Who's responsible for the current Driving Licence situation?

silverharp · 27-10-2006 12:49PM #1

Given that our driving licence system must in some way contribute to death on the roads, who has been negligent.

-Can I blame FF/PD's for a lack of ideas or bottle given that they have had several years to deal with this?

-The state is effectively ungovnerable in certain areas and don't be expecting politicians of any party to implement common sense ideas that a bunch of 5th year students could come up with?

- Deep down we are still a bunch of Paddys and we havn't quite got off our knuckles yet?

bonkey · 27-10-2006 01:01PM

silverharp wrote:

Given that our driving licence system must in some way contribute to death on the roads, who has been negligent.

I think it would be easier to identify who hasn't been negligent.

Well, maybe not easier....it could be quite hard to find any relevant group / body / individual who has not been negligent. But your end list should be a hell of a lot smaller.

RedPlanet · 27-10-2006 01:09PM

I can accept that the "driving licence system" contributes to deaths on our roads however i'm not sure it trumps other factors such as:
- lack of traffic law enforcement
- lack of garda presence
- the condition of roads

It may be difficult to blame FF/PD's for the driving license system because:
- isn't it something they inherited from previous governments?
- it hasn't really been an issue to make political hay from.
- if every government offered to overhaul the driving licence system, doubtless they would be critcized for confusing people.

Whereas potholes for example, has become a political issue in the past.

The only time i recall hearing about the driving licence system in politics is regarding: waiting lists for driving tests.
Basically how the government is/was doing nothing while loads of people need to get on the road.

Akrasia · 27-10-2006 01:22PM

the long waiting lists for driving licences could be fixed overnight by simply hiring more driving testers. It wouldn't even cost anything, they don't need any equipment other than a clipboard and a desk and the driving tests are paid for by the applicants which should cover the extra wage costs.

Once the waiting lists are under control, we could move towards improving the training and testing system.

Mary Hannafin has stated that she will never even consider putting driving training on the school curriculum which is extremely short sighted.

The majority of young drivers who are killed on the road come from poor socio economic background, and are far less lilely to take up expensive professional drining training at a cost of about 35 euros an hour (and that's only for minimum training required to pass the test, and doesn't cover driving at any kind of speed or advanced car control.)
If there was free comprehensive training provided to all students at secondary school, there would be a definite impact on the number of deaths on our roads.
(but this won't happen because of the privatisation ideology of the FF PD government)

RampagingBadger · 27-10-2006 01:28PM

Free driving training for everyone??? Are you mad?? Who the hell is going to pay for that. No other country does that (feel free to correct me on that). To my mind the correct course of action is to MANDATE driving lessons with a QUALIFIED instructor for everyone before they're allowed on the road alone. Also some other measures ala Canada might be worthwhile (i.e. L plates for 2 years after getting the licence, nobody with L plates allowed drive between the hours of 22:00 and 06:00, a repeat driving test to stifle bad habits after having qualified for 3 years). Yes this would mean you needed to have money before you can drive, but you already need to be able to purchase a car, tax, insurance and petrol.

RedPlanet · 27-10-2006 02:12PM

If someone has passed the drivers test, then presumedly they are trained enough to commandeer their vehicles on our roads.
I doubt the deaths are a result of inadequate training.

I would be more open to:
Black Boxes inside of all cars (with GPS).
They could be programmed to:
- record speed, distance and braking.
- communicate to other Black Boxes via wireless within a certain range, this gets recorded.

This is so we can more accurately reconstruct accidents and monitor driver behavior.
Maybe after getting your license you have to submit your Black Box to scrutiny: average speed, braking etc are computed and either you get to continue operating your vehicle on our roads or not.
Maybe a year later you have to resubmit your BB again, then after 2 years, etc. Depending upon the prevailing political wind of course.

axer · 27-10-2006 02:43PM

RedPlanet wrote:

If someone has passed the drivers test, then presumedly they are trained enough to commandeer their vehicles on our roads.
I doubt the deaths are a result of inadequate training.

Not true. Our system of testing is rubbish. We are not required to have had any training in driving at night time or in bad conditions etc. in fact, from what Im aware - you are not required to have ANY driving training at all before you sit you test.

RedPlanet wrote:

I would be more open to:
Black Boxes inside of all cars (with GPS).
They could be programmed to:
- record speed, distance and braking.
- communicate to other Black Boxes via wireless within a certain range, this gets recorded.

This is so we can more accurately reconstruct accidents and monitor driver behavior.
Maybe after getting your license you have to submit your Black Box to scrutiny: average speed, braking etc are computed and either you get to continue operating your vehicle on our roads or not.
Maybe a year later you have to resubmit your BB again, then after 2 years, etc. Depending upon the prevailing political wind of course.

I think it would be more beneficial to create a learning environment than a punishing environment.

I would agree with RampagingBadger. Even when you have proven that you can control your car then you should be on a provisional licence for 2 years.

Again as Akrasia says, we must clear the waiting lists for tests first. We should then abolish the provisional licence and move to using driving schools that are mandatory.

I don't think free driving lessons in school are necessary. I think there should be education about driving and the risks in school but to keep it all theoretical and include details like safe cycling and walking with it.

PROVISIONAL LICENCES ARE A JOKE!

RedPlanet · 27-10-2006 03:10PM

Well, i am not a motorist and have no intention of becoming one.
Therefore i object to making mandatory driving instruction.
Nor do i desire to pay others' driving instruction.
Whereas i do agree, to a system which places the onus upon the motorist (or aspiring motorist) to pay for the privilege of commandeering a vehicle on our roads.

I believe if we could do the maths, a BlackBox system with the goal of making our roads safer, could be implemented at less cost then putting extra garda manpower on the roads to produce the same result.

This is because i attribute the virtual lawlessness, and subsequent deaths on our roads to lack of enforcement.
I think drivers drive in the manner they do, because they choose to, not because they don't know any better.

Limitations on Learner drivers are all well and good, but if traffic laws are not now being observed, what difference would extra limitations really make?
Certainly any measures to make for safer roads must involve Enforcement.
Putting more gards out there is fine, however once out of view drivers will revert back to their existing driving habits (which are poor). BlackBoxes are always on, motorists should pay for them, insurance companies can make them mandatory.

Akrasia · 27-10-2006 04:54PM

RampagingBadger wrote:

Free driving training for everyone??? Are you mad?? Who the hell is going to pay for that. No other country does that (feel free to correct me on that). To my mind the correct course of action is to MANDATE driving lessons with a QUALIFIED instructor for everyone before they're allowed on the road alone. Also some other measures ala Canada might be worthwhile (i.e. L plates for 2 years after getting the licence, nobody with L plates allowed drive between the hours of 22:00 and 06:00, a repeat driving test to stifle bad habits after having qualified for 3 years). Yes this would mean you needed to have money before you can drive, but you already need to be able to purchase a car, tax, insurance and petrol.

what is our education system for?
You could use the same arguments against teaching children physical education (Why should we have to pay for professional sports training for children when they can go out and pay for it like everyone else has to)
surely our schools should give our children the skills to survive past the age of 25?

Surely the social benefits of teaching our children how to drive will outweigh the economic costs of providing that educational service?

If you 'mandate' extensive private training before someone can drive on the roads, it's just another tax on the low paid. I would rather they spent their money on a decent roadworthy car instead of giving thousands of euros to private driving schools.
(I would fully support engine restrictions for inexperienced drivers like the restrictions we currently have on motorbikes)

Akrasia · 27-10-2006 05:02PM

RedPlanet wrote:

If someone has passed the drivers test, then presumedly they are trained enough to commandeer their vehicles on our roads.
I doubt the deaths are a result of inadequate training.

I would be more open to:
Black Boxes inside of all cars (with GPS).
They could be programmed to:
- record speed, distance and braking.
- communicate to other Black Boxes via wireless within a certain range, this gets recorded.

This is so we can more accurately reconstruct accidents and monitor driver behaviour.
Maybe after getting your license you have to submit your Black Box to scrutiny: average speed, braking etc are computed and either you get to continue operating your vehicle on our roads or not.
Maybe a year later you have to resubmit your BB again, then after 2 years, etc. Depending upon the prevailing political wind of course.

the cost of this system would probably be several times more than it would cost to provide advanced driving instruction to every secondary school child. (you're probably talking about a thousand euros worth of equipment for each car, a multi billion euro computer system to monitor and analyse the data, and hundreds of full time administrators to process the information. All for an experiment that has huge civil liberties implications and is not even certain to have any effect on road fatalities. (you can bet that as soon as the technology is released, that people would be working on ways to circumvent it just like the speed restrictors that are supposed to limit all HGVs to 55mph which are almost all deactivated,)

I have done an advanced course, and it makes a huge difference to the way I drive. It changes behaviour through education instead of constantly chasing people with the threat of criminal sanctions

Akrasia · 27-10-2006 05:08PM

RedPlanet wrote:

Well, i am not a motorist and have no intention of becoming one.
Therefore i object to making mandatory driving instruction.
Nor do i desire to pay others' driving instruction.

Hundreds of pedestrians are hit by cars every year.
What if you are crossing the road and some poorly trained provisional driver knocks you down?

Also, I presume you are not a woman, you don't qualify for Breast Check, do you object to your tax money being spent on a service you personally will never be able to use?

AbusesToilets · 27-10-2006 06:02PM

I agree with Alrasia,what's the problem with teaching people how to drive in schools.The potential benefits from this should out weigh the possible cost,with less knockon effects to the comsumer down the line.Compare that to the black boxes,which would push up the price of cars, and probably insurance premiums,especially if there was mandatory checking of the recordings.How would that work in practicality anyway?Everytime you go over a posted speed limit you would get a penalty?It wouldn't take into account the realites of traffic flow.
I think education is a better route to go,can't go wrong by knowing how to drive correctly

RedPlanet · 27-10-2006 08:46PM

Akrasia wrote:

Why should we have to pay for professional sports training for children...

I am not an athlete, however i am very confident the "training" our children receive in PE, is not designed for professional sports.
I'd say the object of PE is not even to provide training per se, rather to provide physical activities with a view to promoting health.

Akrasia wrote:

Surely the social benefits of teaching our children how to drive will outweigh the economic costs of providing that educational service?

I don't know about that, what social benefits are you refering?
I personally would prefer that our education system teaches children how to TYPE, rather than operate motor vehicles because when they mature, more of them will be pursuing careers that require typing all day, than driving. I'm not sure if you're advocating promoting driver instruction with a view toward driving professionally, i don't think so though.
I understand that many of them will choose a lifestyle that involves operating a motor vehicle (like commuting to work), however that is a lifestyle choice, not a career.
Besides, you've not proved that offering driver training makes for safer roads.
The reality maybe the reverse, it may produce overconfidence and more fatalities.
I'm also not sure that Provisional license holders are responsible for the deaths on the roads. In my own experience i would say they are not, rather it's the people that drive professionally (man w/ white van, taxis, lorries) which appear more a threat to my own well being.
I admit i could be wrong, but i'd need to see the statistics.

Also, my BlackBox proposal can accomodate for tourists and those "foreign reg time bombs", by placing the very same BB's in their cars upon arrival. Collecting them upon their exit.
Whereas your proposal leaves them entirely out of the equation.
The implication of civil liberties is a worthy debate.
We already surrender those while flying, and that is a method of transportation.
How much right to privacy can one reasonably expect while in a public space (the road)?
I also object to your proposal as it institutionalizes the promoting of motor vehicles. It would be like selling the concept of private car ownership to our youth.
Which i believe deteroriates our quality of life, is unsustianable and hinders the developement of public transport.
It would doubtless, offer access for private political lobby groups (AA or whoever they are) into our classrooms which is also objectionable.

Akrasia wrote:

Also, I presume you are not a woman, you don't qualify for Breast Check, do you object to your tax money being spent on a service you personally will never be able to use?

You are not comparing like with like.
Choosing to commandeer a motor vehicle is not the same as screening for cancer.

