Time for an orderly retreat from so-called smart motorways

Editorial: A new study suggests that getting rid of hard shoulders is dangerous – Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, should heed the warning signs

‘All lane running’ on a smart motorway (in other words, removing the hard shoulder) (gov.uk)

The evidence is contested, but taking away the hard shoulder on British motorways makes many people feel less safe. Public opinion is against “smart motorways” and the reassurances offered by the Highways Agency are not as categorical as they might be. The agency says that “in most ways, smart motorways are as safe as, or safer than, conventional ones”. That “in most ways” sounds somewhat equivocal.

Until there is conclusive evidence that they are “in all ways” as safe as conventional motorways, The Independent believes that hard shoulders should be restored and resources devoted to alternative means of traffic management. The marginal and possibly short-term improvement in journey times is not worth the perception of danger, let alone the actual risk of more injuries or deaths.

As we report today, a new study of “all lane running” – that is, motorways using the hard shoulder as a normal lane – suggests they are indeed more dangerous than conventional motorways. Defenders of smart motorways will point out that the survey was commissioned by Claire Mercer, a campaigner against them whose husband was killed on a stretch of the M1 without a hard shoulder, but that is not actually a refutation of the findings.