Tougher driving test to be introduced

Elessar

I heard this on Newstalk 106 today after Gaybo let it slip.

The new measures I heard were that after you've passed your test, you STILL have to have a licenced driver with you in the vehicle (that has over four years) for the first year of driving, and there is a zero percent alcohol tolerance.

They are supposed to be introduced next year and while I agree with the second one the first bit is just absolutely insane. Once I've passed my test, having PROVED I'm a capable and good driver, I still have to have someone in the car like I did on a provisional for a whole year? Absolutely ridiculous. I'm getting my work letter in ASAP.

What do the people here think of this??

peasant

Elessar wrote:

I heard this on Newstalk 106 today after Gaybo let it slip.

The new measures I heard were that after you've passed your test, you STILL have to have a licenced driver with you in the vehicle (that has over four years) for the first year of driving,
What do the people here think of this??

At what point during their Christmas party did the RSA dream that one up?

Must have all been langers by then ...

Supercell

Its daft, even if introduced nobody will pay the slightest attrention to it like the current L platers that should have a fully licensed passenger.

Waste of time, zero test queue wait time, then make driving on a public road on a provisional illegal like in other eu countries and then we get drivers that are safe on the road.

Seth Brundle

I heard it also. I think its a brilliant idea and can't see why prov drivers will be so against it. It should ensure that they will be safer thereby justifying large insurance reductions.
If like you mention, this is an inconvienence then get your application in soon. I would imagine it would not apply to anyone currently on the waiting list.

jhegarty

kbannon wrote:

can't see why prov drivers will be so against it.

you can't see why someone would object to waiting a year and a half for a test (which will only be longer is they up the fail rate) and then when they pass this harder test they still need someone with them for year ?


and all this from a person who never even did a test....

mloc123

kbannon wrote:

thereby justifying large insurance reductions.

I'll believe that when it happens.

peasant

kbannon wrote:

I think its a brilliant idea

You can't be serious?

It's the typical half assed solution that politicians and "authorities" seem to come up with, quick-fix knee-jerk reaction that changes nothing about the real problem but looks like "something is being done".

The driving test is supposed to be the culmination of your driver education. It is supposed to examine whether or not you have sufficient skills to participate in traffic safely on your own.

Now the driving test here is a joke and so is the (learner) driver education.
No standardised driving instructions, unqualified driving instructors, no minimum of lessons in different conditions before you sit your test, no standardised test even ...just as long as you're lucky on the day and keep it straight and manage to reverse around a bend you're grand ...

And all this is gonna change to the better because after having passed your test you will have to be accompanied by some other muppet who has as much of a clue about proper and safe driving as you? (after all, said muppet got his/her licence under the same conditions ...or just in the post)

Yeah ...right ...brilliant idea :mad:

Seth Brundle

I also did use the word 'so' within my statement.
A year and a half? The current average waiting time (once the test is booked) is 32.9 weeks. Maybe if they introduced a steeper fine for those who don't turn up then that should reduce bookings. The waiting list times are coming down from what I hear due to the assistance of SGS.
However, my point was that they should save a fortune in the long run. The fact that less drivers inexperienced drivers will be driving on their own* is what I like!


* one hit me this week on the M50

Supercell

Good post peasant.

Think the lack of regulation in the whole learning to drive area is crazy.

The government spends millions on campaigns to catch people driving badly yet totally ignores the new drivers.

This is completely mad imho.

Why the hell don't they regulate the instructors and test the testers???????

The only way the roads here are going to be come safer year on year is to educate the new drivers correctly and come like a hammer down on the older ones that still drive home from the pub after a few for the road...

Long term ..we need to educate the many thousands of new drivers on our roads.
I'm not trying to demonise them , just saying that if our government really wanted to permanently cut road deaths down then driver education is the key and that means instructors need to be qualified first to teach.

I have my full license less than a year and I can become a driving instructor in this country if I wished to..what's wrong with this picture ?

Royale with Cheese

Well I'm on the waiting list for my test. If this law comes to pass I won't pay one bloody bit of attention to it (have been driving 5 months on a provisional, and never without a licenced driver in the car). Nor will anyone else who's just passed their test. It will solve nothing. Waste of time and a pathetically stupid idea.

Seth Brundle

The primary responsibility for education is on the student. Look at how the current system has taught drivers - there are two threads currently running on foglight usage.
Having registered instructors, etc means sweet FA if the student thinks that they can ignore most of what thhey learn.
However, there are plans to improve all of these areas - whan they will be introduced I do not know.

