Drive reports that a section of highway in the Northern Territory has has been switched back and forth between no speed limit, and 130 km/h speed limits over the past decade or so, with some dispute between the politicians about which is safer.

(It seems it was "derestricted" until 2006, speed-limited until 2014, "derestricted" until 2016, and is about to be speed-limited again)

One side claims:

The first 200km section of Stuart Highway north of Alice Springs was derestricted in 2014 after it was found that fewer people died in the years prior to the introduction of 130km/h speed limits that were claimed to cause increased fatigue.

The other side claims:

[The Labor spokesman] disputed claims that the re-introduction of open speed limits had not resulted in an increase in speed-related fatalities, and said Labor believed 130km/h speed limits were "very reasonable" despite experts calling for an even lower 110km/h limit in line with every other Australian state and territory.

Which way does the evidence from the fatal accident statistics on that highway point (or is there insufficient evidence for a clear decision?)

[Related question: Does the establishment of a legal upper speed limit on highways lead to a reduction in traffic deaths and accidents? ]

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .