[Article] Alarm over surge in number of L-drivers

RadarControl

THE number of unqualified drivers on our roads is soaring, shock new figures show.


Thousands of these motorists are on their sixth, seventh, eighth or even ninth provisional licence.

For the first time, figures can reveal that the number of drivers on their sixth and subsequent provisional licence has jumped from just 88 in 2003 to an incredible 15,239 last year.

When those on their third, fourth and fifth provisional licence are added, the figures rise to 101,000.

The surge in the number of unqualified drivers comes despite government promises to cut the number on provisional licences.

Opposition TDs and traffic experts warned last night that the drivers - who are under no obligation to even go for a single driving lesson - are putting the lives of other drivers at risk.

Previously, the Department of Transport had refused to give a breakdown of exactly how many drivers were on their sixth and subsequent licence, saying the numbers were not quantified.

However, figures obtained by the Irish Independent under the Freedom of Information Act show the numbers renewing their provisional licence six or more times has jumped 173-fold in just three years.

The increase occurred during a period when Transport Minister Martin Cullen gave more than €10m to tackle the problem and promised to properly train more drivers to help cut road deaths.

Opposition TDs criticised the system which effectively lets an individual drive for their entire life without their skills being checked.

The official statistics reveal that in 2006 there were 19,744 people on their fifth provisional licence and a further 12,053 on their sixth. The data shows 2,918 drivers are currently permitted to drive on our roads with their seventh licence, 262 on their eighth and six on their ninth.

In 2003, there were just 4,879 on their fifth provisional licence, 79 on their sixth and nine on their seventh.

A loophole in the system means those with a provisional driving licence only need apply to do their test in order to renew their licence, but they do not need to sit it.

The figures also show the numbers passing their driving test each year has remained largely static since 1998.

That year, 81,864 passed with figures peaking in 2001 at 95,569. Last year, the numbers passing dropped back to 86,898 despite a €10m 'war chest' being given to tackle the waiting time problem.

Conor Faughnan of AA Roadwatch said provisional drivers were typically at higher risk of crashing, something which was reflected in their insurance premiums.

He also criticised the "completely unenforceable" system which stipulates learner drivers must avoid motorways and only drive with a fully licensed passenger.

"Essentially in reality the gardai have given up on the old regime," he said, adding that even the dedicated Traffic Corps cannot be expected to monitor the 20pc of all drivers who hold only a provisional licence.

A spokesman for the Road Safety Authority admitted there was no data to tell how many of the drivers did not turn up for a test - or how many failed the test multiple times.

Test

"To apply for a second provisional licence you have to have sat the test or applied. But beyond that there is no way of knowing if it was a fail or a no-show," said spokesman Brian Farrell.

Labour's environment spokesman Eamon Gilmore claimed that unqualified drivers were putting other motorists at risk.

"We have people who are on continuous provisional licences driving around and these people need to be trained by qualified instructors," he said.

Fine Gael's environment spokesman Fergus O'Dowd said he was "shocked" at the figures, and added: "I would never have thought they were as high as that. A person can either drive or they can't, if they go over and beyond a certain number of licences there's obviously something wrong."

A new system has been proposed which will scrap the provisional licence system and replace it with a graduated learner permit.

This will involve mandatory driving lessons from accredited instructors, a zero alcohol limit and a one-litre car engine limit.

Learners will then have to 'earn' their licence by moving through a variety of steps with stringent restrictions and conditions on their learner permit.

It is hoped the new rigorous system will come into force when the current backlog is cleared.

"It's up to the new minister whenever they take up their new post," said Mr Farrell.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/alarm-over-surge-in-number-of-ldrivers-695600.html

Chris_533976

Disgraceful really. 9th provisional? Thats like 18 years of driving without proving yourself qualified.

Zoney

I despair. Really. All chances are it'll be the same old story in another five years.

As it is, searching through past Dáil debates online is like reading through some sort of recurring temporal loop on any number of subjects, not just learner drivers.

Stark

A new system has been proposed which will scrap the provisional licence system and replace it with a graduated learner permit.

This will involve mandatory driving lessons from accredited instructors, a zero alcohol limit and a one-litre car engine limit.