Captain Trips · 27-10-2006 10:09PM

silverharp wrote:

Given that our driving licence system must in some way contribute to death on the roads, who has been negligent.

-Can I blame FF/PD's for a lack of ideas or bottle given that they have had several years to deal with this?

-The state is effectively ungovnerable in certain areas and don't be expecting politicians of any party to implement common sense ideas that a bunch of 5th year students could come up with?

- Deep down we are still a bunch of Paddys and we havn't quite got off our knuckles yet?

Answer , as the question was regarding responsibility for road deaths, is *none* of those.

We are below the EU average on road deaths are just fine. The "crisis" of "road carnage" is front page news and creates a good vibe and support to introduce private speed cameras everywhere.

2001 Road Deaths, European Union: Deaths per 100,000

(Source: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=7254)

United Kingdom 6.1
Netherlands 6.2
Sweden 6.2
Denmark 8.1
Finland 8.4
Germany 8.5
Ireland 10.7
Italy 11.1
Austria 11.9
France 13.8
Spain 13.8
Belgium 14.5
Luxembourg 15.9
Greece 19.3
Portugal 21.0
Data for Portugal, Greece and Italy are for 2000.

The average was 12.24. Ireland is 10.7 = no crisis, but clearly this doesn't bode well for private speed companies and government taxes.

Have a look here: http://www.actuaries.ie/About_the_Society/Society%20Publications/Newsletter/Newsletter_article_October_2006_.pdf

There is no "carnage" no "spiralling deaths on the roads".

Given the vast increase in private car ownership in Ireland in the past decade, we are all doing extremely well considering we have third world roads. I say well done to all the Irish drivers who have helped reduce road deaths by being safer drivers in the past few years.

A solution to the provisional license problem is that everyone should have to take the test before getting it renewed. Allowing people to drive indefinitely without any test is ridiculous but even so, the 400,000 provisional drivers or the rest of the fully licensed drivers have not caused ANY new crisis/problem/whatever the government tries to spin to get more revenue from private speed cameras.

OT: More people every year die by suicide than road deaths. Suicides are going up, road deaths are going down. there is however a continued increase in male suicides which IS a crisis but that doesn't have the potential to generate revenue.

RedPlanet · 28-10-2006 12:12AM

Captain Trips wrote:

We are below the EU average on road deaths are just fine. The "crisis" of "road carnage" is front page news and creates a good vibe and support to introduce private speed cameras everywhere.

You are selective in choosing 2001 to support your conclusion.
However the reality is that road deaths in ireland are on the rise, while everywhere else in Europe is improving.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0926/road_roadsafety.html

The ETSC also notes that, after some progress three years ago, Ireland's road deaths have begun to rise.

silverharp · 28-10-2006 09:05AM

Captain Trips wrote:

Answer , as the question was regarding responsibility for road deaths, is *none* of those.

We are below the EU average on road deaths are just fine. The "crisis" of "road carnage" is front page news and creates a good vibe and support to introduce private speed cameras everywhere.

I should have had another option -move along folks, nothing to see here!

My primary point was not a general discussion on road safety, but looking at a testing and licencing system that is a joke by European standards, and is primarily an administrative issue, which a flexible and creative gov. should be able to change. Some posters seem to think there has to be protests on the street before things happen but to me somebody isn't doing their job.
A more general point is that if they can't organise a modern licencing system what hope have they of changing the health system.

If you asked anyone, in 5 minutes you would get, 5-10hrs of training school instruction before getting a provisional, another 5-10 hrs before taking the test. If there are delays in getting a test, hive it off and privatise it or outsource it. There would be public support for this as everyone knows somebody who has had to wait 6mth or more to get a test. Win win for everyone, the gov. looks like it is being proavtive. Insurance costs come down, and somewhere along the line lives (taxpayers & voters) have been saved.

Captain Trips · 28-10-2006 11:01AM

silverharp wrote:

A more general point is that if they can't organise a modern licencing system what hope have they of changing the health system.

THis is very true, and I agree it doesn't need protests, just whoever or whatever group is employed to run the licensing system to make whatever changes necessary.

