Harder Driving Tests

Every so often, the same stories get trotted out and the same solutions proposed. So, today, we get a reprise of the “killer drivers and the harder driving test” story.

The government is looking into the possibility of much harder driving tests to improve road safety.

Options to be considered include education in safe driving being introduced into the school curriculum, the Times reports.

I suppose my first question would be; “did any of this work the last time they did it?” For instance, has the multiple choice and truly dreadful hazard perception test actually made one whit of difference to accident statistics among young drivers? Or, because it was so obviously an artifical hoop through which they had to jump, did they simply learn how to navigate the test and then carry on as before? It being little more than a very poor attempt at a computer game.

Not that I have any objection to the test being more thorough, more testing of a candidate’s abilities, more searching and, consequently more difficult. If the outcome is a more strenuous examination of a candidate’s competence behind the wheel, then I am happy with it. If, however, it is nothing more than a series of hoops to satisfy the “something must be seen to be done” lobby, then, no, I’m not. Road Safety Minister, Stephen Ladyman tells the Times that:

Also being looked at is the Swedish system under which drivers undergo 120 hours of training before taking a test.

And if they do not need 120 hours to achieve a pass? people who come up with blanket solutions such as this demonstrate a staggering degree of ignorance regarding training, development and competence management. What drivers need is “sufficient” training to enable them to drive safely on their own – the test is merely confirmation that they have achieved that standard. Some will, indeed, need 120 hours or even more. Some need a fraction of that and will go on to be safe and considerate drivers. One size fits all solutions are the product of one size fits all thinkers; i.e. those who either don’t or can’t. What would be nice to see is more encouragement for post test training at a higher level once drivers have started to gain experience of driving solo. The Pass Plus scheme exists, but there is little incentive for drivers to take it up.

Mr Ladyman demonstrated 1970’s thinking when he comes out with this:

We have developed this attitude that you first learn to pass the test and then you learn to drive.

It’s a pretty poor driving instructor who trains to the test. All those I have met and worked with teach driving as a life skill – the test pass is a by product of that preparation. That attitude was prevalent twenty years ago and still is.

Robin Cummins, the DSA’s former chief driving examiner and now road safety consultant to the BSM driving school, said he would like to see longer tests.

Yup, no problem with this. If it gives the examiner more time to make an effective assessment, then this is a simple and logical approach. But, then, Mr Cummins is a professional who knows what he is talking about, unlike Mr Ladyman who is a politician…

Having said that, I do go along with the idea of introducing the subject in schools and I agree that raising the driving age limit is not a good idea, so it isn’t all bad.

The BBC radio news this morning mentioned other proposals such as including night driving and motorways in the test. I can’t see that mentioned in either the BBC piece linked here or the original Times article, so, perhaps that was just someone’s wishful thinking. After all, what shifts will examiners have to work if they are to cover driving during darkness – particularly during the summer months? And what happens if the nearest motorway is a hundred miles away? It was fairly early, maybe my ears were deceiving me.