Government have not thought the new car license laws through.

Hobbes

Dumping this in politics as it is seperate to the L-Drivers pleas/whines/etc.

Putting more thought into this I can see it probably isn't been looked at in all its detail.

So the figure is around 430,000 people that this will hit (17.6% of all drivers). However everyone is thinking about the driver, not other stuff.

For example, with a large number of these off the road for some time means that there will be a huge drop in the amount of petrol bought at stations. Granted I doubt the petrol stations will be looking at 17.6% drop in profits, but I am guessing it will still be a high chunk. As the petrol won't sell the price should increase (not decrease) to offset the missing customers.

For those without the ability to drive the car because they won't be able to get a passenger driver means the cars off the road. Means less tolls, less parking meters being paid and for some they can forgo paying road tax until such time they are in a position to drive the car again. All of these though should be a smaller percentage again.

You then have a strain on the current public transport infrastructure. Not to mention in some instances it would be more expensive, although working it out vs my car it appears Dublin Bus has matched what I pay in petrol. May not be the case for everyone.

Another thing it will hit is the price of second hand cars. With it being harder to get onto the road people will be less reluctant to buy a new car. Which means in the short term its going to be a buyers market, and sellers are going to be screwed. Would be interesting to know if the limiters they plan to put on cars will also have an effect on price.

But the main point for the short term is that a lot of people are going to be off the road. Great for those with a full license, but mess of the system meant that a lot of people who depend on a car. Be interesting to see how many people are going to have problems showing up for work Tuesday. Where I work for example if I was to commute it would add 4.5 hours onto my daily journey.

With this coming in on Monday also means that if you were in a waiting for a test, your wait probably got a little longer if you were planning on short circuiting the process.

They should really have a process in place to streamline the testing so that the 17% of drivers can get the bad drivers weened out as quickly as possible. But as far as I know they paid the testers 25K extra last year and the waiting hasn't improved all that much.

Alkers

Is that 430,000 on provisionals or 430,000 on their 2nd provisional? As it stands people on their first provisional are not allowed drive unaccompanied in any case so nothings new there. This only affects people on their 2nd provisional who are legally allowed to drive alone until the new rules come into place.
Also your figure of 430,000 - is that people holding licenses or people who actually drive? For example I had my first provisional for 18months before I ever started learning to drive, this was the same with most of my friends.

Hobbes

Figures from here.
http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20071003-28252.html

This law is going to be enforced now, so actually it does apply to those on first provisional. IT also screws those people up have a full license for less then 2 years. It will also mean that if your learning in your parents car then they have to have a limiter fixed to the car as well.

Figure is holding license. While not actually driving would be a percentage of that, I suspect it is a very small percentage.

There are probably other factors as well that can't offset by dublin bus. For example, it is a 15 minute walk to the supermarket where I live. So coming back with food would mean a taxi as no bus goes that route. There are probably others in similar situation when it comes to dropping kids to school, etc.

pyrogenx

I hope its ok to post this link here http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?t=27878

Here's part of what i posted there.

There is only one reason why this is such a significant issue, simply due to the amount of people still on provisional licenses because of long waiting lists. Even though it has already been the case for years, it still is an abrupt change to many peoples life’s. Look at this thread, most people are worried how they're going to support themselves and their families without been able to get work and back, nobody even mentioned driving for leasure. And i'm not talking about those living in the cities, as there would some means of public transport. Its really those that living in the rest of the country in rural areas where there's more or less no public transport.

Seriously, look at the bigger picture. We're talking about more than 10% of the entire population of Ireland that may not be able to get to work the way they have been for some time or even not been able to do their current jobs at all. If this going to be enforced properly the Irish economy WILL go down the drain TBH!

It would be fair enough, if they only implemented the "changes" to those that are applying for their first provisional license, at least that way the life style of those that have already been made dependent on their cars would not have to change.

silverharp

firstly the average mileage for this group will be way lower then average, and a fair % will have other options. look on the bright side, the commuting times for everyone else will improve. there will be less young country drivers wrapping themselves around trees. and insurance premiums should drop.

bonkey

The following thoughts have occurred to me on the subject so far...

1) While there are approx. 430,000 provisional drivers out there, the law-change really only effects about 125,000 of them. The rest aren't on a second provisional license and would be breaking the law today (Friday) by driving unaccompanied just as much as they would be next Monday. The fines etc. may change, but people on a non-second provisional who drive unaccompanied are already (knowingly) driving ilegally.

2) As I've often said regarding immigration, if you don't enforce the law then a change of the laws results only in a different set of laws not being enforced. I have to wonder whether there will be more - or less - outrage if turns out that this is the case - that the new laws will be as unenforced as the existing ones.

3) I also have to wonder what the reaction would have been if the Minister had simply said "as of Monday, we will enforce the existing law regarding provisional drivers. This will be done by checked any car displaying L-plates, regardless of the number of occupants." Would there by sympathy for the 300,000-odd provisional drivers not on a second provisional who cannot legally drive unaccompanied? Would there be outrage that Daddy would be stopped because he has non-removable plates on the merc for Little Johnny to learn in?

4) I have to smile at the outrage that the governemnt has done something too quickly. People complain that something has been let fester for years. People complain that the measures to combat something are either ineffective or too slow. It reminds me of the deregulation of taxis. Only after the government took sharp, swift action did interested parties discover that they were actually willing to compromise.

