Driving Test Age Could Rise To 18
11 October 2013, 11:09 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Driving Test Age Could Rise To 18
Young drivers could have to wait until they are 18 before they are allowed to take their driving test under proposals being considered by the Government.
The move is aimed at cutting the number of people killed and injured in accidents on Britain's roads.
Figures show more than a fifth of deaths in 2011 involved drivers aged 17 to 24, and around 10% of novice drivers are caught committing an offence within their probationary period.
The Government-commissioned report by the Transport Research Laboratory suggests learner drivers will still be granted provisional licences at the age of 17.
But they will have to complete a 12-month "learner stage" that would require drivers to clock up at least 100 hours of daytime and 20 hours of night-time supervised practice.
For the first year, newly qualified drivers would be hit by a curfew running between 10pm and 5am unless they were carrying a passenger aged over 30, as well as a ban on carrying anyone younger than that age if they were under it themselves.
A Department for Transport spokesman said: "Young drivers drive around 5% of all the miles driven in Britain, but are involved in about 20% of the crashes where someone is killed or seriously injured.
"We are committed to improving safety for young drivers and reducing their insurance costs - that is why we are publishing a Green Paper later in the year setting out our proposals.
"This will include a discussion about how people learn to drive."
Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, said: "Our own research shows that putting certain restrictions on young drivers allows them to rapidly build up live-saving experience in the safest possible way.
"Putting a firm number on casualty reduction is hard because of the pick-and-mix approach to graduate licensing.
"But the evidence suggests that a full package of measures could reduce fatalities by anything up to 60%.
"We should all have an interest in preserving young drivers' lives rather than exposing them to undue risk at the stage of their driving careers where they are most vulnerable.
"This is about ensuring their long-term safety and mobility, not curtailing it."
AA president Edmund King said although many of the proposals in the report had "merit", he questioned some of the recommendations.
"Road safety on the national curriculum is something we have long campaigned for and I am pleased to see it being recommended here," he said.
"However, at the extreme end this report could be seen as just recommending taking novice drivers off the road by regulation and restriction rather than helping them develop the right attitudes and skills to provide them with the mobility they need.
"Rather than compensating the proposed significant new restrictions through earlier access to the roads under supervision the authors propose delaying and extending the driving development process to the point where even some 30-year-olds will be restricted in whom they can carry as passengers.
"This academic report has raised a number of options for debate and careful consideration.
"The question is how many of its recommendations will be acceptable to the Government and public at large."
http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/news/drivin...012633936.html
Umm, not so sure about the highlighted parts. These could infringe on civil liberties. So if a married 28 year old man has a 27 year old wife with 2 kids. Would they be prevented in travelling as a family ?
The move is aimed at cutting the number of people killed and injured in accidents on Britain's roads.
Figures show more than a fifth of deaths in 2011 involved drivers aged 17 to 24, and around 10% of novice drivers are caught committing an offence within their probationary period.
The Government-commissioned report by the Transport Research Laboratory suggests learner drivers will still be granted provisional licences at the age of 17.
But they will have to complete a 12-month "learner stage" that would require drivers to clock up at least 100 hours of daytime and 20 hours of night-time supervised practice.
For the first year, newly qualified drivers would be hit by a curfew running between 10pm and 5am unless they were carrying a passenger aged over 30, as well as a ban on carrying anyone younger than that age if they were under it themselves.
A Department for Transport spokesman said: "Young drivers drive around 5% of all the miles driven in Britain, but are involved in about 20% of the crashes where someone is killed or seriously injured.
"We are committed to improving safety for young drivers and reducing their insurance costs - that is why we are publishing a Green Paper later in the year setting out our proposals.
"This will include a discussion about how people learn to drive."
Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, said: "Our own research shows that putting certain restrictions on young drivers allows them to rapidly build up live-saving experience in the safest possible way.
"Putting a firm number on casualty reduction is hard because of the pick-and-mix approach to graduate licensing.
