Fix the roads, not the speed limit signs

The Australian Government’s proposal to reduce default speed limits outside built-up areas might sound like a simple safety fix but it risks delivering more harm than help.

NatRoad supports strong, evidence-based road safety measures. However, the government’s proposal to reduce default speed limits fails to capture the full economic and operational impacts, and it overlooks what the latest crash data shows about the causes of heavy vehicle incidents.

The proposal: a one-size-fits-all slowdown

Lowering the default limits on sealed rural roads (to 90, 80 or 70km/h) and unsealed roads (to 80 or 70km/h) isn’t targeted intervention.  It is a blanket change that would apply across all non-signed roads, from well-maintained regional routes to isolated dirt tracks.

For freight operators, this means longer travel times, reduced distances covered within regulated driving hours, and higher costs.

A 20km/h reduction in average speed may only add minutes to a single leg, but across a 12-14 hour day, the delays compound. Drivers still face strict fatigue limits, so less distance is achieved per shift, productivity falls, and transport costs rise.

What the NTARC data really says about crashes

The National Truck Accident Research Centre (NTARC) 2025 Report found excessive speed is a contributing factor in fewer than 7 per cent of fatal heavy vehicle crashes. The figure has been steadily declining for years.

Instead, fatigue, inattention and poor road conditions are far more significant factors in both fatal and serious incidents. The NTARC report highlights:

• Single-vehicle crashes have dropped nearly 20 per cent over the past decade, largely due to better fatigue management, vehicle stability systems and improved enforcement.
• Road condition factors, including poor pavement, narrow shoulders and inadequate signage, feature in a large proportion of serious crashes on regional roads.
• Multi-vehicle incidents are more often linked to driver distraction or vehicle interactions, not speed.

The evidence is clear: lowering default speed limits across the entire rural network would do little to prevent the types of crashes most common to heavy vehicle operations.

Fix the roads, not the signs

Australia’s regional and remote road network remains under-maintained. The Grattan Institute reports that governments underspend on road maintenance by at least $1 billion per year, with regional councils underspending by around 42 per cent on average, and by more than 75 per cent in remote areas.

Poorly maintained roads don’t just increase crash risk, they increase freight costs through higher vehicle maintenance, tyre wear and downtime.

NatRoad is calling for a further $500 million per year investment through the Roads to Recovery program, dedicated to road upgrades and maintenance. In parallel, the government should expand the National Black Spot Program by at least $50 million annually, enabling more targeted safety treatments in high-risk locations.

Smarter safety, better returns

Evidence from the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) shows targeted safety treatments deliver far greater returns on investment than blanket measures. For example:
• Warning signs deliver a benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of 9.6.
• Line marking delivers a BCR of 6.6.
• The government’s preferred 80 km/h blanket option delivers just 2.2.

Well-planned infrastructure improvements save more lives for every taxpayer dollar. They also enable the safer operation of higher productivity vehicles.

Modelling shows increasing the use of longer and more efficient truck combinations could reduce operating costs by $13.6 billion in net present value to 2050, leading to potential savings for the average household of over $400 per year.

Education and awareness matter

Behavioural factors like fatigue, following distance and distraction are recurring causes of serious incidents, according to NTARC. This points to the value of education and enforcement, rather than broad-brush speed reduction.

Public safety campaigns, like NSW’s famous “Pinkie” campaign, have achieved measurable success, cutting speed-related fatalities by more than 30 per cent. Sustained, data-driven education builds long-term behavioural change far more effectively than universal speed cuts.

A balanced, data-driven approach

NatRoad believes the way forward lies in balance, not blanket rules. Governments should:
1. Target speed reductions only in proven high-risk areas.
2. Invest in rural road upgrades and maintenance to improve infrastructure safety.
3. Continue strong public education campaigns to address fatigue, distraction and compliance.

These steps align with the real-world causes of crashes identified by NTARC, rather than imposing productivity-crushing limits that would penalise safe, professional operators.

Australia’s freight network is the backbone of our economy. Slowing it down indiscriminately won’t make the country safer, it will only make it slower, more expensive, and less efficient.

It’s time to focus on smarter, evidence-based safety, not blanket speed reductions that miss the mark.

• To have your say on the proposed speed changes, click here. The deadline is November 10.

Warren Clark is the CEO of the National Road Transport Association.