New Driver Training

The Association of British Insurers want learner drivers to have lessons for a year before being let loose on their own

Learner drivers should take lessons for a minimum of 12 months according to the Association of British Insurers (ABI).

The plans are backed by motoring and safety groups, such as the RAC Foundation, which said they would lead to 1,000 fewer road casualties a year.

The proposals are intended to reduce the high numbers of young drivers killed or injured on Britain’s roads.

Where to start? Once again, a pressure group has opted for a “one size fits all” solution. One of my concerns here is the general nature of the statement made by the ABI. How many lessons in a year? How many hours would that be? One hour a week? Two hours a week? What about people who have intensive training over a couple of weeks? These days, forty one-hour lessons prior to being able to pass the test is not that unusual – it was happening when I gave up driving instruction fifteen years ago. You can teach a moderately capable person to control a vehicle and carry out manoeuvres in ten lessons or so. The rest is spent honing those skills; gaining experience and confidence sufficient to deal with whatever the candidate might encounter on the test and afterwards. Given that many people have one hour’s worth of tuition a week and that there are fifty two weeks in a year, a good many people are already having a year’s worth of lessons anyway – presuming that is the formula the ABI are using and it’s anyone’s guess that they are.

Even young people who learn new skills quickly are finding that the combination of learning to control a vehicle combined with high traffic density is taking more time than it did when I learned to drive in the early eighties. I noticed this trend less than a decade later when I started teaching others to drive. A year, therefore, (or equivalent) is not that unusual already, I suspect. My problem has always been with the immediate post test environment when the newly qualified driver is alone for the first time. I am always loathe to opt for compulsion in anything – however, given that we do not (quite rightly) allow people to drive vehicles on our roads without some form of training and assessment, I believe that the motorways at the very least should be included in that process. The reasoning for it not being included has traditionally been the inaccessibility for many parts of the coutry. However, I do not believe it beyond the wit of man to find a suitable solution – a two stage test, perhaps? Such as the current arrangements for automatic vehicles.

I would like to see more emphasis on post test training on more complex roads, higher speeds and motorways; a change in culture that makes it not only acceptable, but desirable, “cool” if you like, to continue training throughout ones driving career. Unfortunately, many learners don’t want to spend the money on this. The money previously spent on driving lessons is now paying for a car, MOT, insurance and road fund licence. This reluctance could be overcome with imaginative marketing as part of the overall training package and here, the ABI could be of use. And, for once, I am in accord with the Department of Transport:

But the Department for Transport said it wanted to influence new drivers with incentives instead of regulation.

Indeed, and the ABI’s efforts would be more usefully directed at incentives on the insurers’ part to encourage new drivers to take advanced training by offering discounts. But, I suspect, they don’t mean that, as calls for more regulation are much sexier.