FOr the life of me I cannot see how so many provisional licensed people built up so much, but I don't blame the licensing system, as clearly the provisional people decided unless they were going to be actually prohibited from driving, they would just keep on going.

There are plenty of regulations already in place, but there is a definite lack of respect and discipline among many drivers (e.g., L drivers on motorways). Perhaps it is cultural.

1. Have private testing companies - the NCT runs pretty well, so maybe run them out of NCT centres or something

2. NO L drivers on roads after 10pm or something, making a good incentive to get the full license, and it seems that many of the accidents happen at night time (or maybe it just the headline ones).

3. If you don't pass your test - you shouldn't be driving home (!) - FFS, this is just taking the piss really! If so many fail, how do they get home? Obviously, lack of disipline in the failed driver and also in the tester who KNOWS that the failed tester will drive home alone.

4. Start driving training in transition year in school, which is a (or was if I remember that far back) mostly superfluous year anyway, not in junior cert or leaving cert cycle.

Akrasia · 28-10-2006 11:55AM

RedPlanet wrote:

I am not an athlete, however i am very confident the "training" our children receive in PE, is not designed for professional sports.
I'd say the object of PE is not even to provide training per se, rather to provide physical activities with a view to promoting health.

It seems as though you believe education only has one use, to train people to so they can get a job when they leave? I would absolutely disagree. Education is supposed to give people life skills and to teach people how to think for themselves. I said 'professional sports training' not in the context of training people to be professional athletes, I meant training by a professional sports trainer. The aim is of course to promote physical activity and because participating in sports is good for everyone's overall well being. It is good for their health, and it is also on that basis that I would like to see driving instruction taught at Irish secondary schools. There are very few things worse for your health than being involved in a serious car accident.
Incidentally, I would also be highly supportive of giving all children basic cooking and nutrition classes to teach them how to feed themselves, even though hardly any of them would ever become professional chefs.

I don't know about that, what social benefits are you refering?

I would consider reducing the number of deaths and serious injuries to be a major social benefit. Do you not agree?

I personally would prefer that our education system teaches children how to TYPE, rather than operate motor vehicles because when they mature, more of them will be pursuing careers that require typing all day, than driving.

Not being able to type won't get you killed. Not being able to drive gets people killed almost every day.

I'm not sure if you're advocating promoting driver instruction with a view toward driving professionally, i don't think so though.

No, I'm promoting advanced driving training for children because most people will end up owning a car and driving at some point in their lives, and it would be a good idea to teach them how to do it safely.

I understand that many of them will choose a lifestyle that involves operating a motor vehicle (like commuting to work), however that is a lifestyle choice, not a career.

Is it a lifestyle choice to live anywhere in the country but Dublin city center? Because that is the only place where there is even a semblance of a public transport system. You said you don't drive a car, but you still use the roads, I presume you occasionally get a lift in someone elses car, you still get taxis and buses? Passengers get killed on the road too you know, as well as pedestrians. Road safety affects every single person in this country, you can not escape that fact.

Besides, you've not proved that offering driver training makes for safer roads.
The reality maybe the reverse, it may produce overconfidence and more fatalities.

I can not see that happening, unless the training received is of an unbelievably bad quality. The most important part of an advanced driving training course is the part that makes the driver aware of all the different things that can go wrong on the road, how to avoid them happening in the first place, and lastly, how to react should any of those events unexpectedly happen. By showing the driver all the things that can go wrong, this has the effect of reducing the 'invincibility' complex in most young drivers.

Also, my BlackBox proposal can accomodate for tourists and those "foreign reg time bombs", by placing the very same BB's in their cars upon arrival. Collecting them upon their exit.

Are you seriously suggesting that every car that comes off a ferry in Ireland would have to spend hours having a complex piece of machinery fitted before they can drive on our roads and then when they leave they have to spend hours getting it removed?

Whereas your proposal leaves them entirely out of the equation.

that is unavoidable. currently tourists are effectively exempt from all our traffic laws because the laws can not be enforced abroad. Even if the tourists had a black box installed, and they speed and break irish laws, when they go home, they would be beyond the scope of Irish Law enforcement.

