Transport Committee

Oral evidence: HGV and coach driver facilities, HC 1759

Wednesday 11 March 2026

Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 11 March 2026.

Watch the meeting

Members present: Ruth Cadbury (Chair); Steff Aquarone; Dr Scott Arthur; Mrs Elsie Blundell; Jacob Collier; Olly Glover; Alex Mayer; Baggy Shanker; Rebecca Smith; Laurence Turner.

Questions 1–86

Witnesses

I: Alex Robertson, Chief Executive, Transport Focus; Declan Pang, Director of Policy, Road Haulage Association; Adrian Jones, National Officer for Road and Transport, Unite the Union; Maddi Solloway-Price, Head of Road Freight and English Regions Policy, Logistics UK; Nikki Rogers, Trading Director of Retail and Fuel, Moto Hospitality.

Examination of witnesses

Witnesses: Alex Robertson, Declan Pang, Adrian Jones, Maddi Solloway-Price and Nikki Rogers.

Q1                Chair: Welcome to this morning’s evidence session. This is a one-off oral session to examine the progress, or otherwise, made on improving facilities for HGV and coach drivers since our predecessor Committee looked at the matter almost four years ago. The report was published in June 2022. Could I ask each of our witnesses to introduce themselves?

Maddi Solloway-Price: I am the head of road freight and English regions policy at Logistics UK. Logistics UK represents members of all logistics in terms of modes, and driver facilities are a key part of the conversation for our members. I am very pleased to be here today to represent their views.

Nikki Rogers: I am the trading director for retail, fuel and commercial at Moto Hospitality. Moto is the biggest operator of motorway services in the UK and all facilities for HGV drivers fall within my remit.

Alex Robertson: I am the chief executive of Transport Focus and we represent users of the strategic road network in England as well as bus users in England outside London and users of the rail network.

Declan Pang: I am the director of policy at the Road Haulage Association. We are the main trade association for truck, coach and van businesses. We have 8,500 member companies across the UK, and 81% of all freight is moved by road.

Adrian Jones: I am Unite the Union’s national officer for road transport and logistics.

Q2                Chair: Our predecessor Committee, which I was a member of, published a report in 2022. It found that rest facilities for HGV drivers were often lacking in number and were of poor quality. Has the situation improved or worsened since then?

Maddi Solloway-Price: In terms of whether it has improved or worsened, we first need to analyse what has been done. We are very appreciative of the match funding through DFT and National Highways and, where it has been put in place, there have been improvements. We would have loved to have seen it used even more strategically in terms of making sure those improvements were in places drivers needed them the most and opening that opportunity up to new operators of facilities. They are currently only available for existing facilities, which is not the best way of approaching and reducing the issue of capacity. The national planning policy framework helpfully now includes the word logistics. Unfortunately, it is a relatively new addition. Planning remains the key barrier to implementing new facilities across the network. While there have been improvements, the situation is still an issue and we obviously want to see it fixed.

Nikki Rogers: Since the last committee, we have invested really heavily in HGV driver facilities. We have also been able to access the match funding Maddi referenced, which we are really appreciative of. In terms of the things we have been able to deliver on the ground, we have grown our HGV spaces by 7% and added an additional six coach spaces. We have refreshed the showers at 35 of our sites and added 40 additional showers. We now have 20 dedicated showers for females.

One thing we have been really focused on is improving safety and security. Through the match funding, we have been able to install 12 km of fencing, 500 remotely monitored CCTV cameras, and spent £3 million resurfacing our HGV facilities.

To build on what Maddi says, there is still a distinct shortage of spaces. Our occupancy rates continue to grow despite the additional spaces we have installed. While there have been improvements in planning, it remains the biggest barrier to us.

Alex Robertson: We ask lorry drivers every year about their experience of rest stops, which we started in 2023. We go around a third of our sites every year. We are in the final year, so have done all sites. We ask them for their general perceptions of the quality, number, and experience of the specific site we are conducting the interview at. More than half the people we interviewed said that the quality and number of sites was not good enough, so high levels of dissatisfaction. That did not change between the first and second year. We are shortly going into the third year, so do not have the numbers, but I do not think we will see a significant change. That is not terribly surprising given that some improvements have happened in the last two or three years and will take a while to feed through into perceptions. None the less, we will look at those numbers in a few months’ time and find a big gap.

In terms of the experience of individual sites, we get a lot of inconsistency. Some have really good experiences. At some truck stops people have satisfaction levels of 100%. It is very variable among motorway service areas and perhaps that is not surprising because they have a very different business model and are catering to different customers.

The top three issues are parking availability, safety, and the security of the vehicle and driver. Those latter two things are connected and come out as a safety issue in terms of people getting a decent rest. The consistency and quality of the services, particularly food and drink, score really low as do toilets and shower facilities.

Declan Pang: It certainly has not improved enough; there is so much more that needs to be done to properly address this issue. This is one of the top priorities of the RHA. Transport businesses that I speak to every day will tell you that this is one of the key reasons they struggle to attract, retain and train the driving workforce that they need.

I am very glad the Committee is focusing on this because it is at the nexus of reasons why we have a driver shortage, why we cannot attract enough women into the sector, as only 2% of drivers are female, why there are rising levels of freight crime, and why we cannot get enough young people behind the wheel. It is certainly one of the root causes of many of these issues and there needs to be greater political focus on addressing it at a ministerial level.

The grant schemes have certainly been very welcome but they need to address capacity where it is needed rather than increasing standards only at existing sites. Freight crime is a significant issue in the sector. There are a very small proportion of sites—less than 4%—that have security accreditation. This leads to a significant and rising level of freight crime because criminals know that these sites are vulnerable and easy targets. Planning reform is something that has been mentioned and, although there have been some welcome changes, much more needs to be done.

Adrian Jones: The simple answer is that the situation has not improved. Has it worsened? In parts of the country that would certainly be the case. We do not survey our members annually or biannually; we talk to our members every single day of the week. The feedback we get is that the focus should not be on the availability of parking spaces for overnight parking because the vast majority of HGV drivers in this country do not regularly park overnight. They need shorter-term availability of spaces.

Previous speakers have said that the focus on gender and accessibility to the sector and facilities is an extremely important one, and Unite would fully support the Committee in looking deeper into that. Indeed, we took part in the exercise that the APPG for Road Freight and Logistics did at the end of last year on diversity in the sector.

We do need to look at the availability of parking and the issue around freight crime. This is about facilities for drivers. I understand that our members are affected by freight crime but this is about drivers, a critical part of the country’s economy, and making sure that these core professional drivers have the ability to do their job safely and professionally.

Chair: Thank you very much to you all. We will drill down into those issues with our questions.

Q3                Rebecca Smith: Declan, what you said particularly resonated, having visited one of your members and seen evidence of the freight crime that is taking place. I saw small operators, often with only two or three lorries, with slash marks down the side of their lorries. It was pretty stark, so thank you for reminding me.

The Government have begun delivering funding for improvements to parking and driver facilities through the HGV parking and driver welfare match funding grant scheme, which I am sure you are well aware of. Indeed, some you have already mentioned it. What impact do you believe this funding has had so far?

Alex Robertson: The survey we will publish in a few months’ time will look at a new set of sites, some of which will have received some funding. What I hope it will say is that, where we have good scores, it is linked to things that have been done in the last 12 months. We will see a bit of that.

It is worth saying that we brought a lot of people to a roundtable 12 months ago, including some on this table. Everyone looked at what action needed to take place in the next 12 months to move things on and we asked people to report on what has been happening. National Highways is doing its own evaluation of the match funding and the latest figures we have state that it has created 500 extra spaces, but obviously it will be able to give you this itself.

The question we are going to keep coming back to is whether it is enough and at the scale we need. In 2022, DFT sampled the availability of parking spaces alongside demand and we were 4,500 short at that point. There may be more up-to-date estimates; the DFT is going to do it again. We will find some really good examples but is it enough? I am sure that money will have been well spent but it could perhaps have been more targeted, as some people have already said. When that ends, and the DFT-led part is ending, we have to stand back and decide what the next phase is, how we are going to target it, and get enough out of it?

Q4                Rebecca Smith: Nikki, you have already given some good examples. Do you think, as Alex has said, that more funding needs to be put forward for the next phase, whatever that may look like?

Nikki Rogers: Yes. We have been able to access funding to grow our spaces and seen a significant improvement in security. We have 12 km of fencing at 47 of our sites. We have 500 remotely-monitored CCTV cameras, which are linked directly to the police force and a control centre. They are monitoring all our sites. We have seen a 35% reduction in freight crime. We have dedicated security at certain sites where we know we have potential issues. The stat that we are most proud of is that two out of three of our sites have had one security incident or less in the last 12 months. We have seen a significant reduction. We believe that additional funding will allow us to further bolster the security of everybody who stays at our sites. Part of the challenge we have is that security is focused within the HGV compounds, but because of issues we have with occupancy, there are vehicles that simply cannot find a space within the HGV compound that park in the main car park, on the slip roads, or on the entrance roads. These areas are obviously not covered by fencing and CCTV.

Maddi Solloway-Price: Our members are really pleased to see improvements to parking capacity, CCTV, fencing, and lighting, but 500 extra places are just not enough. More is needed. We would also like to make sure that they are targeted to where the need is greatest along the strategic road network. You often find that drivers go out of their way to park where there are good facilities, which obviously reduces efficiencies. We need to make sure that any new facilities or expansions to facilities are along the strategic road network. We also need forward planning to improve confidence. Knowing where funding is going to go and how long it is going to be available for would help people to forward plan as to what investments could look like in the future.

