Driverless cars will soon be rolling off the factory line – allowing us to read books, watch films, and even have a snooze as we are driven to our destination.

The cars rely on radars, GPS and satellites to drive and navigate without the need for a driver to take control.

But one Carlisle driving instructor has severe reservations.

John Clifford, who works for Eclipse Driver Training, said: "I just don’t see the point in having a driverless car if you have to monitor it."

Peers in the House of Lords warned this week that certain types of driverless vehicles may not be safe.

Driverless cars could cause accidents because motorists will fail to react to emergencies while they are asleep, reading a book or answering emails, peers warned.

The House of Lords warned that motorists could become "overly reliant" on the technology and "react slowly" if they are required to take back control of the vehicle.

Mr Clifford, 43, who has been a driving instructor for 10 years, said: "I just wonder who is responsible if there is a collision.

"I just don’t see how it would work and what about the insurance? Who would be responsible for that?

"Would it be the vehicle manufacturer or the software manufacturer? It’s all a bit unknown at the moment."

The government announced last year that a stretch of the M6 near Carlisle had been earmarked as a potential test route for automated lorries.

It said that fleets of as many as 10 driverless lorries in a row could be tested in the hope of securing major savings to journey times and business costs.

Nothing has materialised so far though.

Steve Gooding, director of the RAC Foundation, said that driverless cars pose a "significant challenge".

He raised concerns that motorists "might well be asleep at the time" that they need to take control of vehicles.

Research has already found that drivers of automated vehicles are generally not as effective in emergencies as normal drivers.

The report says: "In simulated emergencies, up to a third of drivers of automated vehicles did not recover the situation, whereas almost all drivers of manual vehicles in the same situation were able to do so.

"In addition, research showed that drivers of automated vehicles took, on average, six times longer to respond to emergency braking of other vehicles compared to manual."

Peers also highlighted concerns that driverless cars could be "susceptible to hacking and used for malicious purposes".

The Lords Science and Technology Committee also heard evidence that driverless cars have the potential to reduce accidents by eradicating human error, which is responsible for up to 95 per cent of accidents.

The Association of British Insurers said that VW Golfs fitted with automatic emergency braking was involved in 45 per cent fewer insurance claims.

The report says: "Driverless cars have the potential to lower the number of road fatalities.

"But the eradication, or near eradication, of human error will only be realised with full automation."

Driverless cars have already clocked up hundreds of miles on London's roads.

The Nissan Leaf has been tested in East London with a qualified driver at the wheel.