Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministerial Statement

Smart Motorways

13 January 2022 · 9 other contributors

Opened by Huw Merriman Con Bewdley

Transport

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Huw Merriman raised concerns about smart motorways in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.

Key points

  • The minister welcomed and commended the recommendations from the Transport Committee regarding smart motorways.
  • All recommendations have been accepted by the Government, including pausing the roll-out of new all-lane running motorway projects until five years of data is available for those built before 2020.
  • 390 million has been committed to retrofit emergency refuge areas on existing all-lane running motorways.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Government Statement

Huw Merriman

The minister welcomed and commended the recommendations from the Transport Committee regarding smart motorways. The statement highlighted that all recommendations have been accepted by the Government, including pausing the roll-out of new all-lane running motorway projects until five years of data is available for those built before 2020. Additionally, £390 million has been committed to retrofit emergency refuge areas on existing all-lane running motorways. The minister emphasised the importance of focusing not just on capacity but also on safety measures and highlighted conflicts in National Highways' target of zero harm, citing examples of delayed implementation of crucial technologies such as stopped vehicle detection technology.

Other contributors (9)
  • Tan Dhesi Lab Slough

    Question

    The Labour party has long warned about the serious flaws with smart motorways. Does the Minister share my assessment that alongside the botched roll-out, the failure to install critical technology such as stopped vehicle detection is scandalous and potentially responsible for lost lives?

    Minister reply

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his points. It has been frustrating that assurances given in 2016 regarding the implementation of technologies like stopped vehicle detection did not materialise, pointing to a culture of building first and implementing safety second.

  • Julian Lewis Con New Forest East

    Question

    I congratulate the Committee on its work and thank the Government for having listened to the recommendations so positively. Will my hon. Friend put a little more flesh on the statistics? Can he give us some actual figures—if not now, then subsequently—on what point-nought-nought-something per cent. means in actual lives lost? Do those statistics show any significant differences between hours during daylight and after dark?

    Minister reply

    I thank my right hon. Friend for his words. He is correct that the Government deserve a huge amount of credit for accepting all the recommendations. The data from 2015 to 2019 shows a better fatality rate on smart motorways, but by 2019, the reverse was true. We called for a pause until we can get to the bottom of this issue. The statistical measure he asked about is per 100 million vehicle miles and does not compare small amounts of network with larger ones in terms of fatalities. I do not have specific day and night data but will write to him.

  • Grahame Morris Lab Easington

    Question

    I commend the Chair, members and staff of the Transport Committee and welcome the Government’s response in accepting its recommendations. What confidence can the public have that National Highways will deliver on promises to install stopped vehicle detection technology by September 2022, which is six years behind schedule?

    Minister reply

    The hon. Gentleman rightly praises the Committee and points out that the target delivery date was frustratingly late. The Government committed to rolling out this technology from 2016 onwards but missed this deadline. We will investigate whether there is enough supply of technology in place for timely installation.

  • Philip Hollobone

    Question

    I congratulate my hon. Friend and his Committee on a superb report, and on persuading the Government to change their mind. I welcome the £390 million commitment by 2025 but am concerned that no commitment has been made for retrofitting the remainder after this date. Is my hon. Friend as worried about potential delays?

    Minister reply

    I thank my hon. Friend and agree with his concern. We will ensure uniform spacing of emergency refuge areas across all stretches, even if it means more funding is needed beyond £390 million by 2025. The Government must not try to evade retrofitting the remainder after this period.

  • Matt Western Lab Warwick and Leamington

    Question

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for the report, focusing on refuges. It is great that some changes are adopted but the proposal to reduce spacing to 500 metres was not accepted. Did evidence from RAC and AA recommend this measure? If so, what would be the cost if 500 metres were used throughout the network?

    Minister reply

    I thank the hon. Member for his question about the evidence we received regarding optimal spacing. The Government have committed to introducing three-quarter-mile spacing where possible but will generally use one mile as standard. We will look into the cost implications of adopting 500-metre spacing and write back.

  • Peter Bone

    Question

    I had a constituency case involving a hard shoulder opening because of congestion, leading to tragic consequences when a car broke down there. Does my hon. Friend know if automatic detection is now in place on all motorways?

    Minister reply

    My heart goes out to the affected families. No technology for automatic detection is currently available, but it must be delivered by the end of this year. CCTV operation and staffing also need improvement. Emergency refuge areas are crucial; stopped-vehicle detection ensures lanes close within a minute.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Question

    Further to my hon. Friend’s comment, I heard an emergency call involving a car breaking down on the motorway with his family inside. Despite these grave concerns about safety implications, does the Committee believe that the emergency refuge area will address such dangers? What can be done during the pause period?

    Minister reply

    Emergency refuge areas are crucial for reducing response times from 75 seconds to around 30 seconds, which could save lives. During the five-year pause, efforts should focus on retrofitting safety measures rather than just collecting data. We will continue monitoring this.

  • Peter Bottomley Con Tandridge

    Question

    I congratulate the Chairman of the Select Committee on how he has answered questions. He has made the point that even motorways with hard shoulders are dangerous. In my time, a third of the deaths on motorways were secondary deaths. If a running motorway stops running, the traffic jam goes backwards at 30 mph. People need to be aware of that, and they also need to be aware that if traffic is kept off motorways and put on other roads, the dangers are significantly greater than the difference between the different styles of motorways, with or without recessed emergency refuge areas. Will my hon. Friend emphasise to the Government that, as well as the pause, making sure that motorways attract as much traffic as possible should be a key Government priority?

    Minister reply

    I thank the Father of the House. He is right to focus on that. It is sometimes a very difficult discussion to have because we are talking about the economic case, but as he rightly says, motorways are the safest part of our road network, and getting more traffic on to the motorways saves lives. There is an economic case. It has been estimated that for every pound spent, £3 is delivered by having additional space on motorways. It is also true to say that might be just for the first year, as when people know there is a better route to travel, more people travel on it, but my hon. Friend is right that the more people who can get on to motorways, the better. That, ultimately and fundamentally, is why the Government’s response is spot on. They recognise that there are concerns with smart motorways and that people may not use them and go on to more dangerous roads. We need to send the message out that smart motorways are safe. They can be safer, but people should continue to use our motorway network, because it is the safest network of all of our roads system.

Shadow Comment

Tan Dhesi

The shadow minister acknowledged the dedication of bereaved families and the Transport Committee's work in pausing the roll-out of smart motorways. He expressed concern over the botched implementation, including the failure to install critical technologies such as stopped vehicle detection technology, which he deemed scandalous and potentially responsible for lost lives.

Get updates like this by email
▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy