wholly used for road safety.
When asked what targets they wanted to see defined, most supported the proposed targets, particularly regional and user-group targets as a means of encouraging ownership at a regional and community level. Targets for road-user groups such as pedestrians and cyclists were seen as important to ensure the safety needs of these groups were taken more fully into account. It was considered important that access be considered in setting targets for vulnerable road users so that an increase in safety was not achieved by reductions in the numbers of people walking or cycling.
The role of education in the strategy received many comments, although education was interpreted in a variety of ways. Driver training was considered important, and many people commented on the need for community and school-based road safety education, advertising, and education that focused on vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists. There was clearly a perception that education had been downplayed in the strategy documents.
Comment on interventions
Many people provided submissions focusing solely on the proposal to reduce the open road speed limit to 90 km|h, with approximately 80% of submissions that addressed this issue opposed to lowering the limit. There were more submissions in favour of than against the other open-road speed management measures of demerit points for speed camera offences and enhanced surveillance.
The majority of submissions commenting on urban speed management measures were in favour of strict enforcement of the 50 km|h speed limit.
There was a widely-held view that New Zealand roads were substandard and poorly maintained and that engineering improvements would go a long way towards improving road safety. Blackspots were identified as an area of concern. There was also concern that expanded construction could adversely affect access for vulnerable road users, unless their needs were more fully taken into account.
Approximately two-thirds of the submissions commenting on a reduced legal alcohol limit supported reducing the limit, and one-quarter opposed it. The remainder wanted more research, or some assurance that enforcement resources would be increased, before supporting a reduced limit. There was a general feeling that reduced BAC limits would provide greater safety improvements and support a community rejection of drink driving. A similar proportion of submissions commenting on the proposed zero BAC limit for young drivers supported the proposal. There was concern, however, about resources for enforcing lower limits. There was also general support for intensified breath testing.
A majority of submissions opposed the proposal to raise the minimum driving age. Many were concerned that raising the age would negatively impact on rural people and their families because of the lack of transport alternatives. The view was also expressed that recent graduated driver licensing system changes should be evaluated before any changes were made to the licensing age.
The proposal to increase enforcement of restraint wearing received general support. Most respondents commenting on the proposed extension to the legally-prescribed hours of darkness were actually stating their support for the use of headlights at all times of the day. There was general support for the recently-introduced licence suspension and vehicle impoundment measures. Although most respondents supported stronger enforcement of drivers' speeds, and alcohol and restraint use, many felt that more enforcement was also needed of other unsafe driver practices, for example failure to give way.
Many suggested that light vehicle standards needed improvement, with a number focusing on the age of imported vehicles. Comments on heavy vehicles showed concern about heavy vehicle driver behaviour and about wear and tear on the roads.
Sector responses
Responses from Local Government
Among responses from local government, which was the largest interest group represented in the submissions, a significant number supported a more ambitious long-term goal, along the lines of "Vision Zero". There was strong support for a greater education component in the strategy, and some concern that the road safety strategy should be integrated with wider government strategies on transport and the environment. Local government responses were strongly in support of more rigorous enforcement of existing laws, but there was a perception that the police were either not adequately resourced to undertake it, or that they were not sufficiently committed to road safety. There was a widespread belief that engineering brought long-term benefits, but equally a concern about having to fund improvements partially through rates and about the need to change the current benefit/cost mechanism for allocating national resources. Urban councils in particular saw the need for a strategy to address the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, children and older people.
Responses from Transport Interests
Submissions were received from a range of transport sector organisations, the Automobile Association, roading contractors, engineering consultants, road transport organisations and companies, and motor vehicle dealer organisations. A consistent comment from this sector was that education was important. There was general support for more safety on our roads, and for a mix of engineering, enforcement and education as the preferred option.
The Automobile Association supported the mixed option, but considered education to be an essential component of the strategy, especially in motivating people to change risky behaviour. Its membership poll indicated that motorists expected the Government to make an adequate investment in road safety from the road-use taxes they already paid.
Roading contractors favoured an engineering emphasis, but there were concerns among engineering consultants about a shortage of expertise in New Zealand. The Road Transport Forum was firmly of the view that road safety would be significantly improved if roading expenditure was lifted to the level of that in comparable countries throughout the world. The motor vehicle industry supported education for drivers and professionals in the industry and higher vehicle safety standards.
Responses from Community Groups
Responses from community groups and organisations generally reflected the view that road safety was a community responsibility. In some cases there was a wish to strive for a more idealistic goal, or at least to match the world's best. Some, however, considered that a realistic and achievable goal was most important. A strong message about the importance of education came from this sector, but also wide support for strong enforcement of existing road rules. Many of these submissions sought more emphasis in the strategy on vulnerable road users.
Health Sector Responses
There was a strong thread of support from the health sector for making the roads safer for children, and for targets for child safety. There was also considerable support for giving priority to vulnerable road users, particularly as encouraging modes of transport other than motor vehicles had wider health benefits. There were also calls for consideration of the environmental impacts of road safety interventions.
Introduction
A total of 852 submissions were received on the proposed Road Safety Strategy 2010. Most submissions based their comments on the National Road Safety Committee's consultation document Road Safety Strategy 2010 and the shorter Overview version of the document. Some also commented on the supplementary Safety Directions Working Papers 6 and 7.
The public was asked to comment on the proposed road safety goal for 2010, and the proposed options for achieving the goal. They were also asked to comment on the range of interventions that might be introduced within the three proposed options.
A total of 59 submissions were received from regional and local government agencies (including Local Government New Zealand and TRAFINZ), 7 from central government agencies, 22 from health sector agencies, 37 from groups representing vulnerable road users, and 35 from various business interests for which road safety is critical (for example, commercial drivers and road transport operators). In addition 580 private individuals made submissions.
Page created: 13 September 2002