A.A. Wants Mufti Patrols And Driving Age Of 17

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30738, 30 April 1965, Page 12

A.A. Wants Mufti Patrols And Driving Age Of 17

. A minimum age of 17 years for holding a driver’s licence is favoured by the Automobile Association (Canterbury). It would also like to see plain*clothes traffic patrols on the highways.

It will make such recommendations to the South Island Motor Union “and they won’t be lost sight of, if I have anything to do with it,” said the president (Mr L. W. Broadhead), when the association’s council met last evening.

“Some of us thought the driving age should be raised to 18,” Mr Broadhead said. Too often a car was used as a status symbol by young people, said Mr T. W. Milliken, chairman of the association’s roads and patrols committee, which recommended the higher driving age. Too much space on the roads was taken up by “aimless teen-age driving.” “Young people . e just driving for the sake of driving —driving for the want of something else to do,” Mr Milliken said. Mounting Accidents Everyone was aware of the mounting toll of road accidents involving these young drivers, he said. “Those young people without a sense of responsibility must be deprived of the opportunity to drive vehicles,” he said. “We think 17 is the youngest age at which a person should be entitled to drive a

vehicle,” Mr Milliken said. “At 15 to 17, I think a person is too young to be in charge of a car, which can be dangerous and lethal.” There might be some hardship in raising the driving age to 17, but it was minimal. The Road Safety Council, which had met that morning, recommended a period of one vear’s probation for all new drivers, said Mr Milliken. It also recommended four other conditions:— Probationary drivers to display an L sticker or card. Probationary drivers to observe a speed limit of 45 miles an hour. Probationary drivers not to teach others to drive. Probationary drivers convicted of accident offences to be liable to disqualification, or to extension of the period of probation. Higher Premiums The roads and patrols committee also favoured higher insurance premiums for younger drivers to blame for accidents, said Mr Milliken. “If the teen-age driver is responsible for a third of accidents and a third of insurance claims, he should bear his share of this,” he said. Mr Broadhead said he hoped every A.A. councillor would support what he considered a most important report.

Mr C. H. Browne asked what would become of the committee’s recommendations, if adopted. If they were not acted on, they would be worthless. Mr Broadhead: They must be channelled through the S.I.M.U. We cannot go direct to the Government or the Transport Department. “You can rest assured the recommendations will not be lost sight of—if I have anything to do with it,” Mr Broadhead said. Mufti Patrols There was no discussion on the subject of mufti patrols —but views of roads committee members were tabled in its report, for the information of council members. Mr Milliken thought that drivers tended to break the law after seeing a uniformed officer, no doubt working on the principle that another would not be encountered for some time. Plain-clothes patrols would only detect those drivers who were cheating the law. anyway. Mr T. D. Craig thought there was no real advantage in such patrols. This method of detection tended to jeopardise any good will between drivers and the Transport Department. Mr J. R. Maling said that he, too, was opposed to plainclothes patrols. Mr Broadhead said he thought plainly-marked patrol cars acted as a deterrent. Mr N. F. Greenslade said that if a patrol car was not in sight many drivers tended to break the law in a minor way. “All Cheat At Times” Mr E. R. Casbolt agreed that “all drivers cheat at times.” The accident rate continued to rise, and desperate circumstances required desperate remedies. Only those who broke the law had anything to fear from plain-clothes traffic officers. Mr E. C. Champion said his legal training made him consider that “snooping” of any sort was detestable. However, if a deterrent was sought it had to be admitted that a olain-clothes patrol “who might be there” was a greater deterrent than a uniformed one who was. Against his own inclination, therefore, he was forced to agree that the proposal had merit. The roads committee made its recommendation in favour of plain-clothes patrols on a majority vote. After Mr Broadhead’s assurance that the recommendations would not be lost sight of, the council adopted them without further discussion.