5 August 2026

More than 13,600 speeding infringements recorded between Coolac and Gundagai

| By Edwina Mason
Join the conversation
7
average speed safety camera warning sign

Average speed cameras on the Hume Highway between Coolac and Gundagai have recorded more than 13,600 light-vehicle speeding infringements in 12 months. Photo: Transport for NSW.

More than 13,600 speeding infringements were issued to light vehicles on the Hume Highway between Coolac and Gundagai during NSW’s first trial of average speed camera enforcement for cars, motorcycles and other light vehicles.

Transport for NSW figures obtained by About Regional show 13,637 infringements were issued on the 16-kilometre section between 1 July 2025 and 30 June 2026.

Of those, 281 involved vehicles detected averaging more than 20 km/h above the speed limit, including 51 more than 30 km/h over and 10 more than 45 km/h over.

Transport for NSW declined to reveal the highest average speed recorded at the site, saying the figure was not publicly available.

READ ALSO No more warnings, Hume Highway average speed cameras switch to fines

The Coolac-Gundagai cameras formed part of a 14-month NSW Government trial that also included a 15-kilometre section of the Pacific Highway between Kew and Lake Innes, near Port Macquarie.

The trial was due to finish on 30 June this year, but Transport for NSW has confirmed light-vehicle enforcement will continue at both sites while it completes its review.

But preliminary results across the two locations show a 76 per cent improvement in light-vehicle compliance compared with pre-trial data.

That figure applies to the two trial sites combined, with Transport for NSW not providing a separate 12-month compliance improvement figure for Coolac–Gundagai.

Legislation passed in late 2024 allowed average speed cameras, previously used in NSW only to enforce speeding offences involving heavy vehicles, to be used for all vehicle types.

Rather than introduce light-vehicle enforcement statewide, the NSW Government selected the two regional locations to test the road safety benefits of extending the system to cars, motorcycles and other light vehicles.

The sites were chosen based on factors including their regional setting, crash history and whether the existing camera infrastructure could be modified for light-vehicle enforcement.

The government has previously said almost 80 per cent of fatalities and serious injuries recorded on NSW’s existing average speed camera routes between 2018 and 2022 did not involve heavy vehicles.

Unlike fixed speed cameras, which record a vehicle’s speed at one point, average speed cameras measure how long it takes to travel between two locations and calculate the average speed over that distance.

The trial began at both locations on 1 May 2025 with a two-month warning period, before fines and demerit points took effect from 1 July.

While 13,637 infringements were issued at Coolac-Gundagai over the following 12 months, they represented only a small proportion of the light vehicles using the highway.

In July 2025, about one in every 213 light vehicles passing through the site was caught speeding.

By June this year, that had fallen to about one in every 270.

The improvement had already begun during the pre-trial warning period.

Across May 2025, about one in every 138 light vehicles checked at Coolac-Gundagai was detected speeding. By July, when fines kicked in, that had fallen to about one in every 214 vehicles.

A total of 912 infringements were issued at the Hume Highway site that month, with the NSW Government saying non-compliance had fallen by more than a third since May.

When the first enforcement results were released, NSW Roads Minister Jenny Aitchison said the early figures pointed to improved driver behaviour.

“The trial is having the desired effect, with speeding offences almost halving across both locations,” she said.

READ ALSO More speed cameras on the way as regional fatalities account for majority of deaths on NSW roads

The Coolac-Gundagai section was selected partly because of its crash history.

Between 2018 and 2022, eight crashes not involving a heavy vehicle were recorded along the route, including four serious-injury crashes.

Across both trial sites, the NSW Government said six people were killed and 33 seriously injured over the same five-year period.

Crash data for 2025 and 2026 has not yet been finalised, meaning the effect of the trial on crashes and serious injuries at Coolac–Gundagai is not yet known.

Transport for NSW’s final review will consider speeding offences and trends, average light-vehicle speeds, the estimated impact on crashes and road trauma, and the cost of the trial.

The results are to be tabled in NSW Parliament.

Free, trusted local news delivered direct to your inbox.

Keep up-to-date with what's happening around the Capital region by signing up for our free daily newsletter.
Loading
By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.

Join the conversation

7
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
Alexander Stollznow11:01 pm 10 Aug 26

right. so all this is about is EIGHT car crashes over FOUR years, and it appears NONE of which included a fatality?? And this stretch – whcih is the cleanest, opeenest, bit of highway for which you could ever hope, is considered to have an accident risk??
That is without any evidence at all that any of those 8 prangs involved speeds over the arbitrary 110 limit anyway.
Wow, aussies just love being BuFu’d for no reason.

Walter James7:30 am 07 Aug 26

I’ll always sit a bit above the speed limit, unless there’s an avergae speed camera. Use your cruise control, stop whining. Its really not that hard, annoying yes, but not hard

If it’s saving people’s lives (yet to be determined, I know) then it can only be a good thing, I think.
If anyone thinks that driving over 110 kmh or what’s posted, at speeds of 150 kmh, on some of these roads is safe, I’d disagree. Remembering too that sometimes it’s a whole family wiped out, or the children, or parents and too often at the start/end of school holidays when major crashes seem to occur. I’m not sure it’s a bad thing at all.
The public was given notice according to the story but obviously thought they’d break the law anyway.
I’m sure About Regional will follow up with the full results when they’re passed on to the media. I look forward to reading more about it.

Shine Bright Torch11:27 am 06 Aug 26

Sadly Marcia I am not as trusting of results as you. Looks like typical State Government revenue raising to me. Just because you are given “notice” does not mean the revenue raising rule is fair or right. Sheeple have a right to bleat. Or do they?

Alexander Stollznow10:58 pm 10 Aug 26

why would you think that some randomly chosen number eg 110 defines “safe”?

Tugya Forelock11:35 am 05 Aug 26

Any chance for more revenue raising eh? Police State and auto tax the poor. No need to fix poor road design or potholes when you can just slug the motorists for a few K’s over a limit. I assume someone has to pay for the politicians expenses and junkets?

cannedbeeria5:56 pm 05 Aug 26

I find it hard to beleive that the average motorist can’t work out how to travel at an AVERAGE speed over that distance.
The other elephant in the room is the people that speed for half the distance then slow down by a similar amount for the other half. Yes, I know, still average speed. Maybe those that tried, failed??
I wonder how many drivers use their car’s average speed computers to work out exactly how fast they were travelling over the 16 klms, then slow way down to compensate.

Daily Digest

Do you like to know what’s happening around your region? Every day the About Regional team packages up our most popular stories and sends them straight to your inbox for free. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.