"But the evidence suggests that a full package of measures could reduce fatalities by anything up to 60%.
"We should all have an interest in preserving young drivers' lives rather than exposing them to undue risk at the stage of their driving careers where they are most vulnerable.
"This is about ensuring their long-term safety and mobility, not curtailing it."
AA president Edmund King said although many of the proposals in the report had "merit", he questioned some of the recommendations.
"Road safety on the national curriculum is something we have long campaigned for and I am pleased to see it being recommended here," he said.
"However, at the extreme end this report could be seen as just recommending taking novice drivers off the road by regulation and restriction rather than helping them develop the right attitudes and skills to provide them with the mobility they need.
"Rather than compensating the proposed significant new restrictions through earlier access to the roads under supervision the authors propose delaying and extending the driving development process to the point where even some 30-year-olds will be restricted in whom they can carry as passengers.
"This academic report has raised a number of options for debate and careful consideration.
"The question is how many of its recommendations will be acceptable to the Government and public at large."
http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/news/drivin...012633936.html
Umm, not so sure about the highlighted parts. These could infringe on civil liberties. So if a married 28 year old man has a 27 year old wife with 2 kids. Would they be prevented in travelling as a family ?
12 October 2013, 12:16 AM
#2
Scooby Regular
I can kind of see it from both sides, having only recenly turned 30 and remembering quite vividly what it was like to be 17.
In general the worst standard of driving on the road that I see is young women, usually below the age of 25. They tend to be aggressive, inconsiderate and drive in a manner where they clearly have no appreciation of the laws of physics that govern the connection of their car to the road. Like young people in general, they lack the experience to anticipate that something could go wrong because they're of the wrong mindset.
Lagging just behind them are young men of the same age group and then very old people, who are dangerous for different reasons.
I see that the proposal, were it to go through, would allow younger drivers to gain experience behind the wheel and protect them from themselves (in effect). Although there are inconsiderate drivers of other age groups, they tend to be less reckless.
However, on the flipside, I remember what I was like when I was 18 and although I was on occasion a little over the top behind the wheel when my inexperience got the better of me but I was largely well behaved - but I think that's because I was well educated in the ways of driving.
I think the proposals are over the top and may be dialled back a bit but here's some food for thought - how come a proposal can be made to stop young adults driving cars on their own when a country can quite happily sign them up and send them off to fight in a war?
In general the worst standard of driving on the road that I see is young women, usually below the age of 25. They tend to be aggressive, inconsiderate and drive in a manner where they clearly have no appreciation of the laws of physics that govern the connection of their car to the road. Like young people in general, they lack the experience to anticipate that something could go wrong because they're of the wrong mindset.
Lagging just behind them are young men of the same age group and then very old people, who are dangerous for different reasons.
I see that the proposal, were it to go through, would allow younger drivers to gain experience behind the wheel and protect them from themselves (in effect). Although there are inconsiderate drivers of other age groups, they tend to be less reckless.
However, on the flipside, I remember what I was like when I was 18 and although I was on occasion a little over the top behind the wheel when my inexperience got the better of me but I was largely well behaved - but I think that's because I was well educated in the ways of driving.
I think the proposals are over the top and may be dialled back a bit but here's some food for thought - how come a proposal can be made to stop young adults driving cars on their own when a country can quite happily sign them up and send them off to fight in a war?
12 October 2013, 01:04 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: southport
Posts: 673
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Richard it was because you were well educated full stop not just well educated behind the wheel, not only that driving instructors must be joking, I recently had to flash a someone coming towards me with full beam on, they hit the breaks and stopped so I did to, then a young GIRL jumped out if the car screaming at me saying she was sick of everyone flashing her that night and why is it happening, I told her about her lights, she said she had no idea there was a main beam. I also switched off her fog lights
12 October 2013, 07:43 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Why do government have to complicate things.
So a young driver has to do 12 month tuition of at least 100 hours day,and 20 hours night ££££.
Just limit the car power a young driver can own,if he/she is restricted to a 1ltr car,and not driving about in a Focus RS or something,they would be less likely to drive aggressive.
Make the pass plus compulsory.
you will be taught Motorways, night driving, rural roads, town centres, all-weather driving etc,and just up the hours it takes to complete the course from what it is now.
So a young driver has to do 12 month tuition of at least 100 hours day,and 20 hours night ££££.
Just limit the car power a young driver can own,if he/she is restricted to a 1ltr car,and not driving about in a Focus RS or something,they would be less likely to drive aggressive.
Make the pass plus compulsory.
you will be taught Motorways, night driving, rural roads, town centres, all-weather driving etc,and just up the hours it takes to complete the course from what it is now.
12 October 2013, 10:04 AM
#5
Exactly. My thoughts exactly.
Make it so that only a group 1 car can be driven for the first year after passing, and nothing above group 5 until you are 21.
TBH, the proposals won't happen, though. Hardly any 18-25 year olds vote now.
Imagine how many MIGHT come out and vote any party out of power that did this to them?
Plus, I can see the ECHR getting involved: you are disadvantaging someone.
Make it so that only a group 1 car can be driven for the first year after passing, and nothing above group 5 until you are 21.
TBH, the proposals won't happen, though. Hardly any 18-25 year olds vote now.
Imagine how many MIGHT come out and vote any party out of power that did this to them?
Plus, I can see the ECHR getting involved: you are disadvantaging someone.
12 October 2013, 10:38 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Stroke it baby!
Posts: 33,828
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just increase the age to 19, and keep the rest of the system as it is.
I don't mind admitting that I was a maniac on th roads when I was 17, as where most of my friends. By 19 I had calmed down (a bit
)
I don't mind admitting that I was a maniac on th roads when I was 17, as where most of my friends. By 19 I had calmed down (a bit
)
Trending Topics
12 October 2013, 02:02 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also agree with limiting new drivers to gutless cars or even restricted speed cars. In the program Wheeler dealers trading up mike bought a weird looking car in Sweden. These cars are all new drivers are allowed to drive and they are restricted to 35 mph. I agree something needs to be done regarding new/young drivers but i dont think this green paper is the way to go.
12 October 2013, 04:27 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
All what the gov are proposing now,you can do in your pass plus.Always puzzled me over the years why it's never been made law that you have to do the pass plus after passing your practical test.
Seriously think it's the way to go,and restrict the power car a new driver can have,easy to do through DVLA and insurance.How would you even control a 10pm curfew across the country for every young driver,Cameras maybe,or is it mr plod sitting in a cul de sac waiting for someone who may look young to drive by.
12 October 2013, 04:43 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Please excuse my Spelling - its not the best !!
Posts: 2,538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea has some good points but I can't work why the government thinks shifting the age can drive at will alter the death / injury statistics. It wont, it will simply shift them by how ever many years alter it by. The problem is the mindset of 99% of the drivers when first start to drive irrespective of age.
A more sensible approach would be to have a minimum number of hours have to complete before can drive including motorway driving, bad weather, car controls, basic car maintenance etc. I would also be limiting the power of the cars can drive for a year / 2 years.
I'm a firm advocate that all drivers should take a compulsory driving reassessment, that can fail, every 5 years to correct bad habits / evolving road conditions, including an eye test.
Richard
A more sensible approach would be to have a minimum number of hours have to complete before can drive including motorway driving, bad weather, car controls, basic car maintenance etc. I would also be limiting the power of the cars can drive for a year / 2 years.
I'm a firm advocate that all drivers should take a compulsory driving reassessment, that can fail, every 5 years to correct bad habits / evolving road conditions, including an eye test.
Richard
12 October 2013, 05:50 PM
#11
IMO age is irrelevant. Some people just can't drive, or need ALOT more time to learn it and realise the consequences of getting it wrong.