The implication of civil liberties is a worthy debate.
We already surrender those while flying, and that is a method of transportation.

What you are proposing is a big brother surveilance system beyond even the scope of what they had in 1984.

How much right to privacy can one reasonably expect while in a public space (the road)?

We have the right to freedom of movement, freedom of association and freedom from excessive intrusion into our private lives. Your system would be so open to abuse it's not funny.

I also object to your proposal as it institutionalizes the promoting of motor vehicles. It would be like selling the concept of private car ownership to our youth.

you suggested typing classes, surely that's 'institutionalising computer ownership' and promoting computer usage to our youth?

Which i believe deteroriates our quality of life, is unsustianable and hinders the developement of public transport.

for most people, there is no alternative to private transport. If the government starts to provide high quality, affordable extensive public transport then people will start to use it. They will cut down on their car usage, but there will always be a need for personal transport.

You are not comparing like with like.
Choosing to commandeer a motor vehicle is not the same as screening for cancer.

of course it's not. The analogy was that you are opposed to paying to provide an expensive service that you will never avail of. i still believe it is a valid analogy

RedPlanet · 28-10-2006 01:08PM

Akrasia wrote:

I would consider reducing the number of deaths and serious injuries to be a major social benefit. Do you not agree?

I do agree, however i am not convinced providing "advanced driver training" trumps Enforcement.

Akrasia wrote:

Not being able to drive gets people killed almost every day.

Again i just disagree with this position. The people getting killed are mostly drivers and their passengers. The drivers are for the most part, fully licensed to drive. Probably many of them have been driving for years. I believe that most of them have choosen to disregard saftey while they drive. Thus resulting in an accident.
Which is altogether different than someone not knowing how to drive.
What are you proposing exactly? Being the case that we already have thousands of motorists fully licensed that are apparently "not able to drive". Are you going to provide them "advanced driver training"?
That seems unlikely.

Akrasia wrote:

most people will end up owning a car and driving at some point in their lives, and it would be a good idea to teach them how to do it safely

Sure, why not overhaul the licensing system so that those whom choose to become motorists must acquire your advanced driver training to do so, and leave the rest of us alone?

Akrasia wrote:

Is it a lifestyle choice to live anywhere in the country but Dublin city center?

I don't live in Dublin and manage just fine without a car, so too most people i associate with.

Akrasia wrote:

Because that is the only place where there is even a semblance of a public transport system.

That's exaggeration.

Akrasia wrote:

I presume you occasionally get a lift in someone elses car, you still get taxis and buses? Passengers get killed on the road too you know, as well as pedestrians. Road safety affects every single person in this country, you can not escape that fact.

I am most certainly not escaping that fact. Rather I am trying to arrest that fact via overhauling our system of traffic law Enforcement.

Akrasia wrote:

I can not see that happening, unless the training received is of an unbelievably bad quality.

I suspect that even those that have availed of "advanced driver training" are also speeding on our roads. Which is a huge factor in accidents. I hear many drivers complain that it would be UNSAFE to operate their vehicle at the legal speed limit.
My point is that even "advanced driver training" may not produce compliance with traffic laws and may do little toward reducing road deaths.
Enforcement on the other hand, can produce compliance and most likely will result in reduced road deaths.

Akrasia wrote:

you seriously suggesting that every car that comes off a ferry in Ireland would have to spend hours having a complex piece of machinery fitted before they can drive on our roads and then when they leave they have to spend hours getting it removed? Currently tourists are effectively exempt from all our traffic laws because the laws can not be enforced abroad. Even if the tourists had a black box installed, and they speed and break irish laws, when they go home, they would be beyond the scope of Irish Law enforcement.

Not hours hopefully.
But it's ok if it does take hours. For that is the scenario the tourist has choosen via bringing their car into ireland, rather than just hiring one here.
The other part of your question is easily accomodated by runnnig a quick scan of the data on teh BB, just looking for "major infractions", if found they'll have to pay up then and there if they don't want their car impounded.
Again, what was your answer to this issue? Just forgetabout them?

