Is the next season of Bridgerton coming to a car screen near you?

The Department of Transport recently announced its intention to allow Automated Lane-Keeping Systems (ALKS) to be used on British roads by the end of the year, following detailed consultation. The technology is similar to the “Autopilot” function in a Tesla —  it is responsible for controlling the position and speed of a car in a single lane, with speed limited to 37mph (60km/h). Cars functioning with ALKS would be defined as self-driving, pending a GB-style approval,  which would mean drivers would not be required to have their hands on the wheel or monitor roads.This would represent a significant change for car insurance and road safety. However, it is crucial to consider why such a change is regarded as a necessary step forward in automation.

According to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, automated driving systems could prevent 47,000 serious accidents and save 3,900 lives over the next decade.The UK’s ambitious climate targets are also a reason why automated electric vehicles may be necessary. With the UK setting ambitious carbon net-zero targets by 2050 and a 78% cut in emissions by 2035, electrical vehicles and their potential self-driving technology will be vital in  reducing harmful emissions from petrol and gas.

However, the ‘reward’ of new electric self-driving vehicles is not without risk. Many view the  marketing of automated vehicles with trepidation. Matthew Avery, director of research at Thatcham Research, states that, "ALKS as currently proposed by the government are not automated […] They are assisted driving systems as they rely on the driver to take back control.”

Perhaps the most pressing safety issue will be driver overconfidence, seen in 2018 when a Tesla-driving Nottingham resident climbed into their passenger seat whilst on the motorway. Notably, the safety mechanisms in even some of the most sophisticated self-driving cars have demonstrated worrying issues. The consumer advocacy group Consumer Reports found that the Tesla “Autopilot” system (which requires drivers to have their hands on the wheel) could be gamed by sitting on the driver's seat belt and using a small, weighted chain on the steering wheel.

Although self-driving cars are touted as bulwarks against human error, their potentially misleading advertising may instead embolden individuals to act in irresponsible ways whilst their cars drive for them. This may lead to unsafe road behaviour and could cause an increase in serious road accidents.

If this were the case, who would be held responsible? The Netflix-watching ‘driver’? The manufacturer? Or the tech boffin in Silicon Valley?

The proposed law on liability is quite clear here. Drivers behind the wheel of a GB-approved automated vehicle in self-driving mode would not be deemed as the active driver. Rather, they are a “user-in-charge”, free to keep their hands off the wheel and catch up on the latest episode of their favourite period drama instead.

The “user-in-charge”, in all their TV-watching, lunch-eating freedom, would not be prosecuted for various breaches of traffic rules. Instead, the issue is to be resolved between the safety assurance regulator and the Automated Driving System Entity (ASDE). This entity will be the vehicle manufacturer, software developer, or both.

Nevertheless, this does not leave the “user-in-charge” free to ignore warnings presented by the car. A “transition demand” that eliminates screen use unrelated to driving, provides clear signals and gives sufficient warning to the ‘user-in-charge’ would be expected to provoke a response from the ‘driver’.

This does, however, beg the question of how liable the human driver would be having received these warnings. A significant challenge to legislating this issue revolves around the severity of action needed by the driver, and the length of warning provided.

Can a vehicle truly be deemed ‘self-driving’ if a human is required to respond to external events such as a tyre blow-out, changing weather or the presence of emergency services on roads? Does the requirement of potential evasive action whilst driving (such as a hard stop) negate a car’s ability to be defined as autonomous or self-driving?

A further challenge in devising laws centres on the functionality of driverless systems outside of motorways and their responsiveness to road alerts. Currently, ALKS cannot operate outside of motorway conditions. There is also concern about their ability to adapt to HGVs that may obscure signs that overrule the road’s status or limits at the time. Manufacturers and software developers must consider whether accepting full liability will be a shared operation, or whether those responsible for the software should foot the bill.

Whatever the legal outcome, it may not be too long until you can binge-watch a Netflix blockbuster series behind the wheel of a car.