
‘I'm worried some kid is gonna die': Auckland suburb pushing back on speed limit reversals
Residents of a seaside suburb in Auckland have been campaigning to reverse the reversal of speed limit reductions on their main road, for fear the changes may end in a fatality.
The Twin Coast Discovery Highway passes through a number of suburbs on the Hibiscus Coast. Like all major roads, the speed limit changes as it passes through residential areas. In beachside Ōrewa, it's set at 60km/h. Slightly further north on the rural stretch leading into Waiwera, it's also 60km/h. But between the two sits the small suburb of Hatfields Beach, where the highway winds past residential streets. The speed limit there? As of late March, 70km/h.
In line with the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024, by July 1, road controlling authorities are required to reverse 'blanket' speed limit reductions imposed by the Labour government in 2020. As an urban connector road, the speed limit for Twin Coast Discovery Highway, which runs through the Hibiscus Coast, can be set between 50-80km/h. Alternative speed limits can be considered for roads adjacent to a beach with public access (at 10-60km/h), or urban streets with 'significant levels of pedestrian and/or cycling activity' (set at 40km/h).
Under the old regime, the speed limit for the Hatfields Beach section of the Twin Coast Discovery Highway was reduced from a 70km speed limit to 60km in June 2020, then further reduced to 50km in May 2023. But in late March this year, the speed limit on the road was bumped back up to 70km/h.
Though the speed limit reversals have only been in effect in Hatfields Beach for a month, its residents say they have sent numerous complaints to transport minister Chris Bishop, Auckland Transport (AT), the police and their local MP, Mark Mitchell. They're concerned the new limits jeopardise the community's safety and defy sense given the more rural road next door to the town requires commuters to drive more slowly. They say these concerns have largely gone nowhere.
Kelly Paddison, who has lived in the area with her family for nearly 20 years, says it became 'safer to move around the neighbourhood' when the speed limits were lowered, and the community has grown accustomed to a slow-and-steady way of life on the road. Now, she's worried those 'hooning' through the street will bring accidents in their wake.
There was significant congestion along the road years ago, Paddison said, when it was still a part of State Highway 1 – but since the Johnstones Hill Tunnels were opened in 2009 to extend the highway, this has significantly lessened any gridlock. However, the Twin Coast Discovery Highway is still an option for those who don't want to foot a toll road fee.
'I think what's most important to us is that we're feeling lost in the bureaucracy of it all,' Paddison says. She says complaints to Auckland Transport, which formally opposed the reversals, returned 'it's just the rules' and 'our hands are tied' responses, while emails to Bishop and Mitchell haven't returned anything at all.
Mum of four school-aged children Jasmin Tapp, a Hatfields Beach local for 10 years, shares Paddison's safety concerns, saying she and other families often walk the main road and watch drivers 'get nervous' as they realise there are no pathways for whānau to cross. There is one pedestrian crossing in the area, but many opt to try their luck with a quick dash across the road to reach the other side, rather than looping back to the crossing.
Tapp also takes issue with the cost of the speed limit changes in Auckland, which AT has estimated at $8.8m, with central government likely to contribute just over half. 'We have a government where they're making job cuts here, there and everywhere because they're trying to get rid of unnecessary spending,' Tapp says. 'They charge a fortune for the signage and the safety [assessment] needed when [reversing the speed limits] … that just seems very counterintuitive to what this government's goal is.'
The Land Transport Rule was signed by former transport minister Simeon Brown in September 2024 – his National Party colleague Chris Bishop picked up the portfolio in a January caucus reshuffle. Bishop told The Spinoff that while National is committed to reversing speed limit reduction, a relevant road controlling authority can undertake a 'speed review'.
'Road Controlling Authority (RCA), such as councils, can initiate new speed reviews for roads subject to reversal, provided the process meets the requirements of the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024 (the Rule),' the minister said in an emailed response to The Spinoff.
For that reason, the decision in this instance is a matter for Auckland Council and Auckland Transport, said Bishop. AT did not respond to a request for comment from The Spinoff in time for publication. However, it is understood that the agency must first roll out all the speed limit reversals in Auckland – for which there is a deadline of July 1 – before it considers reviews.
Local Mike Anderson says it wouldn't be possible to hit 70km/h if you were trying to drive down the road safely – it has too many bends, there are too many residential roads and too many children attempting to cross it to be mindful of. 'If you're doing 70 down there, you're an absolute jerk, to be honest.'
Anderson fears the worst. 'I'm just worried some kids are going to get killed in that time,' he says. 'It's just so frustrating, because everyone knows it's ridiculous … What I don't understand is why Auckland Transport have thrown their hands up.'
Anderson, Tapp and Paddison all believe their community is, for the most part, firmly against the speed limit reversals. However, the reversals do have a fan in Geoff Upson, a self-described road safety campaigner and member of the Rodney Local Board, who says he has spoken to Hatfields Beach residents who are happy with the changes.
Upson says 'upset people have been the vocal minority' in the speed limits debate, and that returning the road to its 50km/h limit wouldn't necessarily mean that the 'risk goes away'. The new setting of 70km/h is a 'very comfortable' limit for the road, he says, and a generation of Aucklanders are used to driving at the speed on the road given it was once a part of State Highway 1.
The real problem, Upson reckons, is that the 70km/h limit ends once you pass Hatfield Beach to enter Waiwera – it's a more rural section of the road, but as it is not an urban connector by Auckland Transport's definition, the limit cannot be lifted. Upson says the frustration with how speed limits have been implemented around the city rests with the fact that Auckland Transport opted to make decisions about the limits while sitting in their offices, rather than going out and inspecting the roads.
Hatfields Beach isn't the only neighbourhood in Aotearoa where residents are trying to fight speed limit reversals. In Wellington's Berhampore, locals have been campaigning against the speed limit reversals that have seen some streets rise from 30km/h to 50km/h – their local MP, Julie-Anne Genter, had penned an open letter to Bishop, who said the Green Party MP's feedback was better placed with Wellington Council and the New Zealand Transport Agency.
Communities in areas including Nelson, Horowhenua, New Plymouth and Gisborne are also making their opposition heard, as well as school principals across Auckland. Whether they will have any success remains to be seen. In April, Wellington High Court's Justice Radich dismissed an interim order submitted by transport advocacy group Movement to halt all speed limit reversals until their judicial review into the policy is heard later this year.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


NZ Herald
8 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Labour's Willie Jackson doesn't want a ‘war with the Māori Party'
Labour's Willie Jackson says Te Pāti Māori needs to compromise and focus on the main issues facing New Zealanders, like health and housing, following three MPs' sanctioning in Parliament this week.

RNZ News
14 hours ago
- RNZ News
The House: A sentencing hearing in Parliament
Rawiri Waititi speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. The noose is a reference to a tupuna who was hanged in Mount Eden Prison. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins The fate of the three Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka during the vote on the first reading of the Principles of Treaty of Waitangi Bill last November was decided on Thursday , following a long, and at times intense debate. The Privileges hearing outcome was something the Government clearly wanted finished, and it ended the week. Leader of the House Chris Bishop, kicked off Thursday's debate by asking the House to bring down the curtain on an issue that has lingered in Parliament for seven months. The debate boiled down to whether the recommended punishments - all unprecedented - were fair, or even wise. Before the debate paused a fortnight ago, the positions of the two largest parties ( National and Labour ) had been outlined. The Privileges Committee Chair, Judith Collins had stood by the recommended punishments, while Chris Hipkins moved an amendment to reduce them to more historically usual levels. Some of the speeches stepped beyond a simple defence or opposition. Some were personal, some philosophical, some emotional. A few moments are noted below. Labour's Duncan Webb, who is Deputy Chair of the Privileges Committee, is a former jurist and went for the dissect-the-facts approach. It felt like a trial defence summary. "It's well known that those three members chose not to attend the Privileges Committee or provide any explanation. They weren't required to attend the committee. They were not called to attend and therefore did not have to. Whilst they can't claim credit for cooperation - nor can they say they were denied an opportunity to explain - neither can they be punished. "It appears that some members of the committee may feel affronted that the members didn't come to the committee when they were invited. They may even consider that the members were defiant in not attending. "However, they were not required to attend. This is no justification for the imposition of a punishment that is disproportionate and arbitrary." Te Tai Tonga MP Tākuta Ferris took Te Pāti Māori's first call, and took a constitutional approach, questioning the underpinnings of the institution making the judgement. "This debate is not about a haka. It is not about a suspension. It's not about the interruption of a vote. "It is, at its heart, about the fact that this House continues to ignore Te Tiriti o Waitangi, that this House continues to ignore Māori sovereignty, and that this House continues to ignore all of the constitutional rights that flow forth from those two things. "The fact of the matter is simple: without Māori sovereignty, there is no Te Tiriti o Waitangi. "Without Te Tiriti o Waitangi, there is no constitutional right for the presence of the Crown in this part of the world. "Without the constitutional right, there is no Parliament." New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters is a harsh critic of Te Pāti Māori. There was a sense that the pot was boiling over as Peters, himself a member of the Privileges Committee, launched into Te Pāti Māori MPs. "No