Thumbs up to mandatory driving lessons. 1.0L engine limit, though? Ouch. And stupid. What happens if you want to learn to drive, but your parents are driving a 1.4L family car? They have to buy a new car just so you can learn to drive? Ridiculous. Plenty of driving instructors around too with 1.25L Fiestas. Are they all supposed to dump their cars and buy new ones just to satisfy the engine requirements?

Learners will then have to 'earn' their licence by moving through a variety of steps with stringent restrictions and conditions on their learner permit.

Oh dear, it looks like tough times ahead for those learning to drive.

It is hoped the new rigorous system will come into force when the current backlog is cleared.

Or maybe not

b3t4

"THE number of unqualified drivers on our roads is soaring, shock new figures show."

What a ridiculous statement. I have a provisional license and due to circumstances have only been "on our roads" about 5times this year. Do they expect everyone to have a car or something?

I'm all for forcing people to take driving lessons with qualified (now there's an idea) driving instructors.

The restriction on engine size is ridiculous as well. Parents having one size engine but their children have to buy a new car so as to meet the requirements.

There should definitely be a limit on the number of provisionals though as being on your sixth is all a little suss.

A.

dam099

I have to say I read the article this morning and thought the focus on sixth and later a bit odd, the fact that there are people on the road on their own while over their second or third provisional is a problem.

mike65

Shows how bad things are, I'm old enough to remember the imfamous driving licence amnesty in 1979 cos my mother availed of it! Nearly 30 years later such a move would'nt happen as even this country is'nt as so hick now as to allow it but all the same systematic failings and pressures are present. Though the idea was raised in a Seanad debate only 3 years ago

Dail debate 1979 Test waiting times

Sound familair?

Mike.

SeanW

:mad: every time I hear some mucking fuppet complaining about provisional licenseholders my blood starts to simmer. The driver qualifications system just doesn't work. Noone should be using provisional licenses to drive, but then again a learner driver should have near-instant access to driving tests.

As for me? Got a first provisional a few years ago, never used it. Renewed last year and started learning. But I booked a driving test last September and now in June there's no sign of it, I email the dept of transport and all I got back was a crappy automated reply telling me crap I already knew giving me general "expected" waiting times that have already passed.

I'll be lucky if I see my test this side of Christmas at this rate and I'm unfortunate enough not to pass this time, I'll need a 3rd prov before I get retest. Fscking ridiculous.

In other countries these ridiculous delays don't exist as they have competent governmnets that make things just F@#*ing WORK!

Fianna Fail have been in power for ... what is it ... 23 of th the last 25 years? And they could give a flying toss. :mad: So when I hear muppets complaining about, or looking for more restrictions on provisional licenseholders I want to puke.

Stark

mike65 wrote:

Though the idea was raised in a Seanad debate only 3 years ago

Mr. Bohan: I support Senator Higgins's call for an amnesty for those holding provisional driving licences. I know quite a number who have been driving on such licences for the past ten years. The waiting list for driving tests is so long that people are put off from applying. It is time to legalise the situation by granting an amnesty for those driving on provisional licences for over three years.

Wow, I can't believe they even considered rewarding those people who either failed multiple times or repeatedly didn't bother showing up for their tests, thus adding to the chaos for people committed to getting their full licences.

spank_inferno

A 1L engine size cap for learner drivers? Someone in the dept of transport must think their new corsa is all things to all people!

But if the government are serious about road safety then all full lisence holders should re-sit their tests with every 10 year lisence renewal.

Of course learner drivers more likely to have accidents but how often have wee seen cars without "L" plates acting with total disregard for all other users of the road. (but then i guess its easy for a government to look tough by bashing younger people

laoisfan

Stark wrote:

[/SIZE][/FONT]Wow, I can't believe they even considered rewarding those people who either failed multiple times or repeatedly didn't bother showing up for their tests, thus adding to the chaos for people committed to getting their full licences.

yeah, they considered it alright but as far as i know they cannot do it even if they wanted to. i am fairly sure the EU told them that they could not do it. i am not sure what EU rule/law, but another amnesty would be illegal.