5) I am somewhat suspicious that this was announced on a Thursday. I half-expect some new revelation to be made today. That it was on the same day as the announced pay-rise is no coincidence. Whether the payrise is just or not, it would have been the focus on an otherwise slow day and there's no shortage of people who'd get up in arms about it.


Regarding Hobbes comments about the impact...to be honest, if you're making money off people breaking the law, its money you shouldn't be making. I have no sympathy for those financially impacted. Its a bit like people crying about how they couldn't afford to stay in business if forced to pay a minimum wage....my attitude was always "then you don't stay in business".

Fratton Fred

I think the OP is clutching at straws.

Ireland is falling inline with every other european country and I don't see their economies falling apart. If there is a gripe it should be that the waiting time for a test is stupidly long, not that sensible legislation has finally been brought in.

I drive on the M50 every day and there are dozens of L plates in display, I've seen Gards following cars on the motorway with a young person driving on L plates and the Gards have taken no action.

When the N7 changed to a motorway, rather than go the long way round several of my colleague who are "Learners" just took their L plates off, again, what is going to change?

I've been stopped and brethalised bu check points three time in the past year and ot once has my licence been asked for. what makes people think this will change?

jhegarty

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Ireland is falling inline with every other european country and I don't see their economies falling apart. If there is a gripe it should be that the waiting time for a test is stupidly long, not that sensible legislation has finally been brought in.

The problem is that goverment are only falling inline with the enforcing of rules , not with getting the driving test waiting list...

in every other country in Europe you have test date in 6 days , not 6 months..


they have a queue of 6 months for people to pay you €40 (or whatever the charge is these days).... unless driving testers cost more than that per hour why can't they hire a sh*t load of them....

bonkey

jhegarty wrote: »

in every other country in Europe you have test date in 6 days , not 6 months..

I live in one of those countries, and I can tell you that you're wrong. Its not 6 days here.

Its not 6 months either, but if you want to make a valid comparison, then make a valid comparison.

stovelid

I do feel some sympathy for those affected as it's been very badly planned, but as somebody said on another thread: a lot of people have built their lives around cars in the full knowledge that they are breaking an unenforced law. A significant proportion of them have probably also put off or canceled a test(s) as well.

As I said in another thread, I live near a learner who drives a very powerful car and is incapable of parking it properly. Excuse my schadenfreude at that one.

Anybody waiting for a test - especially if it's not their first - should have been trying as hard as they could to get retested; applying for cancellations, getting a letter from work or whatever.

Other countries enforce the rules without a breakdown of society, don't they?

Anyway, I can see this being lightly enforced (at least until the driving test lists go down) because of all the negative politcial impact.

leninbenjamin

fist of all, from a safety point of view i dont think this will make any impact. once people pass their test they don't give a damn about the driving, as a cyclist on the roads I've been run off the road numerous times by motorists in this country, and most of those would tend to be middle aged, or worse still professional drivers, like Taxi's, trucks, commercial vans. i can't see why the guards would enforce this rule over actual the actual rules of the road that i see going infringed by drivers of all ages every day that are far more likely to cause accidents... I see people cutting red lights, overtaking on corners all the time never going punished by guards (or worse still I've seen squad cars do it). In general lack of enforcement of the laws is the problem with motoring in this country, now who is driving in fairness.

In principle this is a good idea and i wholeheartedly agree with it, however it's simply the circumstances in which it's coming into force, namely the 8 month + waiting lists for tests. now i wouldn't really have much pity for an urban driver affected by this really, there are buses they can take, plenty of other motorists they could pool with etc. but a good point was made today that it really affects rural areas. what do you do if you're finished school, just starting a job 20 or 30 miles away but because of the waiting lists in this country you can't drive? are they simply supposed to sit on their arse til they can drive?

Hobbes you make some fairly valid points, but if it weren't for the waiting lists most of the amount affected would already have their license and the stuff you mention would not exists. it's just another stupid govt. attempt at trying to be seen to be doing something but in reality they've done nothing that will benefit anybody here except temporary alleviate some traffic, but they'll all be back on the road again in a few months.

Akrasia

Hobbes wrote: »

Dumping this in politics as it is seperate to the L-Drivers pleas/whines/etc.

Putting more thought into this I can see it probably isn't been looked at in all its detail.

So the figure is around 430,000 people that this will hit (17.6% of all drivers). However everyone is thinking about the driver, not other stuff.

For example, with a large number of these off the road for some time means that there will be a huge drop in the amount of petrol bought at stations. Granted I doubt the petrol stations will be looking at 17.6% drop in profits, but I am guessing it will still be a high chunk. As the petrol won't sell the price should increase (not decrease) to offset the missing customers.

Most petrol stations make little if any money from the actual petrol sales, it's just a way of getting people into the shop to buy soft drinks and chocolate (the same with cigarettes, useless profit margin)

Another thing it will hit is the price of second hand cars. With it being harder to get onto the road people will be less reluctant to buy a new car. Which means in the short term its going to be a buyers market, and sellers are going to be screwed. Would be interesting to know if the limiters they plan to put on cars will also have an effect on price.

