Retesting for drivers’ licences

Press, 14 June 1978, Page 18

Retesting for drivers’ licences

If a lack of knowledge of the road code or ignorance of basic driving skills were major causes of road accidents, the case would be strong for requiring all drivers to submit, periodically, to a test before their licences are renewed. But accidents, it seems, have other causes that could be attacked more effectively by other means Periodic retesting for driving licences would mean that drivers should be at least as familiar with the rules as are new drivers after their first test. This may not be a strong recommendation in view of the accident rate among young drivers.

Perhaps the most serious drawback is that the Ministry of Transport would have either to employ many more traffic officers or to divert officers from other work to conduct tests. The numbers of traffic officers in some areas appear already to be below the level needed for effective law enforcement If more officers are to be recruited, they would be used to better effect on the road so that all drivers are more likely to be under scrutiny and test when they are behind the wheel.

Public resentment against retesting would not alone be reason for dismissing the idea of regular testing. But it may point to another argument against introducing it People go along with sixmonth warrant-of-fitness checks because they can see some point in ensuring that defective vehicles are kept off the road But periodic retesting of drivers will not ensure that defective drivers are kept off the road. Public resentment against retesting would probably stem from a realistic assessment of its effectiveness, especially if it were known that many drivers evaded the test.

But if general retesting of all drivers has little to commend it, the

retesting of certain groups of drivers appears more sensible. Two groups in particular appear to be good candidates for retesting: those who have been con victed of traffic offences and young drivers. At present, a driver can be convicted of an offence serious enough to justify disqualification from driving for up to 12 months and still get his licence back without being retested. Any driver disqualified from driving for any period, and perhaps those convicted of less serious traffic offences, should be required to submit to another test. Such drivers will doubtless be able to pass the test by being on their best driving behaviour and by swiftly revising their acquaintance with the test papers. ’But the knowledge that conviction for a traffic offence will mean another licence test would probably discourage some from carelessness or recklessness.

Younger drivers, too, are obvious candidates for selective retesting. The fact that young drivers, more recently tested, are more likely to cause accidents than older drivers is a powerful argument against general retesting. But the accident rate among younger drivers might be reduced if they spent their early years on the road knowing that they must be retested and, perhaps, that a serious offence would prevent the confirmation of a licence.

The Ministry of Transport is investigating the possibility of introducing a learner’s licence which would leave young drivers under extra supervision for a relatively long period. This seems a much more fruitful line to follow than introducing general retesting of all drivers, regardless of their driving records or of the likelihood of their causing accidents.