(1 day, 6 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call Anna Dixon, who will speak for up to 15 minutes.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered road safety.
Road safety is a personal issue for me. My grandfather Herbert Bilsby moved to Ilkley in 1952 to take up a post as a geography teacher at Ilkley grammar school. Aged 62, he was looking forward to retirement: more time to enjoy his passion for hiking; more time to spend time with his grandchildren; and more time to visit family in Australia and Zambia. He never got that time.
On 6 December 1969, my grandfather was driving with my grandmother to deliver Christmas presents to her family at the family farm in Cumbria. Just north of Hellifield on the A65, he got stuck behind two lorries—a common experience even today. He saw an opportunity to overtake and pulled out. At that moment, the lorry pulled out, and my grandparents’ car was pushed off the road and into a stone gatepost. My grandfather was killed outright, and my grandmother suffered head injuries. That fatal collision shaped my family’s life. I never knew my grandfather. My grandmother was widowed and disabled. My dad moved jobs, and he and my mum moved to Ilkley where I was born and raised. My mum then continued to care for my grandmother for nearly 30 years.
It was a time before seatbelts were compulsory, before sections of the A65 were widened to create overtaking lanes, and before airbags. Today’s cars and roads are safer than they were in 1969 thanks to new laws, investment in our roads and the use of technology in the design of cars. Yet, four people still die on our roads every day and 76 more are involved in collisions that leave them with serious injuries. In my own constituency of Shipley, 180 people were injured in road collisions in 2024 and one person tragically died. Across the country, over 1,600 people were killed and nearly 28,000—yes, 28,000—people were seriously injured on our roads. Road collisions happen in a split second, yet their impact can be life-changing and felt for a lifetime. Parents lose their children; partners lose their soulmates; the unborn miss out on knowing their relatives—the human cost of road collisions is colossal.
But it does not have to be that way. A wealth of evidence shows us what the causes of death and injury are—we know what to do. Through the work of road safety groups, researchers and the police, we understand there are five causes of deadly crashes—the fatal five. They are speeding, antisocial driving, mobile phone use, alcohol and drug use, and not wearing a seatbelt. We must continue to tackle the fatal five if we are to reduce the death toll on our roads.
Ahead of the road safety strategy, I wrote to the Minister calling on the Government to include harsher penalties for speeding, to strengthen post-test requirements to protect newly qualified drivers, to lower the maximum legal drink-drive limit and to introduce points for passengers not wearing seatbelts. I therefore very much welcome the many measures in the road safety strategy, which the Government are now consulting on. Those measures include a minimum learning period for learner drivers; lowering the drink-drive limit; reviewing penalties for drink and drug driving offences, including—importantly —bringing in new powers to suspend licences for those suspected of committing serious driving offences; introducing penalty points for not wearing a seatbelt; and taking tougher action on those who fail to stop and report collisions, those who drive unlicensed or without insurance, and those with no MOT.
The strategy also addresses the growing problem of illegal number plates—so-called ghost number plates—which my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) has campaigned for extensively. She was sorry to not be here today for the debate, but I am sure she would join me in congratulating the Government on taking action on this issue. The Government’s strategy is the first of its kind in a decade, and it sets out a plan to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on roads in Great Britain by 65% by 2035.
In West Yorkshire, a more ambitious goal has been set as part of “Vision Zero”, striving for zero deaths and serious injuries on our roads by 2040. It was launched in 2023 by our Labour West Yorkshire mayor, Tracy Brabin. “Vision Zero” brings together the combined authority, local authorities, emergency services, National Highways, victim support services and road safety campaigners, and it is producing results. In just the first year of the strategy, 7,500 dangerous drivers were brought to justice, almost 40,000 fixed penalty notices for traffic offences were issued and 13,000 children across West Yorkshire were part of an innovative educational project.
I pay particular tribute to Alison Lowe, the deputy mayor for policing and crime in West Yorkshire. Under her guidance, the combined authority and West Yorkshire police have taken a proactive approach to improving road safety. Alison, whose own sister was killed by a speeding driver, has listened to the community and effectively targeted police resources. West Yorkshire has introduced community concern sites. These are locations flagged by local authorities based on data and community feedback that receive greater police attention. This innovative scheme has led to 467 new enforcement locations, and over 46,000 speed offences were detected in less than a year.
Another successful example from West Yorkshire is Op Snap, which allows the public to submit dashcam footage of driving offences. There were almost 9,000 submissions just in the second half of last year, and 70% resulted in further action being taken. I hope the Minister can set out how good practice such as that in West Yorkshire can be supported and spread to other parts of the country.
This is only the beginning; far more needs to be done to end deaths on our roads. In 2024, young drivers aged 17 to 24 were involved in 11 of the 40 fatal collisions in West Yorkshire—around 20%, despite making up a much smaller share of road users. I would like to see stronger measures to protect newly qualified drivers. I was interested to see that the Northern Ireland Infrastructure Minister recently announced plans to introduce graduated driver licensing. GDL has already been adopted by other countries with success. Victoria, Australia introduced it in 2007 and, by 2013, saw fatal collisions reduced by 30%. I welcome the Government’s proposed mandated learning period for new drivers, but why not be more ambitious? There is good evidence from other countries. Why should young drivers in Northern Ireland get protections that young drivers in the rest of the UK will not? I urge the Minister to remain open to look at other effective measures to support young and novice drivers, such as limits on the number of passengers and restrictions on night-time driving, which we know from evidence have the biggest impact on reducing death and serious injury.
Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)
That ambition is fantastic, and I wonder whether we could be more ambitious on the drive-drink limit. Pilots cannot fly if they have any alcohol in their system. Why is it not the same for drivers?
Anna Dixon
I agree that it is important that we consult the public on looking to reduce the drink-driving limit to the lowest possible level, and the Minister has heard the hon. Member’s remarks about a possible zero tolerance to drinking alcohol while driving. I hope that on this measure and others the Minister will agree to meet me, other MPs, campaigners and families affected, particularly on the issue of young drivers, to discuss such additional measures, which have widespread public support.
Road safety is also a local issue for residents across the Shipley constituency, who regularly raise road safety issues with me. Residents in Harden and Cullingworth are terrified by rural roads being used as racetracks. Parents in Baildon and Burley in Wharfedale are concerned about their kids crossing the road. School leaders in Cottingley and Wrose are concerned about parking and dangerous driving outside schools. Working with the local police, Bradford council’s highways team, local Labour councillors and West Yorkshire’s deputy mayor, we are making some progress, with new speed cameras on Bingley bypass, local speed watch in hotspots of community concern, the introduction of a 20 mph zone in Menston, reduced speed limits between Bingley and Shipley, and the installation of speed awareness signs.
But there is only so far we can go locally, and that is why I am pleased that this Labour Government are taking action to make our roads safer. The road safety strategy is ambitious and comprehensive. It takes a systems approach and includes all road users. I urge the Government to move swiftly to implement the measures they are consulting on, and I hope the Minister will set out in her response which ones will need primary legislation and when she expects parliamentary time to be given to implement them.
People up and down the country continue to be killed and seriously injured by dangerous driving. As the campaigning organisation RoadPeace and others have identified, dangerous driving is no longer a rarity but an embedded cultural phenomenon. Many people feel able and entitled to drive dangerously, and do not fear the consequences of their actions. That must change so that other families do not suffer the life-changing impact of a fatal road collision, as my family did.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. Members will know that two debates are scheduled this afternoon, which will necessitate a very tight time limit of three minutes from the get-go.
James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)
It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon), who made a powerful speech, particularly in relation to the impact of dangerous driving on her family.
As the hon. Member said, more than 1,600 people tragically lost their lives on our roads in 2024, and 60% of those fatalities happened on rural roads such as those in North West Norfolk. Indeed, there has been a worrying rise in road casualties in Norfolk: in 2024, a 17% increase took the number of people killed or seriously injured to 555. I welcome the publication of the Government’s road safety strategy, and the ambition to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured by 65% by 2035. However, a few things are worth highlighting.
Awareness of the highway code remains far too low, and people do not refresh themselves on what is in the code—that must be improved.
Linsey Farnsworth (Amber Valley) (Lab)
Driving instructors and cyclists in my constituency have contacted me because they are concerned that experienced drivers are not aware of the 2022 changes to the highway code. Does the hon. Member agree that a campaign for greater awareness among experienced drivers would be welcome?
James Wild
I agree. In the context of the debate, and following contact from constituents, I have been refreshing myself on the highway code, which I admit I had not done before even though I should have done. Awareness is important.
Speeding continues to be a major cause of accidents. However, many residents, Speedwatch groups and parish councils tell me that the process for reviewing or reducing speed limits on dangerous roads is too slow and too expensive, so I look forward to the Government’s new guidance on setting local speed limits, which I hope leads to genuine improvement.
Change needs to be driven by evidence, and in that context I refer to the proposal to reduce the drink-driving limit. Offences are typically caused by people who have greatly exceeded the limit, not by people who have had just a pint, so we must consider that proposal very carefully.
Young people are already waiting too long for driving tests, so I am concerned about the proposal to put in place a minimum six-month learning period. People who take intensive courses can be good drivers. The proposal could make the situation worse.
Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)
Will the hon. Member give way?
James Wild
I will not, given the time available.
A number of constituents who ride horses have contacted me with concerns about a lack of driver awareness and the prevalence of speeding and dangerous driving. They face heightened risk, particularly given the limited number of bridleways. The roads connecting bridleways have become more dangerous, too, with over 3,000 incidents in 2024, 80% of which were attributed to drivers passing unsafely. That is unacceptable, and it is why I support the proposals introduced by the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr Dillon), which include setting a required speed and distance for passing horses, and teaching equestrian safety in driving education. I hope that the Government will look favourably on those proposals.
I turn now to a topic that I have raised repeatedly in the House: sentences for driving offences, which must be tougher. In 2022, Parliament legislated for a maximum sentence of life in prison for death by dangerous driving, but sentences remain far too short, as was demonstrated in a case in which three members of a constituent’s family were killed. Dangerous driving should also result in longer disqualification. Less than 1% of those convicted of dangerous driving were banned from driving for life. Will the Government commit to a review of the sentencing guidelines for all dangerous driving offences, and consider how the Sentencing Council is applying those guidelines to reflect what we in this House consider necessary?
I am grateful to have had this opportunity briefly to speak about this important topic, and I hope that the Minister will respond to some of my points.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this Backbench Business debate on road safety. I welcome the Labour Government’s new road safety strategy.
In my remarks, I will focus specifically on Sharlotte’s law—a campaign that began with a tragedy in my constituency. Sharlotte-Sky Naglis was only six years old when she was killed by a driver who was drunk and under the influence of drugs—someone who should never have been behind the wheel. Sharlotte, who lived in Norton Green, was a bright, happy child with her whole life ahead of her.
The perpetrator was taken to hospital and was in a coma. Under the current law, a blood sample can be taken from an unconscious person—and in this case a sample was taken—but it cannot be tested until the individual gives consent. The fact that the current system relies on consent being given by the suspect meant that the investigation was held up. For Sharlotte’s family, that delay made an awful and impossible situation even worse. It slowed the process down, delayed answers and put off accountability while they were trying to grieve for their daughter.
That case shows that justice delayed is justice denied. When such serious cases are held up, the families and victims suffer the most. Sharlotte’s law matters, as it aims to fix gaps in the road traffic law so that those who kill or seriously harm others while driving under the influence cannot gain from delay, and so that the justice system can work quickly and fairly.
Since becoming the Member of Parliament for Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove, I have raised this case in Parliament and spoken about the matter regularly with the Minister, who I thank for her continued engagement. However, I must be clear that the real strength behind the campaign has been Sharlotte’s mum, Claire, whose work has been tireless. In the face of unimaginable loss, she has shown true strength and dignity, driven by the idea that no other family should have to go through what hers endured.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for setting out the danger to our county in not taking this issue seriously. I know that he shares my horror about the case of my constituent, who was knocked down as he took his daughter to school in December 2025. Luckily, he pushed his daughter away, and he was not killed, but it was very close indeed. Will my hon. Friend join me in urging Staffordshire county council finally to get a grip and ensure that roads in our constituencies are made safe?
David Williams
I know that my hon. Friend has been campaigning hard on this matter—we have discussed that case. I absolutely encourage Staffordshire county council to take action.
The Government’s consultation on road traffic offences really matters. It gives us a real way to learn from cases such as Sharlotte’s, so that victims and families are put first. I therefore encourage people across Stoke-on-Trent, Kidsgrove, Staffordshire, and indeed the whole country, to take part in the consultation and support amendments to the law. I also urge colleagues from across the House to back the aims and principles behind Sharlotte’s law. If we get this right, Sharlotte-Sky Naglis will be remembered not just for the tragedy of her death, but for the change that her legacy brings, and justice will no longer be delayed for families who deserve better.
Mr Angus MacDonald (Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire) (LD)
A year ago in my constituency, Lewis Knox, aged 16, Fergus Ward, aged 17, and Jordan Cameron, aged 17, went off the road and died—no other car was involved. It was an enormous shock for the area. Lewis Knox’s father, Alan, is the head of the ambulance service in the area. He and his wife, Elizabeth, are calling for graduated driving licence schemes, such as those mentioned by the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon).
When I was a young lad, I drove like a complete idiot. I have four sons, and I am fairly certain that they did the same. For young men—young boys—this is a particular problem. When they drive, they show off—bravado and all that sort of thing. The statistics are horrifying. Approximately one in five new drivers are involved in an accident within their first year of driving, and drivers under the age of 24 make up 6% to 7% of licence holders but are involved in 22% of fatalities and serious injuries.
Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)
We spoke about the graduated driving licence scheme in a Westminster Hall debate and referred to the situation in Western Australia and Victoria. Does the hon. Member agree that the lessons we can learn from there have absolute relevance to the situation here?
Mr MacDonald
All the evidence shows that graduated driving licence schemes work extremely well in reducing the number of serious incidents.
I have one more statistic to finish with. In 2024, 1,602 kids aged between 17 and 24 were killed or seriously injured in Great Britain. According to international figures, if we introduced a graduated driving licence scheme, that number would drop by about 30%, so it is well worth the Minister considering this.
Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)
In my constituency, road safety is now the No. 1 issue raised with the police. Just in the last year we have seen fatalities, injuries and countless near misses across Rossendale and Darwen. My inbox is filled with emails from people telling me that the roads just do not feel safe, which is why I warmly welcome the Government’s road safety strategy, and we now must turn its ambition into reality.
Let me begin with delivery. Road safety is, by necessity, delivered locally. Road safety partnerships are theoretically the main forum for this, bringing together councils, police forces and other services. Some partnerships, such as the one in Warwickshire, have shown the success that this model can bring; chaired by the PCC, they have the political backing to deliver the change we need. However, in too many parts of the country these partnerships are without that buy-in, with councils and police forces siloed and unwilling to meaningfully share resources. That is very much the picture in Lancashire, with the result being an underfunded and reactive approach to road safety that relies on outdated processes and fails to listen to our communities.
To give one example, William Cartwright, an 11-year-old boy in my constituency, did not feel safe crossing a very busy road on his way to school and launched a petition asking for a zebra crossing to be built, which gained over 1,400 signatures. Despite the mass of evidence showing that the community did not deem the road safe, the Reform leadership at the county council rejected the proposal because they said too few people had been killed or seriously injured there to merit an intervention.
Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal) (Lab)
Is my hon. Friend aware that there does not need to be a certain number of incidents outside a school gate, or indeed on any road, in order for local councils to intervene? It is a myth that we need to bust.
Andy MacNae
Absolutely; I welcome my hon. Friend’s intervention. It is outdated guidance, and it is used as an excuse to avoid taking the action that people need to see.
It does not have to be this way. Neighbouring authorities—we have heard about the example of West Yorkshire—proactively listen to schools and their communities. That community-led approach must become our baseline, because listening to communities is vital. Partnerships also need resources to deliver the change we need; too often they are constrained by low levels of funding. Allowing councils to retain the fees from road offence fixed penalties, which in some cases raise millions of pounds each year, would make a real difference if ringfenced locally.
Nationally, we must be strategic and dynamic with our interventions, aiming for the greatest impact by focusing on higher-risk groups. An empowered road safety board and the new road safety investigation branch could be vital in keeping policy responsive. It would be good to hear from the Minister when the board will be established, what its powers will be and whether she expects it to meet more regularly than once a year.
With speeding being a key factor in 56% of all fatal collisions, this is an area where targeted action is essential. The Minister has committed to update the guidance on speed limits and enforcement, and the need for that is urgent. Just last week I was with residents on a road notorious for speeding, looking at three wrecked cars on the spot where a fatality occurred last year. Everyone knew it was only a matter of time before we saw another crash. They had spent the year calling for speed cameras, yet nothing was done. The message here is clear: communities know where the risks are, and we need to listen.
That is why last month I launched a road safety campaign in Rossendale and Darwen, calling on Lancashire to adopt a new road safety approach that properly resources our road safety partnership and acts to identify and address high-risk roads before incidents occur. Our survey has already had hundreds of responses, and this coming weekend I am hosting roundtables across the constituency to bring together residents, councillors and police to identify the high-risk areas and discuss how we can make them safer. I really hope that Lancashire county council will now listen to residents and work with me to deliver safer roads and save lives.
To conclude, we must end the road safety postcode lottery. Strong national leadership that sets clear expectations will be essential in supporting delivery for every community. That needs to be complemented by steps to genuinely resource delivery on the ground. If we can get this right, the road safety strategy and the lives it saves will be a legacy of which we can all be proud.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I thank the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) for securing this important debate.
Since 2018, there have been 1,506 casualties on our roads in South Cambridgeshire and 34 fatalities, which we all know is 34 too many. Road safety is often discussed in terms of behaviour, speed or enforcement—issues we have heard much about today—but for many of my constituents, the danger begins with the road surface itself. Potholes, worn carriageways and crumbling edges are not just a sign of successive Governments’ failure to invest in our roads and highways but a real safety risk, particularly for cyclists, motorcyclists, pedestrians and drivers forced to swerve to avoid damage. I hear regularly from constituents whose tyres have blown, wheels have cracked or bikes have been thrown off balance because of the unsafe roads beneath them.
This is a recurring nightmare for all councils. I want to take this opportunity to place on record the work of Cambridgeshire county council, which, as the highways authority, is doing everything it reasonably can in very difficult circumstances. Just last night the chair of highways, Councillor Alex Beckett, was out checking the round-the-clock patching of potholes on Cambridge Road in Great Shelford village, following repeated calls from residents and local councillors highlighting just how dangerous this road had become. In the same village, Farhan Hussain, an award-winning curry takeaway owner for whom I recently presented an early-day motion, found a different way of raising awareness: he went viral with a video of himself placing the largest naan in East Anglia in a pothole. To be fair, the council did get it mended within the week.
Under Liberal Democrat leadership, the council’s investment in capital maintenance has more than doubled, and it is delivering tens of thousands of pothole repairs every year. The council is also challenging contractors who do shoddy work, and work that does not meet the right standard is being redone at no extra cost to the taxpayer. However, even with that effort, this situation is untenable. Cambridgeshire’s roads were not designed for the volume of traffic they now carry, let alone the growth planned for the Greater Cambridge area. This is where the Government must take responsibility.
Local councils are legally required to keep roads safe, but they cannot do so without fair, long-term funding. It is like an old pair of trousers—the limited funding given to councils is forcing them to patch the patches, rather than buy the new pair of trousers that is needed. I urge the Government to recognise that proper, scheduled resurfacing is safer, cheaper and longer lasting and will keep people safe on our roads.
Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) on securing this important debate and thank the Backbench Business Committee for allowing it. With over 1,624 people killed in collisions on our roads in 2023, something simply needs to change, and today that has come to the forefront.
I welcome the Government’s announcement of a new road safety strategy, which is much needed and has the potential to reduce deaths and serious injuries on our roads by 65%. The proposals in the road safety strategy will address a number of issues that my constituents raise with me regularly, particularly the new guidance on local speed limits and enforcement. The issues of speeding and unsafe junctions routinely come up in my constituency work, and they directly affect constituents, whether it is speeding on Lead Road in Greenside, through the village of Dipton, or along the A694, where residents in Ebchester have been campaigning for safer road crossings and better speed enforcement. These issues plague the daily lives of my constituents and cause real concern, so it is welcome that the road safety strategy will look at them. It would be great to know how residents can have a greater and more meaningful say on the concerns they have about the roads in their communities.
Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)
There are schools and nurseries in my constituency, such as Jigsaw nursery on Wrexham Road and Delamere Academy, which is just off the busy A556, where children have to navigate fast-moving traffic. Does the hon. Lady agree that proximity to schools and nurseries should be treated as an essential consideration when determining safe speed limits on roads?
Liz Twist
Yes, of course. I believe that that is an important factor in setting speed limits, and it is certainly something that affects my constituents as well as those of the hon. Lady. There are also other places where we must take account of speed limits.
I want to speak briefly about one particular aspect of road safety that was raised with me by my constituents, John and Karen Rowlands, who lost their son Andrew in a road collision in 2020. The driver of the car was underage, uninsured and unlicensed. Sadly, that situation is all too common, and families are left to pick up the pieces, while dealing with unimaginable grief, due to the fact that the laws of our roads, and those affecting vehicles, have not kept up with changing times. Right now in the UK, car insurance costs £562 a year on average, while the penalty for being caught driving without insurance is only £300. The mismatch is simply outrageous.
I welcome the announcement in the road safety strategy that the Government will look again at tougher action against those who choose to drive unlicensed or without insurance, and those with no MOT. A stronger deterrent will help to stop such unlawful practices, and go some way towards preventing further tragedies like Andrew’s.
I believe, as do the Rowlands family, that to improve road safety we must also look at car ownership. Although the correct checks are in place within the car dealership industry, it is simply too easy to buy a car online, with no prior checks taking place on the person purchasing the vehicle or on the vehicle itself. While the deterrent of tougher action is welcome, that loophole still has the potential to cause irreparable harm on our roads. Online car sales are linked to crime, allow unsafe vehicles to remain in circulation, and enable people who do not have a licence to purchase and use cars on our roads. I welcome the fact that the Minister has met the Rowlands family, and will be doing so again shortly.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
I wish to open my contribution to the debate with a tribute to a young man from Pwllheli who was killed in a hideous two-car collision on the Porthmadog bypass just days before Christmas. While we await the inquest, I hope it is some comfort to his family that so many people in our home community want to see changes to the law as a memorial and mark of respect for the life of Mathew Hardy. He was 34 years old and the only child of Simon and Glenys. Mathew’s partner, Mari, is expecting a baby in three months’ time—too many lives shattered by irreplaceable loss. While many of us treat the right—the license—to drive a car with a familiarity verging on contempt, such tragedies remind us how dangerous vehicles can potentially be for all road users. Heaven knows, as Mathew’s father says, that people lose their gun licences, their guns and gun paraphernalia at any suggestion of police concern, but people keep their driving licences far, far too easily.
It is a sad fact that inexperienced young drivers remain disproportionately at risk of being killed or injured on the roads. We had the tragic case in my constituency of Harvey Owen who was a passenger in a car driven by a friend, along with two others, all of them teenagers, who lost their lives in 2023 when their car came off the A4085 near Llanfrothen and overturned in a ditch. Harvey’s mother Crystal—I am sure many Members will know her—is campaigning for graduated driving licences.
Northern Ireland has just committed to a full graduated driving licence system from October this year, which includes post-test restrictions that are designed to reduce exposure to high risk situations, such as carrying peer passengers. Evidence from other countries shows that graduated systems significantly reduce young driver casualties, and they save lives. Safer roads mean fewer accidents, and they also mean lower insurance premiums for young people, which is a message the Government should engage with. The Government should monitor Northern Ireland’s approach as a pilot for the rest of the UK.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
My colleague in the Scottish Government, Fiona Hyslop, Cabinet Secretary for Transport, has indicated a strong willingness to engage with the UK Government and other relevant bodies to trial things such as graduated licences and other road safety measures. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is something the UK Government could proactively engage with to make positive progress across the home nations?
Liz Saville Roberts
The hon. Gentleman makes a powerful suggestion. It is interesting that we are all talking along the same lines.
I welcome that the road safety strategy includes consultation on proposed changes to penalties for motoring offences. For families who have lost loved ones to repeat drink-drive and drug-drive offenders, it is incomprehensible why those drivers do not lose their licences at the point of providing a positive test. At the very least, that should happen automatically at a second or further offence. Such a policy would ensure that there was swift preventive action when there is clear evidence of risk.
My last example is that of Amanda Peak, who lives in Brithdir, near Dolgellau. She lost both her sons, Arron, aged 10, and Ben, aged eight, and her husband was badly injured. The driver who inflicted this on the family was drunk and driving at speed. Amanda begs the Government to bring down the alcohol limit and to address sentencing. When the drunken driver was sentenced, Amanda was told that this man would not even have been sentenced to imprisonment if he had killed only one child. Imagine that—it took two children to be killed for this man to be sentenced to imprisonment. I urge the Minister to meet lobbyists and to meet families as well, because this might well be a once-in-a-generation opportunity to make a change that will benefit very many people’s lives.
Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)
Prior to my role as a Member of Parliament, I was pleased to serve as a Norfolk county councillor for 12 years. In Norfolk, each time somebody is killed or seriously injured within a council division, the relevant councillor is informed. Clearly, nobody ever wanted to receive such an email, but all too often a message would arrive in my inbox. I recall vividly the email that informed me of the tragic death of 15-year-old Salvador Modke, on London Road in Thetford.
Salvador stepped out on to a crossing, just a short distance from his home, on a Saturday afternoon. He was hit by a car and tragically killed. The coroner’s report detailed evidence that had been received during the inquest, highlighting that the crossing contained minimal facilities for pedestrians and no signs on the approach to alert drivers. I pay tribute to Salvador’s family and friends who lobbied for safety improvements in the area following his death. I am pleased that Norfolk county council will be using money provided by the Government to undertake a full assessment of safety measures. I will do whatever I can to ensure that money is found to enact whatever recommendations are made.
As a member of the county council’s transport committee, I would routinely review performance indicators that tracked the number of people killed or seriously injured on the county’s roads. It was always a statistic of great concern, with a significantly high number of incidents. Sadly, the most recent Department for Transport data released in November indicates that road casualties have risen more in my county of Norfolk than anywhere else in the country, with the number of people killed or seriously injured rising from 470 in 2023 to 555 in 2024.
It is worth noting that across the country, 10 times as many people die on rural roads as on motorways. The view of road safety charity Brake is that rural roads are the most dangerous roads for all users. Many do not have cycles lane, pavements or bridleways. Many rural roads are narrow, with blind bends and limited safe places to pass. There is often much that obstructs the driver’s view and, all too often, there are animal collisions, particularly with deer. Deer are a constant risk around Thetford forest, in my constituency, which is the UK’s largest man-made forest.
Worryingly, in a Brake and Direct Line survey, 68% of drivers said that they felt it was acceptable to drive above the speed limit on a rural road, and nearly half of drivers said that they had driven faster than the speed limit on a single-carriageway rural road in the past year. Drivers are openly admitting to speeding on the most dangerous roads. I welcome the Government’s road safety strategy, and I ask that serious thought be given to the specific circumstances and opportunities to improve safety on our rural roads.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. After the next speaker, I am going to have to drop the time limit to two minutes, because there is a very important debate on Gaza that I would like to start by 3.30 pm.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) on securing this important debate and sharing her own family’s story. I dedicate my speech to a close and dear friend, a councillor in Richmond upon Thames, who lost her adult son in a road traffic collision on the A31 in Hampshire just before the new year. I am thinking of her and all her family as I make these remarks.
Every life lost on our roads is tragic, so I welcome the publication of the new road safety strategy. It is vital that we explore how our roads can be made safer so that lives can be saved. Young people are disproportionately involved in road traffic accidents. Drivers aged 17 to 24 represent just 6% of licence holders but are involved in 24% of fatal and serious collisions, so I am pleased that the Government have recognised that that statistic must be addressed.
Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)
May I join the hon. Member in what she says? Just last month, three young members of the community in Bolton, in the constituency next door to mine, lost their lives in a road traffic accident. A 17-year-old and two 18-year-olds were killed, as well as one of my constituents, Masrob Ali, who was 54 and out there working as a taxi driver.
Sarah Olney
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman; it is tragic to hear about all those lives lost.
Consulting on measures to reduce the number of accidents involving young people is a really positive step. Not only is it vital for the obvious safety reasons, but it will make driving more affordable if insurance companies subsequently reduce their fees for 17 to 25-year-olds if they are involved in fewer accidents.
The THINK! campaign was launched at the turn of the millennium and presented a strong message to young adults about the dangers of drink driving, but 17 to 24-year-olds are still involved in a disproportionate amount of cases. As we have heard from other contributions, in the UK it is still seen as somewhat acceptable, especially among young people, to drive while over the limit.
However, drunk drivers can also be confident drivers, who, after three pints, would rather not have the inconvenience of having to book a taxi or leave their car parked elsewhere overnight. There can be lots of reasons why people think that it is acceptable to drink and drive. Will the Government commit to examining the perceptions of drunk driving, along with exploring the use of new preventive technology?
We should also examine road safety through the lens of everyone who uses our roads. Last Friday, I met a constituent who had been hit by an e-bike being ridden on the pavement. While e-bikes should certainly not be ridden on pavements, my constituent was actually very understanding of the fact that the reason why so many riders choose to do so is that they are so concerned about the dangers of cycling on our roads.
The 2007 national safety camera programme provided guidance that cameras typically should be installed only on stretches of road that experienced at least three deaths or serious injuries in the past 36 months. I have heard from other Members that that guidance can be overridden locally, but will the Minister commit to re-examining the guidance? Anyone who cycles will tell us that there are stretches of road and corners that present specific dangers to them, but experienced cyclists will anticipate that and consequently not suffer serious injuries. We need to encourage more cycling, particularly in our cities, and improving road safety for all road users is a huge priority in ensuring that that can happen.
Reviewing the guidance on safety cameras could really go a long way in encouraging all our road users to use the roads more safely. We want to see our roads safe for all users and to reduce the number of deaths on our roads.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
I very much welcome the steps that our Labour Government are taking to improve road safety. From record funding to improve road conditions to the publication of the road safety strategy last month—the first of its kind in a decade—there is a clear commitment to deliver on our manifesto commitments and set out vital reforms to make our roads safer, particularly as the UK has slipped from third to fourth in Europe’s road safety rankings.
One of the key issues that I will highlight is tackling drug driving. Data from the Department for Transport shows that although alcohol remains the leading cause of impairment-related collisions, the gap between alcohol-related crashes and drug-related crashes has narrowed over the last decade. Between 2014 and 2023, the number of drivers killed in fatal collisions with drugs detected rose by more than 70%. I welcome the Government’s decisive steps to give the police additional powers to act at the roadside, including immediate licence suspensions to remove dangerous drivers from our roads, as well as the commitment to explore alternative testing methods such as saliva-based testing and improved processing, including increased roadside testing.
In the short amount of time that I have, let me say that road safety must include pavement safety. I really welcome the work that our Government are doing to bring forward measures to tackle the enforcement of hugely inconsiderate pavement parking. Many of my constituents tell me about the danger it poses, particularly for people who have children in pushchairs, use wheelchairs, or are visually impaired and use a guide dog. They often take the risk of walking into the road simply to go about their day.
The existing legislation restricts the powers of local authorities outside London and Scotland. When will the Government introduce interim secondary legislation, so that local authorities can enforce against unnecessary obstructions on the pavement? I encourage all my constituents to sign my petition on pavement parking.
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) for securing this debate. I also thank Alan Faulds and Melanie Mitchell for inviting me to a Safe Drive Stay Alive event last week, where emergency service workers shared real-life experiences with local secondary school children about working at collisions and dealing with the aftermath of what has happened.
As a parent, it was John Galloway’s contribution that I have thought about most this last week. John told the story of what happened in 2001 to his son, David, who was then an 18-year-old with his entire life in front of him. He was involved in a road traffic accident—one that was entirely avoidable. John detailed the accident and how David was hospitalised for two years, as well as the pain and heartbreak that John and his wife felt, and continue to feel. It was full of raw emotional trauma.
David then came on to the stage in his motorised wheelchair, and John explained how he struggles with swallowing and must now be fed through a PEG—percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy—in his stomach. After the event, I had the honour of speaking with the Galloway family. The Galloways have been attending Safe Drive Stay Alive for nearly two decades now. They go and share their story because they do not want other families to experience the pain they have.
Safe Drive Stay Alive costs around £36,000 a year to run—Clackmannanshire council provides £3,000, Falkirk council £5,000 and Stirling council £10,000. The rest must be made through donations from local businesses and individuals, and I give credit to Air Products, which has a site in Alloa, for getting behind the campaign and making a donation. The three councils are facing financial issues, and when we consider the fact that each road death in Scotland costs approximately £2.8 million, they feel that they might not be able to step up and fund Safe Drive Stay Alive going forward. We really cannot put a pound sign in front of that.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) for securing this debate.
Parish councils across my constituency have been raising the alarm on road safety for years. In Bradley, residents and councillors continue to push for a reduction in the speed limit from 30 mph to 20 mph, and for action to stop inappropriate heavy goods vehicle traffic on the really narrow village roads. Despite clear signage, 44-tonne articulated vehicles still pass through regularly, causing severe damage to road surfaces, verges and drainage, worsening potholes and flooding, and creating a real danger to pedestrians, as Members have said throughout this debate.
In Eccleshall and surrounding villages, speeding hotspots are repeatedly raised on routes such as the A519 through Slindon, where multiple accidents occurred in a single summer, and on rural narrow lanes near schools and homes, where there are no pavements at all.
I also want to highlight the experience of one of my constituents, Diana Kynaston, who is a motorbike rider from Stafford. For motorcyclists, potholes and crumbling road edges create a serious threat to life and limb. She has highlighted the route between Doxey and Astonfields industrial estate, where uneven surfaces, deep potholes and damaged corners force sudden manoeuvres and increase the risk of losing control, particularly for learner riders. I have heard reports across the constituency—from Norbury to Cold Meece, and from Bishop’s Offley to Great Bridgeford—about potholes going long unrepaired, and this includes stretches of major roads.
Adam Jogee
I am grateful to my other constituency neighbour for giving way—there is a theme about the quality and condition of our roads in Staffordshire. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for setting out the situation in her constituency, and I just want to make it clear that the same situation is also happening in Newcastle- under-Lyme and other parts of north Staffordshire.
Leigh Ingham
Something that all Staffordshire MPs have in common is our absolute despair at the state of our roads. The Government have allocated additional funds, which is really important and will make a significant difference to what we can achieve. However, to put it in perspective, Staffordshire is the slowest authority at repairing potholes. If a snail started off in Stafford town centre when a pothole was reported, it will have moved 22 kilometres by the time the pothole is repaired, which is ridiculous.
I ask the Minister what mechanisms the Department has in place to ensure the additional road maintenance funding is being used effectively by councils and is translating into safer, better-maintained roads, and how it supports local authorities to take a joined-up approach to road safety that includes both speed and road maintenance. When funding rises—which I am very grateful for—but safety does not, how can the Minister tackle that in her role?
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
Just two weeks after my election, I was contacted by my constituent Julie. Her husband Kevin was a devoted husband and grandfather, and was dedicated to keeping us safe on our roads as a traffic management officer. On the morning of 26 February 2022, Kevin was parked up in a closed lane, completing checks between junctions 14 and 15 of the M6. While he was there, a stolen Audi travelling at over 100 mph and being actively pursued by police entered that closed lane and collided with Kevin’s vehicle, killing him instantly.
Julie was told that the police pursuit had been authorised to protect the public and that although officers were aware of a coned-off section of the motorway, that did not feature in the risk assessment because there was no indication that road workers would be present, but Kevin was present—he was authorised to be there and was working. Julie has never sought to apportion blame, but has consistently asked for answers about the protocols and lack of communication that led to Kevin losing his life. In her words,
“Kevin looked out for everyone’s safety, but who was looking out for his?”
A member of the public stopped in the same place where Kevin was working would rightly be considered at serious risk, yet Kevin’s only physical protection was plastic cones, and he had no radio link to the regional operations centre.
I welcome the Government’s road safety strategy, which recognises that road workers are among the most vulnerable people on our roads and commits to harnessing technology, data sharing and improved enforcement to protect them. Julie believes that a simple message on the gantry signs could have saved Kevin’s life, but there is currently no requirement for communication between the police and National Highways when it comes to traffic control officers, as there is for those working on repairs. My team and I are engaging with National Highways about this issue, but it would be very welcome if the Minister would also consider it.
I pay tribute to Kevin’s widow Julie, and thank her for her courage in repeatedly telling his story. I urge the Government to work with families such as Julie’s to make sure those who put themselves at risk to keep us safe are respected and protected.
Pam Cox (Colchester) (Lab)
I welcome today’s debate on road safety, which is a subject of deep concern in Colchester and across Essex. In our county, we have seen a year-on-year increase in deaths on our roads, rising to 58 in 2025—too many of those have been young lives. In Colchester, we are marking a terrible anniversary at present: the moment that four young people lost their lives in a single crash. In April last year, an 18-year-old was killed on the A12. In the previous September, a 13-year-old was struck and fatally injured on Mersea Road. The deaths of these young people must be a call to action.
