UK Government Under Pressure to Uncover Truth on Safety of Smart Motorways
A campaign by road campaigners and motoring organizations is gaining momentum, urging the UK government to release a series of previously withheld safety reports on smart motorways. The reports, known as "popes," were supposed to be published last year but have been delayed, sparking concerns that they may reveal unfavorable findings.
Smart motorways are designed to increase capacity by converting the hard shoulder into a live lane of traffic. However, campaigners argue that this has compromised safety and led to a number of high-profile accidents in which drivers have died after breaking down on the road. They believe that the government is trying to suppress the reports because they may cast doubt on the safety benefits of smart motorways.
According to Claire Mercer, whose husband was killed on a smart motorway in 2019, the delay in publishing the reports is suspicious. "We've had stocktakes, select committees, ombudsmen... We continually investigate smart motorways – but leave them running," she said. "Any company would be done for corporate manslaughter by now."
The UK Department for Transport (DfT) has maintained that the delay in publishing the reports was necessary to ensure that the complex findings were fully understood and presented accurately. However, campaigners are skeptical of this explanation.
National Highways, the organization responsible for England's motorways, claims that safety is its top priority and that smart motorways remain the safest roads in terms of deaths or serious injuries. However, the campaign group Smart Motorways Kill believes that the hard shoulder should be restored to provide a safer option for drivers in emergency situations.
The issue has become a contentious debate, with some arguing that smart motorways are a vital part of modernizing the UK's road network, while others claim that they pose a significant safety risk. The government is under pressure to release the withheld reports and come clean about the true nature of smart motorways.
A campaign by road campaigners and motoring organizations is gaining momentum, urging the UK government to release a series of previously withheld safety reports on smart motorways. The reports, known as "popes," were supposed to be published last year but have been delayed, sparking concerns that they may reveal unfavorable findings.
Smart motorways are designed to increase capacity by converting the hard shoulder into a live lane of traffic. However, campaigners argue that this has compromised safety and led to a number of high-profile accidents in which drivers have died after breaking down on the road. They believe that the government is trying to suppress the reports because they may cast doubt on the safety benefits of smart motorways.
According to Claire Mercer, whose husband was killed on a smart motorway in 2019, the delay in publishing the reports is suspicious. "We've had stocktakes, select committees, ombudsmen... We continually investigate smart motorways – but leave them running," she said. "Any company would be done for corporate manslaughter by now."
The UK Department for Transport (DfT) has maintained that the delay in publishing the reports was necessary to ensure that the complex findings were fully understood and presented accurately. However, campaigners are skeptical of this explanation.
National Highways, the organization responsible for England's motorways, claims that safety is its top priority and that smart motorways remain the safest roads in terms of deaths or serious injuries. However, the campaign group Smart Motorways Kill believes that the hard shoulder should be restored to provide a safer option for drivers in emergency situations.
The issue has become a contentious debate, with some arguing that smart motorways are a vital part of modernizing the UK's road network, while others claim that they pose a significant safety risk. The government is under pressure to release the withheld reports and come clean about the true nature of smart motorways.
! I'm not saying it's all bad but like, what's going on with these delayed safety reports? 
It's super suspicious that they're trying to keep them under wraps 
. I mean, if the gov't is hiding info about smart motorways, that's just not right 
. Claire Mercer's husband died on one of those roads and now she's fighting for justice 
. Can't we all just get the truth out? 
It's time for transparency and accountability, even if it means admitting some bad decisions were made 
. National Highways says safety is their top priority but I'm calling BS 
. Let's see those reports and decide for ourselves 
but i guess the gov just really wanted to sweep it under the rug 
. like, what's the worst that could happen? some safety records say smart motorways are more deadly than not using them? 
no biggie, right? 
and btw, corporate manslaughter by now is pretty much a given if they keep messing with people's lives on those roads... it's only a matter of time before someone gets held accountable 
Remember when our parents used to tell us not to speed on the motorway back in the day? 
Now, it's like we're playing a game of "smart motorway roulette" and someone's gonna get hurt. I mean, what's wrong with just keeping the hard shoulder as is? It's not that complicated! 
. My grandma used to tell me, "if it seems too good to be true, it probably is." 
And that's exactly what's happening here.
. We should be supporting these campaigns and pushing for real safety improvements, not just covering our backsides 
.
like 2019 was just yesterday lol. I remember watching that video of the guy who died on a smart motorway because his car broke down and he couldn't move to the side... it was so shocking. I think the government is being super shady by withholding these safety reports, they're basically covering up some major issues. National Highways says safety is their top priority, but if that's the case then why not just release the reports already? 
. It's not good that the hard shoulder isn't even an option for us drivers in emergencies - what if we break down on the road and can't get to a safe place? 
. Campaigners are calling them out on their transparency, and rightfully so – the public deserves to know the truth about safety reports that could impact our roads 
. It just sounds like a fancy way of saying 'we don't want to upset our corporate sponsors'. I'm not buying it 
.
. The public deserves to know what's really going on with our roads, especially when lives are at stake 
.
lol, then we started thinking about getting a puppy of our own but we'd have to build an extension on our tiny flat 
what would be cool is if they built some dog parks with skate parks too 