Safer Journeys submission: your input invited by 4pm Friday 25 September

CAN groups and members are looking for CAN guidance on making a submission.

What are the most important initiatives? CAN staff had a go and want your input.  

Please let us have your thoughts by 4pm Friday 25 September as we wish to post this to CAN Forum and local groups to encourage submissions.

Submissions close Friday 2 October so we want to give people a week to consider their submission.



The Safer Journeys submissions are due: 5pm Friday 2 October.

One newbie (who has read a few strategies) said the Safer Journeys Document was one of the easiest she had read. It is fairly readable.

3 ways to make your voice heard

1. Write a submission [medium in terms of time and effort, satisfying!]

Attached is CAN's draft submission, highlighting areas of concern for walking and cycling.

It is a matter of choosing your top 10-20 initiatives and backing your choices by looking at the rationale/background info. in the Discussion document, selecting a few key supporting facts to support your choice. Fairly easy as submissions go.

The Discussion Document breaks up the proposed initiatives into

  • Areas of High Concern (Alcohol, Drugs, Young Drivers, Speed, Roads & Roadsides, & Motorcycling);

  • Areas of Medium Concern (Light Vehicles, Walking and Cycling, Heavy Vehicles, Fatigue, Restraints); and

  • Areas for continued focus and emerging issues (Older Road Users, Raising Awareness and Advertising)

We consider Walking and Cycling needs to be moved to the Areas of High Concern. 
Many of the initiatives listed under the "Areas of High Concern" initiatives are probably the most important for improving safety for Walking and Cycling.
Although those under the heading "Walking and Cycling" are also helpful.

2. Rate your top 10-20 initiatives using an on line form [easy]

  • When prioritising think winnable and greatest gain for greatest number, e.g. urban initiatives are perhaps more important as the greatest number of walking and cycling occurs in urban areas.

  • The online form allows 20 choices (MoT proposes 59 possible initiatives). The voting system also allows one new initiative that you can propose.

  • We think a few key walking and cycling initiatives are missing (see asterixed below)

  • It's hard to decide the priority order within your 20 choices so perhaps choose your top 10 and approximate what order you think is most significant, then add your next 10 most important. Alternatively try rating the 59 initiatives as High, Medium, & Low.  Then start with your High, add Medium until you max out your limit.  P.S. Don't forget the initiatives CAN thinks should be considered and were not included in the 59 MOT listed initatives (see those with an asterix below).

  • MoT is clear there is not enough funding for implementing all 59 initiatives so is considering (based on public feedback) which to prioritise.

Below is our suggested list of highest priority initiatives for walking and cycling.

Of the Safer Journeys Discussion Document proposed Initiatives 

(plus a few we think MOT missed) the top 20 high priority

in approximate order of priority for pedestrians/cyclists are...

  1. Change the legal onus of blame for road crashes to the motorist rather than pedestrians or cyclists.*

  2. Reduce the legal adult blood alcohol concentration (BAC) to 50mg per 100ml (BAC 0.05).

  3. Introduce a zero blood alcohol limit for certain drivers (drivers under 20 years old, adults without a full licence, commercial drivers (Safer Journerys Discussion Document), [and recidivists drink driver offenders]*

  4. Raise the driving age to 17 and extend the learner licence period to 12 months.

  5. Increase the adoption of lower speed limits in urban areas.

  6. Change the give way rules for turning traffic and pedestrians.

  7. Support a targeted programme for high-risk urban intersections.

  8. Review speed limits on mixed-use arterials.

  9. Create more speed zones (80km/hr, 90km/hr) on high risk rural roads.
  10. Have stronger promotion of road user education, including targeted messages and more national promotions, such as “share the road”.
  11. Add specific walking and cycling questions into driver licence testing so drivers are more aware of pedestrians' and cyclists' safety needs.

  12. Strengthen the effectiveness of enforcement by: increasing the number of road safety cameras; changing the penalty system to deter speeding (higher demerit points and lower fines).

13. Implement treatments to make high risk roads more self-explaining.

14. Improve techniques to integrate safety into land use planning.

15. Carry out crash reduction studies and make these more targeted.

16. Implement targeted programmes to address run-off road, head-on and overtaking crashes on high volume, high-risk rural roads.