There are few provisional drivers who drive new cars (unless they're insured to as named drivers on their parent or spouse's vehicle)
I don't think they will put limiters on cars, and if they did, they wouldn't work anyway (trucks and buses are supposed to have limiters but the vast majority of them are disabled)

But the main point for the short term is that a lot of people are going to be off the road. Great for those with a full license, but mess of the system meant that a lot of people who depend on a car.

I don't think so, unless there is a massive garda campaign to crack down on this law, most people will carry on as before out of necessity or because they don't respect a bad law.

Akrasia

silverharp wrote: »

firstly the average mileage for this group will be way lower then average, and a fair % will have other options. look on the bright side, the commuting times for everyone else will improve. there will be less young country drivers wrapping themselves around trees. and insurance premiums should drop.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that. If the drivers who are most dangerous on the roads are prepared to overload their cars (an offence) and speed (an offence) and drive without tax or insurance then what are the chances that they'll respect this technicality of a law?

Also, I remember figures that said young drivers (on average) actually subsidized the rest of the motor insurance pool and are the most profitable section of the market for those who are prepared to offer them insurance at all

Akrasia

bonkey wrote: »

The following thoughts have occurred to me on the subject so far...

1) While there are approx. 430,000 provisional drivers out there, the law-change really only effects about 125,000 of them. The rest aren't on a second provisional license and would be breaking the law today (Friday) by driving unaccompanied just as much as they would be next Monday. The fines etc. may change, but people on a non-second provisional who drive unaccompanied are already (knowingly) driving ilegally.

That depends on whether or not the new law is going to be enforced. It was already an offence to drive unaccompanied, but it was tolerated and never prosecuted. So if there is going to be enforcement, then it will have a real effect on all provisional drivers. The current fine is 60 quid, the new fine is at least a thousand quid. big difference, and a final change is that you need to be accompanied by a driver with a full licence for at least 2 years, this totally disenfranchises young couples, students and young people living away from home.

3) I also have to wonder what the reaction would have been if the Minister had simply said "as of Monday, we will enforce the existing law regarding provisional drivers. This will be done by checked any car displaying L-plates, regardless of the number of occupants." Would there by sympathy for the 300,000-odd provisional drivers not on a second provisional who cannot legally drive unaccompanied? Would there be outrage that Daddy would be stopped because he has non-removable plates on the merc for Little Johnny to learn in?

Yes, there would be similar outrage, because the effects would be similar. People would be prevented from getting to work without first offering them a fair chance to make alternative arrangements, or sit a driving test within a reasonable timeframe.

4) I have to smile at the outrage that the governemnt has done something too quickly. People complain that something has been let fester for years. People complain that the measures to combat something are either ineffective or too slow. It reminds me of the deregulation of taxis. Only after the government took sharp, swift action did interested parties discover that they were actually willing to compromise.

You need to lay the groundwork before you make swift decisive action. Otherwise you have chaos. In russia under Yeltsin everything was privatised almost overnight. That was swift and decisive, it was also a Disaster for the people of Russia. In Ireland, the government could easily make a swift and decisive decision to impose a punitive toll on driving in dublin city center, but without laying the groundwork by providing adequate public transport, there would be chaos.

Regarding Hobbes comments about the impact...to be honest, if you're making money off people breaking the law, its money you shouldn't be making. I have no sympathy for those financially impacted. Its a bit like people crying about how they couldn't afford to stay in business if forced to pay a minimum wage....my attitude was always "then you don't stay in business".

These are ordinary people who, if they obey the law, could lose their jobs, whose children won't be able to get to school, who won't be able to do the weekly shopping. How can you seriously say that you have no sympathy for them?

djpbarry

Hobbes wrote: »

it is a 15 minute walk to the supermarket where I live. So coming back with food would mean a taxi as no bus goes that route. There are probably others in similar situation when it comes to dropping kids to school, etc.

You need a taxi for a 15-minute walk :eek:? Are you serious?

leninbenjamin wrote: »

fist of all, from a safety point of view i dont think this will make any impact. once people pass their test they don't give a damn about the driving, as a cyclist on the roads I've been run off the road numerous times by motorists in this country, and most of those would tend to be middle aged, or worse still professional drivers, like Taxi's, trucks, commercial vans.

This is very true. I'm a cyclist myself and I have had numerous near misses with taxis and vans.

Akrasia wrote: »

These are ordinary people who, if they obey the law, could lose their jobs, whose children won't be able to get to school, who won't be able to do the weekly shopping. How can you seriously say that you have no sympathy for them?

Because they are breaking the law. If they cannot get by without breaking the law, then they need to make major changes to their lifestyle.

bonkey

Akrasia wrote: »

Yes, there would be similar outrage, because the effects would be similar. People would be prevented from getting to work without first offering them a fair chance to make alternative arrangements, or sit a driving test within a reasonable timeframe.

So basically, you're saying that because people have decided to take advantage of law being unenforced, its not their problem to solve if enforcement is introduced?

I'm sorry...but thats like saying the government had a responsibility to find a way for drunk drivers to get home without driving drunk once they started enforcing the drink-driving laws.

If you are breaking the law, you deserve no sympathy if you can no longer continue to do so. If you've built your life around breaking the law, thats really tough, but its no-one's problem but your own.

You need to lay the groundwork before you make swift decisive action.

So the first you heard of the government working on reforming the process was the announcement yesterday?

Amazingly, despite living abroad, I've been aware of it for nigh-on a year now.