AnnaStezia

Like a lot of other things in this country this idea will only come to pass when some idiot learner - and there are plenty of those - runs over someone important......

peasant

kbannon wrote:

The primary responsibility for education is on the student. Look at how the current system has taught drivers - there are two threads currently running on foglight usage.
Having registered instructors, etc means sweet FA if the student thinks that they can ignore most of what thhey learn.
However, there are plans to improve all of these areas - whan they will be introduced I do not know.

Thanks for proving my point!

The current system is not even eable to teach "students" when and when not to use their foglights ...neither are the unqualified and unregulated/unchecked so-called driving instructors.

And putting someone who has sufferd the same bad education four years ago next to someone who just passed their test is going to improve that situation?

How exactly?


And doesn't it strike you as somewhat weird, that one day after having passed your test you can hang out the shingle and call yourself "driving instructor" yet if you want to accompany a newly licenced driver under the proposed new rules you will be required to have held your licence for at least four years??

Where's the logic in that?


Stupid, useless, harebrain, vote-catching idea ...that's all it is.

I am very, very disappointed with the RSA for coming up with such an utter crap proposal.

Supercell

kbannon wrote:

The primary responsibility for education is on the student.
Having registered instructors, etc means sweet FA if the student thinks that they can ignore most of what thhey learn.

Can only speak for myself.

I failed my first driving test and passed the second time.

My instructor spent a lot of time killing my bad habits that my first instructor incorrectly taught me.

With proper regulation new drivers will learn the right way to drive first time, and piss poor instructors will be out of a job -and there is a lot of them out there.

Oh and as to fog lights..while there is a motors board..there will be fog light tread ..like Alfas..everyone has an opinion that's unshakable

DonJose

kbannon wrote:

I heard it also. I think its a brilliant idea and can't see why prov drivers will be so against it.

I agree 100%. The only people against this new test are learner drivers who have most likely failed a test at some stage and who should be kept off the road anyway. I've been forwarding boards.ie threads to Noel Brett at the RSA for the past couple of weeks, specifically those bragging about driving unaccompanied on first provisional licences

Lorax

I aint gonna obey this law anyway. Its so stupid. What makes having a full driver 1 year after getting your full license in anyway significant? Example, someone gets full license, doesnt drive at all for the year, then when the year elapses can hop into the car on their own and drive. Second example, someone gets full license, drives every day of the week with full driver, after 6 months of doing this which will be the better driver? The 1 with 6 months experience. Thats why time-lapse is a stupid way of setting the full-licensed driver thing, technically it should be measured by your mileage but better yet not at all because this new idea is absolutely ridiculous. I guarantee if its introduced, road deaths will NOT go down!

Seth Brundle

Longfield wrote:

Oh and as to fog lights..while there is a motors board..there will be fog light tread ..like Alfas..everyone has an opinion that's unshakable

There shouldn't be if people respected that law.
I run a primarily UK based forum (see my sig) and don't recall conversations about people using their fog lights. It only happens in Ireland.

mackerski

I heard the item on Newstalk today. Apart from the fact that such a (daft) system would never affect me either way, some thoughts:

• The RSC doesn't get to make these laws, so it's not exactly a primary source
• Newstalk is a station that consistently gets even the most basic facts wrong - most recently, claiming our port tunnel as the longer Motorway tunnel in Europe
• It's a funny jump, to go straight from a system where some learners are actually allowed to drive alone and pretty much all can with impunity, to one where not even qualified drivers are allowed to.

So don't anyone panic until a more fact-complete version of this information surfaces. (but do press ahead and get real licences anyway)

old boy

sure they have to check gabos senility, so thick and stupid, can they come up with something that makes sense

Supercell

kbannon wrote:

There shouldn't be if people respected that law.
I run a primarily UK based forum (see my sig) and don't recall conversations about people using their fog lights. It only happens in Ireland.

As I said..proper driver education is the key...

If people didn't dazzle me on the way home i wouldn't feel the need for fogs...

Unfortunately some truckers and 4x4's and other high mounted vehicles here are free to dazzle all and sundry without any kind of penance and that's the problem.

Its self feeding, if I could drive home without being dazzled by idiot truck and car drivers I'd have no need for fogs...

Its regulated in the Uk thus its not an issue, its a free for all here..thus ...

Seth Brundle

Longfield wrote:

Its regulated in the Uk thus its not an issue, its a free for all here..thus ...

But when changes are proposed then you disagree with them because everything else if crap? Where exactly do you suggest they start and in the meantime should prov drivers be allowed to continue drive unaccompanied?

DonJose

Lorax wrote:

I aint gonna obey this law anyway. Its so stupid.

