Tougher driving test to be introduced

Nuttzz

Elessar wrote:

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.

Madness really, you pass a tougher test and some one who either got their drivers licence in an amnesty or by doing a simpler test still has to accompany you. My mother hasnt driven in years and got her licence in the 60's when you could just pay over your cash for one, is uncle gaybo telling me that she is qualified to monitor all the new drivers out there??

steveland?

So if they're forcing you to have a 4-year minimum qualified driver in the car with you at all times for a year after passing the test presumably the insurance costs for your first year of driving with a full licence will come down yes?

Of course not... that'd make too much sense... after all the Government thinks that having a 4-year qualified driver with you will make the roads safer, thereby making the roads a safer place and you a safer driver...

Hmmm...

In my opinion they should actually try using that bit of mush in their heads and get a proper testing system implemented which actually measures your ability on the roads and only pass someone who's shown that they keep to the letter of the law...

Ergo, when everyone has a full licence that was obtained through proper tried and tested techniques and was examined to the finest details no-one will be breaking the law, speeding, drink driving...

By the way I agree 100% with the 0 tolerance alcohol rule and feel very strongly that this should be implemented accross the board to appy to every single driver on the road, regardless of how many they think they can have for the road and still be safe...

matrim

I don't see how this could work. One of the reasons that so many learner drivers drive unaccompanied (and the guards allow them) is because of the wait to drive on their own.

At them moment even if you pass first time, you will have been waiting 6 months to a year before driving on your own. Under the proposal, even if there was no waiting list you would have to wait a year.

The best system would probably be some kind of R plate system, and if you get points within the first year, you have to resit the test.

snickerpuss

I don't think that after you pass your test still having to have a licensed driver with you makes any sense. Espeically since not everyone has somebody to drive around with them. I know people who learnt to drive aged 40/50. Who do they get to drive around with them for a year or more?

For most people its so unpractical that they'll just ignore it, like now. They need to bring in something workable since most people don't have someone who'll drive around with them for 2 years or whatever.

Rudolph Claus

It`d suit the dopes better if they`d concentrate on the test we have at present and reduce the waiting lists to 6weeks. If you fail a test you should be resittibg it 6weeks later, not ayear which is the biggest joke of this country. When they get the waiting times down to 6weeks then we might be interested to hear waht new retarded rules they want to introduce. Passing a test and still needing a licenced driver is retarded and more bull**** if you ask me. Where do they expect drivers to get all these fully licenced "passengers" anyway? Do they think parents/people have nothing better to do than to spin around with their "fully licenced" offspring? Do they not realise that most people actually work for a living and dont have time to be sitting in a car making sure a "possible fully licenced" driver doesnt make a mistake. Sure these "passengers" probably got their licence handed to them in the amnesty. Fookin laughable proposal if ever I did hear one.

In fairness, they did contract the nct crowd to help reduce waiting lists but still theres no point talking about new stuff till they get the waiting times down to a reasonable 6-8weeks. If they bring in a "tougher" test before drastically cutting the waiting lists, then more people will be failing the tougher test and the queues will still be at a ridiculous retarded level.

Seth Brundle

WRT the long waiting lists and the fact that its terrible on all the prov drivers who must endure this wait and how they become so good that they should be entitled to drive around on their todd - if they are that good and given they have so long to practice for the test and that the test is so poor, why then is the pass rate only 53.5% (source)?
Would it be because they cannot pass a simple test despite all this practice? Given that, do you still think that the current system should continue to exist?

steveland?

kbannon wrote:

WRT the long waiting lists and the fact that its terrible on all the prov drivers who must endure this wait and how they become so good that they should be entitled to drive around on their todd - if they are that good and given they have so long to practice for the test and that the test is so poor, why then is the pass rate only 53.5% (source)?
Would it be because they cannot pass a simple test despite all this practice? Given that, do you still think that the current system should continue to exist?

Well the waiting list (from time of application to time of test) is a different issue to the test itself but they do go hand in hand.

To introduce a tougher test but not cut down the waiting time is stupid. It'll mean more people driving around on provisionals because they may fail the tougher test and then wait another year for a resit.

In an ideal Ireland there'd be a regulated agency for providing lessons, you do a certain amount of these and are certified as ready for the test depending on the progress you make that the qualified, regulated instructors decides on.

You're given a certificate that you send in with your application, informing the testing agency that you've done these lessons and are ready for a test.

You wait 6 weeks max and take your test.

You should pass since you weren't allowed take the test until you were good and ready but if you fail you take the detailed feedback they should be giving you after your test back to the lessons agency who will work on fixing these problems and then 6 weeks after you send in your retest application you get another test.

When you get your full licence you can drive around on your own safe in the knowledge that you're a qualified driver who has had training and can handle any situation you may run into on the road.

In my opinion there should also be a 0% tolerance on alcohol on the roads accross the board. Even if you're 45 and have been out for "a shandy" after work you're breaking the law. None of this "Oh I've often had 6 or 7 drinks and driven home. But I've never killed anyone!!!!" crap.

Insurance comes down because there's less accidents, less people drink drive, less people die, road confidence and competence goes up, the Government go back to campaigning...

But then again it'll never happen...

Seth Brundle

You quote me but don't address my point!
Anyhow, WRT the alcohol - it is impractical to have a 0% limit - mouthwash, some deserts, etc can inadvertently put alcohol in one's system.

WRT the waiting times for an appointment, I can only presume that this is down to the politicians not wanting longer waiting lists. However, should the waiting list come down (and I believe that it is) then the wait for an appointment should also.

There is movement on the waiting lists. SGS have recently arrived in the market despite IMPACT opposition to outsourcing (they in fact delayed outsourcing!). However, a significant number (~20 or 30% IIRC) of those on the waiting list will not turn up for their test. These should be penalised for wasting a place.

Still, my point stands - given the length of time it takes to sit a test from when one sends off the application - it is enough time for prov drivers to become sufficiently competent to pass the test.

Stark

kbannon wrote:

Still, my point stands - given the length of time it takes to sit a test from when one sends off the application - it is enough time for prov drivers to become sufficiently competent to pass the test.

Well things can still go wrong on the day for even a competent driver. 12 months is a long time to build up "exam nerves". Most people who fail their first test pass the second test without much bother. Of course then there are the muppets who don't even bother taking lessons for their test.

kbannon wrote:

There is movement on the waiting lists. SGS have recently arrived in the market despite IMPACT opposition to outsourcing (they in fact delayed outsourcing!). However, a significant number (~20 or 30% IIRC) of those on the waiting list will not turn up for their test. These should be penalised for wasting a place.

Hopefully if the waiting lists go down, the number of no-shows should decrease also as you have less people deciding to throw a few applications in at the same time. Also many of the no shows are due to people changing address during the waiting period and forgetting to notify the DoT. Less chance of this happening also the waiting list decreases. I reckon if they get the waiting list below a certain threshold, they'll have a much easier time of keeping it down.

That said, I wish they'd do something in the here and now to sort out the no-shows. A steep fine like you suggested would be good. Also an efficient and easy to use test scheduling system like they have for the NCT. Someone should be able to login to a web interface, click "Cancel" or "Reschedule" while someone else should be able to login, see the newly vacant slot and take it. It would probably cost millions in consultancy fees to set it up though