Read Bill Ministerial Extracts
Automated Vehicles Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting) Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateTrudy Harrison
Main Page: Trudy Harrison (Conservative - Copeland)Department Debates - View all Trudy Harrison's debates with the Department for Transport
(8 months, 1 week ago)
Public Bill CommitteesAs I set out in my response to the hon. Member for Sefton Central, when he was making the case for the amendments, there is not a sufficient appreciation of the word, “acceptable”. I know that in English it can sound a bit vague, but it means what is acceptable for the public and Parliament as expressed through the statement of safety principles. I completely agree with the point made by the hon. Member for Easington that we need to bring the public with us and it is about confidence—absolutely.
Would it be helpful to set out how we have already embraced elements of self-driving in transport? For example, I doubt there will be a driver in this place who does not rely on anti-lock braking systems when using their car. Self-parking is now quite common and autopilot is used when we are flying across the skies. Driverless trains are in operation, as are Starship robots. There are already elements of self-driving provisions on our roads that we have come to accept. I think it would be helpful if the Minister could perhaps set out how the sensory equipment in those vehicles—the lidar, the radar and the sonar—is so much more powerful than the human eye and other aspects of human sensory facilities. In addition, perhaps he could set out that human error is often the cause of accidents in this country.
I agree that technologies are evolving all over the place in lots of different modes of transport, and we are at the beginning of a revolution. I think that self-driving cars are probably a different order of magnitude.