End of the road for smart motorways

Drivers are confused and unclear about how to use hard shoulder, Highways England boss tells MPS

The highways authority has admitted it had not investigated the dangers of removing the hard shoulder when it began introducing the “smart motorway” concept. Jim O’sullivan, the boss of Highways England, said that drivers were left confused by the arrangement that allowed vehicles to use it as a live lane at peak times on parts of the M1, M4, M5, M6, M42 and M62. He added that the lanes were “too complicated” and that the system would not be rolled out further.

DRIVERS are confused by some smart motorways, the boss of Highways England admitted as he revealed that the agency has not investigated the dangers of removing the hard shoulder.

Jim O’sullivan, the chief executive, told the Commons transport select committee that “dynamic” smart motorways, where the hard shoulder is used as a live lane during peak times, are “too complicated for people to use” and that the system would not be rolled out further.

Smart motorways were developed as a way of increasing capacity and reducing congestion without the more costly process of widening roads. The dynamic design is in use on parts of the M1, M4, M5, M6, M42 and M62.

Earlier this year, The Telegraph revealed that four people had been killed on the M1 in just 10 months after being hit by traffic when they broke down in a live lane which used to be the hard shoulder.

Dynamic motorways account for 68 miles (110km) of the “smart” network. A further 135 miles uses the “all-lane run- ning” system, where there is no hard shoulder, but there are emergency refuge areas at intermittent intervals.

A third variety of smart motorway – “controlled motorways” – which have variable speed limits but retain the hard shoulder for emergencies is in use over 120 miles of road.

Highways England have said they may consider converting dynamic smart motorways to the all-lane running system in the future.

However, when asked if Highways England had investigated whether smart motorways that retain their hard shoulder were more or less dangerous than those that don’t, Mr O’sullivan replied: “I am persuaded that the difference is so slight that we would have not looked into it.”

Jack Cousens, head of roads policy at AA, said this was “concerning”.

Mr O’sullivan told MPS that drivers on dynamic smart motorways are often confused about when they can use the hard shoulder, and when it is closed to non-emergency traffic.

He explained that some dynamic smart motorway hard shoulders are only open to running traffic at busier morning and evening commuter times, but this catches out drivers.

“People whose normal daily commute takes place at 8am or 9am, if they’ve been to the dentist and come out at 11am, they drive down the hard shoulder,” he said. “When we close it at other times of the day, people still drive down it.”

Mr O’sullivan said even when open, usage is low because “people aren’t sure if it’s a hard shoulder or not”.

He added: “I don’t think we will be building any more dynamic hard shoulder smart motorways. They’re just too complicated for people to use.”

Addressing concerns about what happens if a car breaks down on an alllane smart motorway, Mr O’sullivan said that technology exists which can quickly divert traffic around a vehicle.

The prefix “smart” on any initiative is designed to gull us into believing that it is better than something that has gone before. It often isn’t. As with the “smart” meters fiasco, whose roll-out across the country has been expensive and slow, so with “smart” motorways.

These multibillion-pound upgrades to existing roads have been under way for several years, causing widespread disruption and delays on some of our busiest highways. England has more than 100 miles of all-lane running (ALR) smart motorways, with 225 miles more planned.

However, unlike meters, which may be an inconvenience but should ultimately cut bills, the roads are potentially dangerous. The removal of the hard shoulder to create another lane has left motorists stranded in broken down vehicles with no safe refuge.

The smart technology is supposed to spot drivers in difficulties. But Emma Brown, the West Midlands area coroner, recently warned that lives are at risk after conducting an inquest into the death of a child in a car that was hit by a lorry on a motorway hard shoulder temporarily opened to traffic. Highways England conceded it did not detect the vehicle was stationary or close the lane before the accident.

Now the chief of Highways England, Jim O’sullivan, has told MPS that some “smart” roads where the hard shoulder is only used at busy times are confusing to motorists, though he insisted they were as safe overall, if not safer, than conventional motorways. The evidence is mounting against him. The Government needs to pause these schemes until the risks are dealt with and motorists feel comfortable using them.