Some take away’s from the Transport Committee: The roll-out and safety of smart motorways, HC 26 (Wednesday 30 June 2021)
Number 5
What amount of money it is worth spending to save a life?
Chair (Huw Merriman): Again, looking at the data, it appears that you are driven by the evidence that smart motorways are safer than conventional motorways. But is it not the case that controlled motorways, as a smart motorway concept, are safer than all-lane running smart motorways?
Baroness Vere: We have not introduced a controlled motorway for quite some time. When we introduce a controlled motorway, it is usually in the context of a road having just been widened. This goes back to Mr Smith’s point about the economic case. You are looking at travel times, tax revenues, health, safety, noise, air quality and all of these things. For a controlled motorway, yes, they have this technology, but it was introduced in the context of road widening. The capacity was introduced and then the technology was put on.
As a responsible Government, if you are looking at the options between building a new road, widening or using the existing footprint, actually the business case comes out better for using the existing footprint rather than using controlled motorways. We are not intending to do much road widening unless the business case proves that it is the right thing to do.
Chair: We have been very keen to make sure that we explore the business rationale, the economic case. If money was no object, you could spend it all over the place, but money is the object, so I completely see the need to see where you get the best bang for the buck in that regard.
Would I be right in saying that there is an acceptance that you slightly weaken the safety case of a smart motorway by putting all-lane running in, but you get an economic benefit by doing that?
Baroness Vere: No. How would that be?
Chair: As we have just discussed, if you look at a controlled motorway, and indeed a dynamic hard shoulder motorway, and you look at the comparison with all-lanes running, the all-lanes running appears to be the least safe of the smart motorways.
Baroness Vere: Ah, but hang on a second.
Chair: Why would you then do all-lanes running? There has to be a reason. Is the rationale the economic benefit that all-lanes running gives?
Baroness Vere: No. That is not how we look at that. We would not introduce another controlled motorway because you are usually road widening….
Chair: Minister, if safety is the key, if you look at the 100 million vehicle miles, there is a 1.10 serious casualty rate for dynamic hard shoulder motorways versus 1.24 for all-lanes running. Notwithstanding what you have just said about the concerns you have for the dynamic hard shoulder, it appears to be safer, looking at your own statistics.
Baroness Vere: Can I give you a statistic back? There can be a lot of volatility, which is why we try to do five-year averages, but why do we not look at the fatal weighted average? That is an overarching measure and is standard in the transport sector; it is basically a measure of all sorts of casualties, with an index put on them. You have 0.34 for dynamic hard shoulder and 0.35 for ALR, which I would put to you is pretty much the same thing. I am concerned. I would be—
Chair: We have 0.36.
Baroness Vere: Oh, I have 0.34 and 0.35. Anyway, I would be concerned about rolling out dynamic hard shoulder now. In any event, they are going to need to have the hard shoulder open more frequently….
We can have a whole other argument as to whether motorway speed limits should be 60 or 70. The reality is that the lower the speed limit, the less likely fatalities are. It is not Government policy to introduce dynamic hard shoulders, and we do not see that there is a specific safety case to do so.
Mr Bradshaw:… What is your calculation of the amount of money it is worth spending to save a life?
Baroness Vere: Unfortunately, we have to be a pragmatic and rational Government. We are today, once again, talking about smart motorways. As I mentioned previously, it is 1% of fatalities. We have to make a business case. We have to look at how we spend our money. I would question the environmental impact of spending lots of money on a controlled motorway where, for the same money, I could probably save I cannot imagine how many lives, if I sorted out some of the single-track A roads. You have to make that decision.
Mr Bradshaw: Does the Department have a figure as to how much it would spend on a road to save a life, or on roads generally to save a life?
Baroness Vere: No. There are academics who come up with such figures, but no.