Akrasia wrote:

What you are proposing is a big brother surveilance system beyond even the scope of what they had in 1984

A litte OTT Akrasia, BB's i cars is not even close to the surrvelience in 1984.

Akrasia wrote:

If the government starts to provide high quality, affordable extensive public transport then people will start to use it

Sure, the problem is however they mostly observe a "let the market decide" approach. Which has resulted in massive congestion, increased SUV sales and turned our narrow streets into car parks, how great is that?

Akrasia wrote:

The analogy was that you are opposed to paying to provide an expensive service that you will never avail of.

I am not opposed to paying for expensive services which i will never avail of.

Captain Trips · 28-10-2006 01:18PM

I was out on my bicycle a few weeks ago and a pedestrian stepped right out on front me on the street. I couldn't turn or stop and just flipped over the bike.

It was an accident.

However, I think that all pedestrians should have black boxes fitted as clearly they are making a lifestyle choice to walk around and not sit at home and order everything they need over the internet.

Many people get by just fine without walking, and many parts of the country don't even have footpaths, walking is so unnceccesary.

Furthermore, all tourists who come into the country should be fitted with the black box at the airport for the purposes of their visit, rather than viewing Ireland by television. If they bump into anyone on the street, or walk across a road without paying a toll, then they should be impounded in a police cell until they pay the infraction fine.

Hopefully, this black box system will stop people from scuffing their arms, grazing their elbows or slipping when running.

Capt'n Midnight · 28-10-2006 02:05PM

RedPlanet wrote:

It may be difficult to blame FF/PD's for the driving license system because:
- isn't it something they inherited from previous governments?
- it hasn't really been an issue to make political hay from.
- if every government offered to overhaul the driving licence system, doubtless they would be critcized for confusing people.

Whereas potholes for example, has become a political issue in the past.

The only time i recall hearing about the driving licence system in politics is regarding: waiting lists for driving tests.
Basically how the government is/was doing nothing while loads of people need to get on the road.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irish_general_elections
FF have been in power most of the time so should they not take most of the blame ??

We only need to overhaul the driving testing once and even then all we need to do is bring in line with that used in other countries.

Yes the driver testing unions seem to have taken a lot of blame, but I can't see any evidence of any govt standing up to them. They would have made a handy scapegoat.

Overall compared to the scale of the problem, almost nothing has been done in the last 30 years. The 1979 FF amnesty was a political response to a safety issue.

At a 50% pass rate you would twice as many tests as new licensees per year to stop the list getting longer. And the current absymal pass rates and numbers of tests are probably from the better drivers.

To have any chance of being considered serious we would need a system where a date was set beyond which people would have to do a test before they could get a provisional renewed. The waiting list only contains 1/3 of provisional licenses, because tests are optional. If everyone had to do a test the waiting time would be far longer especially since I'd expect the fail rate to be higher amongst those who have been avoiding it and have devloped bad habbits. ( like that guy a while back who went the long way through all the city west roundabouts without indicating once and yes the indicators did work when he used then later )

As long as people can treat the driving test as optional, WE HAVE NO DRIVER TESTING and no amount of new testers will change that.

RedPlanet · 28-10-2006 02:08PM

Captain Trips wrote:

However, I think that all pedestrians should have black boxes fitted as clearly they are making a lifestyle choice to walk around and not sit at home and order everything they need over the internet.

The problem Captain Trips is that pedestrians are not killing people nor causing other injury while they are walking.
They move slowly and don't weigh very much, therefore under the laws of physics there's not a huge amount of damage they can do.
Motorists on the other hand, are commandeering a very heavy metal box, at speed in public space. It's not that motorists are dodgy people, it's just that the activity they engage in, results in fatalities.
It's not only fatalities however, they also cause damage to our roads, produce CO2 emissions which are responsible for global warming, produce noise pollution, other air pollution and as a low density form of transport, cause congestion that inconveniences us all.
All of which lower our quality of life.

Who's responsible for the current Driving Licence situation?

Comments