I accept that the specifics may not have been known in advance...but seriously...figuring out that the only country in the world to allow people without a full licence to drive unaccompanied might just do something about that doesn't take a rocket scientist. People took the complacent "arrah shur, plenty of time, and they won't ever do anything fast anyway" line, and they've gotten stung.

These are ordinary people who, if they obey the law, could lose their jobs, whose children won't be able to get to school, who won't be able to do the weekly shopping. How can you seriously say that you have no sympathy for them?

Because to get into those positions, they had to make the decision - consciously or unconsciously - to be dependant on breaking the law and reliant on being able to continue breaking the law.

Passing a driving test isn't hard - and I say that as someone who passed one recently. If you can't do it in a reasonable amount of time, you shouldn't be driving. If you built your life around the assumption you could drive, without being qualified, then getting qualified should have been and should be your top priority.

I've already said that people who are on the waiting list, who are on a second provisional, and who haven't already failed a test....they're the ones deserving of sympathy. They've done everything right, and they're getting screwed. Everyone else has decided one way or another to take advantage of the system, and their basic gripe is that they won't/mightn't be able to do that any more.

Ronan|Raven

A friend of mine is waiting over ONE year for a test in Roscommon. They are dependent on their car for getting to work in Sligo, when talking to them thye are just going to take the L plates off the car and hope to get away with it. Penalising people who are waiting outrageous times for a test is an absolute joke imo.

leninbenjamin

Bonkey i agree with a lot of what you're saying, but there are some key areas here you're not picking up on. While most affected by this will be your average 3rd level students who's mammy or daddy bought them a nice golf or something, there are some people broke the law simply because with the state of affairs in this country as they are today they had no other choice. Public transport in this country is a joke. Secondly, it's relatively easy to pass the drivers test but you can't do it if you cant get a test date. Are some people simply to put their lives on hold while they wait for the test? It's a problem the govt. has created and a problem the government has done little to alleviate prior to bringing this in.

Hobbes

leninbenjamin wrote: »

fist of all, from a safety point of view i dont think this will make any impact. once people pass their test they don't give a damn about the driving

Anyone with a full license <2 years old will have to wear R plates, not allowed on motorway and will only have 6 points to play with on their license. Oh yea and have to get a limiter fitted to the car.

Your right, the only real issue is how it is being dumped on peoples laps so quickly. My guess is that Gaybo is looking at the disaster of people killed this year (we are only something like 18 less difference to last year) and wondered what would keep him employed.

What they should of done is set the provisionals to change on expire date, and R drivers once new provisionals pass. It won't clean up the mess fast but would give people time to get their act together.

Hobbes

djpbarry wrote: »

You need a taxi for a 15-minute walk :eek:? Are you serious?

Well sadly the shopping trolleys are designed only to work within the shops grounds and I don't know about you but I have problems trying to carry a weeks food for 3 people and 1 child for 15 minutes.

Everyone keeps going on about provisionals. This is going to impact people who have a full driving license as well.

bonkey

leninbenjamin wrote: »

there are some people broke the law simply because with the state of affairs in this country as they are today they had no other choice. Public transport in this country is a joke.

I don't doubt that....except the bit that they had no other choice. They had no other appealing choice, perhaps, or no other choice that htey were willing to make, but they had a choice.

Answer me this...where do you draw the line on laws that are ok to break as long as you can say "I had no choice", bearing in mind that "no choice" doesn't really mean "no choice" but rather "no other convenient or appealing choice". If driving on a first provisional is ok, what about with no license? No insurance? At reckless speeds?

Secondly, it's relatively easy to pass the drivers test but you can't do it if you cant get a test date.

Let me repeat myself again. If you have applied for a test, are currently legally allowed to drive on your own, then you have my sympathy.

If you're currently illegally driving alone, then you deserve to be caught and stopped...I don't care what your reason for it is.

If you're currently legally driving alone, and are on a waiting list, then you have my sympathy....although if you've already failed a test, =in my eyes you've proven that you shouldn't be let drive alone so its hard to see what the complaint is.

It's a problem the govt. has created

The government has some responsibility, but not all. They are not responsible for people not turning up to tests without cancelling, thus wasting the exam-slot. They are not responsible for people repeatedly failing. They are not responsible for people driving alone after one or two lessons, on their first provisional. The list goes on.

Well..to be fair...they're responsible for not having these things enforced. If thats a responsibility they're now going to shoulder, by ensuring the law is enforced, then I applaud that aspect of what they're doing.

bonkey

Hobbes wrote: »

Anyone with a full license <2 years old will have to wear R plates, not allowed on motorway and will only have 6 points to play with on their license. Oh yea and have to get a limiter fitted to the car.

None of that is finalised, from what I've been reading. They may have to do these things....in an uncertain timeframe, but probably as of sometime in 2008.

bonkey

Just to clarify on one thing...

I agree that the government have done this wrong.

I do not agree, however, that 450,000 people will be unduly effected, nor that many of the "side issues" are issues at all.

pyrogenx

I'm going to take alternative action with this legisation!

I'm going to have to go to another country to do my full drivers license. For example in Germany you get a choice to do the test in 5 working days INCLUDING all the professional training required. i.e. about 2 dozent practical and theoretical lessons. Its expensive but I WILL HAVE NO CHOICE especially with the "R-license" coming in here.

