Content
There's a clear logic behind the idea that lowering speed limits can reduce accident risks, and I do support that idea when applied appropriately. But having spent a lot of time driving on unsealed regional roads, I really doubt the Federal Labor Government’s plan to reduce default speed limits on rural and regional roads will work as intended. If the goal is to save lives on these roads, then the real solution lies in improving infrastructure and education, not slashing speed limits for all.
Right now, the default speed limit outside built-up areas in Australia is 110 km/h unless signs say otherwise. The Federal Government is thinking about dropping that limit to as low as 70 km/h on roads without signs, which has folks in regional Western Australia pretty worried. It’s easy to see why – for people driving between Perth and Geraldton, this change could tack on more than an hour to their trip, and nearly an extra hour between Perth and Margaret River. For those who spend hours driving for work, school, healthcare, or family reasons, that’s a big and unnecessary hassle.
The intention behind this proposal is good, but there’s little solid proof that simply lowering speed limits on country roads will make them safer. In fact, research suggests other factors like road quality, how well drivers know the road, and environmental conditions actually matter way more. Driving in regional areas is different from urban driving – road surface, width, shoulders, visibility, wildlife, weather, and driver fatigue all impact safety. Blanket speed limits don’t take these unique challenges into account, which is why there’s so much debate about this.
One local said, “I remember when Labor tried this before. When everyone had to slow down on roads they knew well, they got distracted, and the death toll actually went up.” Another person added, somewhat sarcastically, “Research shows that 96.2% of all deaths involved people who drink water. The assumptions behind this rural roads analysis are just mad. Fix your darn roads, improve driver education, and let folks who drive a thousand km a day avoid extra fatigue.”
Groups like the Australian Livestock and Rural Transporters Association have also warned this plan could hurt productivity, impact animal welfare, and hide the real problem – chronic under-investment in rural roads. And they’re spot on. Only about 30 percent of Western Australia’s massive road network is sealed, the rest is dirt, gravel, sand, and grit.
The Federal Government really needs to get serious about regional roads. That means proper investment in sealing, better shoulders, regular maintenance, road widening, and more overtaking lanes. Plus, driver awareness campaigns tailored to the realities of regional driving would help a lot. The Cook Labor Government should also pull its weight by focusing road safety funding through the Royalties for Regions program instead of spending it on flashy city projects.
Nobody disagrees safety is the top priority, but solutions have to be based on evidence and real-world experience, not decisions made in Canberra thousands of kilometers away. Remember last year’s bizarre idea under Canberra’s Nature Positive legislation to drop speed limits in the Pilbara to 40 km/h? Before rushing into new rules like that, we should stick to what actually makes a difference: better roads, better knowledge, and smarter investments.
Regional Western Australians know the importance of road safety because they live it every day. What we need are policies that actually fit the unique conditions and demands of regional driving. The consultation period for Labor’s proposal ends on November 10, and I encourage everyone who lives, works, and drives in regional WA to have their say. Let’s make choices based on facts and common sense, not just quick fixes.
Julie Freeman is the shadow minister for road safety.
