Driving unnaccompanied on a first provisional

Capt'n Midnight

Originally posted by Victor
Possibly if the fees for licences were restructured so as to discourage "passive" (non-driving) licence holders and to finance more testers, instead of merely funding testers out of test fees.

This would discourage some people as the licence fee would be higher and there is a risk it would be increased to form a money generating mechanism.

Question. Should road tax be on the driver or vehicle?

Road tax should be on fuel - a usage tax - we live on a island - get the NI executive involved so no incentive for cross boarder smuggling.

Low standard of the tests - due to the large number of deaths on the road and all the rumours of people being passed without having completed a full test , the testing system should be revamped. At present the numbers who die each year on our roads are similar to the number of testers - cause/effect ? Insurance companies are offering discounts on the basis of doing a one day course. If the insurance companies don't trust the test (and they have statistics) ... plug in the values including the % of accidents caused by driver error and you will get the figure. On average every X months each driving tester passes someone who later die due to driver error...

Long waiting times - this is not a decade old - anyone remember the amnesty ? You could increase the cost of the test (yes it would be indirect taxation) but overall it should be cheaper - the test only costs the same as two lessons... Or get a private company to do it like the NCT. Anything more that two or three weeks is a health and safety issue.

As soon as waiting times are a a realistic level phase out the driving on second provisional. Enforce the no driving on a provisional rule. Use large fines - self financing. ~1/10 of the population have a provisional so it should also ease traffic congestion.

Seth Brundle

the test should be compulsory every two or four years (however, given they can't sort out the current mess, this will never happen)!

Imposter

Originally posted by kbannon
the test should be compulsory every two or four years (however, given they can't sort out the current mess, this will never happen)!

I'd say every 10 years might be more realistic and possible. Aren't licences for 10 years? Perhaps a quick test before getting your renewed licence would make sense.

Silent Bob

Originally posted by Victor
Question. Should road tax be on the driver or vehicle?

Not on the driver, road tax is meant to be used for upkeep of roads. It should be based on the amount of damage inflicted on the roads by the vehicle.

Taxing fuel gets you a usage based measure and would also take into account weight of the vehicle (heavier cars use more fuel).

Taxing based on engine capacity (like at the moment) is just silly.

Originally posted by seamus
Licence 2; Driver can drive unaccompanied between 6am and 11pm.

What's the difference between driving before 11pm and after 11pm?

seamus

Originally posted by Silent Bob
What's the difference between driving before 11pm and after 11pm?

Statistically, more serious/fatal accidents occur in the wee small hours of Saturday and Sunday mornings.

Probably something to do with the roads being empty - feel it easier/safer to speed - ad it also has a lot to do with drink-driving.

MrPudding

Originally posted by John R
How long you have to wait is not irrelevant to the people who have to wait, there is a world of difference between 6 weeks and a whole year.
Your assertation that possesing a licence in this country is any indicator of driving standard does not hold true. There are thousands of people with full licences who never even sat a test, some people who had never sat in the driving seat of a car got licences because they were available without tests. Most people who do take a test are never required to drive on national routes or dual-carriageways, most never exceed 30mph but once they have that piece of paper are competent; I think not.

I'm sorry but the waiting time is irrelevant. It is illegal to drive unaccompanied on your first licence. That is fact. How long you have to wait is quite irrelevant. Having to wait for a long period of time is not and should not be considered mitigating circumstances. I haven’t actually said that holding a licence is a definite indication of good driving skill. It indicates that you can hold it together long enough to pass the test. My point is the really crap people will fail. This is the point.

Don’t even start me on the licence give away. That is a joke and a poor one at that.

There seems to be a serious inability in some people here to see the absolute stupidity in allowing inexperienced drivers on the road by themselves. You have to stop thinking about yourself and how good a driver you think you were and think about some complete f**king idiot who has no clue at all and is at the wheel of a car which could kill and maim so many people so easily. Once again for the cheap seat. IT IS NOT TO INCONVIENIENCE GOOD DRIVERS WHO ARE JUST WAITING FOR A TEST, IT IS TO PROTECT THE GENERAL PUBLIC FROM DANGEROUS MUPPETS. Please get this into you head. And once again in case you didn’t read it earlier, I do not believe that the driving test in it’s current form will catch all the bad drivers nor will it stop people from changing their driving habits after they pass. What it will do is catch the worst.

I refer you to the 2 questions I posed in an earlier post. Can you really honestly say you would answer yes to those questions?

Personally I also think there should be regular re-testing. It would be a real pain (for me and for most people) but I think worth it.

At the end of the day it does not matter how good a driver you are. You could have just graduated top the class in the “Super Driver World University” and still be killed by some f**king muppet who thinks that ‘cos he has managed to fill out a provisional driving licence application form twice he is God’s gift to driving. Seriously catch yourself on.

MrP