What a pain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But at least i won't have to worry about:

1. LONG WAITING TIMES
2. Failing the test because of some tiny unlucky mistake
3. And especially the CRAPPY NEW "R-LICENSE" if you happen to pass your test.

sovtek

djpbarry wrote: »

Because they are breaking the law. If they cannot get by without breaking the law, then they need to make major changes to their lifestyle.

That assertion would assume that all provisions are made that people can realistically obey the law. Things need to be changed to accommadate people to enable them to follow the law. This isn't the core of the problem IMHO anyway. Until you provide a proper transport system and a proper road infrastructure then you can't set punitive measures on the people in general and expect results.

gandalf

I wonder how many of the Provisional License holders who voted the incompetents in are now regretting their choice.

As alot of people have said overhaul of the system is long overdue. But without bringing the waiting list for a test down to a couple of weeks, ensuring that proper public transport options are in place there is no point in forcing people either off the roads or to break the law. If these so called public servants who are our ministers and taoiseach had an ouch of civic responsibility they would "donate" their undeserved raise to eradicating the waiting list for tests and then implement these rules.

Dempsey was on the radio over lunch saying the Gardai will be following a softly softly approach warning people, then around an hour later the Gardai Commissioner is quoted as saying the Gardai will be enforcing the law from Tuesday. The so-called government can't even manage to get their message on song let alone any of the organisation or assets behind it.

Can't wait for Cowans tighten our belts speech for the next budget in December after the wasters have given themselves a kings ransom of a raise.

RedPlanet

sovtek wrote: »

Things need to be changed to accommadate people to enable them to follow the law. This isn't the core of the problem IMHO anyway. Until you provide a proper transport system and a proper road infrastructure then you can't set punitive measures on the people in general and expect results.

Is driving a privilege or a natural right?
I think it's a privilege.
I don't think we can have a quality transport system when all our roads are filled with cars. Building more roads and tailoring our laws to accomodate/encourage more car usage is not the answer either.

gandalf

RedPlanet wrote: »

Is driving a privilege or a natural right?
I think it's a privilege.

You're right it is a privilege and if a warning was issued 6 months ago stating that from October the 30th the new rules would be implemented I would have no sympathy for those caught up in it. As usual in this country its a kneejerk response that has not been thought through or planned properly.

I don't think we can have a quality transport system when all our roads are filled with cars. Building more roads and tailoring our laws to accommodate/encourage more car usage is not the answer either.

From my limited travels on holidays I know our transport system is complete and utter rubbish. The problem is that developers were allowed to build estates upon estates of shoe boxes further and further away from the main urban areas without any infrastructure being put in place before hand. The governments allowed this and for a majority of those years Fianna Fail were in charge. Then again who were the majority of people in the tent at the Galway races with them.

Nuttzz

this comes out the day that the government ministers get massive payrises....the spin, its wonderful, 2 weeks time it will be business as usual for the country's L drivers

moe_sizlak

while on the surface it would appear to be a very draconian measure , being ireland it will never be fully enforced , that said , the guards do love easy targets , expect to see quite a few freshmen straight outa templemore getting busy by making criminals of young provisional licence holders who untill now just wanted to go to work and make an honest living

cyclopath2001

Nuttzz wrote: »

this comes out the day that ....

This comes out at a time of year when daylight hours get shorter and accident risks increase.

The 'provisionals' are in denial.

metrovelvet

Its a chance for greater revenue through fines.

However, since the government will lose a lot of tax revenue [about 50% of pump prices are taxes] through less demand for petrol one cant be surprised if a hike in motor tax or petrol comes about to compensate.

Why didn't they just hire more driving examiners?

pyrogenx

metrovelvet wrote: »

Its a chance for greater revenue through fines.

However, since the government will lose a lot of tax revenue [about 50% of pump prices are taxes] through less demand for petrol one cant be surprised if a hike in motor tax or petrol comes about to compensate.

Scary fact that could become true...

metrovelvet wrote: »

Why didn't they just hire more driving examiners?

Exactly, i mean with the amount of constant money flow they should definatly be able to do that.

purple'n'gold

When I hear Benchmarking Bertie and that Idiot Noel Dempsey I think fondly of the late great Stan Gerber Davis. (He used to write for the Sunday Independent) he once described Ireland as “the last great bastion of bullsh1t and codswallop west of the Urals” how true!

Nuttzz

pyrogenx wrote: »

Exactly, i mean with the amount of constant money flow they should definatly be able to do that.

they couldnt hire more testers as their union objected...

wow sierra

If everyone who is dependant on Driving on a provisional license decided to obey the law on Tuesday it would be like a National Strike. It would be wonderful to see the chaos which would insue if all those people didn't turn up for work.

There are waiting times of more than 6 months in most test centres. I believe the failure rate is approximately 50%.

There is NO EVIDENCE that an 18year old with a full license is less likely to drink and drive/speed/play chicken/road race etc etc etc than one with a provisional. There is no evidence that road accidents are caused by learner drivers - they are more likely to be caused by overconfident drivers.

There is NO PUBLIC TRANSPORT in most of Rural Ireland. I don't mean poor, I don't mean inadequate, I mean NONE. Most people are driving distances of more than 10 miles to work, many are driving 20 or 30 miles. Would ye propose that they walk/cycle/use a horse and cart?????

