Third Report - Rollout and safety of smart motorways

The government's response

What the committee recommended 11

1. 1
   The design of our motorways and strategic roads necessarily entails balancing competing priorities. Conclusion · paragraph 15
2. 2
   We welcome the Department’s acceleration of safety improvements to all-lane running motorways and acknowledge that... Conclusion · paragraph 16
3. 3
   The design of our motorways and major roads can currently be altered without any independent... Recommendation · paragraph 17
4. 4
   The available data on the safety of all-lane running motorways are limited and volatile. Recommendation · paragraph 24
5. 5
   We welcome the steps that the Department is taking through the action plan to rebuild... Conclusion · paragraph 28

See all 11 recommendations and conclusions

Sources

• Third Report - Rollout and safety of smart motorways ↗The committee's report, HC 26, parliament.uk
• Rollout and safety of smart motorways: Government Response to the Committee's Third Report ↗The government's response, 12 January 2022, parliament.uk

Recommendations and conclusions 11

1. 1
   The design of our motorways and strategic roads necessarily entails balancing competing priorities. Conclusion · paragraph 15 · addressed to Department for Transport Conclusion (the committee's words)

   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.
2. 2
   We welcome the Department’s acceleration of safety improvements to all-lane running motorways and acknowledge that... Conclusion · paragraph 16 · addressed to Department for Transport Conclusion (the committee's words)

   We welcome the Department’s acceleration of safety improvements to all-lane running motorways and acknowledge that the current Secretary of State for Transport and Minister for Roads have, upon their appointment, taken steps to address safety and delivery failures on all-lane running motorways. However, it is regrettable that the Government should find itself in this position. Safety risks on all- lane running motorways, such as those raised by the Transport Committee in 2016, should have been addressed before those motorways were rolled out.
3. 3
   The design of our motorways and major roads can currently be altered without any independent... Recommendation · paragraph 17 · addressed to Department for Transport Recommendation (the committee's words)

   The design of our motorways and major roads can currently be altered without any independent assurance on safety by a regulatory body, which is a systemic weakness. The Department should make the introduction of changes to the design and operation of the Strategic Road Network depend on a formal health and safety assessment by the Office of Rail and Road.
4. 4
   The available data on the safety of all-lane running motorways are limited and volatile. Recommendation · paragraph 24 · addressed to Department for Transport Recommendation (the committee's words)

   The available data on the safety of all-lane running motorways are limited and volatile. There are only five-years of safety data available for 29 miles of all-lane running motorways. The Department and National Highways should pause the rollout of all-lane running motorways until five-years of safety data is available for the remaining 112 miles of all-lane running motorway introduced before 2020.
5. 5
   We welcome the steps that the Department is taking through the action plan to rebuild... Conclusion · paragraph 28 · addressed to Department for Transport Conclusion (the committee's words)

   We welcome the steps that the Department is taking through the action plan to rebuild trust in smart motorways and to make them safer. However, we are concerned a) that emergency refuge areas will remain too far part on existing all-lane running schemes at up to 2.5 km; b) whether stopped vehicle detection technology is effective and reliable; and c) that emergency services and traffic patrol officers will still struggle to access incidents, especially when traffic is congested.
6. 6
   The Department and National Highways should: a) retrofit emergency refuge areas to existing all-lane running... Recommendation · paragraph 29 · addressed to Department for Transport Recommendation (the committee's words)

   The Department and National Highways should: a) retrofit emergency refuge areas to existing all-lane running motorways to make them a maximum of 1,500 metres apart, decreasing to every 1,000 metres where physically possible; b) commission the Office of Rail and Road to conduct an independent evaluation of the effectiveness and operation of stopped vehicle detection technology, including maintenance and monitoring; and c) insert the emergency corridor manoeuvre into the Highway Code to help emergency services and traffic patrol officers to access incidents when traffic is congested.
7. 7
   While we welcome the action plan, it is not clear whether the interventions that the... Recommendation · paragraph 30 · addressed to Department for Transport Recommendation (the committee's words)

   While we welcome the action plan, it is not clear whether the interventions that the Government and National Highways are rolling out will effectively mitigate the specific safety risks associated with the removal of the hard shoulder. Beginning in September 2022, the Office of Rail and Road should be tasked with evaluating how successful the action plan has been in a) reducing incidences of live lane breakdowns on all-lane running motorways; b) reducing the time for which people who breakdown or stop in a live lane are at risk; and c) educating drivers on what to do if they breakdown in a live lane.
8. 8
   The Government and National Highways should pause the rollout of all-lane running motorways to collect... Recommendation · paragraph 43 · addressed to Department for Transport Recommendation (the committee's words)

   The Government and National Highways should pause the rollout of all-lane running motorways to collect more data, to upgrade and then evaluate the safety of existing all-lane running schemes and to consider alternative options for enhancing capacity on the Strategic Road Network. The Government and National Highways should pause the rollout of new all-lane running schemes until: • five years of safety and economic data is available for every all-lane running scheme introduced before 2020; and • the implementation of the safety improvements in the Government’s action plan has been independently evaluated.
9. 9
   Dynamic hard shoulder motorways apparently confuse drivers, because the hard shoulder is used unpredictably to... Recommendation · paragraph 44 · addressed to Department for Transport Recommendation (the committee's words)

   Dynamic hard shoulder motorways apparently confuse drivers, because the hard shoulder is used unpredictably to tackle congestion. A more consistent approach, where the hard shoulder is used at known times, could clarify the situation for drivers without physically removing the hard shoulder. The Department for Transport and National Highways should pause plans to convert dynamic hard shoulder motorways until the next Road Investment Strategy and use the intervening period to trial alternative ways in which to operate the dynamic hard shoulder to make the rules less confusing for drivers.
10. 10
    Controlled motorways, which retain the hard shoulder and have technology to regulate traffic, have the... Recommendation · paragraph 45 · addressed to Department for Transport Recommendation (the committee's words)

    Controlled motorways, which retain the hard shoulder and have technology to regulate traffic, have the lowest casualty rates of all types of motorway on the Strategic Road Network. The Department and National Highways should revisit the case for controlled motorways. The Department should set out how the business case for controlled motorways compares with that for all-lane running motorways.
11. 11
    Examining the available evidence base, we are not convinced that reinstating the hard shoulder on... Conclusion · paragraph 53 · addressed to Department for Transport Conclusion (the committee's words)

    Examining the available evidence base, we are not convinced that reinstating the hard shoulder on all all-lane running motorways will improve safety. The evidence suggests that doing so could put more drivers and passengers at risk of death and serious injury, especially if the reduction in capacity were to divert drivers on to less safe, local roads. Although the hard shoulder offers a relative place of safety, it is not a safe place to stop. The Government is right to focus on upgrading the safety of all- lane running motorways.