Yeah right, like you are obeying the current law about driving unaccompanied 4 months into a first provisional licence, come back when you actually have a real driving licence

Supercell

But when changes are proposed then you disagree with them because everything else if crap?

i'm confused ?

Where exactly do you suggest they start and in the meantime should prov drivers be allowed to continue drive unaccompanied?

Ground level, newbie drivers learn safe and progressive driving from instructors that have been certified as capable of training.

Regarading prov unacompnied, its pointless now as it is, they might be accompnied by their aul lad that never even sat a test ffs, the accomnied thing is daft imho

Capt'n Midnight

Great idea, heard it on the radio too, maybe they meant that for L drivers you could only be accompanied by someone who has had a driving license for 4 years - very similar to the system a few miles north of Dundalk.

But it would be better if they enforced existing laws first.

And since there are 400,000 with provisional licenses , that's how long the queue really is.

OSiriS

DonJose wrote:

The only people against this new test are learner drivers who have most likely failed a test at some stage and who should be kept off the road anyway.

You are forgetting the huge number of people who aren't acquainted with a fully licensed driver who will sit with them every time they wish to get behind the wheel. The best way to learn to drive is through experience (provided you have a solid foundation of good instruction), and you won't get much if you are severely limited in how much and how often you can get that experience. Drivers should be held accountable for knowing all the rules and regulations of safe and proper driving, but keeping beginner drivers on a short leash for at least 20 months is unlikely to improve matters much.

Nephew

A link to pass rate and waiting time for each centre.

http://www.drivingtest.ie/drivingtest/HTMLContent/frameset.html

It’s pretty sickening tbh.

Rathgar has a pass rate of 44.2% and a waiting list of 34 weeks, you don't even have a one in two chance of passing in Rathgar, thus the waiting list will keep increasing.

If they worked on reducing the waiting list, the roads would be safer. People are driving around on provisionals for approximately 10 months before they do the test that tells them if they have the required ability to drive alone. In which time they might have picked up many bad habits which are hard to forget, resulting in quite a few failures I suspect.

If they are going to reduce the alcohol limit it should be a blanket reduction for all ages. Why should young drivers who successfully pass the test be treated any different to older drivers? We're treated the same when comes to the likes of paying tax. But a blanket reduction will never happen as it will affect those who make the laws.

It doesn't say much for the governments faith in the whole testing procedure if they have to apply further restrictions, once a driver has successfully proved they are competent enough to drive at the required level.

Does anyone actually have the statistics for the amount of L drivers involved in fatal crashes? I could well be wrong, but anytime I hear about young drivers involved in front page accidents its mostly stupid assholes with a full licence acting the bollox on the road. A couple of idiotic assholes make the rest suffer.

CrowdedHouse

I often wondered what the full licensed driver-passenger is supposed to do anyway...grab the steering wheel,pull the handbrake...give provo fatherly advice/bollocking ?

Seth Brundle

I would imaging it is to provide advice so that an emergency manouvre shouldn't arise

Stark

CrowdedHouse wrote:

I often wondered what the full licensed driver-passenger is supposed to do anyway...grab the steering wheel,pull the handbrake...give provo fatherly advice/bollocking ?

Well everyone should be made do lessons in a dual-control car to start off with. That's just common sense but unfortunately it's not the case here.

After that, the fully licenced driver would be able to give advice to keep someone out of difficult stages and to help calm someone down if they get into a panic. I remember one time when I was learning I was in the car with my father and I got panicked because I couldn't start the car at a junction so he had to get out and start the car for me. There were also other tricky situations, such as when I pulled in between parked cars to let a car on the other side past and couldn't get out again. Being in a car with a fully licenced driver, you also have the advantage that you can get them to clarify the rules of the road if you're unsure at any point.

Capt'n Midnight

one other point about having an experienced driver with you is that they can take over driving if you get tired or encounter a situation you can't handle or if you need to go on a motorway

An extra pair of eyes is always handy especially since so many drivers out there can barely manage to control the speed and direction of their car , any extra task like correctly using indicators seems totally beyond them.

maidhc

Stark wrote:

Being in a car with a fully licenced driver, you also have the advantage that you can get them to clarify the rules of the road if you're unsure at any point.

I have yet to meet a fully licenced driver who knows them there rules!

Gay Byrne is really starting to grate on me. Yes we need to overhaul the licensing system, but him pontificating from on high is probably not how it should be done. I suspect like others that he is going senile, specially when Noel Brett is not exactly backing up what he says!

Wait until someone who knows what is actually going on makes an announcement.