A huge percentage of the people driving on provisional licenses are in their 30s 40s etc - not 18 year olds.

Someone posted that driving is a privilege not a right - give us a break. Driving is taking resposibility for your own transport instead of depending on someone else for it. In many parts of Ireland it is a necessity - unless you want to be housebound and unemployed.

RedPlanet

wow sierra wrote: »

If everyone who is dependant on Driving on a provisional license decided to obey the law on Tuesday it would be like a National Strike. It would be wonderful to see the chaos which would insue if all those people didn't turn up for work.

I doubt you'll get all 420,000 of ye to follow suit however.
Particularly since one of the arguments made is that those people affected have mortages to pay.

wow sierra wrote: »

There are waiting times of more than 6 months in most test centres. I believe the failure rate is approximately 50%.

I agree there should be more testing centres, however i hope you're not making the argument that the standards should be reduced.

wow sierra wrote: »

There is NO EVIDENCE that an 18year old with a full license is less likely to drink and drive/speed/play chicken/road race etc etc etc than one with a provisional. There is no evidence that road accidents are caused by learner drivers -

I'm not sure of the numbers, however it does appear that a disproportionate number of fatalities are young males. I don't think the media inform the public if the driver was on a provisional or full. So certainly information in this respect is lacking.

wow sierra wrote: »

There is NO PUBLIC TRANSPORT in most of Rural Ireland. I don't mean poor, I don't mean inadequate, I mean NONE. Most people are driving distances of more than 10 miles to work, many are driving 20 or 30 miles. Would ye propose that they walk/cycle/use a horse and cart?????

10 miles is certainly cycleable, particularly by young fit males.
But it's not practical, nor safe on our roads.

wow sierra wrote: »

A huge percentage of the people driving on provisional licenses are in their 30s 40s etc - not 18 year olds.

what percent?

wow sierra wrote: »

Someone posted that driving is a privilege not a right - give us a break. Driving is taking resposibility for your own transport instead of depending on someone else for it. In many parts of Ireland it is a necessity - unless you want to be housebound and unemployed.

I posted it, and i stand by it. I don't for one minute believe that by electing to drive a car, you're doing society a favour.
I think the reason Public Transport is lacking is down to bad planning, but also i think, a pervasive ideology of "Let the Market Decide". That's why we have silly housing estates built onto agricultural land. Instead of being progressive and opting towards sustainable modes of living and transport, people want their little cottage on a green acre, and their big feck-off SUV parked in the drive.
On boards.ie you'll occasionaly hear of a poster living a few miles from Dublin city centre complaining about the traffic as he/she drives into work.
Public transport is certainly available to them, they just prefer to sit in their own comfy metal box on wheels, taking up loads of road space.
I'd say Public Transport is not going to be particularly viable in "Rural Ireland" due to distances between houses and the low density of population.
But why are they living out there, instead of finding a place nearer where they work? Surely a better model is required unless we prefer to cede most of our public space for the nearly excluvisue use of motor cars. (They'll need more roads to off-set the bottle necks, and then they'll need to be parked somewhere, i suppose the footpath is handy...)
Anyway, trains are expensive and the low density populations of "Rural Ireland" won't fill the train so it's always a net loss.
Buses and Bus Lanes are probably a better solution, however for Buses to effective and attractive, they can't be stuck behind queues of private motor cars.
Anyway, i'm just rambling.
In order to get public transport to work, we need to get cars out of the way.
So anything that furthers that goal sounds good to me.
I think those provisional holders that have built their livlihoods around their belief that the laws will never be enforced, are making a poor decision.

zexstream

I truly hope the Gardai enforce this law, and hopefully with the Christmas campaign coming up a lot of drivers will be stopped and asked for their licence.

It is a crazy situation and one that is a laughing stock to anyone out side of ireland.

Are some people really saying that should you not be good enough to drive on Irish roads, Fail a simple driving test designed to see how safe and confident you can be on the road you should be allowed to carry on?

And If you havent even been for a test, You should be granted permission to drive? Thats like saying to a medical student I know you havent passed your exams yet but hey what the heck carry on with the open heart surgery!


If people in this country are unhappy with the law then simply take and pass your test. If you cant pass your test then you shouldnt be on the roads.

I took and passed my test in the UK. I had 15 lessons and waited for 3 months for the test. Whilst I waited for it I carried on taking lessons. For work I caught the Bus and arranged lifts from friends and family. I lived in a rural area at the time. Why should anyone else be different? Thats Life.

Also the other empact of this new law is insurances. I do hope that anyone chancing their arm at breaking the law on Tuesday onwards realise that should they be envolved in a accident they will no longer be insured. No insurance company are going to pay out for a driver who broke the law, thus not only are you chancing your lives and others , receiving fines and points you are also liable to a civil prosecution for uninsured damages!

I hope the next steps the government take are to stop people who are living in Ireland driving on non Irish Licences. I still have my UK Licence which in theory enables me to drive at any speed and receive no points for breaking any rules of the road.

The only reason I havent changed my licence is because of the change in my allowance of what I can drive. Of course If the law said I must change I would and this is sometihng that must be brought into force for people like me and other non Irish Driving Licence holders.

oscarBravo

zexstream wrote: »

Also the other empact of this new law is insurances. I do hope that anyone chancing their arm at breaking the law on Tuesday onwards realise that should they be envolved in a accident they will no longer be insured. No insurance company are going to pay out for a driver who broke the law, thus not only are you chancing your lives and others , receiving fines and points you are also liable to a civil prosecution for uninsured damages!