Solair

Well, I reckon they need to crack down on this. I know a few people who just can't be bothered to go take a test. It's putting everyone else's insurance premia up and putting other road users at serious risk.

If you can't pass a test by your 3rd provisional. I really think you ought to have to provide a very thorough explanation as to why you should be entitled to a 4th or subsequent licence.

E.g. certificate from an optician proving you have no major visual difficulties with a proper eye exam.

Proof that you are signed up to an approved school of motoring and that you will take the classes.

IF you go on to a 5th, 6th etc, you really ought to have to get some kind of assessment of your hand-eye coordination.
There's no absolute right to drive, and if you can't pass a test after 4+ provisionals there's a big question mark over whether you should be ever allowed on the road at all.

Accident rates are way too high here. It's about time we stopped pussyfooting about on this issue.

Either learn to driver, or get a bus pass!

Stark

Solair wrote:

It's putting everyone else's insurance premia up and putting other road users at serious risk.

Wouldn't it be only putting provisional licence holders' premiums up? I think they need to introduce more insurance policies that only insure you if you're accompanied. A few companies do alright, and I know a few people who were able to learn to drive with very low premiums this way. I had to pay an exorbitant amount just so I could spend an hour or two every week driving with the parents in preparation for my test while subsidising those people merrily spinning around on their tod.

MrPudding

Stark wrote:

1.0L engine limit, though? Ouch. And stupid. What happens if you want to learn to drive, but your parents are driving a 1.4L family car?

Well, other countries seem to manage why cant we?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver's_license

We even manage to restrict bikers. When you think about it it does not make sense to allow people to drive any size of car for learning or when they pass their test.

MrP

Solair

Well, the insurance industry could take a stance on it if they wanted to. i.e. allow you to be insured at a reasonable rate while you're actually learning to drive.

But, if you haven't passed a test with in a specified period of time, and it was not caused by a backlog, that your premium will go through the roof.

You can be sure that most insurance companies load everyone's premia to cover the cost of L-drivers.

It's unfair to penalise the sensible L-driver who actually learns to drive quickly and puts some effort into passing the test.

I know quite a few people who simply never bothered to do anything other than apply for a test as they just either won't put the time aside to learn to drive properly or couldn't be bothered generally.

Something serious has to be done, it's a complete disgrace.

jhegarty

People who don't bother doing the test actually put down everyone else's insurance...

situation a: I am on L plates pay €2000 a year , don't bother doing the test...


situation b: I passed my test and now pay €1000.... I am the same driver , just as safe (or not) but I am paying less into the pool the insurance companies use to make the profit that want....


Now you can say a non L-Plate driver is safer in general , but no one driver gets the any safer the day they pass the test....

Stark

MrPudding wrote:

Well, other countries seem to manage why cant we?

What countries and what's the engine size restriction? I'm sure people will be able to manage but forcing people to buy a second car just so their offspring can learn to drive is wasteful and unnecessary if they already own a standard family car. Other countries might do it, but that doesn't necessarily mean it makes sense.

MrPudding wrote:

We even manage to restrict bikers. When you think about it it does not make sense to allow people to drive any size of car for learning or when they pass their test.

Well I agree that you shouldn't be letting people out in 2.0L turbos and the like, but I can't see why a learner shouldn't be allowed learn in their parents' car if it's a modest 1.4L. 1.0L is a very low cut off, there's hardly anything wrong with a 1.2L or a 1.25L.

jhegarty wrote:

Now you can say a non L-Plate driver is safer in general , but no one driver gets the any safer the day they pass the test....

Not necessarily. In order to pass the test, you'll have to get a few pre-test lessons usually, and that's going to add extra polish to your driving that you wouldn't have had the month before going for your test. Of course, for most people the good habits they picked up will go out the window when they pass their test, so take that as you will.

Seth Brundle

jhegarty wrote:

Now you can say a non L-Plate driver is safer in general , but no one driver gets the any safer the day they pass the test....