17. Increase cyclists skills training in schools (Safer Journerys Discussion Document),  [and for adults]*

18. Introduce compulsory 3rd party insurance. *

19. Change the tolerance for motor vehicle speed limit enforcement from 10km/h to a maximum of ten per cent of the posted speed limit.*

20.  Develop and support new approaches to safety on mixed-use arterials.

*This is not currently one of the suggested initiatives in the Safer Journeys Discussion Document (rationale for these follows in this submission)

3. Comment on the MoT's on-line Discussion Forum [easy]

NB: Your opinion may influence others considering making a written submission. However, the Ministry of Transport is clear that comments on the Discussion Forum will not be considered in the decision making process for shaping the final Road Safety Document.



Re the Safer Journeys initiative
"Change the give way rules for turning traffic and pedestrians. "

I was at a meeting today where Tim Hughes explained what the above initiative means.
It actually covers three give way rules.
1) It removes the give way to the right rule (so NZ is in line with all other countries, and the expected 3 million visitors don't cause or have crashes).
2) It changes the give way rules at uncontrolled T intersections where two cars are turning right so that vehicle on the side street effectively has a give way sign.
3) It changes the give way rules at non controlled intersections so that pedestrians have right of way when crossing and cars are turning across the path of the pedestrian from either the left or right. (apparently everywhere else in the world has this rule).
So a very important initiative to support.
In addition:
I think Blood Alcohol Count (BAC) decreasing to 50mg/100ml is very important to support. It is my understanding that the Alcohol Strategy (I think submissions closed?) does not have lowering the BAC. The Alcohol Lobby is very strong so it can not be seen as a given.

I changed the order of the top 20 (based on discussion I heard today e.g. new 10 given more priority is based on the comments heard see tag attached to article) and added a comment of "high, medium, low" as a way of people ordering the 59 initiatives (Glen did it that way) so if you already looked can you please recheck and let know it is all okay.
On the bus to Alexandra tomorrow but have T-Stick to look at comments.

Is the idea that the draft submission document gets updated with the above priorities and then made available for the local groups to use and get in by the 2nd?


I think this document looks good. Two points I'd make.

As should be evident by now *I* think the blanket request for 1.5 m passing clearance should be dropped or replaced by a more considered and balanced approach to promoting safe passing of cyclists.

I'm not sure where the request for reducing rural speed limits comes from. is it backed up by accident statistics? is it because rural roads are not seen as being engineered well enough for 100 km/h? does it include rural state highways or just secondary rural roads? The reason I'm asking is that farming lobbies and the entire rural sector would probably oppose this on the grounds it increases travel times and so the request should be explained and justified.

Stephen Wood , based in Central Otago

OK, I've looked at the rural speed limits tem in the SJ document. It's targeting high risk roads only, and suggesting they have lowered speed limits, which is a good idea. I'd been mistaken when I thought it was calling for a reduction of speed limits on all rural roads.

Stephen Wood , based in Central Otago

yes from me too

I think the 1.5 metre concept is covered under point 10 (as a share the road type of initiative)

10. Have stronger promotion of road user education, including targeted messages and more national promotions, such as “share the road”.

And I think Point 20
20. Develop and support new approaches to safety on mixed-use arterials.
should become Point 12 and all the others slide down. Below is a snippet from Safer Journeys that shows how good this initiative would be.
From Safer Journeys under "Develop and support new approaches to safety on mixed-use arterials. "
Overseas, there have been many innovative techniques used to deal with the range of problems at urban arterials. For example, in 2002, the UK government introduced a series of demonstration (or pilot) projects on urban arterials, investing one million pounds ($2.4m) in each project.
I think the 1.5 metre concept is covered under point 10
Common factors in these projects were the reallocation of road space to better reflect the mix of users (eg bus lanes, wider footpaths), improvements to the streetscape, parking management, more crossing points, intersection improvements and traffic calming. These were proven methods, but they were combined and integrated in new ways. These projects delivered, on
average, a 46 percent reduction in casualties. They also helped to reduce congestion and increase the use of public transport, walking and cycling.

If there is sufficient support for this initiative then a package of interventions will be put together to assist local authorities.