Declan Pang: The grant scheme is very welcome and has had an impact on upgrading basic facilities such as showers, toilets, welfare, and rest areas. We do not believe it has had an impact on capacity because it has focused on upgrading existing sites. While some additional lorry spaces have been added as part of the scheme, I believe it is less than 2,000 overall. Our estimate is that there is a shortage of 11,000 lorry parking spaces nationally. It is a very significant capacity problem. There needs to be more focus on freight corridors and route strategies. Whether you look at the M1 or M6 in the Midlands or the M20 in the south-east, there are countless major arterial routes that do not have sufficient lorry parking capacity. The scheme has not changed that; it has not addressed the capacity problem. There needs to be a more active and co-ordinating role by the Government in looking at how we can bring capacity at these key routes. While we want the grant scheme to continue because the investment is needed and unlocks private investment. The key is looking at where drivers need stops.

Chair: We are coming on to capacity shortly.

Adrian Jones: The scheme itself has delivered tangible improvements in certain areas. I know there is going to be an assessment of the impact of the scheme later in the year, but from a driver’s perspective, we are not seeing that improvement. There may be hundreds of kilometres of extra fencing, but criminals will just look elsewhere. With the lack of secure parking areas, criminals will look at where trucks are being parked outside those areas. We need to have a holistic approach.

One issue we have identified with the scheme is the match funding, which in theory we agree with. Looking at the figures, Moto has been by far the biggest user of that scheme and therefore the biggest investor. Has that match funding prevented some smaller operators or companies from being able to invest because they have not been able to match fund what they need to do to improve their facilities? I will again flag that this is not just around formal parking areas, motorway service areas, and the strategic road network; this is about a national infrastructure issue that we need to look at to ensure that our drivers are kept safe.

Q5                Chair: Can I come back to that point about the match funding element of the MFGS? Are there types of stops or parts of the network at the opposite end of the scale from Moto where the owners of the stops do not have the capacity to match the funding? If so, who pays? Is a match funding scheme appropriate for some parts of the network or some types of stops?

Declan Pang: The issue with truck stops as a whole is that the majority of truck stops are independent businesses. Motorway service areas are obviously dominated by larger companies. A lot of independent truck stops have not engaged in the grant scheme because of the size and nature of their businesses. The scheme has certainly relied on proactive applications from those businesses. The funding has not gone to the areas it is most needed in some cases, for example, particularly high-crime areas. We have not seen the funding impact those particular problems.

Q6                Chair: Is that because the owners of the truck stops cannot afford their side of the match funding?

Declan Pang: Certainly that is a potential barrier for them to be involved in it.

Q7                Mrs Blundell: The HGV sector and its workforce are really crucial to the local economy in my constituency of Heywood and Middleton North, which is in Greater Manchester. As you will probably know, the previous Transport Committee heard comments from drivers such as, “I would rather stay dirty than use the showers at one site,” and, “They paid £37 a night to sleep in their cab and have their tyres slashed.” It is clear from your comments that facility-related issues facing those that make up the sector have been substantial. You have all touched on this already but what would you identify as the biggest problems currently affecting parking or rest facilities for drivers and how can they be overcome? Adrian, it will be interesting to hear the experiences of your members.

Adrian Jones: It is capacity; it is availability. Drivers have to take statutory breaks. While drivers will take breaks as and when they need to, there is a legal obligation to take statutory breaks so facilities have to be provided. The state says you must take a break, but the state is not providing the facilities for drivers to be able to take those breaks. We need to have a serious look—I keep saying a holistic look—across the entire country and sector.

When we look at the match funding scheme, there are 100 successful applications. The majority of those are one or two applications, so the much smaller elements. We look at the geographical spread of that and, for example, looking down the list I cannot find a single one in Greater Manchester. That might be because the facilities are already there but probably not. We need to look at an end-to-end solution to this. I am sure we will come on to the restrictions and obstacles in the planning process but one issue that we have seen over a long time is that new logistics developments are being built without lorry drivers’ facilities included.

I have challenged individual developments over the years and been told, “Well, we don’t have parking facilities for lorries because we have a window where a driver will come in, load or unload, and then leave.” That is fine. That is saying, “It’s outside our gates so it’s not our problem.” It is your problem. That is why Unite is very clear that there is a responsibility on the hauliers, our employers, and on the users of road transport. That means companies outside the logistics sector that have drivers coming in every day, but do not have it on their radar at all. It is not something that is considered and we should look at it.

There are five people on the panel and we all broadly agree on what the problem is and can agree on how we solve it. One way to do that is actually engage with people outside the sector, with the CBI and small businesses, and say, “This is an issue so how can we make sure that, when a driver turns up, they can access toilets, a canteen, and a vending machine?” It is not something that is off limits because they are not their employee. If we can start at that very low level, then we can build up to deal with the issue on a day-to-day basis and look at the bigger schemes, which are the motorway service areas being the larger areas of investment.

Q8                Mrs Blundell: As you say, there will be broad agreement across the panel in terms of what the problems are and some ways they can be overcome. I may not ask everybody but I will ask a couple more. Maddi, I would be interested to know if the experiences of your members and the drivers you speak to are similar to what Adrian has just identified.

Maddi Solloway-Price: It is all down to getting the basics right. If you or I went to work and did not have access to toilets, showers or food, then it would be a bad day. Unfortunately, that is the reality of the men and women who literally keep our country moving. It is really about getting those basics correct at the bare minimum. Rest in a lay-by is not always going to provide adequate rest, which is ultimately also a safety concern. The welfare of drivers, at least in our view, should be viewed in exactly the same capacity as the safety of a vehicle. Ultimately, their welfare has safety and productivity implications but they should be viewed in the same way. It is not a big leap to say that drivers suffer when no facilities are available for them.

Q9                Mrs Blundell: Does anyone else have a comment on the question?

Nikki Rogers: We are focused on that longer-term stay but we have 10 million HGV visits to our sites every year and only 900,000 of those stay for longer than two hours. When we talk about capacity and the challenge that a lack of space brings, it is not just about those who are parking overnight. We would definitely agree that space is a big challenge. We have been able to add 187 spaces since the last hearing and our occupancy rates have grown further. Space and planning is the biggest challenge for us.

Q10            Mrs Blundell: What about for drivers?

Declan Pang: Drivers need a safe, clean, and secure environment where they can properly rest but they frequently do not have access to that at all. If you or I were working, we would not accept having no access to a toilet, but we are expecting drivers to do that day in and day out. It is very basic facilities, giving dignity to people who are doing very important jobs.

Q11            Chair: Presumably you also represent the owners of big logistics sites, Maddi. I seem to remember hearing that drivers were not made to feel very welcome if they wanted to use the toilet when they stopped, let alone get into the works’ canteen to grab something to eat. Is that an issue in your sector?

Maddi Solloway-Price: It can be and is something that we often talk to our members about. Unfortunately, when we still hear feedback from drivers that the biggest difference that could be made in their day is someone bothering to learn their name, then there’s an issue, isn’t there? When people are called driver as opposed to their actual name, then it does not really show the respect that drivers deserve. Literally, as I have said, nothing moves without logistics and certainly nothing moves without drivers. When they do not feel respected, it obviously has a significant impact on their mental health. Where there is no sharing of facilities, which is a point Transport Focus identified we could work on, we try to make sure that our members open up facilities where available to other members and although it is not wide—

Chair: You have to be a member.

Maddi Solloway-Price: Exactly. It does not solve the issue, but it helps in a small way.

Q12            Chair: Is there awareness in the sector of that human need?

Maddi Solloway-Price: Yes, there is. There is an improvement. A bit of a cultural shift is happening at the moment, with traffic commissioners talking more about the human factor and driver welfare. Within Logistics UK, we have created something called Thrive to signpost to our members and further afield where they can access support for mental health. Ultimately, the lack of driver facilities impacts mental health day to day, and we are very aware of that. Respect is a big part of that and access to facilities is another.

Q13            Laurence Turner: I should draw the Committee’s attention to the fact that I am a member of Unite and GMB. On that point, Mr Jones, you said previously that there should be an obligation on the large logistics operators to share those facilities. Would you mind talking us through how that would work in practice?

Adrian Jones: You are absolutely right. It is not just the large logistics operators but anybody that uses road transport. Broadly, we can go to a large retail distribution centre and speak to a company that says, “Yes, we give our drivers access to the canteen and toilets and they can have proper rest.” This is not an apocryphal story; it is a genuine example. When I asked one of the largest retailers in the country to see the facilities for goods-in drivers rather than their own delivery drivers, it was a pokey little room with hard plastic chairs and a vending machine. It was completely different. When we challenged that employer they said, “It’s a bit of a no-brainer. We can deal with that; we can put that right.” It is making sure that that conversation is taking place. We cannot do that distribution centre by distribution centre, factory by factory and shop by shop. There has to be some overall control and sharing spaces, as Maddi said.

There is an organisation called Snap that has different facilities and an online booking system. It has created a scheme where, if a small haulier has a couple of spaces when their trucks are out, they can then in effect Airbnb that space for a truck to come and use. That is progressive and inventive. We have spaces that are sitting there, so can we actually use them?

When you drive around the country, and I spend a lot of time in industrial areas, just a mile from a very good truck stop you will see trucks parked up in a lay-by. We have to ask why. Sometimes it will be the cost. Sometimes it will be because they are on a short break and could spend 10 minutes driving around an MSA trying to find a space rather than pull off and stop in a lay-by for 15 minutes, 30 minutes or 45 minutes.

There is a very broad spectrum of issues within this with very different solutions to each one.

