Why smart motorways turn out to be not so smart

THE Government is being asked to have another look at the hazards of smart motorways by, Highways England, and not before time.

What in theory is a very good idea, in practice is quite dangerous, especially for drivers who only achieve a small mileage every year.

I commute regularly between Birmingham and South Devon, and pass though three areas of the M5 where there are various types of controlled motorway conditions.

Take the section of the M6 between junctions 3A and 6.

I have seen this summer at first hand several loaded cars that have broken down and come to a grinding fault, not making it to the safety of the special refuge bays provided (which at times, are already full, especially if there is a commercial vehicle parked there).

These vehicles are at the mercy of speeding traffic if the camera operator in the control centre does not spot the problem and switch on appropriate hazard lights in time.

Regular drivers are fully aware of the increased traffic density on all roads, not only motorways.

This is a reflection not only of the increase in population of some 10 per cent over the last ten years, but also down to much reduced unemployment levels, enabling more people to run their own cars, freeing them from relatively poor public transport.

The use of an extra lane assists in keeping vehicles moving, but does not help any motorist in distress who cannot get to a refuge bay.

Highways England is asking for a suspension of further smart motorways which is understandable.

It would be better to compromise by increasing the number and size of refuge bays sited at much shorter intervals.

Of course, if green targets are to be met, then the amount of road use must be substantially reduced by all types of vehicles, and that means a far better and more efficient electrically powered railway system.

Russell Luckock is chairman of Birmingham pressings firm

AE Harris