All-lane running safety concerns ‘blatantly ignored’

12.00 | 29 September 2016 | | 1 comment

The Transport Committee has criticised the Government for ‘blatantly ignoring’ safety concerns about all-lane running schemes.

In a statement released today (29 Sept), the Committee takes ‘real issue’ with the Government’s assertion that all-lane running schemes on motorways are no different to other types of roads without hard shoulders.

It also has reservations over the Government’s endorsement of the proposed M4 scheme, and says it should be shelved until a review looking at Emergency Refuge Areas is complete. Earlier in the month, the Commitee said the scheme could put lives at risk.

A Transport Committee report published earlier this year recommended that the Government should not proceed with all lane running schemes while major safety concerns exist.

The report argues that the permanent conversion of the hard shoulder into a running lane is a radical change to the nature of motorways and creates a real challenge for motorists.

However, despite this the Government has expressed its desire to press ahead with the latest design of all lane running schemes, including a stretch of the M4.

In its response to the report, the Government revealed that Highways England is to review the spacing of emergency lay-bys in a bid to reduce the likelihood of cars stopping in live lanes.

Louise Ellman, chair of the Transport Committee, said: “The DfT is blatantly ignoring the safety concerns set out in our report. We had barely received the response to our report before the Government endorsed an all lane running scheme on the M4.

“The Committee isn’t arguing with the Government about the need for more capacity on our motorways, or their statement that motorways are our safest roads. We support smart motorways such as the M42 scheme.

“But we take real issue with the Government’s assertion that all lane running schemes on motorways are no different to other types of roads without hard shoulders. Motorways are a different class of road and drivers have different expectations when using them.

“The Committee remains concerned about the size and spacing of Emergency Refuge Areas. While we are pleased that Highways England has committed to a review, the M4 proposal should not have gone ahead until the review is complete.”

Photo: Highways England via Flickr used under Creative Commons.



Comment on this story

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Report a reader comment

Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated

    The M25 has traffic levels of around 100,000 vehicles per day. So some 36.5m vehicle passages in the first year (and more since). That’s a lot of data (evidence) that this is a safe solution. By all means keep monitoring and assessing but it’s hard to see what warrants this loud reaction from the committee.

    Pete, Merseyside
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.