Q14            Alex Mayer: Coach drivers are also driving reasonably large vehicles, often over fairly long distances. What are some issues experienced specifically by coach drivers and to what extent are they similar or different to the experiences of HGV drivers?

Nikki Rogers: We value coach drivers; we see them as a valuable customer group for us. As I mentioned in the opening, we have 636 available coach spaces at our sites. We treat them in the same way as HGV drivers. Coach drivers are also entitled to a meal voucher, as HGV drivers are. There are some challenges that we see because when they come on to our sites they are full of customers and passengers. We have to make sure that those spaces are quite close to the main amenity building and there are clear walkways and passageways for customers. They tend to arrive predominantly during our peak trade times but are on our sites at different times of the day. We treat them with the same professional regard as HGV drivers and will always go out of our way to make sure that coach spaces are available when they arrive. However, we recognise that there are instances when sometimes those coach bays are busy.

Q15            Alex Mayer: We have also heard from the Confederation of Passenger Transport that, “Sometimes HGV drivers monopolise coach spaces.” Does that ring true to you?

Nikki Rogers: I would not say that they are monopolising coach spaces. As we have already discussed, because of a distinct lack of spaces the HGV drivers have to stop somewhere if they are on a Tacho break or they need a break. By their very nature, HGV bays are a similar size to coach bays, so if there are no HGV spaces available, then they do occasionally use the coach bays. We have security on a number of our sites where it is a problem and we will make sure that HGVs are not blocking those spaces unnecessarily. We will always support coach drivers and their passengers if they have to park in an undesignated area.

Alex Robertson: We include coach drivers as well as logistics drivers in our surveys. It is worth saying that they are a much smaller part of the sample; they are 5%, which reflects broadly where it is in the industry. They have similar issues to what you have heard. The solutions might be different and the stopping patterns, I suspect, will be different too. There probably is an issue—this is more on the solutions rather than the experience—about how the availability of scarce parking spaces shifts over the course of a day. We have seen examples of it working where the use of a space can be changed depending on the time of day. Coach drivers are broadly reporting the same thing on availability, quality, and so on.

Declan Pang: I am very glad you have asked about coaches. Coaches are a unique and very much underappreciated mode of transport that are frequently lumped in with buses. I am glad the Committee is looking at coach parking.

One concern is that there are a number of tourist sites and towns that have restricted coach parking, whether in the Cotswolds or some National Trust sites, which discourages people, often those who are disabled or elderly, from using coaches. Coaches are one of the greenest forms of motorised transport so we need to encourage coach travel rather than discourage it. Too often, we do not view coaches as part of the tourist supply chain and visitor experience. If you look at how the Government approach tourism, coaches do not get featured in the conversation or overall strategy. We need to view coaches as a key part of that, including how visitors experience coach parking when they visit sites.

Q16            Alex Mayer: Adrian, it is not a very unionised sector but—

Adrian Jones: We have agreements with coach companies but there is a variance in the sector. You have Victoria Coach Station up the road, for example, where there are appropriate facilities for coach drivers. Building on what Declan has said and what we have had highlighted to us, a coach driver takes a group of passengers to a stately home or visitor attraction. He drops them off but there is nowhere to park so has to go and find somewhere to park. As you can see, coaches park up on the Embankment to drop people off but where do they go afterwards? Invariably, it is an industrial estate or a side street where there are no appropriate facilities for those drivers. There are similarities with the HGV world but it again comes to capacity and the standards that drivers can access.

Maddi Solloway-Price: I am afraid that Logistics UK does not cover the group so I will have to defer to others.

Chair: We are going to drill down into an area a couple of witnesses have already touched on but in a bit more detail now.

Q17            Mrs Blundell: Real concerns have been raised by female drivers, including one of my constituents, Kaz, who works in this sector. There are few appropriate facilities for drivers in Greater Manchester, especially for female drivers, and Kaz has raised this with me repeatedly. They raise issues relating to their safety and security at stopping locations and specifically facilities with poor lighting and a lack of suitable or, in fact, any women’s toilets and showers. Many women also have to sleep in wholly unsuitable places. I am sure these concerns are central to why women only make up 2% of the sector, why they are leaving it, and why they might be deterred from ever joining it in the first place. What is the panel’s view on the specific problems that female drivers face when trying to access facilities and how can we begin to address them?

Adrian Jones: You have highlighted very eloquently the main issues. Women drivers have exactly the same issues as male drivers, such as poor lighting and a lack of security. We have a women workers’ committee within transport and logistics and our members ask if there could be dedicated spaces for women drivers. Could an MSA be closer to the facilities so they do not have to walk all the way across an HGV park? Even when facilities are available, are they suitable for lone working women?

We have had many discussions with employers who provide facilities but when we say, “They are just general drivers’ facilities. Why are there are no separate facilities for women?”, they reply, “Well, there are no women drivers.” It is a chicken and egg scenario, isn’t it? Let us be perfectly honest: even where there are separate cubicles in toilets, which as a bloke would not bother me, how would a woman feel being in a cubicle next to a man? There has to be some consideration in a male-dominated sector by hearing the voices of women drivers and saying, “Okay, we need to make some fundamental changes.” The key to it is engaging with women drivers, finding out what the problems are, and then putting a plan together to solve those problems.

Q18            Mrs Blundell: Nikki, do you think there should be dedicated facilities for women drivers?

Nikki Rogers: Yes, and we do. Some 20% of our showers are female-only. They are female-specific. They are located in the female toilets or within the female block so no males can access them. All our toilets are male and female. We have a handful that are unisex, but at every site we have dedicated male and female facilities. We designate a further 20% of our showers as unisex, but they are not conjoined cubicles where you share a facility with somebody of the opposite sex; they are dedicated showers in a completely separate area. We absolutely believe that there should be separate facilities. Every site we are now building from scratch also has dedicated female facilities.

Q19            Mrs Blundell: Maddi, would you say that the industry faces particular problems when providing these facilities? Why are there not more of them? I know there are relatively few women drivers, but are there any other reasons why industry does not—

Maddi Solloway-Price: There should be. Very simply there should be provision for women. Women are not asking for special treatment. Obviously, the betterment of driver facilities is good for all drivers and the infrastructure that has existed historically has been geared more towards male drivers because of the nature of the industry. There is no reason why facilities are not provided for female drivers and, as far as I can tell, there are no barriers to doing so. As the facilities get better, with provision for female drivers, we will certainly see more brilliant women entering our industry.

Q20            Mrs Blundell: There is clearly an issue here and it would be good to understand how the industry or Government can begin to address it. Does anyone have any comments on what is needed here?

Declan Pang: Not only are there not enough female facilities but frequently female drivers cannot access the facilities that they need when they need them. For example, I have heard stories of female drivers going to truck stops or motorway service areas where there is a key for the female toilet but no one is available to give it to them. A lot of female drivers do not feel that it is a welcoming environment. We know there are high levels of discrimination against female drivers. Research by Trucking Lives, which looked into driver sentiments, talked about that. A lot more needs to be done to provide these facilities and create the welcoming space.

Q21            Mrs Blundell: Alex, do you have any comments on that one?

Alex Robertson: I agree with everything the panel has said, which will be borne out by our survey. Obviously, we are surveying a very small number of women and the challenge, as with a lot of what we are talking about, is how you get ahead of the problem. What facilities would make a significant impact and make the industry more attractive to women? What would that look like and how do we get ahead of it rather than just react to the situation we are in at the moment?

Q22            Chair: Is part of that because it is quite a male culture? Is there an issue around misogyny within the driving culture or is it more to do with how women are perceived as being treated in other parts of their job when they are interacting with customers, clients, or whatever? Or do we not know?

Declan Pang: The reality is that many women do not feel driving is a job for them because they do not feel it is a welcoming environment they can operate in.

Q23            Chair: Is that upheld by any studies?

Declan Pang: We know there are high levels of discrimination against women and that impacts how comfortable they feel doing the job.

Maddi Solloway-Price: From speaking to our members, they are very welcoming of women coming into the profession across all different jobs within logistics but also as drivers. One key issue and barrier is the historical infrastructure that exists. If there are no facilities for women to use, even if they join the industry, it becomes an issue of retention. Even if everyone makes them feel welcome, which we hope they do, if there are no facilities for them it sends quite a clear message.

Q24            Dr Arthur: Just coming back to the Road Haulage Association, it is interesting what has been said about misogyny in the sector. As a membership organisation, do you set standards for your members in terms of how they approach this problem? It is not unusual to see an HGV that might be depicting women on the outside or sometimes the inside in a way that is not always positive, is it? Is this something you expect? Do you expect any standard of behaviour from your members? Sorry to put you on the spot.

Declan Pang: We have certainly been a very vocal organisation about ensuring that the industry is a welcoming space for females. We are part of the APPG for Freight and Logistics chaired by Rachel Taylor, which recently put out a report on improving diversity in the sector and the practical ways that that can happen.

Q25            Dr Arthur: Did that include some of those externally facing things? They are probably very small operators that are doing that, not bigger operators.

Declan Pang: It includes both. The solutions lie in some actions that we have been talking about on facilities but also just ensuring that there is a more welcoming environment. Whether it is customers or anyone else, many women drivers just do not feel it is a welcoming place that they can be part of.

Q26            Jacob Collier: I am just trying to understand the health and wellbeing impact. Obviously it is very concerning that suicide rates among HGV drivers are 20% higher than the general population, and drivers are more likely to be affected by type 2 diabetes. We would just be really interested to know what impact the lack of rest facilities is actually having on drivers’ health and wellbeing. Adrian, do you want to start?

Adrian Jones: Thank you for raising this point; it is extremely important for our members and us. There is some really good work being done in this area, particularly through Loughborough University and the Structured Health Intervention For Truckers scheme, which Unite is a big supporter of. It is not just about understanding what the issues are but offering solutions for drivers. Some solutions are to have more exercise, which is great, but when you are in a motorway service area, where do you exercise?

One example last year was a driver in his own depot where he was employed who used to walk the perimeter of the depot, which was half a mile; he would do it a couple of times so that was a mile walk, excellent. He was told, “No, you can’t do that; there’s not a dedicated walkway.” So he was prevented from doing that, rather than, “Okay, let’s look at having a dedicated walkway and encourage more people to do that.”

You are absolutely right: it is lone working. Many drivers are out under a hell of a lot of pressure, constant monitoring and surveillance, with tight delivery and collection deadlines and sometimes unsympathetic road users. Being able to escape that environment to have a break that is away from the workplace is vitally important.

That is another thing that we need to look at: what are the minimum standards for different types of parking areas, from very well-equipped MSAs and large truck stops to lay-bys and informal parking areas? Where do we create that standard and how do we enforce it? There are direct links with the nature of the work and the lack of parking facilities. Particularly for overnight drivers who are overnighting in informal parking areas; the quality of rest is not what it needs to be to ensure safety on our roads.

Maddi Solloway-Price: The statistic that you shared is one of the first things that I actually found when joining Logistics UK and I found it completely shocking. Randstad’s 2023 “Health and well-being in the workplace” reported that 27% of the logistics workers they surveyed had taken time off due to unmanageable stress and mental health issues. Joined with the statistics you shared, that just really illustrates the impact that mental health and wellbeing have on this industry.

I have mentioned it previously but health and wellbeing should certainly be seen as a safety implication as much as anything. These people are running very large vehicles and need to be safe doing so. When sleep is impacted, there are no places to get healthy food and you have to park in a lay-by, those things are ultimately going to impact your mental health, wellbeing and everything in between. That is why we have set up Thrive, which is a platform to signpost drivers and others to support, as I mentioned earlier.

Alex Robertson: I very much agree with the points that have been made already, but I just want to illustrate them from our survey and the link between vehicle security, personal security and sleep. If you think the vehicle security is poor, you are very likely to think your own personal security is poor. Four in 10 people would then go on to say that they had a good night’s sleep, which is far too low in a safety-critical environment.

The other thing is we are talking a lot about effectively getting the basics right, but actually if we are going to attract people into it, particularly younger HGV drivers—what is the average age now? Perhaps 52—we want to attract people like that. It is absolutely about getting the basics but it has to be about more than that as well. Thinking about the facilities in terms of exercise, that is what you would expect, wouldn’t you? It is effectively your home environment for that night. There are some initiatives; for example, Newark is looking at how you can connect with the local community. There is so much more that needs to be done, not just to get the basics right but to create an environment where people think, “Well, actually, I wouldn’t mind doing that and being there overnight.”

Q27            Chair: That is scary when you have a very large, heavy metal box being driven down busy roads by people who are more likely than most to drop off to sleep or have a critical health incident.

Alex Robertson: Sorry to come back in, but Adrian made the point. I am talking about a survey in actual sites. This is the good end of it. There will be experiences that are far worse than I have described.

Q28            Jacob Collier: We have touched on some issues around sleep deprivation and lack of exercise. What would you say are the main health and wellbeing issues that come across from drivers that you speak to?

Declan Pang: There is certainly a range of health risks associated with HGV drivers. They are one and a half times more likely to be obese, and as you say there is a much higher rate of diabetes. Providing spaces at these facilities where they can get out of their cab, socialise and exercise is critically important. I also do not think we treat driver health seriously enough when it comes to road safety. Certainly as you say, having good quality sleep is essential for reducing accidents and fatigue and we are not thinking about driver health in that way.

Q29            Jacob Collier: Is there any particular good best practice across the sector where changes are being made that are positive? Nikki, you have obviously mentioned some work that you are doing but are there any other parts of the sector that are doing particularly good work to support health and wellbeing?

Nikki Rogers: It probably will not surprise you that I am going to reference something that we are doing here. We absolutely recognise that the health and wellbeing but also the mental health of our drivers is absolutely critical because it is quite isolating being out on the road for that period of time. We partner with Mind and we launched something called Cabversation where we encourage drivers to sit down at a designated bench where they can talk to other HGV drivers or customers just to create that social bond. We have had some really positive feedback from that. We are also reviewing additional facilities that we might be able to install at some sites that have space such as driver lounges, gyms and all those things.

It is interesting that you say four out of 10 drivers do not feel safe, because what that highlights is—as I mentioned—two-thirds of our sites have had one or fewer security incidents over the last 12 months, which we are really proud of. We need to make sure that we are communicating that level to all our drivers who park there because sometimes it can be about the perception rather than the actual incidents that happen. We have TAPA security accreditation at 47 of our locations so we are really confident that our sites are safe. We just need to make sure that we communicate that in the most effective way.

Q30            Jacob Collier: How many of your sites have gyms or places where drivers can exercise?

Nikki Rogers: I would need to go away and find out the exact number, which I will get back to you on.

Q31            Laurence Turner: Just before we move on to the next question, the National Highways’ work to prevent suicide and reduce the number of suicides among all drivers has relevance here. If any witnesses wanted to submit evidence in writing about the National Highways’ role in reducing suicide rates, it would be interesting for the Committee to receive that.

Returning to workforce recruitment and retention pressures, we are all conscious that the extreme pressures during the pandemic were symptomatic of underlying problems in the sector. You have all given us evidence on recruitment and retention strains, and Logistics UK said that the number of HGV drivers is actually falling. I appreciate that the reasons are multifaceted but we would be interested in hearing about what contribution you think that poor facilities play in people leaving the sector and new people not being recruited to the sector. Perhaps starting with Ms Solloway-Price and working our way down the panel.

Maddi Solloway-Price: As you say, retention and attraction to the industry are either stagnating or falling and we have an ageing workforce within logistics so it is an issue that we are all well aware of. In terms of attracting people to our industry as a whole, what we are very keen to see and are working on with organisations such as Generation Logistics, which you may have heard of, is to raise the profile of why this is a brilliant industry to be part of.

One thing that we are always calling for is case studies from industry to show why this is a brilliant industry to be part of. While saying that, we can all have an adult, nuanced conversation that there are things that need to improve and a very key thing is the provision of driver facilities. It does not go without saying that ultimately, if you go to work and do not have access to the basics, you might not have longevity within that industry. We should not underestimate how important driver facilities are to the retention and attraction of people working in our industry.

Nikki Rogers: I would just echo everything that has already been said. We are committed to improving the facilities for all the HGV drivers who arrive at our sites but we are very aware that even our sites with spaces are running at higher occupancy rates than we would like to see. I totally understand that an industry where you cannot get parked safely overnight is not going to be attractive to many drivers. We would be committed to increasing space, adding in more capacity and then improving the facilities, which is what we are doing.

Alex Robertson: Again, I agree with what has been said. Getting the facilities right is a necessary but not sufficient condition of attracting people into the workforce and it needs to be more than the bare minimum. At the time that the Trucking Lives survey mentioned earlier was done, half of current HGV drivers had considered quitting in the 12 months prior. We need to be getting new drivers in. If you are going to try to attract people in, when they actually get there and experience it or hear the experience of existing drivers it has to match the ambition that has been told to you in terms of coming in so it needs to be sorted out.

If I can, I might just clarify something that I was saying earlier about the relationship between sleep and vehicle security. It is nine out of 10 drivers who rated vehicle security as good who also felt able to rest or sleep. By contrast, fewer than four in 10 felt they could rest when they perceived vehicle security as poor. It is that link between vehicle security and poor sleep. Obviously, when vehicle security is higher, the number is higher than four in 10.

Q32            Laurence Turner: Mr Robertson, just before we move on, do the surveys and other evidence that exist allow us to rank driver facilities relative to other factors to a satisfactory degree?

Alex Robertson: The surveys that we do allow you to look at the facilities against one another over a three-year period, so it is a third of the facilities each time. You can rank them and there was a very big disparity, particularly among the MSA provision and truck stops, which tend to be a lot better. It does not then rate—if this is what you are getting at—how much the experience of facilities affects their overall enjoyment of their work or whatever. I could check but I do not think we have something quite as direct as that. We have sat down and talked to people in qualitative work where people talk about it as potentially a factor in moving the industry.

Declan Pang: I do not want to repeat what has been said but I want to just give a few things in relation to the driver shortage because this explains why this issue is so important. We have heard about the structural challenges that exist among the driver population: the ageing workforce, the lack of female drivers and the narrow demographics. Those structural challenges have not improved in recent years and have been the case for a long time, which makes the sector very vulnerable if there is an increase in freight volumes or fluctuations in growth.

We have done some work that shows that there is a need for 40,000 new drivers to come into the sector each year over the next five years just to keep supply chains moving. We already have an issue with retention, which is not being helped by the standard and lack of facilities. This is the root of the reason we need to address this.

Adrian Jones: You have highlighted that there are a number of issues that play into the very long-term driver shortage. The driver shortage was not in 2021-22, nor is it now; the driver shortage has been ongoing for 30-plus years. That is driven mostly by low rates of pay, long hours, poor facilities and the fact that it is one of the most monitored jobs. I represent drivers and logistics workers and I cannot think of another profession anywhere that is monitored and surveilled as much as a professional driver is. When you put that with low rates of pay, long hours, nights out, poor places to park, lack of security and poor health, it is not a good advert for a job, is it? We need to deal with each element, but again I will say there is a holistic view that we need to take about an industry.

