Mr. Peter Walsh:

On the benefits of the system, we produced a full business case, which is where the 2.8 benefit to cost ratio comes from. It takes in a lot of factors. The easiest way to illustrate it is that currently, during congested conditions, a trip from the M1 to the M11 in uncongested conditions takes 22 to 24 minutes. In congested conditions it can take in excess of 70 minutes, three times as long. An awful lot of stop-start driving is occurring. It has been demonstrated on many road networks that if we can achieve continuous driving at an appropriate speed, many benefits can be gained, including a reduction in accidents because there are not the varying speeds across all the road users and there is a much better result in air quality in both carbon emissions and particulate matter. We have curves on the performance of internal combustion engines. At higher speeds, the curve is relatively flat, a minor change in operating speed at 100 km/h has very little difference for particulate matter or carbon emissions but at lower speeds, when going from below 10 km/h or 20 km/h, it is a much steeper curve. There will be benefits from that. If the committee wishes to see the business case, we can provide it. It enumerates all these things.

On the concerns from the UK committee and smart motorways, it is a different issue. As the Deputy points out, it is the all-lane running and the dangers to two road users in the event of them having a breakdown. We are not introducing all-lane running. We are conscious of the safety concern.

We agree about information and clarity. We are doing our best working with the RSA and An Garda Síochána, which has also been involved. It will be a pretty comprehensive education programme, I hope. I hope that answers the question.