Source · Select Committees · Transport Committee
Recommendation 1
1
Paragraph: 15
The design of our motorways and strategic roads necessarily entails balancing competing priorities.
Conclusion
The design of our motorways and strategic roads necessarily entails balancing competing priorities. However, successive Administrations, together with the Department and National Highways’ predecessor, Highways England, underestimated the scale of safety measures needed effectively and reliably to mitigate the risks associated with the permanent removal of the hard shoulder on all-lane running motorways. The Department and Highways England failed to deliver safety improvements to all-lane running motorways in a timely fashion, despite having promised previous Transport Committees that such improvements would be prioritised. Moreover, the communication of this radical change in the design of our motorways has been woeful. Six years after their introduction, many people do not understand what all-lane running motorways are and what to do if they breakdown in a live lane.
Paragraph Reference:
15
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
8. The Government commits to further investigating the benefits of a health and safety assessment being undertaken by ORR before changes to design or operational standards are implemented on the SRN. 9. National Highways have in place robust processes and governance to oversee changes to the design and operation of the SRN. All schemes implemented on the SRN are subject to high standards of design, risk assessment and construction, followed by detailed monitoring and evaluation once opened to traffic. It is a requirement that all National Highways’ projects are designed, specified, and built, in accordance with industry recognised processes and procedures including the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) and the Project Control Framework (PCF). 10. The Government however recognises that independent oversight may further strengthen existing processes and provide further assurance to the public when new design and operational standards are introduced. As such, we are committing to investigating further the benefits of independent assessment of health and safety being undertaken by ORR when changes to design or operational standards are implemented. This will include reviewing existing regulatory responsibilities and assessing the benefits and risks of additional assessment by ORR. We will also consider whether there are alternative approaches to achieving the outcomes proposed in the Committee’s recommendations. 11. While comparisons are made with ORR’s role overseeing railways, if implemented, this approach would be a significant departure from the current responsibilities ORR holds for roads as set out in the Infrastructure Act 2015. It may require legislative powers and would result in significant organisational changes for ORR. It could also have ramifications for roads beyond smart motorways and the SRN. As such any changes will need robust consideration and consultation with a wide range of stakeholders. Rollout and safety of smart motorways: Government Response to 5 the Committee’s Third Report 12. We will shortly be establishing an expert panel to help us review existing regulatory responsibilities and assess the costs, benefits and risks that additional assessment by ORR would give, with recommendations being made to ministers later this year. We will keep the Committee informed of the progress of this work.