Drivers And Horses

This makes interesting reading. Well, it’s more mind-blowing than interesting, with almost 10% of drivers admitting that they don’t know how to behave when they encounter horses. Even more surprising is that the figure rises when you ask younger drivers (or Londoners) about the subject!Horse riders on the road

You’d expect that even a monkey would realise that when you are passing an animal weighing upwards of half a metric tonne, usually with a young girl on top of it, you’d slow down and give it wide berth. For people who haven’t yet acquired the mental capacity of monkeys the Highway Code clarifies the situation further:

214

Animals. When passing animals, drive slowly. Give them plenty of room and be ready to stop. Do not scare animals by sounding your horn, revving your engine or accelerating rapidly once you have passed them. Look out for animals being led, driven or ridden on the road and take extra care. Keep your speed down at bends and on narrow country roads. If a road is blocked by a herd of animals, stop and switch off your engine until they have left the road. Watch out for animals on unfenced roads.

215

Horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles. Be particularly careful of horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles especially when overtaking. Always pass wide and slowly. Horse riders are often children, so take extra care and remember riders may ride in double file when escorting a young or inexperienced horse or rider. Look out for horse riders’ and horse drivers’ signals and heed a request to slow down or stop. Take great care and treat all horses as a potential hazard.

The survey conducted by the AA is quite worrying, and raises a number of questions. Setting aside the obvious one about the intellects of people who are deemed competent to hold a driving licence and yet are clearly too stupid to work it out for themselves, what the hell are driving instructors doing when younger drivers – those who have recently passed their tests – don’t know what to do? The Highway Code is there for all to see, and at the very least the topic should be covered verbally if it can’t be dealt with using real situations.

Apparently, nearly 20% of those questioned believe horses shouldn’t be allowed on the roads. The simple fact is that greater than 99% of horse riders are courteous and don’t deliberately get in the way, and they get off the road as soon as they can. Contrast this with cyclists – of whom 99% are complete arseholes who get in the way on purpose, and who definitely shouldn’t be allowed on the roads – and you can see that everything is the wrong way round.

I do everything in my power to get my pupils to encounter horses at some stage on their lessons. I take them on single track roads near stables at the time of day when horses are being walked out so we can deal with them. As I’ve said before, girls on horses (the majority of riders) usually give a friendly wave of thanks. Male riders can be less friendly (I don’t know why that is), and racehorse riders (the minority of riders around my way, and usually failed jockeys) are miserable and arrogant little sods most of the time. Racehorses are useful training tools because they are usually restive and don’t like walking, so it gives us an opportunity to stop or even switch off the engine in some cases. In fact, on my way to a lesson tonight I had to slow right down for a horse being led along the roadside which was obviously a little edgy, eliciting a polite wave from the male handler.

It isn’t that difficult to find horses and horse riders in many places – even in urban areas – and many instructors really ought to be driving just a few miles extra in order to cover the subject properly instead of hanging round the test centres conserving fuel. Obviously, not everyone can experience horses and riders first hand on their lessons, and in those cases the instructor should absolutely and definitely be covering it verbally – which many clearly aren’t.

Two Plus One Cases Of TB Equals Media Frenzy

You’ve probably seen the news this week about two cases of TB being caught from cats. I suspect that the cleaners at the Daily Mail and The Sun’s headquarters had to clean a lot of urine-soaked carpets this week, as the entire workforce at both establishments probably pissed itself at this brand new opportunity to scaremonger over something.

In fact, The Sun has already started. It managed to dig up a story about dog infecting a human with TB. Since The Sun is no longer free online, I’ll include a link to an alternative version from the Daily Mirror. You will note the wording which allows a timeframe to be surmised:

A child has been diagnosed with tuberculosis after catching it from a family dog.

The pet has now been put down after giving the child the lung disease at a house in Gloucestershire.

The child, aged under ten, has now made a full recovery, according to the Sun.

This is scaremongering at its most pathetic, and the incident appears completely unconnected with the two cat cases. None of the various stories (this one is in the Mail) says when the dog-child case occurred, though normal TB treatment lasts typically between 6-12 months (in serious cases, for up to 2 years) and if the child in question is “fully recovered”, infection must have occurred at the end of last summer at the latest. However, it does establish the fact – if it wasn’t already widely known – that TB can be transmitted from badgers to dogs (and cattle), and then from dogs (and cattle) to the kind of people who are then most likely to put the dogs (or cattle) in their mouths. Oh, and vice versa, because there are historical documented cases of dogs apparently catching TB from humans. There is no reason to assume that it couldn’t miss out the cattle stage and go straight from badger-to-human, and since almost ANY mammal can carry TB it doesn’t take a giant leap of your imagination to see it being transmitted directly from pets. Vets were warning of it a year ago.Garfield Sneezing (large)

