 |
| Martin Vickers believes older motorists are particularly discomforted by headlight glare |
CLEETHORPES MP Martin Vickers this week initiated a debate in the 'Commons on the glare from car headlights which, he claimed, were often so bright as to discomfort motorists driving in the opposite direction, thereby potentially increasing the likelihood of road accidents. Here, courtesy of Hansard, is part of the debate.
Martin Vickers Con, Cleethorpes): I know I am not alone in believing that modern headlights on cars can be too bright, causing discomforting glare for motorists and potentially increasing accidents.
Many of my constituents have made their views known, following an article in my local newspaper, the Grimsby Telegraph, which detailed the findings of a study by the Royal Automobile Club.
I am sure successive Ministers have been aware of and considered this issue, but I am disappointed that no action appears to have been taken until recently when the Government decided to commission an independent study following a public petition.
I hope that by bringing this matter before the House, a meaningful series of exchanges with motorist organisations, road safety campaigners and others will follow.
Jim Shannon, DUP, Strangord: Back home, this is a big issue for many of my constituents when they observe what they refer to as one-eyed monsters coming over the hill.
These new headlights seem to have almost a searchlight quality.
On another issue, does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is essential that learner drivers learn to drive in the dark?
For new licence holders learning to drive at night when a car is coming towards them can be overwhelming.
Does he agree that there should perhaps be time in the driving licence application and instruction process to practise night-time driving?
Martin Vickers: Night-time driving is very different from normal daytime driving.
Perhaps consideration should be given to whether that should be part of the driving test.
It is a statement of the obvious that vehicle headlights are crucial in enabling drivers to travel safely in the dark or in poor weather conditions.
They are required to identify signs, bends, obstacles and other road users, pedestrians in particular, and to make their vehicle visible to others.
Over the last 20 years, however, vehicle lighting technology has changed rapidly from halogen to high-intensity discharge to light-emitting diodes.
I appreciate that they are slightly different technologies, but I will use LED as an all-encompassing shorthand for the various alternatives.
In general, LED vehicle headlights are advantageous for sustainability and the driver’s view of the road ahead, but they do also cause problems.
Although I intend to focus on high-intensity headlights, it is worth highlighting that dazzling taillights, front and rear indicators, fog lights and reversing lights may also cause concerns about glare in various situations.
Dr John Lincoln, of LightAware, explains that, although the human eye can adapt to a wide range of light levels, from bright sunlight to almost total darkness, it cannot adapt in a short space of time.
Comfortable vision requires a limited range of light levels at any particular time.
LED vehicle headlights are much bluer and brighter than the halogen headlights of the past.
Halogen headlights are usually around 3,000 lumens, but LED lights are commonly double that, with a colour temperature of 6,000 Kelvins, which is much bluer than that of halogen bulbs.
In January, the RAC published the results of research conducted with 2,000 drivers.
It found that 89 per cent of drivers think that some or most vehicle headlights on the UK’s roads are too bright, while 74 per cent said that they are regularly dazzled by them while driving.
What is more, it has probably not gone unnoticed that there are a lot more large cars on the roads nowadays.
Sport utility vehicles sit high off the ground and are particularly likely to cause glare.
About six in 10 drivers of conventional vehicles blame the higher angle of SUV headlight beams.
All that ought to suggest that vehicle headlight design needs a rethink.
Although the hazard caused by headlights is primarily due to unregulated luminance and blue wavelength light, as existing standards largely predate modern vehicle designs, some may argue that it would be best simply to enforce the highway code, rule 114 of which states: "You MUST NOT use any lights in a way which would dazzle…other road users."
Personally, I would show caution here.
Much of the issue is down to new, supposedly intelligent, technology that largely takes control of the headlights from the driver.
Although the driver can override the technology, it can be difficult to know when to do so.
I would much rather see that resolved by fixing technology than by punishing motorists who may be unaware of the issue that they cause, not to mention the fact that it would be practically impossible to police as we know that officers cannot be on every corner.
In built-up areas, sleeping policemen, or speed bumps, cause oncoming vehicles suddenly to angle upwards, frequently shining their headlights directly into the eyes of oncoming traffic.
Similarly, a driver properly in control on a dark country road can see vehicles approaching and dip their full-beam headlights, even if other vehicles are around the bend or over the brow of a hill.
Matrix lighting systems are LED headlights made up of multiple units, and portions of the lamp can switch on and off automatically depending on road conditions, but they do not have human anticipation and switch off only when they directly sense the oncoming headlights, which can be too late to avoid blinding the oncoming driver.
Having set out to raise the issue, I consulted with a range of organisations, such as the RAC, the College of Optometrists and LightAware, which have done their own research into the matter.
I also point to the noble lady Baroness Hayter, who has also been campaigning on this issue.
All of them told me that this is a very real issue for all motorists, but particularly those over 60, about half of whom, according to the College of Optometrists, have early-stage cataracts in one or both eyes, which make them even more vulnerable to the glare from bright headlights.
LightAware reports that, as a result of headlight glare, many drivers are restricting themselves to driving in the daytime and purposely avoid driving at night.
The RAC’s study found that as many as 14 per cent of drivers aged 65 or over find glare such a problem that they have stopped driving at night.
That has two primary impacts.
First, the individual is less able to get out and less flexible in making medical appointments or seeing friends, leading to increased social isolation.