This simply isn't true. Insurance is a contractual matter between the insurance company and the driver, and once you're insured, the insurance company has to pay in the event of a claim.

That said, I believe they would have a case for suing the unlicenced driver to recover the cost of the claim.

cyclopath2001

RedPlanet wrote: »

10 miles is certainly cycleable, particularly by young fit males.
But it's not practical, nor safe on our roads. .

It will be once we get rid of the unqualified drivers.

zexstream

oscarBravo wrote: »

This simply isn't true. Insurance is a contractual matter between the insurance company and the driver, and once you're insured, the insurance company has to pay in the event of a claim.

That said, I believe they would have a case for suing the unlicenced driver to recover the cost of the claim.

The reason I mentioned it is because I was basing this under UK law, maybe I am wrong but I would have considered Irish Law similar.

In UK law Insurance companies will wiggle out of any insurance claim if A) Your Vehicle is unfit to be on the road regardless of MOT/NCT. In other words you could have one bald tyre which means you are no longer insured.

Also Drivers at all times must comply with the law and Highway code. So if you are breaking the law I.E you are driving illegally on a provisional you are breaking the T&C`s of your Insurace policy so you are no longer insured.

I would have thought Irish Insurance policies the same and would point towards a driver having a accident whilst drunk. Surely No insurance company would pay up as the driver shouldnt have been driving.

I could be wrong so I wont say for sure!

IRLConor

RedPlanet wrote: »

10 miles is certainly cycleable, particularly by young fit males.
But it's not practical, nor safe on our roads.

Nor is it pleasant on a rainy day. Nor is it pleasant if it's a warm day and you've no shower facilities in work.

Even if the roads were safe enough for me to happily cycle the 6km to work there are precious few days during the year when I'd be happy to do so.

RedPlanet wrote: »

In order to get public transport to work, we need to get cars out of the way.

That's the wrong attitude to have. In order to get public transport to work we need to make the public transport a better option than taking your car. Then the cars will get out of the way.

I'm lucky that I can use the LUAS (green line) to get to work but I'm painfully aware that it's one of the few bits of public transport that works here.

I used to use Dublin Bus to school and college and it really sucked. The effect traffic had on the bus was not the worst of it by a long shot. The bus would take 20-45 mins depending on traffic whereas the times I got a lift from someone in a car it would take 15-30 mins. Add in the waiting time for the bus and it was almost twice as slow as a car even in the same traffic.

The real problems I found with Dublin Bus were:

• The route they took was idiotic (I just followed it on GMap Pedometer and it was 9km of slow, narrow roads (I mean Aughrim St FFS!) where the bus had to crawl where a more direct route would be about 7.5km of better roads).
• The buses were filthy and terribly maintained.
• Your choices of atmosphere on wet days were hot'n'steamy, cold'n'windy or if you were really "lucky" smoky'n'hashy.
• The buses came every 20 mins outside of a really narrow "rush hour" and there weren't enough buses during the rush hour either. This meant that if you were lucky you'd get to stand and if you were unlucky you'd get to see full buses just drive past your stop.

The four points above could be addressed without taking other road users into account.

RedPlanet wrote: »

Public transport is certainly available to them, they just prefer to sit in their own comfy metal box on wheels, taking up loads of road space.

They're paying a premium and yet they still do it. Why? Because the alternative just isn't worth it.

If I had a choice between 60 minutes sitting in traffic in a bus or 60 minutes sitting in traffic in a car I'd pick the car every day of the week.

RedPlanet

IRLConor wrote: »

That's the wrong attitude to have. In order to get public transport to work we need to make the public transport a better option than taking your car. Then the cars will get out of the way.

Just how do you propose to do that while our roads are stuffed with cars?

IRLConor wrote: »

I used to use Dublin Bus to school and college and it really sucked. The effect traffic had on the bus was not the worst of it by a long shot. The bus would take 20-45 mins depending on traffic whereas the times I got a lift from someone in a car it would take 15-30 mins.

Your contradicting yourself here. You claim that the worst part of riding the bus was NOT because of the traffic, but in the very next sentence you cite traffic as a complaint.

IRLConor wrote: »

They're paying a premium and yet they still do it. Why? Because the alternative just isn't worth it.

I think it's because they are lazy and too accustomed to the comfort their car provides.

IRLConor wrote: »

If I had a choice between 60 minutes sitting in traffic in a bus or 60 minutes sitting in traffic in a car I'd pick the car every day of the week.

Because your car is more comfortable than the bus.
But what about the net effect that decision makes upon the rest of society?
Forget about them, just look out for number 1 huh?

IRLConor

RedPlanet wrote: »

You're contradicting yourself here. You claim that the worst part of riding the bus was NOT because of the traffic, but in the very next sentence you cite traffic as a complaint.

No, I was demonstrating that the bus was always slower than the car DESPITE both dealing with the SAME traffic. Hence, traffic is not the worst bit. It's a constant which can be removed from the equation.

RedPlanet wrote: »

I think it's because they are lazy and too accustomed to the comfort their car provides.