True but at least someone who has passed a test has shown that they have a certain level of competency. Anyone without a full licence has not got this proof.

jhegarty

Stark wrote:

Well I agree that you shouldn't be letting people out in 2.0L turbos and the like, but I can't see why a learner shouldn't be allowed learn in their parents' car if it's a modest 1.4L. 1.0L is a very low cut off, there's hardly anything wrong with a 1.2L or a 1.25L.
l

Its a point considering you can't even get a Micra under a 1.2 now.....

MrPudding

jhegarty wrote:

Now you can say a non L-Plate driver is safer in general , but no one driver gets the any safer the day they pass the test....

People do this all the time, they take a driver the day before his test and the day after and ask how is he or she safer or a better driver. Of course they are not, they have just proven, debatable I know, their skills.

I am sure you will agree, however, there is a huge difference between a driver when they start learning to drive and the same driver when he has just passed his test, this is why the premiums change.

We have a single stage learning process. You are a provisional driver and then after a test you are not. There is no process to split provisional drivers into smaller groups therefore a driver on his first day of driving and a driver on the day of his test is effectivly the same, a provisional driver. Of course, in Ireland you have no claims to take into account which will make a difference.

So you statement is really a bit misleading. I am sure no one here thinks after passing your test you are suddenly a better driver.

MrP

jhegarty

MrPudding wrote:

People do this all the time, they take a driver the day before his test and the day after and ask how is he or she safer or a better driver. Of course they are not, they have just proven, debatable I know, their skills.

I am sure you will agree, however, there is a huge difference between a driver when they start learning to drive and the same driver when he has just passed his test, this is why the premiums change.

We have a single stage learning process. You are a provisional driver and then after a test you are not. There is no process to split provisional drivers into smaller groups therefore a driver on his first day of driving and a driver on the day of his test is effectivly the same, a provisional driver. Of course, in Ireland you have no claims to take into account which will make a difference.

So you statement is really a bit misleading. I am sure no one here thinks after passing your test you are suddenly a better driver.

MrP

My post was only about a persons contribution to the insurance companies, I don't disagree with anything you said .... just saying someone too lazy to take the test puts down our insurance bills, not puts them up as said before.....

MrPudding

Stark wrote:

What countries and what's the engine size restriction? I'm sure people will be able to manage but forcing people to buy a second car just so their offspring can learn to drive is wasteful and unnecessary if they already own a standard family car. Other countries might do it, but that doesn't necessarily mean it makes sense.

Victoria in Australia has a power to weight or capacity to weight restriction. It is pretty high tbh but is something. Personally I think power restriction would make more sense than engine restriction. This would also potentiall mean that a new car would not be required as the existing cars could possibly be restricted.

Then again, if my children want to learn how to ride a motorbike they will have to buy one and they won't be able to use mine. Does that make sense? Is that not wasteful and unnecessary?

Quite a few of the counties also impose curfews. I think the gov would do well to see how other countries are doing things and pick the best parts.

MrP

Solair

You could have a more comprehensive testing system.

You do a test which covers a whole range of driving and at the end of it you get a result, much like a leaving cert grade.

If you get say A or B grade - you get a full licence
If you get a C or D - you get a restricted licence e.g. perhaps not allowed on motorways on your own, required to have some further training.

If you get an E or F - back to learner permit and re-test required.

I don't think it's fair that it's a pass/fail thing. Some people are excellent drivers and put a lot of effort into passing others need perhaps remedial help.

Some people fail on a minor technicality e.g. they can't parallel park. That shouldn't necessarily mean they need to go through the whole process again. Give them a C, apply some restrictions to their licence and require more lessons and let them re-do that single aspect of the test.

IF you fail badly - no licence.
Also, if while on an L-licence you commit any traffic violations
Speeding, dangerous driving (ignoring signs etc) - disqualified for a period of time.

D'Peoples Voice

Solair wrote:

There's no absolute right to drive, and if you can't pass a test after 4+ provisionals there's a big question mark over whether you should be ever allowed on the road at all.

My thoughts exactly.
You never know but it might even force some learner drivers into being more dedicated to the cause! At the moment, some of these people can be very nonchalant about their education.
However, I do believe the journalist should have added balance to the story by stating how few accidents learner drivers are involved in relative to other groups! Lets not cause a panic!