We have to look at how we can improve facilities to reduce that impact and take that contributory factor away. Again there is broad agreement on what we need to do and how we need to do that but we need to see action and a Government-driven action plan to make real change. This is the third Transport Committee I have given evidence to and to a certain extent, I am saying the same things that I have in the two previous sessions. We are seeing the improvements that have already been highlighted but there is so much more to do.

Q33            Laurence Turner: I have one follow-up on something you said about surveillance. It certainly accords with my experience as a union officer that invasive and at times unscientific monitoring was a real problem in the sector. To your knowledge, are any operators collecting information data through surveillance during rest periods? Would it be the case that some operators might be holding information that would be relevant to our inquiry, such as the amount of time drivers are spending in lay-bys?

Adrian Jones: That information would be recorded through GPS tracking and tachograph data. As you will know, I deal with the better end of the sector, with the employers that work with Unite, and we ensure that the intrusive data collection is kept to a minimum. Can I say that that does not happen elsewhere? No, I cannot.

Q34            Chair: Just on the subject of lay-bys, when we did the inquiry four years ago, we went to a lay-by on an A road on the SRN in Kent, which had to be used because so many of the Kent MSAs are often full. We were told that if you do not get in by 5 pm, you cannot get into the MSAs when running to or from the Channel. I have to say that what we saw was disgusting and obviously dangerous for drivers and loads. Is the situation still as bad on lay-bys? What is the relationship with local authorities? They are in a difficult position. Should they close them? Should they encourage them and therefore fund the maintenance of them?

Adrian Jones: I am quite happy to come back. It is exactly the same situation, particularly down in Kent—as you said—with the freight coming in and going out of the country through Dover, but it is not just limited to that. If you go outside the Port of Liverpool, it is exactly the same: drivers parked up with absolutely no access to any facilities whatsoever. It is not just around ports; it is exactly the same situation up and down the country.

Lay-bys play a very important part for professional drivers because again that is where a driver will look to pull in and take a 15, 30 or 45-minute break just to have that statutory tachograph break. They play a vital part but they are not the solution for longer-term and certainly overnight parking. We understand there is a safety element with slow-moving vehicles pulling into fast-moving traffic; the A34 in Oxfordshire is a prime example of this.

Don’t get me started on smart motorways, but where we are seeing technology being used and you have slow-moving vehicles with signage being used to tell other road users that slow-moving vehicles are entering the carriageway, can’t we look at a different solution rather than closing lay-bys and just forcing drivers elsewhere? If I can also bring a comparison with what we see in mainland Europe, there are far more and much better roadside facilities. Not MSAs or big retail outlets, but areas where lorries and drivers can park relatively safely with basic facilities that are much more widely accessible than we have in this country. We can learn from international examples as well.

Chair: In France there is a low-key service area every 10 km with basic facilities, including exercise and outdoor gym facilities. We now move on to Scott with a bit more on the variations between different locations.

Q35            Dr Arthur: We have covered this to a certain extent but I just wanted to make sure nobody had anything to add about the variation between the different types of stopping locations.

Alex Robertson: Of the top 16 areas that we surveyed in our most recent report, all but one were truck stops, so they have dedicated facilities; maybe that is not too surprising. You get a lot of variation particularly in the MSAs and a bit of variation on the A roads. What does that tell you? It tells you there is inconsistency and that you can get it right. There is a very mixed picture and it is how we get onto the solutions.

Q36            Dr Arthur: Do we know what best practice is and is there a forum to share that?

Alex Robertson: Yes. We had a roundtable—was it 12 months ago? We brought people together who were sharing good practice and actually talking about a lot of the solutions that we are talking about now.

Q37            Dr Arthur: Who took the actions away from that then?

Alex Robertson: We had some actions for the Department for Transport, some for National Highways, some for logistic operators and others, and we are coming back together in September or October. I wanted to say at some point that it would be good to have members of the Committee there if you would like to come along and be part of that conversation too because it needs some political support as well as hearing what some challenges are. There are plenty of other forums outside that where good practice can be shared; I do not think there is a shortage of that.

Q38            Dr Arthur: Do you have any feeling for how it varies based on where you are in the country? I am guessing if you are on a motorway network, you are much more likely to come across a well-serviced station but I guess once you get further away from it, it gets trickier. Is that unfair?

Declan Pang: As I say, there are many major freight corridors on arterial routes or A roads that do not have enough parking capacity. Going back to the point around lay-bys, we are just accepting lay-by usage as the norm. A primary function of lay-bys is for emergency use and they are just used frequently for overnight or long stays.

Q39            Dr Arthur: Could you point out a place in the country where there is a gap?

Declan Pang: I could name many: the M1, the M6 in the Midlands, the M20 going to the south-east. I would say the vast majority of major arterial freight corridors do not have enough parking capacity. There are a number of examples that are well over capacity night after night, drivers cannot find any space, and they are full by about 3 pm. It is an unacceptable situation.

Adrian Jones: The last National Survey of Lorry Parking highlighted the geographical areas and the hot spots, and the new survey from this year will probably replicate the same kind of information. If we just look at the match funding scheme and where in the country those successful applications were, 14—the largest number—were in Lincolnshire, where the strategic road network is pretty much down to one or two roads. The issue of local government and the road network away from the SRN is something that is really important.

Remember that lorries are up and down motorways all the time but they are delivering in every single square mile of the country and are using the roads there, which is why we need to consider where drivers can park at the point of delivery and collection. They now have a legal right to access facilities, which was granted relatively recently, but most employers do not appreciate that and it is just not enforced through local governments or the Health and Safety Executive.

That would be one way—a very simple way in our opinion—of saying, “Look, if you are preventing drivers from accessing facilities when they are delivering or collecting, there is going to be a penalty for that,” even if it is naming and shaming. That will give drivers more confidence to say, “Actually, you do have to give me access to a toilet,” and for employers and companies out there to say, “Actually, I don’t want to be tagged with this kind of reputation.” It is a very simple thing we can do but we need better enforcement.

Q40            Dr Arthur: Just going back to the point you made to start with, are you saying that the funding is matching where there is an investment partner rather than where there is the greatest need, or were you saying the opposite there?

Adrian Jones: I am just trying to think off the top of my head about the last survey. Lincolnshire is key along the A14 corridor.

Q41            Dr Arthur: There is a need there, so it is good news.

Adrian Jones: Definitely, but I do not know what those schemes are. It may be increasing security in existing parking areas. Whether it is added capacity or not, I could not possibly say at this moment.

Declan Pang: To answer your question, the funding has been directed to areas that can match the investment.

Q42            Dr Arthur: Rather than where there is the greatest need. I guess if you are a private operator, you are only going to invest in an area where there is need so you are hoping that there is some connection.

Declan Pang: Unfortunately there is no incentive for truck stop businesses to make these investments because there is no competition in the market. The fact is that these spaces are full regardless of the standards. The grant scheme breathed new life into it and unlocked investment but there is no incentive to invest because of the market failure in the system.

Chair: You said the grant scheme is for existing facilities not new facilities, which is where some questions were facing.

Q43            Laurence Turner: One issue that has been raised through constituency casework is roadworks, limiting access to dedicated facilities and then blocking lay-by access. When that happens over multiple locations, I have had constituents who are drivers and they have said it has had a severe impact on their welfare. It is an issue we have looked at as a Committee more generally as to how these works can be better co-ordinated. I would just be interested if that accorded with any witnesses’ experience.

Nikki Rogers: I can certainly take that. Obviously there have been extensive roadworks on the motorway network over the last 12 to 24 months, which have caused a huge amount of disruption. What we have found is that there has been evidence of a lack of co-ordination—that one finishes just as another one starts, the next junction along. We also find that we do not get enough advance notice of full motorway closures in some instances. They may only be happening overnight but we are given probably days or a week’s notice in some instances of works that must have been planned way in advance of that.

Q44            Chair: Just to be clear, are you talking about the motorway network, the National Highways?

Nikki Rogers: The motorway network. I do not think these planned closures just happen overnight; they are planned months and months in advance. We do not always get enough notice of those, which puts additional pressure on the sites. If the motorway is closed, drivers and HGVs might be able to get on, but they cannot get off and there needs to be escorts to get them on and off. Without that proper planning between what National Highways is doing and the local operators that it impacts, it adds pressure to a system that is already operating at the limits.

Alex Robertson: We do a Logistics and Coach Survey as well; that is different from the Lorry Driver Facilities Survey. It would echo some of what has just been said; that need for early information and dialogue about what is going on, in terms of road diversions, closures and so on, is absolutely crucial, and not just communicating it but also thinking about the sequencing and the best way to do it. I am sure there is room for improvement there.

Q45            Alex Mayer: You just said that there was no incentive, in effect, to invest because everything is full already. If facilities are better, can you not charge more and therefore the investor might make a return?

Nikki Rogers: I would disagree with the statement that there is no incentive to improve facilities because we want to make things better for HGV drivers. This is not just about us deciding to do it because we have been given some money; this is about us genuinely wanting to make things better. Yes, we are busy and full but we want to make things better and create an environment where people will actually choose to stop at our locations as opposed to anywhere else.

In a world where there are suddenly an additional 5,000 spaces, we want people to choose to stop at a Moto. That is our investment. We want to make things better. We are working with Mind and HGV groups and we get all the analysis from Transport Focus. I do not agree with the statement that there is no incentive to make things better because that is absolutely what we are doing.

Q46            Alex Mayer: Can you put the price up when the facilities are better?

Nikki Rogers: We do not put the price up.