Secondly, it reduces the number of reports into the issue of headlight glare, making it appear to be less of an issue than it really is.
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents states that "between the ages of 15 and 65, the time it takes to recover from glare increases from one to nine seconds."
When travelling at 30 mph, that equates to travelling 13 metres for a young person and 117 metres for someone aged around 65. At 60 mph, that equates to an older person travelling 229 metres. Imagine the potential damage that could be caused by travelling 229 metres while visually impaired.
Plainly, this is not a problem reported just by UK drivers.
A number of RAC-equivalent organisations around the world have conducted their own studies and reached the same conclusions.
Organisations in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Austria, Switzerland, Slovenia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina are finding the same results.
Carla Lockhart (DUP, Upper Bann): I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing this timely debate.
He will be aware that the investigation concluded that 44 per cent of drivers think dazzle could be caused by badly aligned headlights.
Does he agree with me that there is more that MOT centres across the United Kingdom could do to ensure that lights are aligned adequately?
Martin Vickers: I was coming on to mention MOTs.
The first point I put to the Minister is that he should bring together car manufacturers, the lighting industry, eyecare professionals, neurologists, driving organisations and other interested parties to gain a broader understanding of the problem of headlight glare and its true causes.
Secondly, the Minister should direct the National Institute for Health Protection, or another suitable body, to sponsor research to establish how vehicle lighting is causing discomfort in drivers, other susceptible individuals, and road users, such as cyclists and pedestrians.
Thirdly, the research should be used to develop a set of realistic safety standards for headlights and other vehicle lighting, and to outlaw those that do not meet the standards.
Fourthly, legal limits should be set for the amount of blue light that vehicle headlights can have in their spectrum by setting standards for their colour temperature.
Fifthly, garages undertaking MOTs should be provided with guidance and training on how to recognise inappropriate after-market installation of LED bulbs and ensure that such cars fail their MOT.
My sixth point is that the matter should be raised internationally, via the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Working Party 29, and a request made that the informal working group on glare prevention be revived.
Anthony Browne (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport): I notice glare as a driver myself, I get a huge amount of correspondence about it from Members and constituents, and I spend a lot of my time as a Minister answering letters about it, so I know that it is a real issue and one on which the Department has done quite a lot of work.
A lot of interesting points have been raised in the debate.
Glare from headlamps is a perennial issue - it has been around for a long time - but there is a compromise between providing illumination with sufficient intensity and distance to enable drivers to see and anticipate potential hazards, and the propensity to cause glare for other road users.
There is a clear balance to be struck.
In order to strike the right balance, all vehicle headlights are designed and tested to follow international standards - developed under United Nations rules to ensure that they are bright enough to illuminate the road ahead but do not affect the vision of other road users.
The standards define the beam pattern, and include maximum and minimum light intensities: down on the ground, at a higher level and what would be seen at the driver’s level.
The colour of the light is also regulated. The rules are neutral on the form of light, so they apply to LED lights as much as to halogen lights or any other form of light.
We have statistics for Cleethorpes, which I thought my hon. Friend might be interested in.
From 2013 to 2022 - so in the last 10 years - there were five accidents where dazzling headlights were cited as one of the causes, which is obviously five too many.
That does not mean that the statistics are perfectly accurate.
Glare is clearly problematic for drivers for all the reasons that my hon. Friend mentioned.
The Department has not been inactive on the issue.
Over recent years, it has raised the issue at the United Nations international expert group on vehicle lighting.
Following lengthy and significant negotiations, proposals to mend headlamp aiming rules were agreed in April last year, together with requirements for mandatory automatic headlamp levelling, which is a system that automatically corrects the aim of headlamps based on the loading of a vehicle - for example, when passengers are sat on the backseat or there is luggage in the boot.
Some cars have manual headlamp levelling, but very few drivers know to set it, so when somebody sits on the backseat and the car lifts up slightly, they will not dip their headlights further.
The point of automatic levelling is to correct that.
I accept from the volume of correspondence I receive that concern about headlamp glare is rising, but we do not know why that is.
My hon. Friend mentioned that older drivers are more susceptible to dazzle, which is probably true, and the number of older drivers is growing rapidly.
The number of people over 70 who are still driving has risen by 50 per cent over the last 10 years.
Driving has become easier because of power steering, automatic cars and a whole load of other safety features, and people feel confident to drive later in life even though they might be more prone to dazzling.
Things such as road humps are a cause of dazzling as the car lifts up, and I am guessing that there are a lot more road humps now than there were 10 years ago.
My hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes made a lot of interesting suggestions about the sort of people who should be consulted and involved, and my officials will be taking on board everything he said.
The research will include real-world trials to test the impact of different light technologies under different scenarios, and driver and vehicle characteristics, to fully understand the root causes of driver glare and how significant it is.
We welcome input from relevant experts in the area and those taking part in this debate.
Once the research has been completed, the Government will consider the outputs fully and share them within the UK and with international lighting experts, as my hon. Friend requested.
Once we have that research, we will look at whether there need to be any other changes to rules and regulations, and we will discuss that at international level.
We will do everything we can to reduce the problems of driver glare, and ensure that our roads are safer and that people can continue to drive for as long as it is safe for them to do so.
I am personally determined that the only way the people in the constituency of Cleethorpes should be dazzled is by the wit and wisdom of their Member of Parliament.
