Source · Select Committees · Transport Committee
Recommendation 4
4
Accepted
Paragraph: 62
Require Government to set a clearer, more stretching safety threshold for self-driving vehicles.
Recommendation
While it is widely assumed that self-driving vehicles will prove safer than human drivers, this is not a given. Optimistic predictions are often based on widespread self- driving vehicle usage that is decades away, or assertions about human error that ignore other risks. Safety must remain the Government’s overriding priority as self-driving vehicles encounter real-world complexity. Given this, we question the Government’s proposed ambition that self-driving vehicles must be as safe as a competent and careful human driver. This is too weak and too vague. The Government should set a clearer, more stretching threshold.
Government response summary AI-generated
The government noted the recommendation and outlined how the forthcoming Automated Vehicles Bill will provide a legal liability framework and detailed safety requirements, with specific requirements to be set in secondary legislation and developed through the CAVPASS programme, without committing to changing its proposed safety ambition.
Summary of the government's response below — read the verbatim text to verify.
Paragraph Reference:
62
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government · verbatim extract
Accepted
The Government does not accept the Committee’s view on the proposed safety ambition. Safety is a priority for the Government and is a focus of the recently announced Automated Vehicles Bill. As set out in the Bill, it is the Government’s intention to publish a statutory ‘Statement of Safety Principles’ which will support the safety ambition and which will be used in the assessment of the safety of self-driving vehicles. CAM 2025 highlighted that balancing safety, innovation and public expectations is challenging, and must be considered carefully in the context of technologies that are still under development and about which public understanding is still being developed. Setting too high a level of ambition could have the effect of stifling the introduction of the technology and needlessly delay near-term safety improvements. A lower level of ambition would not deliver a publicly acceptable level of safety and risk undermining the introduction and uptake of the technology. It is the Government’s view that a competent and careful driver is safer than the average human driver and that a level of safety equivalent to that of a competent and careful driver it is an appropriate ambition at this time. As set out in CAM 2025, Government recognises that no technology is infallible and that new technologies generally bring new risks and challenges which must be managed and met. Government also recognises that road safety is not the result of vehicle technology alone, which is why CAM 2025 set out a ‘safe system’ approach aimed at embedding safety throughout the development, deployment and use of self-driving vehicles. This includes the development of detailed, clear and verifiable technical requirements for pre-deployment approval and in-use operation. These technical requirements are being developed as part of the CAVPASS programme, in discussion with stakeholders. Recommendation 3: Greater automation will reduce time spent driving. Over time drivers may become less practised and therefore less skilled. Conversely, the demands on drivers will grow as they will be called upon to retake control of vehicles in challenging circumstances with little notice. The Government should set out a strategy for the future of human driving in a world of self-driving vehicles. This should include possible changes to driving tests and a plan to ensure that all drivers fully understand self-driving vehicles and both acquire and maintain the necessary skills for taking control of a vehicle in all circumstances.
Read the full response on Parliament ↗