Lemming

Once again, we see people going for the 'soft target' .. the learner driver. The situation outlined is most definitely fubar and in need of serious redress, but the way the circumstances are put, you'd swear that learner drivers are the great evil and every road death is their fault by the manner in which the article is written.

The 'risk' every driver is put at is lack of enforcement of existing road law. learner drivers by and large aren't the ones able to afford powerful cars due to loaded premiums in the first place ....

Undoubtedly, the situation regarding learners on 'nth' provisional licences should not be happening, and is only adding into the mix of extremely poor driving / general chaos on our roads.

A staggered approach seems like a sensible idea, but it needs enforced *now*. They did it with the driver theory test, why can't they do it now? ie. everyone applying from *this* date onwards is on the new system, not the old one, etc.

But I'd have to agree with the engine restrictions being silly. And a bit moot, since under any new system learners would most likely (in earlier stages of a modular system) not be permitted to drive unaccompanied whatsoever. And as I mentioned, loaded premiums keep learners away from powerful cars, with the only real exception I can see being "Daddy's car - but there's no way he'll let me drive it around by myself".

Claiming that we restrict bike sizes as a comparison doens't work for what i should imagine are fairly obvious reasons.

MrPudding

Lemming wrote:

Claiming that we restrict bike sizes as a comparison doens't work for what i should imagine are fairly obvious reasons.

Humour me.

MrP

Lemming

MrPudding wrote:

Humour me.

MrP

I'll keep this brief since I'm in work ...

Tell me MrP, ever sat on the back of a bike with a clear view of what's in front of you and instructing the driver?

More to the point, have you ever managed to get a clear view of what's in front whilst *NOT* having your head bounced about by wind sheer like it's a ragdoll?

Niall1234

Solair wrote:

There's no absolute right to drive, and if you can't pass a test after 4+ provisionals there's a big question mark over whether you should be ever allowed on the road at all.

I don't know woul that be workable or indeed fair. If a person will eventually pass their test after 10 goes, then they have passed their test and are deemed fit to drive on our roads, end of story. The big question point is wether they are a danger on our roads up to the point that they pass the test considering the amount of times they fail it.

On the driving test. I find the examination itself to be far too much based on technical stuff and not on the practical ability to drive. Surely the testers must know that hardly anyone drives with both hands on the steering wheel at 10 to 2. Or that people shuffle the steering wheel through their hands. Or are constantly looking everywhere.

Test should be based on the ability to drive the car, not the ability to drive the car without any technical infringements.

On drink driving. I don't understand the point of lowering the alcohol rate for learners to 0%. This would essentially say that its fine for some people to drive with alcohol in their system. Either have it the same for L and qualified drivers or lower everyone to 0% like in Czech Republic.

Floppybits

I took my driving test in England as I was living over there for a few years and wanted to drive. When I got a provisional licence in England it was one licence for 9 years and in that time I had to pass my test. I think thats a reasonable amount of time in which someone has to pass their test. Also I was unable to get insured on a car as a main driver with a provisional licence unlike over here where you can get insured as the main driver. Maybe pressure needs to be put onto insurance companies to stop insuring L drivers as the main driver?

Also enforcement needs to increased. I drove to and from Dublin to Limerick last week without seeing on police car or police bike. I cant remember when I last seen a police car or bike patrolling on the M50. Has anyone ever seen a garda car or bike parked in the garda parking spots along the M50? I think the only time I seen one was a few weeks ago and that was because there was some truckers protest.

I my humble opinion someone needs to take this whole driving test, enforcement and insurance by the scruff of the neck and start kicking some arses. Maybe a certain M Harney would be the right person her.:)

Chris_533976

And what bugs me too is the little things. You're doing a three point turn but can be failed on whether you indicate left or right HALFWAY THROUGH the turn when you're sticking across the road. No other driver can see it and its really stupid to fail an otherwise good driver on that little thing.

There is no nighttime driving, no skid-pan driving and no proper dual carriageway driving during the test. Its stupid.

Wishbone Ash

Chris_533976 wrote:

no proper dual carriageway driving during the test. Its stupid.

It depends on the test centre. Some take in dual carriageways on their routes.