Residents regularly raise concerns about the A12 and the A120, where frequent incidents and congestion contribute to these horrors. I would like to highlight the need for better road infrastructure and traffic management on those stretches. As an Essex MP, I am committed to working with Essex Highways and Essex police to develop measures set out in the road safety strategy, particularly the mandating of safety technologies in new vehicles, taking tougher action against drink and drug driving and improving driver testing and learning periods, especially for young drivers.
Linsey Farnsworth
Dave, a driving instructor in Amber Valley, contacts me regularly about road safety—he is a passionate advocate. However, he is concerned about the consultation in the road safety strategy on a three-month or six-month minimum learning period. Does my hon. Friend agree with Dave that structured training and lesson time is just as important as a minimum time period?
Pam Cox
I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. I am sure the Minister has heard that point and will respond to it.
Far too many people die on our roads—we really must act to save lives. I will close by asking the Minister what new funding will be available to help us in that key endeavour.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
Road safety is one of the top issues that constituents write to me about. That is why I took the opportunity to hear from nearly 1,000 Bracknell Forest residents on this issue over the summer, as I conducted my summer campaign on road safety. Those conversations and speaking with many incredible charities and organisations in Bracknell Forest and beyond impressed on me the need for greater action on uninsured drivers.
Those who drive uninsured are statistically more likely to be involved in road accidents, as well as to commit other risky offences on the road, including hit-and-run incidents and speeding. Towards the end of last year, I introduced a ten-minute rule Bill to bring in tougher measures, and I thank the Minister for listening to my constituents and launching a consultation on a review of the motoring offences framework, which has not been updated since 1988.
Uninsured driving was not the only issue raised with me by residents. Speeding is a concern for so many who use the roads responsibly. They see it happening, and they know that they and their loved ones are put at risk by this dangerous behaviour. In fact, more than 70% of respondents to my road safety survey agreed that people drive too quickly down residential and main roads in Bracknell Forest. I am therefore pleased that the Government are publishing new guidance for setting local speed limits and updating guidance on the use of speed cameras and red-light cameras.
I pay tribute to the work already undertaken by Thames Valley police on vehicle offences more generally. Vehicle crime in Bracknell Forest is down 14% compared with the end of 2024, and I know that our local policing team has been working hard to crack down on offences including illegal car meets and uninsured driving. We have already heard from many Members about potholes, so I will quickly welcome the nearly £17 million invested by this Government in our local roads over the course of this spending period.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
That brings us to the Front-Bench contributions. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
May I start by thanking the Backbench Business Committee for granting time for this debate? I congratulate the hon. Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon), who secured it, on her powerful speech. She, like many other Members, rightly focused on the appalling human cost when road safety goes wrong. So many Members spoke powerfully with stories from their own lives or from their constituents of people who have lost their lives or been injured and the impact that has on families—that has to be where we start from—and the emergency services.
On road safety, we must start with our own human shortcomings. Few of us are, generally speaking, the skilled and wise drivers and road users that we often tend to think we are. It remains to be seen whether driverless cars will save us from ourselves. In the meantime, we need to tackle a whole range of factors, as well as the fatal five factors that the hon. Member for Shipley outlined in her introduction. We need to address culture and attitudes to speeding and drinking.
A number of hon. Members referred to a particular problem with how young people, in particular young males, can drive. We need to think about the design of our roads and the lack of safe walking and cycling infrastructure. In my Oxfordshire constituency of Didcot and Wantage, the A417 and A338 are very busy A-roads. They have no viable alternative for people cycling and lack cycle paths, as would be common in Germany, the Netherlands and many other places. Potholes and poor road surfaces are the bane of all road users’ lives, and there is a link there to wider policy, given that upper-tier council authorities are seeing more than half their budgets consumed by statutory requirements such as adult social care. Road safety links to a lot of other policy areas.
We need to think hard about enforcement, whether that is cameras or the human interface. We need to continue to expand cycle training, particularly the Bikeability programme for young people, and we need better training and support for new drivers, particularly young ones. The recent Government announcement on pavement parking is welcome, but I hope the Minister will say something about how she intends to implement that. I note that Lord Blunkett in the other place tabled an amendment on that subject.
We must, however, look to ourselves as well as to others. Pedestrians should think carefully before crossing the road at an inappropriate place, and we all need to get out of our phones and look around us. Cyclists need to be consistent in obeying rules and signals and respecting pedestrians, and drivers need to have good vehicle maintenance and be mindful of the power of their vehicle. Nobody should want to be the cause of the human harm we have heard about today, and we should all think about that the next time we attempt to behave badly on the roads.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
First and foremost, I thank Members from across the House for taking part in this debate, and I particularly pay tribute to all those mentioned who tragically lost their lives or faced life changing injuries in road accidents. It is right that we do all we can to stop such terrible incidents occurring again in the future.
The ability to travel in our cars and on the roads is integral to the vast majority of people’s everyday lives. Not only is it the most popular form of transport, but it is a lifeline for many people, so all motorists and every other road user, whether they are lorry drivers, motorcyclists, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders or others, deserve safe journeys.
In considering the Government’s road safety announcements, the Opposition support and welcome some elements of the strategy, while the effectiveness of other measures remains in question. We strongly support measures such as stronger fines for those who commit egregious offences and action to combat ghost number plates. However, the overwhelming sentiment, which I hope the Minister adopts when putting into practice the policies set out in the strategy, is about enforcement. One of the worst things to hear when there has been an accident is that it involved people breaking existing laws, putting themselves and others in danger.
Unfortunately, since the Government released the strategy, we have seen further decreases in police officer numbers, with a decrease of more than 1,300 officers between September 2024 and September 2025 and further decreases occurring before that date. How can we expect the Government to enforce our wide range of existing road laws, let alone new ones, if there are insufficient police officers? It would be useful to know what discussions the Department has had with the Home Office to ensure that sufficient officers will be allocated to police our existing road laws and any additional ones the Government might bring forward. Also, I understand that the Government’s police performance framework says that there is a target to “decrease” the number of
“People killed or seriously injured in road traffic collision”,
but does not actually say what that target will be.