Adrian Jones: Just on the cost, our members constantly talk about the cost of parking. Who pays for it? Many RHA members are very small operators and increasing the cost of overnight parking is a significant obstacle. If that is then put on the drivers themselves in an already relatively low-pay industry, where does that come from? That gets passed along. I understand the market forces that if you improve facilities, can you not put the price up, but where does that money come from?

Q47            Jacob Collier: The main things that have come out of this evidence today are problems with parking and the lack of suitable parking spaces, meaning that drivers are having to park on slip roads or—as Nikki said—in the wider car parks that are not secure. Why is it that there is a shortage of parking spaces for coaches and HGVs? Adrian, did you want to come in first?

Adrian Jones: It is historical. Like many things in the industry, it is a lack of investment. Historically, there has not been investment. As I mentioned earlier around developments of new logistics areas, there has not been the foresight to include parking areas within those developments. I am pleased to report we are seeing some change in that now but there is that not-in-my-backyard element. These are the planning obstacles that certainly companies such as Nikki’s face, which are so time-consuming and costly that it comes back to whether there is an incentive to actually develop new areas. That is where central Government and local government have to join in having a national infrastructure plan that includes HGV and coach parking.

Q48            Jacob Collier: I will come to Nikki on the planning in a bit. Maddi, did you have something to add?

Maddi Solloway-Price: Yes. Obviously planning is such a key issue. It can take a decade in some cases to get a planning application approved but we really see embedding driver facilities into infrastructure projects as a key part of this. For example, the Lower Thames Crossing does not include driver facilities within the application. It did but no longer does and we would say that seems a missed opportunity. When looking at those large-scale investment opportunities, there should be driver facilities included to make sure that provision is sufficient.

Declan Pang: We would say that we have a broken planning system. Almost every time a truck stop is proposed, the application seems to be refused. There is a very high rate of refusals. If you look at Kent as an example, there were about 18 truck stop applications that were refused in the last 15 to 20 years. Some grounds for refusal are quite spurious.

There is an element of freight blindness in planning policy. Freight and logistics do not have the profile that they need in the planning system. We have seen some recent improvements on that but we are very far off the place that we need to be. Part of the issue is that these are essential infrastructures and need to be considered as such in the planning system. They are left to local authorities as to whether the approval happens. Local authorities do not have the profile for the industry in their local plans or local transport plans. That is one reason why they are refusing to allow these sites to be built.

Q49            Chair: Does the refusal get upheld on appeal or do they just not bother appealing? What is the record on appeals?

Nikki Rogers: I can talk about one specific example in Kent as well, so it is really timely. There have been movements in the planning policy. We have definitely seen identification at a central level that there needs to be more facilities for HGV in areas of high need. The challenge is that the need is not defined in any documents. We had a recent example where we had National Highways support our application for a dedicated truck stop; it was not even an MSA. This would be the first dedicated truck stop that we want to build.

Q50            Chair: Is this a new facility?

Nikki Rogers: It is a brand-new facility in Kent where we want to build a dedicated truck stop. National Highways supported our application and agreed that there was a need for it but it got refused: the local planning authority did not agree that there was a need. We appealed, were successful and then it got taken to judicial review. That has just concluded and we have been successful. To Maddi’s point, that has taken years and years and hundreds of thousands of pounds just to get an approval that we can proceed. We absolutely see that there have been improvements made but there needs to be more done.

We see the same level of challenge when we are talking about extending existing sites. Yes, there is a need but the local planning authority says no. On existing sites, we are also really up against the challenge of the biodiversity net gain challenges. It is very hard to find 10% additional biodiversity net gain when we need to put additional HGV spaces in. We always do but it means that in some instances we cannot extend to the level that we wanted to so it is still really challenging for us.

Q51            Chair: Many MSAs and parts of the SRN are going through or located in areas of outstanding natural beauty, which adds to the planning complications. Does anybody know how many of these refusals were appealed and were appealed successfully? Has anyone done that work? If not we can find out from MHCLG.

Alex Robertson: I was reflecting back on the roundtable that we had almost 12 months ago where, as I said, we were here along with colleagues from other organisations and we pulled out the things that need to be done differently. Actually, just thinking about this conversation, some things need to be done together. A key point that came out was match funding and grant allocations. Obviously we need to find out where that is going in the future and probably evaluate the success of the grants. Has it had the impact that we thought it would? What have we learned from that? We have talked about some of that.

National Highways is doing a good job of mapping existing provision nationally and then regionally but we need to think about how that is used alongside other decisions. We have talked about planning guidance, which was a big theme of the roundtable 12 months ago. We have to put all that together in a way that makes sense so that you are targeting the provision where the need is and putting in place the right enabling blocks at a national level so that people can get on and do it locally. Something that came out was maximising existing space. Again, we have talked about examples of that but how do you move that from good constructive conversations to really impactful changes?

Declan Pang: I just had one comment to add, which was that we have done some research on the local plans and local transport plans for metropolitan councils and combined authorities.

Q52            Chair: We are coming on to planning policy, so if you just want to pause that. Nikki, going back to our inquiry four years ago, your colleagues at Moto said that it is not just planning that you have issues with but also the leases that many MSAs are on and the difficulties with the DFT because as a collective group you lease a lot of the MSA land. There were then issues about renegotiating further leases in order to make investment worthwhile. Is that still an issue for MSAs?

Nikki Rogers: I would need to take that offline and we would have to come back with some written evidence; I do not have that information to hand unfortunately.

Chair: No, that is useful. As I say it was four years ago.

Q53            Baggy Shanker: Some site operators have trialled practices such as dynamic parking and making additional bays available overnight that are just ordinary car parking spaces during the day. Has that helped to improve the experience for drivers?

Nikki Rogers: I can certainly take that. That is not actually something that we have been able to implement at the majority of our sites and the reason for that is safety concerns. All our sites are mixed-use sites, and we have reviewed and looked at them and we have our health and safety teams to look at them. The concern that you have is being able to securely change a coach bay—we have talked about coaches—to an HGV bay.

We have not done that because we need safe and secure facilities for coaches when they arrive as they are full of passengers. In a number of our car parks, the movement of traffic just makes it almost impossible to guarantee safe passage for normal people in private cars when the car park is taken over by HGVs. We have reviewed it, but it has not been something that we have been able to implement.

Q54            Baggy Shanker: Does anyone have any experience where it has been done? Has it worked or not?

Adrian Jones: Any increase to capacity is welcomed but we would agree with that for all the reasons that Nikki has said. Because MSAs are particularly mixed-use, if a driver is having a daily rest and you have coaches and cars pulling up left, right and centre, again, it is about that quality of rest. Any increased capacity is welcome but it has to be the right capacity in the right place.

Alex Robertson: We have gone out and talked to a lot of the operators and Extra has given us examples of using dynamic parking, which may be what you were referring to so it might be able to provide more to the Committee. Generally—this reflects a comment that was made earlier—the challenges are different in each site, are they not? We have had other operators say that they have commissioned independent, specialist expert advice to consider whether they could increase their capacity within their existing sites, and actually in one case said that they had looked at them and they could not. The challenges are different depending on the site.

Q55            Baggy Shanker: Moving on to planning policy—I know we have touched on it a few times—what changes could Government make to planning policy to help to create more spaces?

Declan Pang: Just to continue my previous comments, a lot of the issues are that there is national planning policy framework that needs to change and there needs to be a higher profile for freight and logistics within the NPPF document. There is also just not enough weight given to HGV planning policy nationally. As I mentioned, we have done some research that looks at local plans and local transport plans. Of all metropolitan authorities, only a quarter have a policy for lorry and coach parking in their authority, and of combined authorities only 50% have a policy for freight and logistics. The profile for the sector in local authorities is one reason we are not seeing enough capacity. I also want to bring the Committee’s attention to a Government taskforce that was formed.

Q56            Baggy Shanker: Sorry, can we just go back to the question? What specific changes could Government make to planning policy rather than just saying they did not have a policy?

Declan Pang: Along with industry—the RHA, Logistics UK, Moto and other operators—the Government taskforce recommended guidance that is issued to local authorities on HGV parking best practice and how that should be considered in local plan-making. That has not progressed to date. The taskforce was initiated by the previous Transport Secretary, Mark Harper. We would like to see that put in place; it would be a very strong move to try to make improvements in this area and it had consensus across the industry for that to happen.

Nikki Rogers: I would just echo that point. One of the biggest challenges that we have is the lack of policies at local level that actually really define what their expectations are relating to HGV and freight. There is a big disconnect between the national policy and what the local planning authorities are implementing.

Q57            Baggy Shanker: Are you saying national policy and the NPPF are okay; it is just the way they are interpreted locally?

Maddi Solloway-Price: It comes down to interpretation but also understanding. When talking to local authorities, it is not always clear that they fully understand the importance of logistics when creating local plans. On one hand, they do not necessarily want HGVs parking in lay-bys or parking inappropriately. Equally when it comes to approving planning applications that would solve that issue, there is not the political will to do so, which comes down to understanding. Something that Logistics UK is doing is trying to raise the profile of what logistics is when talking to local authorities so that when they are creating their local plans, they actually give the correct weight to the need for driving facilities.

Q58            Baggy Shanker: Just before I bring Alex in, the NPPF—as written at the moment—says, “Decisions should recognise the importance of providing adequate overnight lorry parking facilities.” Do you think that is adequate?

Declan Pang: We would say it needs to be strengthened, because although the change made in 2024 was very welcome, there needs to be increased references to freight and logistics throughout the framework so it is seen as an integral part of plan-making.

Alex Robertson: Just super quickly, there was a consensus that “DfT Circular 01/2022” needs to be updated.

