07.09.07 Theory tests made tougher to improve road safety

del.icio.us digg Technorati Furl reddit SPURL.NET
18 comments 66 votes

Young drivers, in particular young males, have over twice as many accidents as older, more experienced drivers. It takes a full twelve months before their accident rate starts to reduce and two years before it equals that of more experienced motorists.

In July 1996, it became compulsory for learners to pass the driving theory test before being able to apply for a practical test. In Nov 2002, the hazard perception section of the theory test was introduced as part of the Government’s attempt to reduce by 40% the number of fatalities and serious injuries on the roads by 2010. 14 video clips are shown to the candidate on a computer and learner drivers have to identify 15 developing hazards. The earlier they are aware of a developing hazard the more points are scored.

On September 3rd this year the multiple choice section of the theory test was expanded in an attempt to produce safer drivers. Currently candidates have 40 minutes in which to answer 35 questions. In order to pass, they need to answer at least 30 correctly. The new test will take 57 minutes and candidates will need to get 43 out of 50 correct.

The pass mark is still the same at 86%. The aspects examined are:

  • Driver attitude
  • Traffic signs and regulations
  • The effect on the driver of alcohol, drugs and fatigue
  • Safety and environmental aspects

The fee for the test increased as well, from £21.50 to £28.50. Full information on booking a theory test is available on the Direct Gov website.

In an attempt to reduce the number of deaths, accidents and casualties on our roadways other suggestions are being considered. These include:
  • Making “P” plates compulsory
  • Restricting driving at night for less experienced drivers
  • Reducing the speed limit for newly qualified drivers
  • Lowering the permissible alcohol level for a period after passing the test
  • Introducing a minimum learning period
  • Making professional lessons compulsory
  • Raising the age at which you can learn to drive
  • Restricting the number of passengers (who are often a distraction) carried by new drivers


But will this make any difference to road safety?
Can tougher theory tests impove road safety?

Your Comments

Click here to add your comments

the only way to improve road safty in young drivers is to limit the horse power of the vehicle they can drive till the age of about 30 years of age

Posted by Ian Coward, 27th September 2007 5:18pm

I have recently been hit head on whilst I was stationary by a young male drive coming round a corner who did not have his feet on the pedals and then pressed the wrong one and therefore smashed into me. My newish car was damaged although not hugely - the point is "What if". I taught both my sons to drive in the early stages in my car on very quiet side roads - one of the first things I drummed into them was where the brake was and made them practice stopping when I told them after checking their mirrors. The young man who bumped into me must have been treating this very real and dangerous machine as some kind of "toy" car i.e. no control needed.
I would ask that all young male drivers if involved in any kind of incident go back to square 1 and retake their test with a huge insurance rise.

Posted by Diana Mercer, 27th September 2007 6:56pm

My 16 year old son, who already holds a full tractor licence has always had it drummed into him that any vehicle is a potentially dangerous instrument. Limiting the size of engine until they are 30 is unrealistic, perhaps limiting it for the first 5 years of their licence would be better then anyone who is a new driver would have to have gained experience before driving something bigger.
At the same time, the elderly also cause many accidents they are as dangerous as many young, yet they still have massive cars, perhaps they also should have to retake a test after 70!

Posted by Mrs Brookes, 27th September 2007 11:15pm

Maybe limiting the amount of passengers they carry or the time of day they drive for the first couple of years,having some sort of plate telling others that there newly passed drivers be displayed, but i don't think it's always the young driver to blame looking at some of the driving instructors around I really wonder sometimes how on earth they passed a driving test let alone teach someone else to drive maybe thats were people need to look at and on the quality of the driving instructors.

Posted by Kriss Smooth, 28th September 2007 9:47am

I wonder how many of these accidents are actually caused by wrecless driving but by poor driving standards. Look at how many people are in the country who have not passed a UK driving test but are driving on our roads using their native licences. I know one person who passed his motorbike test in fiji on a moped, he drove around the sqaure in one direction then the other. He now can use that licence to ride a bigger bike as he wants in this country. Is that right?

Posted by Daniel Britten, 28th September 2007 9:55am

I passed my theory test first time with 35 out of 35 and was in and out in 15 minutes! I did that after a LOT of study! I think it is VERY important for people to know rules of the road, I am convinced that half the drivers round here have no idea what the national speed limit sign means or most of the other signs for that matter. When most older people learnt how to drive there were a lot less rules and signs etc. and I think EVERYBODY (young and old) should have a regular theory and sight tests if they want to continue driving, maybe once every 5 years for under the age of 60, then annually after that. I was nearly hit by a woman driver yesterday (no comment) who obviously had no idea that you must give way to the right on roundabouts! Maybe they should do public information films like they used to explaining things like that and put them on in the ad breaks of popular programs (just don't raise petrol prices to pay for them!).

Posted by Dean Thorpe, 28th September 2007 3:47pm

Just thought I would add some comments on the suggestions:

* Making "P" plates compulsory

I don't think this would make any difference.

* Restricting driving at night for less experienced drivers

Some may need to for work purposes, emergencies etc.

* Reducing the speed limit for newly qualified drivers

That would be very hard to monitor

* Lowering the permissible alcohol level for a period after passing the test

I think the limit should be zero for all drivers, if you want to drink, don't drive!

* Introducing a minimum learning period

That I think would be a good idea, I know in Australia they have a certain amount of hours that you must do as a learner before you can take your test.

* Making professional lessons compulsory

Some "professional" instructors are not that good either!

* Raising the age at which you can learn to drive

I think 21 would be a much better start age, but in rural areas it may be hard to get out to good jobs without access to transport.

* Restricting the number of passengers (who are often a distraction) carried by new drivers

Good in theory, but some people learn to drive to be able to transport their children or elderly / disabled relatives, it would not be fair to restrict them.

Posted by Dean Thorpe (again), 28th September 2007 3:59pm

In response to post #2,

Diana, why paint everybody with the same brush? I am 19, have been driving for over two years and have not had a single bump, let alone a crash.
I'm also sick of reckless young male drivers pushing up the cost of insurance for the rest of my age group, but we're not all clones. To be honest I wish the idiots would be banned too - atleast until they grow up.

I have a neuromuscular condition, therefore punishing people like myself for the actions of other young male drivers seems pretty unfair.







Posted by Mathew, 8th October 2007 2:05am

Here Here Mathew I agree.

I have cystic Fibrosis and cannot walk the 4.5 miles to work. Why Shun all young drivers and tar them with the same brush.

I live in the countryside and my job is 4.5 miles away.

James

Posted by James Stephenson, 8th October 2007 1:29pm

I agree with the above two posts.
I myself am 22 and obtained my licence at 17, I drive what I consider to be a fairly large / powerful car, (5 door / 170bhp). I have never had an accident or insurance claim or any points on my licence; in fact, on paper I have a perfect record.

Yet my mrs, on the other hand has 3 points, made 1 claim and drives a similar insurance group car, is about £200 better off every year from insurance costs. - Fair? - I don't think so

Anyway, most of the suggestions made to make safer drivers, are either unenforceable or just unfeasible.

My top favourites are:
1) Increasing the age requirement.
2) Restricted power for first 3-5years (difficult to enforce though)
3) Creating a minimum number of hours you must learn before being able to apply for a practical exam.


In my opinion what makes a good driver is experience and attitude, and attitudes change with experience.

Posted by Paul Bishop, 19th October 2007 1:27pm

some of the comments make my blood boil, young drivers are no worse than the idiots on mobile phones or the smokers lighting up or indeed the lowest of the low drink drivers, give the younger drivers a break they are not all the same and should joe bloggs crash at 17 then he should be penalised not the hundreds or thousands of other youngsters with common sense, i by the way am 36 driving for 4 years

Posted by Sam Blackmore, 6th November 2007 2:10pm

In what way will making younger drivers drive less powerful cars help?
I practise in a 1.8 litre 5 door, which is far more powerful then my instructor's car, but it means I have to be extra careful when accelerating (in case it goes a bit too fast). However, I've been lead to believe that even though most small cars have tiny engines they go like sh*t off a shovel because they're so light.

Posted by Jennifer Arnold, 6th November 2007 3:19pm

Why is it when driving is concerned, young people are the first people pointed at with a giant finger as main cause of accidents etc?

I passed my driving test first time in September aged 24 after 9 months of weekly 1-hour lessons.

