Smart motorways branded ‘catastrophic’ waste of time and money
Smart motorways are losing the economy money and creating traffic jams with mixed safety benefit, according to new analysis.
The AA said several smart motorway schemes are either losing the nation cash or barely breaking even The AA investigated 16 long-awaited evaluation reports published by National Highways yesterday (Thursday 5 February 2026). Its analysis found that several schemes are either losing the nation cash or barely breaking even, while the safety record on some schemes is worse than before the changes and most are mixed.
National Highways' Post Opening Project Evaluation (POPE) reports assess whether the 16 smart motorways scheme upgrades - delivered between 2013 and 2019 - are on track to deliver the anticipated impacts, including on safety, customer journeys, environmental outcomes, and value for money and journey time benefits over the next 60 years. The AA said the M25 All Lane Running (ALR) section between junctions 23 to 27, and the M6 Dynamic Hard Shoulder (DHS) section between junctions 5 to 8 are losing the economy money and have been rated "very poor" by the road agency. Alongside the two schemes above, a further six schemes have been rated as "not on track - poor" or "not on track - low" in respect of providing value money at the end of the evaluation period once the motorway has been opened to traffic.
In many cases, converting the hard shoulder into a permanent or temporary running lane has reduced the speed of traffic, meaning more jams and congestion across England's motorway network. The AA, which earlier this week said that nearly half of drivers are anxious about using smart motorways[1], said the reports - which are dated September 2023 - showed smart motorways had been a "catastrophic waste of time, money and effort". The UK has three different types of smart motorway.
Controlled motorways retain the hard shoulder, but with added safety technology and gantries. For dynamic hard shoulders, the hard shoulder can be used as a running lane at peak times and periods of high congestion. All lane running schemes permanently convert the hard shoulder into a running lane with emergency areas spaced approximately every 0.75 miles apart.
Just three schemes at the end of the five-year evaluation period are "on track" in relation to value for money. The M6 between junctions 10a and 13, which incorporates both a Controlled Motorway which retains a permanent hard shoulder and ALR has a "low" rating, however only has four years of data due to covid occurring in the final year of evaluation. The M3 ALR section between junctions 2 and 4a is "on track" due to faster journey times, but has a worsening safety record.
The only scheme to exceed expectations is the controlled motorway on the M25 between junctions 16 to 23 which was also widened. This section saw faster journey times and an improved safety record, highlighting the AA's calls for this to be the standard bearer for motorway improvements. The AA also said the safety benefit of 'smart' motorways has been brought into question as two schemes show a worsening safety record.
The M3 ALR section between junctions 2 and 4a shows an increase in the number of those killed or seriously injured by around a third. The M1 stretch of ALR between junctions 29 and 42 also shows an increase in crashes where people were killed or seriously injured (KSI) on the motorway. The scheme was also given a "poor" value for money rating as journey times did not improve.
Elsewhere, the M25 ALR section between junctions 23 to 27 saw a marginal reduction in those killed or seriously injured. However, at either end of this stretch are two controlled motorways which were widened, retained the hard shoulder and installed safety technology (M25 16-23 and M25 27-30). In both cases, a significant reduction in KSIs was observed.
The AA also warned that the reports had been "locked away" for years with varying datasets and an inconsistent nature of figures. Edmund King, AA president, said; "After a lengthy wait, these reports finally see the light of day. The reluctant release of these documents, without any announcement feels like an attempt to bury bad news.
"This has been a catastrophic waste of time, money and effort. Many of the schemes have slower journeys which causes traffic jams, loses the country cash and worsened the safety record of motorways. "Motorways which have been widened, the hard shoulder kept, and safety technology added have proved the most successful.
We have been calling for this standard for so long and urge any government that looks to improve motorways to use this style as the blueprint." In April 2023, the former Conservative administration officially cancelled plans for all new smart motorways and removed earmarked projects from road-building. But the AA continues to call for the return of the hard shoulder to help give confidence to drivers.
It says the reports show that widening motorways and retaining the hard shoulder with improved technology provides the best safety improvement. However, National Highway asserted the safety benefits of smart motorways along with their congestion-cutting advantages. A National Highways spokesperson said: "Our latest analysis continues to show that overall, smart motorways remain our safest roads.
They are also providing much-needed extra capacity for drivers, helping to reduce congestion and lower carbon emissions." It also said that the findings cover the relatively small amount of time smart motorways have existed, during which time there has been lower than forecasted traffic growth due to factors including Covid and lower-than-expected economic growth. The government agency also said the reports demonstrate that some of the motorway sections would have been unable to cope with today's traffic volumes had they not been upgraded, and the remainder have additional capacity for future growth.
A number of schemes are also shown to be delivering faster, smoother journeys compared to if they had not been converted.
It's also cautioned that the value for money assessments should be treated with caution as they were based on projections made more than a decade ago.
The findings cover the relatively small amount of time smart motorways have existed, during which time there has been lower than forecasted traffic growth due to factors including Covid and lower-than-expected economic growth.