Twattery

Another petty authoritarian speaks.

Older motorists should be forced to take mandatory eyesight tests every three years in a major driving law shake-up, according to a leading expert.

Calls for strict new regulations have been made by Rob Heard, a Sergeant for Hampshire Constabulary and now chair and founder of the Older Drivers Forum.

Under the current rules, an eyesight test can be arranged by the DVLA if a motorist renewing their driving licence at 70 has a medical condition.

However, these checks are not a requirement for individuals considered to be fit and healthy meaning many cases may slip through the net.

As we get older, our eyesight deteriorates. I’ve been wearing glasses for reading since my late forties. What does this mean? Oh, yes, I have regular assessments of my eyesight by an optician, as does anyone who needs eyesight correction, which is much of the older population.

On the other side of this, we have to do the basic DVSA check on new CBT students before training them. We’ve had three fail the very basic eyesight check in the last month. They were all youngsters, who are less likely to be seeing an optician on a regular basis.

So we have another ‘expert’ who can safely be ignored.

According to Government data, motorists above the age of 70 accounted for 23 percent of all road deaths in 2022.

So 77% weren’t. Hardly a ringing endorsement for the argument, is it?

“We estimate at the moment that around 3,000 people a year are killed or injured on our roads due to people with defective eyesight. It is a big issue.”

See how the argument is shifting here? How many of those who caused those accident were in the target demographic? That’s a classic bait and switch argument being presented. Set up the basic premise then craftily shift the stats to suit and hope no one takes notice. These people must think we are stupid.

17 Comments

  1. ’Rob Heard, a Sergeant for Hampshire Constabulary’

    If he’s still working for Hampshire Constabulary isn’t he prohibited from lobbying in this manner? In fact, shouldn’t he prohibited from joining, never mind chairing, a third party lobby group?

      • Retired coppers, school teachers and civil servants are always the worst for this sort of thing.

        Can’t by busybodies through work any more so they find some other sort of busy bodying to do. Often with things like Neighbourhood Watch.

        Ghastly people.

  2. “a Sergeant for Hampshire Constabulary . . .chair and founder of the Older Drivers Forum”
    Is he a traffic officer with years of relevant experience or a desk pilot with an aptitude for massaging numbers and a desire to see his name in print? We old gits are itching to know . . . but the ointment seems to be working.

  3. Eyesight can deteriorate significantly in 10 years, so why not require everybody to have an eye test when they renew their licence? So every 10 years up to age 70, then every 3 years after that, rather than tick a box saying you can read a number plate at the required distance, produce an eye test result from an optician that proves you can do it.

  4. They got into a habit years ago of conflating deaths and injuries to make the un-observant think that the ‘3000’ was 1500 of each, rather than say, 20 deaths, 180 serious injuries and 2800 minor injuries. They also dropped ‘serious injuries’, and left it as just ‘injuries’ to scary up the numbers. Lying scum.

  5. Do we have an “Amount of people”; or is it a “Number of people”? We can have an amount of coal (ton), sand (TON) or flour (lbs or kg), but a number of bricks, of loaves or cards.

  6. It does make sense to me to require eye tests for all ages in order to hold a driving licence. I also think that you should have to do some kind of refresher course maybe every ten years to make sure that your driving skills are still up to speed. I don’t know how practical that would be to implement.

    • All ages being the relevant point. Anyone could have eyesight problems and my real world experience tells me that younger people are wandering about with defective eyesight without realising it.

  7. The amount of doddering old farts I’ve seen wobbling around the supermarket, only later to see them taking three minutes to get into the driver’s seat of their car in the car park is… A lot.

    “Never had an accident” is their common refrain. No? But I bet you’ve seen a few.

    Obviously eyesight is important. Equally so is reaction time. This should be tested as well.

    We impose mandatory minimum age restrictions on obtaining and holding a license. Upper age limits should apply as well.

    • My father is ninety. Sure, he’s slowed down a little and he now rides a lighter bike, but he’s safe on the roads. Older people know their reaction times are slower, but their awareness of this is a counter balance as they have more experience and are more likely to be planning ahead better than younger, less experienced road users. There does come a time, however, as happened to my mother in law not so long ago, when giving up the licence is the right thing to do, but it should always be an individual matter, not some blanket mandate from the state.

  8. “My father is ninety. Sure, he’s slowed down a little and he now rides a lighter bike… ” What a trouper!

  9. If they want to reduce the number of accidents it would make more sense to raise the minimum driving age to 25.

  10. One reason for the number of young people with short sight is … Mobile Phones. Your eyes adjust to the way you view the world – if you read a lot or view things at close range then your eyes adapt to that use. Trying to look at things at long range means that they cannot focus and hence the inability to read number plates at 20 yards/metres etc. People that grow up and work outdoors have the opposite problem in that they cannot focus on close objects and need “reading” glasses, setting aside age related deterioration.

    Of course, mandatory eye tests will deter those people that drive without licenses or any instruction or training whatsoever in stolen cars and motorcycles …

  11. I offer this for info only.
    I have a couple of licences, both renewed this year.
    In NZ – to renew is trip into the agent (eg AA) quick long distance eyesight test (not short) on a viewer thing, photo taken, pay money. 10 years expiry.
    In Tasmania – trip to the gov agency, declare good eyesight (no test), photo taken, pay money. 5 year expiry

Comments are closed.