Adrian Jones: Finally, from a driver’s perspective, if there is an obstacle in the planning system, let us remove the obstacle. We need to see real progress and change because any obstacle that prevents an increase in capacity and good quality facilities is something that drivers want to see changed. From our perspective—I have referenced this a couple of times already—it is not just about overnight parking; it is about HGV parking. It can be the same, it can be different; but that is where we would need to see it.

From a driver’s perspective, we want to see change and increased capacity so there could be planning reform that fast-tracks applications for new capacity. Why not? Let us have a look at that. It is a crucial part of our country’s infrastructure and plays a massive part in creating wealth for the economy so let us look at something progressive.

Q59            Chair: For those of us who have chaired local planning committees, the local perspective and priorities and the national perspective and priorities are often in contradiction with each other. Would you say that there is something specific in national and regional guidelines such as a service area or a truck stop every x kilometres on new roadways? I am really shocked to hear about the fact that the truck stop has been removed from the Lower Thames Crossing. Should there be a specific condition on renewals and new road facilities or something specific as opposed to have regard to?

Declan Pang: The “DfT Circular 01/2022” has details on that. As others have said, it does not carry enough weight within current planning policy.

Q60            Chair: Is it about the level of weight it holds? Planning decisions are always playing off different priorities.

Declan Pang: Exactly. As I say, we think the Government need to play a much clearer role in directing local authorities on how important this is.

Chair: Obviously if the direction nationally and regionally is of a higher level of material consideration, then it is more difficult for a local authority to refuse or win on appeal. Did you have something you still wanted to come in on, Alex?

Q61            Alex Mayer: It was very largely the same point, in the sense that I cannot see what is in it for a local authority. I understand what is in it for the driver and the national economy. Perhaps you can see what is in it for the local authority, but if you cannot, perhaps it needs to be taken away from the local authority.

Declan Pang: That is intrinsically part of the problem: local authorities do not see this as a priority for them. It is the nimbyism. We know exactly which local authorities have the highest need for lorry parking but they are not doing enough to actually address it in their planning policies and it is a real issue.

Chair: In planning terms, the stronger the higher-level guidance, the more difficult it is for a local authority to get away with refusal rather than taking the decisions away from them.

Alex Mayer: Maybe they could be incentivised.

Maddi Solloway-Price: Probably the most obvious is the end to inappropriate parking. All your casework inboxes will be full of issues around inappropriate parking. If there were provision in place for appropriate parking, that would obviously end that. That is obviously an incentive to local government.

What I would say is that logistics is so integral to local economies, and where there is a strong logistics economy locally then you have a strong local economy in general. It is that overall lack of understanding as to what logistics can bring regionally and to local governments that we ourselves are working on. Until that issue is resolved, you are quite right that they do not necessarily see it as a priority.

Q62            Chair: Maddi, I want to go back to a point that Adrian raised earlier about the supermarket chain that gave a different welcome to its own drivers than the goods coming in until Unite intervened. Given that logistics sites are by definition secure, is there an opportunity for logistics sites to serve not just the drivers who are actually serving that site on that day, or even if they are, about using facilities and maybe even staying overnight?

Maddi Solloway-Price: In that instance it is incredibly disappointing to hear that that driver had that reaction. However there will be sites where it is not appropriate just by the general nature of logistics; there are dangerous goods and other reasons why not, and operating licences would obviously come into it. There will be instances where sharing of facilities works. What we have seen is that we have members that have offered that to other members in terms of a wider network of access. Perhaps we all on the panel could have a conversation about how we could implement something like that, but at the moment that does not exist on a wide scale.

Q63            Baggy Shanker: The Department has already announced it is going to do another National Lorry Parking Survey sometime later this year. What impact do you think the previous survey had and how would you like to see the new one used?

Declan Pang: We do not need another survey. The issues are very well documented. We know exactly which local authorities are facing the biggest capacity issues and which routes and arterial freight corridors have no parking capacity. We need action to actually address those issues on those routes, and that is what is missing at the moment from the range of government policies.

Baggy Shanker: That was quite clear.

Alex Robertson: Yes, that was very clear and I agree with that. When the survey is done, we will find a lot of the same problems occurring; that must be right. Instead of putting yourself in the Government’s shoes and wanting to take action and a more strategic approach, you might think, “I want an up-to-date survey that tells me where the gaps are now.” We are approaching a moment where you have the survey, the ending of the current funding and potential changes to the planning and we could actually get something together, look at it strategically and move forward on some issues you have talked about now in a way that we have not before.

Chair: As one of my colleagues has said, DFT loves its surveys.

Dr Arthur: I guess the result of the survey could be a review.

Olly Glover: Don’t encourage them, Scott.

Chair: And a consultation.

Dr Arthur: Oh yeah.

Alex Robertson: We need action. You are right.

Olly Glover: Anything to avoid doing something.

Q64            Mr Arthur: I hear Declan’s cynicism about the survey, but you sound a bit more optimistic that it might actually show something new. Declan was suggesting it might be a waste of time.

Alex Robertson: It is how it is used, isn’t it? If it is just used to illustrate the scale of the problem, then we are going to find it is a really big one and not that different to four years ago. If it is used as part of a concerted effort to target provision in the right area, think about the planning framework and funding, work with the sector to work through solutions and it is a milestone to move forward from, fantastic. Let’s not have a survey and review and be chatting in two years’ time, having identical conversations and re-describing the problem with more animated examples.

Q65            Dr Arthur: So far this morning, every time we have mentioned security, we have talked about fences. Are fences a gold standard when it comes to security for drivers? I am being slightly flippant in saying that.

Nikki Rogers: I have talked about fences; we have 12 km of them. We have seen that the fences have deterred a lot of criminal activity. It makes it harder for perpetrators to get in and out of the sites. Because we are a motorway service area we cannot have fully secure compounds; we have to be able to offer parking to all HGV drivers that arrive, so we just have fencing but you can still get in and out.

Probably the biggest improvement that we have seen has been with the CCTV cameras. We have 500 CCTV cameras that are remotely monitored off-site by AI and operatives and when they see something that is suspicious, they will trigger the local police. We also have security at sites where we think it is an issue. We have TAPA accreditation; I cannot remember if somebody else mentioned the importance of getting that level of accreditation.

Security is critical. It is one of our key priorities to make sure that drivers feel safe when they stop at our sites, as we have already talked about. It is absolutely essential to be able to get a good night’s sleep. It is not just fencing; it is dedicated, on-the-ground security where you need it, CCTV, access to the police force and the police responding. We have seen some really positive responses from the police: when there are incidents and they get triggered, the police have responded really quickly. It is a combination of everything, not one thing in isolation.

Q66            Chair: Does that include security staff walking around?

Nikki Rogers: We have security at 15 sites.

Q67            Dr Arthur: Do you record the registrations of vehicles going in and out of the site as well?

Nikki Rogers: Yes.

Q68            Dr Arthur: What security measures are the users asking for? You have given them fences and cameras. Are there other things they are asking for? I am looking at Nikki but I do not know if others have an answer.

Nikki Rogers: On our sites, no. The feedback we are getting is that actually that is what they were looking for: CCTV, fencing and dedicated security guards on the sites where there were particular challenges.

Declan Pang: Freight crime is a very serious problem but it is not being taken seriously. There are countless drivers who have their livelihoods—

Q69            Dr Arthur: Who is not taking it seriously?

Declan Pang: We need a better police response to it and more secure sites in place. It is seen as more serious and more organised and is being perpetrated by organised criminals who are targeting vehicles, quite often when they are parked at truck stops and motorway service areas. They know exactly where these vehicles are moving and what is inside them, and quite often they have insider knowledge.

To your question about what security measures are needed, of course it is not just fencing; it is a whole range of things. There is a well-documented list of things, which would not surprise you, including CCTV, better lighting, fencing and patrolling. These are important security measures that really need to be put in place, but less than 4% of truck stops have a security accreditation so there are not enough secure sites.

Q70            Dr Arthur: I do not want to indulge in victim blaming but are the companies doing enough to make sure their vehicles are secure and their drivers are well-trained?

Declan Pang: The issue is not vehicle security; it is actually the security of the sites.

Q71            Dr Arthur: Surely the more secure the vehicle is, the better it is for everyone.

Declan Pang: There are standard measures on all vehicles, which improves security but the root issue is the security of the site.

Q72            Dr Arthur: Nikki, back to you for a very quick one. Have you faced any barriers when it comes to upgrading the sites? Do you need planning for your fences and so on? Are there barriers? Do you have funding to help you?

Nikki Rogers: We have not come across any barriers to putting the fencing up other than there are a handful of sites where it is just not physically possible because of the layout of the land; it is up against a bank or something like that.

Q73            Dr Arthur: What about barriers more generally?

Nikki Rogers: For security?

Dr Arthur: Yes.

Nikki Rogers: Not really. There are no systemic issues or barriers to providing security. As I said, 47 of our sites are accredited. I am shocked to hear that only 4% of truck stops are. It is something that we have been really focused on.

Q74            Dr Arthur: That is 47 out of how many?

Nikki Rogers: That is out of 50.

Q75            Dr Arthur: So more than 4% of your sites.

Nikki Rogers: Way more than 4% of our sites are accredited. I have not done the maths.

Olly Glover: It is 94%.

Q76            Laurence Turner: As a former researcher, I feel obliged to place an enthusiastic defence of a good body of surveys on record. On that point, I have a question directed to Alex. In June 2025, Transport Focus convened a roundtable of attendees across the sector to focus on this issue and an action plan was published in November of that year. What progress has been made since and are you satisfied with the rate of progress?

