Drivers may soon be forced to stick to speed limits by satellite technology that automatically slows down speeding cars, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

Radical road safety reforms being considered by the European Commission would require every new vehicle to be fitted with a device that limits engine power for anyone driving too fast.

The gizmos use orbiting satellites to pinpoint a car’s position, and intervene if it enters an area with a lower speed limit – such as a controversial 20mph zone – to slow it down.

Road safety campaigners say the move will safe hundreds of lives – but critics branded it ‘absurd’ and questioned just how reliable the technology will be.

If adopted, the proposals would be the most seismic motoring reforms since it became compulsory to wear front seatbelts 43 years ago. The move could eliminate speeding fines and cost the Treasury an estimaed £130 million a year.

While Europe’s proposal to make such devices mandatory from 2030 would not extend to Britain because of Brexit, experts say almost all manufacturers would still install the technology in models sold here because it would be too expensive to make exceptions for UK vehicles. And that would make it easier for the UK to intoduce its own legislation later.

The MoS can also reveal that 5,000 of London’s 8,000 buses have already been fitted with speed limiters, with the whole fleet set to be covered by 2031.

The technology will familiar to anyone who has rented an e-bike from Lime or a similar company, as they have an onboard GPS system that automatically limits speed in areas such as parks and pedestrianised zones – with an icon of a tortoise displayed to the rider to indicate the restriction.

As well as GPS, cars would also use 5G phone signals to fine-tune positioning data, then determine the speed limit from digital maps. They would also be fitted with cameras to spot road signs. Drivers would be able to temporarily over-ride the system and accelerate in an emergency, but only for short bursts.

Safety campaigners claim the move could cut road deaths by a fifth, as an estimated 809 out of the 1,441 fatal road crashes in 2023 were linked to speed.

However, shadow transport secretary Richard Holden, writing below, raised concerts about hacking and reliability – as well as fears over more sinister uses of the technology.

Hugh Bladon of the Alliance of British Drivers, added: ‘It’s got to be absolutely infallible – and it won’t be. I’ve got a year-old car and every time I drive down a certain road outside my town it thinks the limit is 30mph when it’s actually 50mph. Now if this wonderful technology suddenly slows me down to 30mph, what’s going to happen with the driver behind?’

Howard Cox of campaign group FairFuelUK, said: ‘The majority of drivers are sensible and know how to handle the correct speeds for the road conditions they face. The EU nanny state should butt out of how we need to drive.’

Since July 2024, every new car sold in the EU must be fitted with a so-called Intelligent Speed Assist (ISA), which displays the speed limit and gives the driver a warning if they are driving too fast, usually via a ‘beep’ or a small vibration in the steering wheel. The same technology is also installed in almost all new models sold in Britain.

Earlier proposals for ISA also included a function that would automatically restrict the vehicle to the speed limit but lobbying by car manufacturers resulted in the plan being watered down and the technology became optional.

Multiple industry sources, however, told this newspaper that European Commission officials are now quietly talking to major car firms and safety organisations about making it mandatory.

‘This was always just an interim stage,’ one well-placed source said. ‘Let’s tell the driver, let’s warn him, let’s beep [when exceeding the speed limit]. But eventually we will just fix the speed of the car so you can’t go over the speed limit.’

Thatcham Research, Britain’s biggest vehicle safety body, last week published damning research showing that ISA systems fail to identify when the speed limit changes in up to one in four cases.

An EC spokesman said: ‘Any expert discussions with stakeholders on potential needs for improvements of the general safety regulation are of purely exploratory nature.’

For: This could stop tragedies

By Claire Corkery, Road Safety Campaigner

Speeding is a cultural problem in Britain and every day, families like mine pay the price. Two years ago, I lost my lovely parents, Sue, 68, and Tom, 61, because of a speeding driver who lost control on an ice patch. They were out for a walk on a country lane in January 2024 when they were hit by Scott Gunn, now 38, who was travelling at 87mph in a supersized SUV he’d bought seven days earlier.

For that reason, I welcome any new technology that keeps drivers to the limit and reduces collisions caused by speed. We know it is the most common factor in fatal collisions. Even being a few miles-an-hour over the limit puts other road users, particularly children, at risk.

The statistics bear this out. Reducing average vehicle speeds by just one mph results in a six per cent decrease in traffic collisions and casualties. The European Transport Safety Council says the new tech – in simply ensuring everyone travels at or below the speed limit - could reduce collisions by 30 per cent, and deaths by 20 per cent.

Even if you’re lucky enough never to be affected by a crash, fewer collisions should benefit all drivers by reducing insurance premiums. The taxpayer, and our overwhelmed court system, will also benefit from a reduction in the number of prosecutions.

But technology alone won’t solve the issue, particularly on narrow, rural roads where the national speed limit is still too fast.

The real issue is that speeding is socially acceptable. I understand we all make mistakes but too many people see speeding points on their licences as a badge of honour. ‘I was only doing 25mph in a 20mph zone,’ they say, instead of acknowledging the damage that they could have caused.

I’m disheartened, too, when I hear some of our politicians, some of whom have served driving bans for speeding, talk as though road offences are not really a crime.

If Gunn had seen speeding for what it is - morally reprehensible and shameful - then Mum and Dad would still be here. Dad would be enjoying the retirement he was due to take weeks after he died. Mum, who had just been given the all-clear from cancer, would be busy preparing for my brother’s wedding. And they’d both be delighting in the joy of my beautiful son, their only grandchild.

Instead, I will one day have to sit him down and explain why he’ll never get to meet his Nana and Grandad in the sky.

Against: A recipe for Big Brother

By Richard Holden MP, Shadow Transport Secretary

Imagine the scene: Inside the car, it’s hot, sticky and the kids are fighting in the back.

You are merging up a slip-road onto a busy motorway. There is a safe gap ahead of a column of lorries on the inside lane. You need to give it a bit of welly to ensure you safely merge into the traffic. Every driver’s been there.

But under proposed new technology to ensure cars automatically keep to the speed limit, your acceleration might not be there when you need it. And it could have catastrophic consequences.

There will be a temporary override button, but good luck working that at speed or when it decides you have had enough seconds of temporary extra torque.

By rights, this system, for which Brussels is pushing a Continental roll-out, should not feature in cars sold in Britain, given that we voted to leave the EU a decade ago. But manufacturers will press for our inclusion - and they’d be pushing at an open door with this nanny-state obsessed Labour government.

Indeed, their MPs will not be able to hide their glee as they see speed limiters enforcing more bonkers 20mph zones, which have become so common in our towns and cities.

New technology always comes with new problems. ‘Phantom braking’ was never an issue before automated systems in new vehicles misinterpreted shadows and jolted cars to a sudden stop. There have been horror stories of driverless cars in the US causing fatal accidents. And I guarantee that, like me, you have driven down roads where the speed limit sign differs from the one your car tells you.

All of which is to say that putting our faith in new technology is a risk, especially when barrelling down the M4.

And that is assuming the people behind the technology are acting benignly. Is this not another means by which foreign actors armed with increasingly powerful AI can hack into our everyday lives and cause chaos? Could a future version even prevent certain people driving in certain areas? There might become a dystopian day when we long to be rid of the tyranny of automation.

To me, this is a recipe for Big Brother.

Conservatives will never surrender the ability for our drivers to react nor support red tape that makes motorists' lives harder.

We voted to Take Back Control. The last thing Britain needs is Labour letting Brussels take the wheel.