To improve enforcement, we must have a targeted response to problem drivers, who put everyone on the road at risk. One issue that demands an even greater focus is drug driving. The Government’s consultation acknowledges that some police forces are arresting more drug drivers than drink drivers, and that there has been a steady increase in the number of people convicted. Although that represents some progress, I would call on the Government to go further. Data shows that, in 2023, 22% of deceased drivers tested positive for impairment drugs, an increase from 11% in 2014. Among the youngest cohort of drivers—those most likely to get into terrible accidents—the vast majority of cases involved illegal drugs only. While there are sensible proposals within this strategy about testing and looking at further fines, the Minister must work with the police to ensure they are doing more to target drug driving and not relying on tests after the fact.
In addition, I hope the Government strongly consider any further measures that stop those committing these terrible crimes on our roads from being able to avoid punishment, whether that be due to testing or statutory limits, which, in particular cases, have enabled those who have committed the worst crimes on our roads to avoid the full weight of the law.
To conclude, for road safety measures, I believe that the Government must bring drivers with them in any changes and measures that they take. Where drivers do not feel that those road safety measures actually help them—such as with 20 mph limits—they will not take them seriously. This is a strategy that must be delivered, and delivered well, but with drivers, not just against them.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Minister, who I am told is aware of how much pressure there is on timing.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Lilian Greenwood)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) for her powerful and moving speech in opening today’s debate, and thank so many Members on both sides of the House for their thoughtful and heartfelt contributions. I wish we had more time for the debate; I know I will not be able to respond to all the points raised, so I will endeavour to write to people if I do not manage to answer their questions today.
It is evident from the discussion that road safety is a subject that affects everyone. Members have shared the effect of road collusions on their constituents and on themselves. My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley is one of too many people who have lost family members on our roads, and I extend my sympathies to her and to all constituents whose tragic cases have been raised by hon. and right hon. Members. I have met many bereaved families, and it is without doubt the hardest part of my job, but I will continue to do so.
I am proud that this Government have published the first road safety strategy in over a decade, which sets out our vision for a safer future for all. Although Britain has some of the safest roads globally, the last 10 years of complacency mean that our road safety record has dropped. As we have already heard, four people are killed on our roads every single day. It is not acceptable, which is why we have set ambitious targets to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on British roads by 65%, and by 70% for children, by 2035. The strategy is rooted in innovation and underpinned by the “safe system”, which recognises that although driver error is inevitable, deaths and serious injuries on our roads are not. A new road safety investigation branch will analyse data to identify causes of danger, and to generate safety solutions, in order to cut deaths and serious injuries.
Hon. Members, including the hon. Member for North West Norfolk (James Wild) and my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee), have spoken about the need for action to reduce speed. We will update guidance for local authorities, which have the power to set speed limits on their roads, to inform decision making at local level. It is for councils to determine what measures are appropriate, because they have local knowledge. It is right that they focus on areas of highest risk, which may be where fatal collisions have occurred, but there is nothing to stop them implementing road safety measures elsewhere. I can assure the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) that we have already committed to updating the guidance on speed camera deployment.
The enforcement of road traffic law is the responsibility of individual chief constables and police and crime commissioners, taking into account the specific local problems that they face. We are investing in additional police officers, with 3,000 to be recruited by the end of March and 13,000 by the end of this Parliament. Like my hon. Friend for Shipley, I pay tribute to Alison Lowe, the deputy mayor for policing and crime in West Yorkshire, for her personal commitment. Last month I visited West Yorkshire to see at first hand the work being delivered, and last week I joined the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners to talk about our strategy and how we can work together.
Tragically, as we have heard, young drivers are over-represented in the number of people killed and seriously injured, and crashes involving young drivers also result in deaths and serious injuries among other road users. This issue was raised by numerous Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley), the hon. Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire (Mr MacDonald), and the right hon. Member—I will probably murder the name of her constituency—for Dwyfor Meirionnydd (Liz Saville Roberts).
Graduated driving licences vary around the world, as does how they are implemented; there is not one standard type. For England, Scotland and Wales, we are consulting on introducing a minimum learning period to ensure that learner drivers get the necessary time and training to prepare themselves for a lifetime of safe driving. We have to strike a balance between protecting young people and impacting their opportunities to get to work, education and social activities. We already have a two-year probationary period for all novice drivers once they have passed their test, and we are now seeking views on a lower blood alcohol limit for novice drivers in England and Wales. I am very aware of the recent announcement in Northern Ireland, which my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley mentioned. My officials regularly meet their counterparts in Northern Ireland, and I have asked them to keep me updated on the progress and on the impact of the measures once they have been implemented.
At the other end of the spectrum, drivers aged over 70 account for around 24% of all car drivers killed in 2024. That is why we are consulting on mandatory eye tests for drivers in this age group, and we are also exploring cognitive testing. As well as improving safety, these measures could support families to broach difficult conversations with older relatives who are still driving.
Drink-driving continues to cause too many deaths and injuries. The drink-drive limit has not been lowered since it was first legislated for in 1967, and our understanding of impairment has developed. To support a shift in social acceptability, we will work with our THINK! campaign and alcohol brands to encourage people to choose drinks with 0% alcohol content. Drug-driving has also increased, without sufficient measures in place to curtail it, so we are consulting on alternative methods of testing for drug driving and on licence suspension for those suspected of the most serious offences. There is so much more I would like to say, Madam Deputy Speaker, but may I just say that we are seeking opinions on tougher penalties for motoring offences? usbI thank my hon. Friends who raised those issues, in addition to raising the issues of pavement parking and vehicle safety.
Although the Government are leading the charge, this will be a collective effort in partnership with local authorities, the industry, the emergency services, communities and the devolved Administrations. I assure everyone in this House that action is beginning now to make our roads safer, as we put the commitments in the strategy into place. I will chair a new road safety board that will be set up in the coming months to support and monitor the commitments, and we will announce further details of its membership and other arrangements in due course.
Finally, as hon. Members are aware, many of the measures on which we are consulting will require primary legislation, and we intend to bring this forward when parliamentary time allows. However, where we can deliver change faster through secondary legislation, we will do so. I encourage hon. Members to respond to our consultations. We will listen to this feedback, alongside evidence and recommendations from the Transport Committee’s inquiry.
I again thank all right hon. and hon. Members for their contributions, and I look forward to updating the House when we have considered the findings.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered road safety.