Just this very minute I have had my driveway blocked by a Vauxhall Zafira. On a street where everyone has a large driveway with space for a guest to park. Not a big deal I know, but that should set bells ringing (driver who can't park, or realise they are causing an obstruction).
Anyhoo, here I am tapping away on t'internet and from next door waddles this porky woman with a 5yr old in tow heading towards said car.
First off she jumps in and lets her five year old girl walk into the road and get into the passenger side unassisted (the car is parked facing oncomming traffic).
Then she starts the car up, goes to pull away, checks blind spot (good), but then spends the next 10 seconds waving goodbye to the neighbours before pulling away...without rechecking behind.
Her age? Probably early 30's. Maybe late 20's if she had a tough paper round (although from the size of her I doubt she ever had a paper round).
Point being, her daughter could easily have been clipped down by a passing car as she ran around to get in without looking. And the driver could have pulled out into a passing car because the time between her pulling away and looking was so long.
It a minor thing to some people , but to me it just sums up the typical naive driver. Its people like this I want to see off the road. And age is irrelevant to this. As Richard says, compulsory reassessment is a more effective way to help get bad drivers off our roads.
Just this very minute I have had my driveway blocked by a Vauxhall Zafira. On a street where everyone has a large driveway with space for a guest to park. Not a big deal I know, but that should set bells ringing (driver who can't park, or realise they are causing an obstruction).
Anyhoo, here I am tapping away on t'internet and from next door waddles this porky woman with a 5yr old in tow heading towards said car.
First off she jumps in and lets her five year old girl walk into the road and get into the passenger side unassisted (the car is parked facing oncomming traffic).
Then she starts the car up, goes to pull away, checks blind spot (good), but then spends the next 10 seconds waving goodbye to the neighbours before pulling away...without rechecking behind.
Her age? Probably early 30's. Maybe late 20's if she had a tough paper round (although from the size of her I doubt she ever had a paper round).
Point being, her daughter could easily have been clipped down by a passing car as she ran around to get in without looking. And the driver could have pulled out into a passing car because the time between her pulling away and looking was so long.
It a minor thing to some people , but to me it just sums up the typical naive driver. Its people like this I want to see off the road. And age is irrelevant to this. As Richard says, compulsory reassessment is a more effective way to help get bad drivers off our roads.
12 October 2013, 06:02 PM
#12
I agree with Ali-B. Some people just shouldn't have a license!
They've been talking about raising the age since I was learning - 20 years ago. The only way of logging those hours will be an instructer. 120 hours @ £20+ an hour. Ouch. On top of that £2k+ insurance policies after passing. How the **** is a 17/18 year old supposed to afford that anyway!
I agree with the restrictions to engine size more than the number of hours thing. They do it with bikes now, but I'm not sure if I would prefer automatic upgrades, or having to re-take the test at each age/level.
They've been talking about raising the age since I was learning - 20 years ago. The only way of logging those hours will be an instructer. 120 hours @ £20+ an hour. Ouch. On top of that £2k+ insurance policies after passing. How the **** is a 17/18 year old supposed to afford that anyway!
I agree with the restrictions to engine size more than the number of hours thing. They do it with bikes now, but I'm not sure if I would prefer automatic upgrades, or having to re-take the test at each age/level.
12 October 2013, 06:06 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO age is irrelevant. Some people just can't drive, or need ALOT more time to learn it and realise the consequences of getting it wrong.
Just this very minute I have had my driveway blocked by a Vauxhall Zafira. On a street where everyone has a large driveway with space for a guest to park. Not a big deal I know, but that should set bells ringing (driver who can't park, or realise they are causing an obstruction).
Anyhoo, here I am tapping away on t'internet and from next door waddles this porky woman with a 5yr old in tow heading towards said car.
First off she jumps in and lets her five year old girl walk into the road and get into the passenger side unassisted (the car is parked facing oncomming traffic).
Then she starts the car up, goes to pull away, checks blind spot (good), but then spends the next 10 seconds waving goodbye to the neighbours before pulling away...without rechecking behind.
