time, the risks would have been reduced. i think the scandal here is that, basically, motorways have been expanded on the cheap and safety considerations have not always been at the top of the agenda. the transport select committee said these new smart waterways allow 1600 vehicles every hour to travel, and it s vital on busy days. this was vital to ease congestion, to allow people to get around faster and more easily. is there a better way to do this? ., , easily. is there a better way to do this? . , ., , ., this? certainly we would question whether smart this? certainly we would question whether smart motorways - this? certainly we would question i whether smart motorways worked this? certainly we would question i whether smart motorways worked in terms of congestion. all our surveys show almost 40% of drivers do not use the inside lane which would have been the hard shoulder on smart motorways because they are petrified that there may be a broken down vehicle ahead so y
outside lane and that reduces capacity so we don t believe, even on the capacity grounds, you could get better use and better efficiency from the current motorway network evenif from the current motorway network even if you reintroduce the hard shoulder. ~ . , , even if you reintroduce the hard shoulder. ~ , ., ., , shoulder. was this also a problem with education? shoulder. was this also a problem with education? people shoulder. was this also a problem with education? people did - shoulder. was this also a problem with education? people did not. shoulder. was this also a problem | with education? people did not feel safe enough knowing what the rules were, should i or should i not be in this lane, what does the sign so? had the education been better around a change to how the motorways are used, that could have avoided some problems? i used, that could have avoided some roblems? ~ u, ., used, that could have avoided some roblems? ~ ., problems? i think education can alwa s proble