They're not necessarily lazier (unless you're suggesting human-powered transport as a replacement for the cars) but they are "accustomed to the comfort their car provides". Of course they are!

What a ridiculous notion that people should make their lives harder when they have an option not to! If you had to travel to Boston, would you take a plane or a ferry?

RedPlanet wrote: »

Because your car is more comfortable than the bus.
But what about the net effect that decision makes upon the rest of society?
Forget about them, just look out for number 1 huh?

Well, personally I don't have a car, so that argument doesn't necessarily apply to me. But yes, that's exactly how people think. People (not just in Ireland) are inherently quite selfish. The trick is exploiting that selfishness to benefit everybody. It's possible to make public transport much better than driving (see New York for a fine example), and if/when that happens people will move to using it.

To re-use what I said above, if the bus on my route to school/college had taken the same amount of time (door-to-door) as a car and had been clean and well maintained and pleasant to sit in I'd never want to use a car.

lostexpectation

IRLConor wrote: »

No, I was demonstrating that the bus was always slower than the car DESPITE both dealing with the SAME traffic. Hence, traffic is not the worst bit. It's a constant which can be removed from the equation.

eh hello the bus much larger vehilce carrying 80 people or so of course it going slower, your not very public minded are you?

Boggle

redplanet wrote:

I doubt you'll get all 420,000 of ye to follow suit however.

IN an ideal world, all those who are not necessarily licenced should be banished from the roads.
But in this one....

Particularly since one of the arguments made is that those people affected have mortgages to pay.

where people need to drive to work and have become accustomed to an imperfect system, it really is not and will not be an option just to ban all of them off the road.

however i hope you're not making the argument that the standards should be reduced.

In order to get a reduction you would have to go into negative figures!

I remember when I sat my first driving test, and I was one of those people who just never bothered applying for my test until I absolutely had, the tester was an a** who had me failed before I even entered the room. Despite having driven thousands of miles per year for several years without so much as a caution or a parking ticket AND having driven the roads perfectly on the day I was failed (I know people can accuse me of being biased but I know plenty of REALLY good drivers who repeatedly failed tests and plenty of REALLY DANGEROUS drivers who passed it).

In my opinion, the reason (and a cause of our problem): The test is too simple and too short. A 20 minute spin whereby you spend 15 of it stuck in traffic, never drive on an open road and never have to demonstrate any actually relevant skills (particularly relevant when you consider most accidents occur at night and at speed - neither of which is even considered in a driving test) makes it impossible to tell a good and safe driver from a bad one.
The tester is forced to nit-pick in order to find sufficient grounds to fail anyone - add this to the incessant power trip some of these guys are on and you have a bad combination.

I don't think the media inform the public if the driver was on a provisional or full. So certainly information in this respect is lacking.

I seem to recall that they did not keep statistics of what percentage of drivers are responsible for crashes (fatal or not).

I think it's because they are lazy and too accustomed to the comfort their car provides.

Too lazy? I remember taking the bus to work in Dublin - took us at least an hour and a half extra to get to and fro work using buses. They often didn't arrive (on time or at all), were often full and never clean. The amount of times I was VERY late was disgraceful and thank god I had a understanding employer - I don't imagine every boss is so forgiving!

IRLConor

lostexpectation wrote: »

eh hello the bus much larger vehicle carrying 80 people or so of course it's going slower, you're not very public minded are you?

I don't have a car and I use public transport for my commute. How much more publicly minded do you want me to be?

The LUAS carries far more people than a bus and it doesn't suck. In most cases along the green line you'd be hard put to outpace it in a car too.

I wasn't arguing that "all public transport sucks", I was arguing that Dublin Bus sucks way more than it should and that there are several things which they could do to fix it that don't require anything other than them getting off their arses and doing it (better route planning doesn't cost much, for example).

Hobbes

zexstream wrote: »

Also Drivers at all times must comply with the law and Highway code. So if you are breaking the law I.E you are driving illegally on a provisional you are breaking the T&C`s of your Insurance policy so you are no longer insured.

One of the girls in work checked on this. If you have third party insurance then the insurance company will pay for any damages you cause. Damage to your car they said they would as well. What happens though is your premium goes so far up that you can't afford to drive.

lostexpectation

IRLConor wrote: »

I don't have a car and I use public transport for my commute. How much more publicly minded do you want me to be?

The LUAS carries far more people than a bus and it doesn't suck. In most cases along the green line you'd be hard put to outpace it in a car too.

I wasn't arguing that "all public transport sucks", I was arguing that Dublin Bus sucks way more than it should and that there are several things which they could do to fix it that don't require anything other than them getting off their arses and doing it (better route planning doesn't cost much, for example).

you can't get your head around why it would take longer in a bus then a car? you can't understand the difference between a tram and a bus?

RedPlanet

I'm curious to hear a response to this one:

IRLConor:
That's the wrong attitude to have. In order to get public transport to work we need to make the public transport a better option than taking your car. Then the cars will get out of the way.
My reply: Just how do you propose to do that while our roads are stuffed with cars?

IRLConor

RedPlanet wrote: »

Just how do you propose to do that while our roads are stuffed with cars?

The roads are stuffed with cars driven by people who would probably use public transport if it was good enough. It currently isn't good enough to tempt those people out of their cars.

My argument was that if you make it good enough, people will use it and that you don't need the roads to be empty to make our public transport much better than it currently is.