If we're going to point the finger at people, how about the 'more mature' drivers - on two separate occasions of which I have had tailgating me in an agressive manner for no reason at all and one middle-aged man who pulled out straight in front of me on a very busy junction without checking his mirrors etc first! Not to mention the numerous amount of drivers who have been in front of me who appear to have 'broken indicators' or have just simply forgotten that they are there!

Maturity, common sense and experience prevents accidents - this applies to all drivers

Posted by Hayley Jones, 7th November 2007 9:28pm

I agree with comment 13 - it's us young drivers who always have the finger pointed at us.
I'm the first to admit I had two accidents when I first passed my test - neither of them being my fault though.
1. This was an elderly gentleman aged 69 who thought it would be a good idea to pull out in front of me on a dual carriageway when I was 2 seconds from the junction (The police made him, an experienced driver take a 6 week driver improvement course for what he did - and he had been driving for 40 odd years - and also it was proved I hadn't been speeding because my tyre marks were measured)
2. Another elderly gentleman - aged 70. Being a retired driving instructor went into the back of me when I was stationary at a roundabout and ripped my bumper off.

Mmmmmmmmmm there seems to be two words there that seem similar - Elderly (I'm not saying there all to blame but maybe some people need to open their eyes up a little)

Posted by Scott Adams, 15th November 2007 10:51am

Although young male drivers cause a large percentage of insurance claims, older drivers (those over 50) account for a higher percentage of actual accidents (those which are non fatal and are often not claimed for on insurance).

I don't think its a case of age at all but that of the person themselves and their willingness to keep up to date with their driving skills and knowledge.

The issues come down to:
* People get into bad habits of driving (forgetting to use indicators, leaning on the arm rest, etc).
* The highway code changes regularly, but many people fail to keep up to date.
* After a while, people (even myself) take driving for granted, especially speeds, you 'get used' to speeds - 70 never seems fast on a motorway....until you come off at a junction.


The only way to truly 'ensure' that people were safer drivers [hold your breath, lots of people won't like this] is to require a re-test every 5 years, for everyone.
If you're a good driver, this wouldn't be a problem at all, the test only takes 45 mins for the practical and 25 for the theory (although you're allowed longer) - this is no time at all for the time you save by having the ability to drive.
The infrastructure isn't currently there to support this, we'd need 10 fold the amount of instructors and test centers. Although it would provide a lot of jobs.

This would not only ensure that those people on the roads were relatively devoid of bad habits, but it would ensure that everyone would have to check up on their highway code every 5 years.
The function of driving hardly changes, but the rules and laws do change.

Off note: I'm frequently amazed by people who seem to have no idea about the highway code, such as giving way on roundabouts, mini-roundabouts, the use of indicators and 'lane discipline'.

Posted by Andrew Brigham, 15th November 2007 11:12am

In reply to No.3
I am disgusted with the attitude that old people are as dangerous as youngsters. I have been driving for over 40 years (that is not a boast) and I take driving seriously.
I am not prone to 'showing off' or 'going faster that the youngster in the car next to me at the lights' etc.
I drive through enjoyment and also necessity and with great awareness for others.
I also have my eyes checked regularly and belong to a gym
Tarring with the same brush comes to mind - again!

Posted by Yvonne Clover-lambert, 11th December 2007 10:52am

Road safety is not just an argument about young and old being better or worse than one another . Yes experience is very important , but so is the attitude of the driver however old they may be . There are good and bad drivers of all ages. One thing they all have in commom is that at some time they have all been assessed and passed as competant to leagally drive on our public roads. There are however a group of road users who are not tested , pay no tax and have no insurance , and in my experience in the majority do not adhere to the rules and guidelines in the highway code. Cyclist's. I wonder how many accidents invloving cyclists occur , and I bet the finger is always pointed at the driver of the car no matter how old or experinced they may be.

Posted by S Collins, 12th December 2007 9:56pm

As with most exams the student will swat like a sponge, pass the test and then forget the majority of what they have learnt in a years time or less. The current driving test teaches people how to pass the test and not the art of driving, ie no motorway tesing or night time driving to name but two.

Posted by Robert Ramsey, 19th February 2008 11:10am

This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.

Please ensure your comments comply with our Blog Policies or your comment may be removed.
Full Name: *
Email Address: *
Comments: *
Enter the code you see to the left into the text box below.
 

Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.

Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of PetrolPrices.com (Fubra Ltd)

« Go Back to Main Blog