Her age? Probably early 30's. Maybe late 20's if she had a tough paper round (although from the size of her I doubt she ever had a paper round).
Point being, her daughter could easily have been clipped down by a passing car as she ran around to get in without looking. And the driver could have pulled out into a passing car because the time between her pulling away and looking was so long.
It a minor thing to some people , but to me it just sums up the typical naive driver. Its people like this I want to see off the road. And age is irrelevant to this. As Richard says, compulsory reassessment is a more effective way to help get bad drivers off our roads.
Just this very minute I have had my driveway blocked by a Vauxhall Zafira. On a street where everyone has a large driveway with space for a guest to park. Not a big deal I know, but that should set bells ringing (driver who can't park, or realise they are causing an obstruction).
Anyhoo, here I am tapping away on t'internet and from next door waddles this porky woman with a 5yr old in tow heading towards said car.
First off she jumps in and lets her five year old girl walk into the road and get into the passenger side unassisted (the car is parked facing oncomming traffic).
Then she starts the car up, goes to pull away, checks blind spot (good), but then spends the next 10 seconds waving goodbye to the neighbours before pulling away...without rechecking behind.
Her age? Probably early 30's. Maybe late 20's if she had a tough paper round (although from the size of her I doubt she ever had a paper round).
Point being, her daughter could easily have been clipped down by a passing car as she ran around to get in without looking. And the driver could have pulled out into a passing car because the time between her pulling away and looking was so long.
It a minor thing to some people , but to me it just sums up the typical naive driver. Its people like this I want to see off the road. And age is irrelevant to this. As Richard says, compulsory reassessment is a more effective way to help get bad drivers off our roads.
12 October 2013, 06:31 PM
#14
Yup, not every bad driver is an idiot or unintelligent, but this global acceptance that driving is a right rather than a privileged needs to end.
One gripe I have is people who freeze in panic, or go into a hand flapping frenzy. These people should never be allowed to drive IMO. Nothing against them as people, but when it comes to making snap judgements in a life threatening scenario when behind the wheel of 1.5tones of speeding metal, I'd rather these type of people not be the ones driving.
Can you imagine a aircraft pilot with that kind of mindset?
One gripe I have is people who freeze in panic, or go into a hand flapping frenzy. These people should never be allowed to drive IMO. Nothing against them as people, but when it comes to making snap judgements in a life threatening scenario when behind the wheel of 1.5tones of speeding metal, I'd rather these type of people not be the ones driving.
Can you imagine a aircraft pilot with that kind of mindset?
12 October 2013, 08:36 PM
#15
Driving test is simply not rigorous enough, it tests only the most basic elements of car control, and young drivers are coached on how to pass the test, not how to drive. I passed my test in June 1992 having had six lessons, two months after my 17th birthday. I never drove in the dark, in the rain, snow or ice prior to passing my test. In my view that is a risk area that needs to be addressed by the driving test or instructional process. In my opinion the baseline needs to move to that of the advanced driving assessment, and I think I would like to see a modular approach taken on this, where you pass a basic car control test first, a separate motorway assessment, skid control driving dynamics assessment, night driving assessment, point to point assessment - starting at point A you are told to drive to point B in a reasonable amount of time. Other skills like hazard perception, and commentary on observations and 'body language' of other vehicles and road users should be assessed as part of this.
This approach will reduce the pass rate, but it is the only way to really make the roads safer. There are a number of legal changes required as well as part of the overall strategy. Things like, the speed limit being reduced by when it rains, mandating the use of winter tyres between November and April, enforcing he use of daytime running lights, limiting drivers to certain cars based on age and experience, enforcing an annual eye test for anyone wanting to drive.
This approach will reduce the pass rate, but it is the only way to really make the roads safer. There are a number of legal changes required as well as part of the overall strategy. Things like, the speed limit being reduced by when it rains, mandating the use of winter tyres between November and April, enforcing he use of daytime running lights, limiting drivers to certain cars based on age and experience, enforcing an annual eye test for anyone wanting to drive.