ordinary Māori, Māori, or non-Māori should accept the behaviour or the intent of this party of absolute extremists, screaming out that everybody else in the Parliament is here only by their behest. "Have a look in the mirror. Mr Ferris, look in the mirror. What is the majority of your DNA? What's the majority of your DNA? Well, if you're disgraced by your European DNA, we over here are not. We are proud of all sides of our background because we are New Zealanders first and foremost. As for blood quantum, if the cowboy hat wearer is an example of blood quantum, I'm going to a new biology class." Winston Peters speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith Labour's Willie Jackson also focused his speech on Te Pāti Māori, playing what could be called the role of 'good cop' and encouraging them to compromise. "You know I love you, but a little bit of compromise could help the situation... I know it's hard to apologise, but I want to say to you Te Pāti Māori that not every single Māori in the country supports you and they don't support some of the strategy. "They love you, I love you, but some of the stuff is not going down well. "This is the centre and a celebration of the Westminster system, and I think our challenge - as, I think, you know - is that we have to imbue some of our Māori culture into the system. "We have to get a partnership going, and I don't think the kōrero so far is going to help with the partnership. You know, we have to get the House to embrace some of our values." Willie Jackson speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith Former Speaker Adrian Rurawhe is also from Labour's Māori caucus. His speech was a change of pace and had a touch of elder statesman. He began by speaking of a new precedent set - a government majority within the privileges committee punishing the opposition. Raiwiri Waititi and Adrian Rurawhe chat during the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins "There are no winners in this debate. Each party in this House might think they're winning by talking to the people that support them, but there are no winners in this debate - none - especially not this House. "The Privileges Committee of the future will have a new precedent, without a doubt - a new range of penalties against members who err in the future. You can guarantee that. "You can also guarantee that Governments of the day, in the future, will feel very free to use those penalties to punish their opponents. "This is what we are doing in the House today." The House also heard from the ACT party, who the Te Pāti Māori performed the haka in front of. One of the key points of contention was whether the ACT MPs were victims of intimidation. All three ACT MPs who spoke certainly thought so, with Karen Chhour, who compared the debate to an HR meeting. "I've listened to the speeches across this House, and the hate and the anger that's been chucked from both sides of this House, and it actually really saddens me - it really saddens me. Somebody can say that I don't have the right to stand here and speak, but that's what this place is about. "Four and a half years ago, when I had the privilege of being elected into this place, I felt that burden of what was expected of me when I came to this place, to represent the people that I wanted to come here to make a better life for." "This is what the Privileges Committee is there for - sort of like our HR, where we sit down and we discuss what the issue was and, hopefully, can come to a medium ground where there is a little bit of contrition shown from those who have had the accusations brought to them, and then a simple apology could be enough." Demanding an apology for behaviour found to be intimidating is actually one of the most common punishments recommended by the committee. The Committee's report noted that the MPs not meeting the Committee had no bearing on their decision. As in most courtrooms, where the accused have the chance to represent themselves. All three Te Pāti Māori MPs in question spoke during the debate. Rawiri Waititi used his speech to not only defend his and his colleague's position but as a rallying cry. Rawiri Waititi speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins "Turn our rage into power and make this a one-term Government. Enrol! Vote! If you hear the haka outside these walls, add your voice. If you see injustice trending online, amplify the truth. "If you feel fear, remember fear is the coloniser's last currency. Spend it into worthlessness by standing up. You can bench my body from this house for 21 days, but you will never bench our movement." The Greens' Steve Abel, who was the last to speak, also picked up on the courthouse feel to it all, but not just any courthouse. "We're not supposed to critique the courts, but I guess this is a court of our Parliament. The Privileges Committee represents the Parliament. We have two of the most senior members of this Parliament on that Privileges Committee, the then Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters, and the Attorney-General, Judith Collins. "Two of the most senior members, both lawyers, have egregiously punished one of the newest members of this Parliament. "What is the message that that sends to young people watching about the justice of this House, to newcomers to the House? "What is the message that it sends about a young Māori woman who has come and spoken with such certainty of the people she represents? "I think it sends a very bad message and I believe it renders the character of the Privileges Committee under that leadership as something of a kangaroo court." After three hours of debate, the House finally came to vote. All amendments put forward by the Opposition were voted down, and the original motion supporting the punishment recommended by the Privileges Committee was agreed upon, thereby kicking off the suspension period for the three Te Pāti Māori MPs, who also lost their salary and their votes in the House whilst suspended. - RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.


Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Suspended Te Pāti Māori MPs To Embark On National Tour
Te Pti Mori says it will continue to stand its ground as three MPs begin their record suspensions. , Political Reporter Te Pāti Māori says it will continue to stand its ground as three MPs begin their record suspensions. On Thursday night, Parliament dealt its harshest ever punishment by suspending co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer for 21 days, and Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke for seven. The trio were sanctioned for their actions during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill in November. Parliament's privileges committee deemed the haka the MPs performed could have 'intimidated' others. Government parties supported the recommended suspension. Labour agreed they should face some sanction, but disagreed with the length of time the committee had landed on. Speaking to media after their suspension was handed down, the MPs said they planned to use their time away from the House to organise. 'We're going to go home and show that we stood our ground,' Ngarewa-Packer said. The party now has the Regulatory Standards Bill in its sights, and will use its time away to encourage supporters to make submissions against it. Party president John Tamihere told Midday Report the party was feeling 'very chipper' and the co-leaders would embark on a national tour. 'What we've got to do is just get out on our streets, in all our pā up and down the country, activate, organise and that's where we're going now.' Accusing Parliament of being a 'very unhealthy place' for Māori, Tamihere said the MPs would apologise once it was made clear what they would be apologising for. 'If you're saying we should apologise for bringing the tikanga that displays our reo, which is the haka, into the House… see, we're not here to just appear for tourists. We're not here to start a rugby game, you know? 'We are here to display and practice who we are and what we are. We do that 24/7, and we don't do it because somebody says, 'No, when you walk in that Parliament you've got to stop being a Māori,' for goodness sake.' Waititi said there were 'many tools in the tikanga basket' when it came to opposing further legislation. 'It will be deemed, and probably sanctioned, by tipuna who guide us in our wairua, in our ngākau, and the people who guide us outside. They sent us in to be the unapologetic Māori voice. Māori voice means that everything that we have in our kete kōrero will be used.' He said Thursday's debate got 'pretty ugly and sad', referencing Winston Peters' 'scribble' jab at his mataora. 'I would be ashamed,' Waititi said. 'If I was his mokopuna, to look over those clips and to hear him denigrate not only something that was handed down by his ancestors, but also him as a future ancestor the legacy he will leave for his tamariki-mokopuna. I'm saddened by that, but also I feel ashamed that his family have to wear that legacy.' Peters agreed the debate was sad, though for different reasons – telling Morning Report Te Pāti Māori's behaviour was unprecedented and unforgivable. Disappointed by inevitable – former leader Te Ururoa Flavell, Te Pāti Māori co-leader from 2013 to 2018, said he was disappointed at the outcome, but it was inevitable. 'Māori and haka, that is part of who we are and what we do, as an expression of a message. No different to giving a speech in the House and pointing the finger at people. You sort of think, where's the consistency here?' he asked. 'Our people understand the protocols that go with various places. Our marae are run by tikanga and protocols about what you can and can't do. And we also know that there are consequences of actions, both for better or for worse. 'That's never an issue – the issue here is when you line it all up, you'd say that the three MPs were dealt with very, very harshly and unfairly.' Flavell said Parliament had come a long way from the days where MPs could not speak te reo in the House, but even that was hard fought for. He said Parliament allowed waiata and even Christmas carols, despite not being in the rules, but with an acceptance they were in the spirit of the occasion. 'Really, can we get to a point in time to accept that Māori are tangata whenua of this land? Can we not get to a time and have a conversation about actually accepting that kaupapa Māori is okay in this land and in the halls of Parliament, for goodness sake, and to allow it to happen on appropriate occasions?' Flavell said a debate about tikanga in the House was long overdue, but said any debate must run alongside education. 'I hope that we learn from the history and allow the debate to happen, but let's do it fairly, not in the sense of allowing every party to have their vehicle. That will move nothing, it will not move the dial, and we saw that yesterday, but allow actually, a debate to inform. 'Hopefully, the committee that's digging into the whole issue of the Treaty of Waitangi will raise some of those issues. But let's have the debate. Let's allow a discussion on kaupapa Māori within the halls of Parliament, and that, I believe, will go a long way to settle some of these grievances that will not only have come up in the past, but are likely to come up in the future.'