Alex Robertson: That is a good question. Thank you for raising that. We are shortly going to publish an update on all the actions. We have identified seven areas and have pretty much talked about them all today. I guess we were slightly filling a gap at a national level by bringing people together and publishing something that said this is what needs to be done. You will see it when it comes out. There is definitely movement on all the areas but the big question is whether it is enough.

It is hard to see that when we stand back from it and get people back together in the autumn, we will think, “Right, all we need to do is carry on doing more of the stuff that we’ve done in the last 12 months.” We will identify that there is quite a lot more that needs to be done. There are examples of good practice and National Highways doing its mapping and there is a bit of movement on the planning framework. We need to see more detail about the assessment of the funding that has come through and a whole load of stuff. It needs to be brought together, thought about holistically and acted on at a strategic national level.

Q77            Laurence Turner: In respect of those seven recommendations, are there particular recommendations that you have seen particularly strong or weak progress on?

Alex Robertson: The most important ones—certainly at a national level—are the ones about the funding and mapping existing provision and planning guidance and pulling those together. We have touched on all those. It is an interesting conversation about the sharing of facilities and how you might move beyond goodwill and the odd example into something much more fundamental. Probably sitting here at this point, we do not know how far that could go, but it is clearly a very powerful example.

It is not good enough at the moment, but beyond talking about it more to the right people, what would really catalyse that into something else? There will be an opportunity for us to come together, stand back, look at it and get into problem-solving. The danger is that we keep redescribing the problem every so often. We need to get around a table with DFT and others and think about what things would really make a difference now.

Q78            Olly Glover: In terms of the challenge of improving facilities at stopping locations, how are the various industry groups and site operators—including yourselves— working together to advance that? What would you say the issues are?

Maddi Solloway-Price: There are some brilliant organisations and companies. I do not know if anyone has heard of the My Truck Stop app, which is run by a lady called Sue Alty. It is basically like Tripadvisor for truck stops and is free to use. Drivers can go and rate a truck stop, and say whether it is good or bad. What is wonderful is that she calls out the operators that are doing brilliant work as well, raising the profile of what is good.

Equally you have Motorway Buddy, which is exactly the same principle but for freight crime so that drivers can have more commercial awareness around where is good to park and where is not. Organisations such as NAVSYS are doing huge amounts of work with ourselves and the RHA on issues such as freight crime and trying to push for a specific crime code. We are all doing a lot together. What is clearly missing and is coming out of this conversation is a more joined-up approach across our organisations as to where we can pick up together and fill in those gaps. There are people doing very important things and trying to improve things across the system.

Q79            Olly Glover: Is there anything to add from the rest of the panel?

Nikki Rogers: I would just echo what Maddi has already said. We work with NAVSYS and all those facilities and were rated last night on the My Truck Stop app. We work really closely with the guys at Transport Focus just in terms of understanding—directly from their members or from the surveys—what the feedback is showing. I would echo what Maddi said: there is probably more that we could do cross-functionally just from the people on this panel.

Declan Pang: A lot of work has actually already been done by the industry with us all on the panel. I mentioned our government taskforce earlier, which was initiated by the previous Government. That had very clear recommendations that the industry signed up to including planning reforms and certainly measures to address freight crime as well as extension of the grant scheme. That has not been progressed by the Government and there is a whole set of recommendations—both on capacity and standards—that we think need to be progressed properly.

Q80            Olly Glover: That actually brings me on to my next question and by all means come in if you want to say something about that. The last Transport Committee described parking capacity as, “A national issue,” because of its importance for the supply chain. Do you feel that the Government are treating drivers’ facilities as an issue of national importance? It does not sound like it from your last answer, Mr Pang.

Declan Pang: I do not believe it is being treated with the importance that it needs. It is not seen as national infrastructure, which it needs to be. We have not seen enough political focus on it from Ministers despite raising it repeatedly. We would like to see much greater political priority placed on this because that is the only way we will get some changes that we need brought about.

Adrian Jones: I would broadly agree with that, but there is also a certain element of us all knowing what the problem is, but it being someone else’s job to sort it out. From the evidence that has been given today, there are good things that are being done but it is far too little and far too slow. From a driver’s perspective, there is more that the logistics and road haulage sector can do.

We would want to see a much broader, cross-sector discussion involving retailers, manufacturers, ports and construction so we can talk about what the issues are because we are almost talking among ourselves here rather than talking about what the issues are more broadly. There is good work being done but we need to have a much broader and wider discussion so we can talk about the small wins that we can achieve while still working for the big changes that we have all been so clear on today.

Chair: The question is whether Government are taking sufficient ownership of the issue, and you are basically all saying no. I have a question at the end that will pick that up as well. Laurence, you have a question on standards.

Q81            Laurence Turner: Long-term observers of the industry might feel a certain sense of déjà vu because the predecessor Transport Committee published a report in 2022 that covered much of the ground we have been talking about today. One recommendation of that report was that the Government should set out a statutory code of conduct containing minimum standards covering security, availability of amenities, food and provision for separate women driver facilities. It is a question for anyone who wants to come in. Did you agree with that recommendation? Do you agree with it now? Do you think that is something that this Committee should be taking forward?

Nikki Rogers: I can take that from Moto’s perspective. We would welcome more clarity around what those standards are and what those minimum standards would be. The one caveat that we need to be constantly aware of within the MSA sector, which we have already talked about, is that we service a number of mixed user groups. Any minimum standards that would apply to a dedicated truck stop may not be able to be implemented in full in an MSA that has mixed use for coach drivers, families, passengers and commuters. We just need to be really cautious that there is nothing that would restrict our ability to service the needs of all our user groups.

Adrian Jones: I would say that Unite absolutely supports this and it is something that we have been campaigning on for a very long time. It is worth remembering that minimum standards are minimum standards, not gold standards. From a driver’s perspective, that is somewhere to park with a decent surface where I do not need to dodge potholes and things—Nikki has already said that Moto has invested in that kind of thing—access to toilets and a certain level of security. The minimum standard expectations from a driver’s perspective are really quite minimal, not that gold standard. Yes, we would love somewhere to exercise, a gym, a spa and everything else, of course we would, but there also has to be a recognition that there would need to be different minimum standards for different facilities.

For us the key is that it is all right having minimum standards and using a Tripadvisor-type app to rate, but ultimately what is the purpose of having minimum standards? How do we measure them? How do we reward going above and beyond minimum standards? Clearly that should be access to further funding for further investment. If you meet a certain standard, you could then access further funding to further improve your facilities.

Drivers are very passionate about the industry. The passion for the job and the sector is something I love about working in the sector. To be treated in the way that they are and not have nationally recognised minimum standards is an insult to the profession in our opinion. We would very strongly support developing minimum standards but also how do we inspect, enforce and reward?

Declan Pang: We also support minimum standards—particularly minimum security standards—because there is a lack of competition in the market. You cannot reliably obtain permission for these sites so there is not enough competition to ensure that these standards are what is required. As Adrian said, these are very basic things that we all take for granted in our jobs and it is the basic dignity that drivers deserve that needs to be put in place.

Q82            Laurence Turner: If I have understood correctly, are you saying that if minimum standards were in place, it would actually help with some planning issues and refusals?

Declan Pang: I do not think it would help with planning but it would help improve current sites.

Alex Robertson: At the roundtable we had a year ago, minimum standards came up. It did not quite make it onto the list of things that should happen in the next 12 months, actually because of some issues we have talked about in terms of who would enforce them, who would set them and what they would cover. It is symptomatic of the challenge we have generally. It is a bit of national infrastructure that is not owned at a national level by any single organisation. Were you to start going down the route of standards, you would probably have some prior questions about who is responsible for monitoring them and taking that strategic view of rest stops as a whole, and then therefore be in a position to set and monitor the standards.

Maddi Solloway-Price: My only addition would be that any standard needs to be developed alongside industry to make sure that drivers have their voice within any development of the standard.

Q83            Chair: The final question is from me. Four years ago, drivers told us that conditions were a lot better for drivers in other European countries. I assume that is still the case. I am particularly concerned to pick up this issue about the role of Government. Do we think that Government are more involved in those countries where the situation is better? I have referred to many other people’s experiences of driving on the French motorways. I cannot speak for the equivalent of the SRN in France but you can quite clearly see there is a national standard for aires every 10 km and full-service staffed MSAs every 50 km. Do any of the witnesses have any understanding of the role of Government in providing adequate facilities for drivers in other countries?

Declan Pang: France, Spain and Italy, for example, run services under Government concession contracts and there are many examples on the continent where other countries are doing this much better. Frequently drivers will tell us that the UK has the worst facilities in Europe.

Q84            Chair: In the whole of Europe?

Declan Pang: That is a frequent comment that I receive. It is very acute if you make the comparison with our European neighbours.

Q85            Chair: Anything to add from logistics?

Maddi Solloway-Price: Just that we hear that one of the biggest differences is that drivers on the continent feel more respected than drivers here. I do not know whether that is a cultural view of the profession of driving or where that comes from but that is certainly what our members tell us.

Chair: Do any colleagues have any further questions they want to pick up?

Q86            Alex Mayer: Do lorry drivers ever pre-book their spaces or is it all turn up and pay and display?

Nikki Rogers: Certainly at the MSA network and Moto, they do not book, because we have to open full access to be able to offer spaces, so we do not offer booking.

Adrian Jones: There are facilities that offer pre-booking, but again it is not standard.

Chair: We are all going to load up My Truck Stop on our phones and have a look and see where the lay-by that we saw four years ago fits on the scale, if it even features at all. Thank you very much to our witnesses. That concludes today’s session but feel free to write to us with anything you feel you have not been able to cover in your answers this morning.