12 October 2013, 10:08 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yup, not every bad driver is an idiot or unintelligent, but this global acceptance that driving is a right rather than a privileged needs to end.
One gripe I have is people who freeze in panic, or go into a hand flapping frenzy. These people should never be allowed to drive IMO. Nothing against them as people, but when it comes to making snap judgements in a life threatening scenario when behind the wheel of 1.5tones of speeding metal, I'd rather these type of people not be the ones driving.
Can you imagine a aircraft pilot with that kind of mindset?
One gripe I have is people who freeze in panic, or go into a hand flapping frenzy. These people should never be allowed to drive IMO. Nothing against them as people, but when it comes to making snap judgements in a life threatening scenario when behind the wheel of 1.5tones of speeding metal, I'd rather these type of people not be the ones driving.
Can you imagine a aircraft pilot with that kind of mindset?
13 October 2013, 12:18 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
That would leave not many being able to go for car test then..
13 October 2013, 12:28 PM
#24
Driving test is simply not rigorous enough, it tests only the most basic elements of car control, and young drivers are coached on how to pass the test, not how to drive. I passed my test in June 1992 having had six lessons, two months after my 17th birthday. I never drove in the dark, in the rain, snow or ice prior to passing my test. In my view that is a risk area that needs to be addressed by the driving test or instructional process. In my opinion the baseline needs to move to that of the advanced driving assessment, and I think I would like to see a modular approach taken on this, where you pass a basic car control test first, a separate motorway assessment, skid control driving dynamics assessment, night driving assessment, point to point assessment - starting at point A you are told to drive to point B in a reasonable amount of time. Other skills like hazard perception, and commentary on observations and 'body language' of other vehicles and road users should be assessed as part of this.
This approach will reduce the pass rate, but it is the only way to really make the roads safer. There are a number of legal changes required as well as part of the overall strategy. Things like, the speed limit being reduced by when it rains, mandating the use of winter tyres between November and April, enforcing he use of daytime running lights, limiting drivers to certain cars based on age and experience, enforcing an annual eye test for anyone wanting to drive.
This approach will reduce the pass rate, but it is the only way to really make the roads safer. There are a number of legal changes required as well as part of the overall strategy. Things like, the speed limit being reduced by when it rains, mandating the use of winter tyres between November and April, enforcing he use of daytime running lights, limiting drivers to certain cars based on age and experience, enforcing an annual eye test for anyone wanting to drive.
13 October 2013, 12:48 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: ....
Posts: 6,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I did my IAM test I had to give a running commentary for 30 mins of the almost 1 hour test.
That should be brought into the normal test imo, as it focus the mind to what you are actually doing and not just 'driving'.
That should be brought into the normal test imo, as it focus the mind to what you are actually doing and not just 'driving'.
13 October 2013, 02:54 PM
#26
The age limit at the moment is perfect. If it was raised to 18/19 how are these people going to get to work if public transport is not an option? For me, learning to drive was essential in getting me to work.
I agree that something needs to be done but it all comes down to the individual and their own ability. Costs of learning to drive are already off putting to young people and I don't think any of the restrictions listed will help.
In terms of young people not being allowed to drive more powerful cars, then I think you'll struggle to find many 17/18 year olds that will be able to find an insurance company willing to cover them and then be able to pay that amount.
I agree that something needs to be done but it all comes down to the individual and their own ability. Costs of learning to drive are already off putting to young people and I don't think any of the restrictions listed will help.
In terms of young people not being allowed to drive more powerful cars, then I think you'll struggle to find many 17/18 year olds that will be able to find an insurance company willing to cover them and then be able to pay that amount.
13 October 2013, 03:37 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think "P" plates should be compulsory for at least the first year after passing the driving test. Then a law could be bought in that any car displacing the "P" plate is only allowed to do 40 or 50 mph max and even a curfew.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post