If we look at the recent cat incidents that have resulted in human infection, they are from a cluster of nine cases of feline TB identified last year in Berkshire and Hampshire. To get a full picture of what was going on you really do have to read the the right source – one which sees value in scooping a dramatic chat with the “victims” – because it’s only then that you realise that if someone is as soft as a sack of monkeys they would have the cat up to their face a lot of the time (I like cats, and it’s what I’D do if I still had one, and from what I remember if you forget to rub your face against your cat, the cat will come and rub itself against your face to remind you). The stories attempt to blame cleaning an open wound on one cat as the route of transmission, but I’m not prepared to dismiss the in-your-face route that easily. It’s pretty obvious that if a cat had TB there is no reason why it wouldn’t pass this on to a human who was rubbing it with their nose! The cat involved died from the illness. It was a rescue cat and was already unwell.

Regular TB in humans is caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (abbreviated M. tuberculosis). Mycobacterium bovis (or M. bovis) is the bacterium that causes TB in cattle, and which is carried by badgers and many other mammals – so many mammals, in fact, that the list includes humans. M. Bovis is the type of TB involved in these pet-human cases. According to Public Health England around 6% of TB deaths are attributable to M. bovis.

It is also worth noting that seven of the nine cats found to be positive for M. Bovis had bite and scratch wounds consistent with fighting with badgers, according to Carl Gorman – the vet who alerted authorities to the outbreak in Berkshire. He also said he believed that an outbreak in local herd of cattle was to blame. All nine cats lived within a three-mile radius, and six of them within 250 yards of each other. There’s nothing sinister involved, and it is certainly not “a mystery”, as suggested by one cat owner who had to have her cat put down. It is rare, but around 25 cats are nonetheless found to have contracted TB every year in Britain.

The two cat incidents are the first documented cases of cat-to-human transmission. There’s no reason to assume it hasn’t happened before, or that it won’t happen again. The apparently unrelated dog-to-human case proves that.

Both Public Health England and Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories have assessed the risk to the public as VERY LOW. But I doubt that this will stop our gutter press from pretending otherwise. Remember that almost five years ago to the day we were all going to die of swine flu. A couple of years before that, avian flu was going to kill us all. They never give up, and I wonder how long it will be before some prat starts talking about culling cats.

Giant Rat In Sweden

One of the more popular stories on the blog is the one (well, several) about giant rats. I noticed another surge in hits, and this recent story on the BBC is probably why.Swedish Giant Rat

It would appear that a rat weighing around 1kg chewed through concrete and wood to gain entry into a Stockholm kitchen, whereupon it traumatised the human and feline inhabitants for several days until it was finally caught in a giant mousetrap.

As you can see from the photo, it was bloody huge – and unlike the British examples, it really does look like a proper rat. Mind you, yet again something which is such a scientific curiosity that it should be on display in a museum has been destroyed and cannot therefore be verified.

Note the nonsense at the end of the article. There is no scientific evidence that rats are getting bigger – and yet scientists “believe” that they could eventually grow to the size of sheep and weigh nearly 13 stones.

“New” Advice For Learner Drivers

Anyone who reads the blog regularly will probably be aware of my general disdain for groups like IAM and RoSPA when they start poking their noses into the affairs of driving instructors or offering “advice” about learning to drive (my personal opinion, of course). This is especially true of IAM, membership of which you’d be forgiven for thinking allows you to remain active in the Neighbourhood Watch even when you’re not at home! So when I saw this headline in my newsfeeds I wasn’t holding out much hope.

To be fair to RoSPA, though, they do make it clear that driving lessons are best taken with a qualified ADI (which will probably upset most IAM members). Their new website – which is the point of the news article in the first place – is actually quite sensible, and it certainly doesn’t overtly come across as seeking to undermine the ADI’s role (IAM take note). It focuses on what supervising drivers should be doing during private practice. You can view the site here.

Having said all that, I can’t help think that the goals of the site are somewhat unrealistic. On its home page it says:

This website will help you [the supervising driver] to:

During the learning period

  • Ensure the learner meets all the legal requirements for learning to drive
  • Ensure you meet all the legal requirements for supervising them during private practice
  • Allow the learner to get as much supervised practice as possible
  • Keep in touch with your young driver’s instructor and co-ordinate what happens in private practice with what happens in the professional lessons
  • Get the most benefit from practice drives

This creates problems right from the start. Unless the supervising driver is an ADI then he or she is unlikely to be able to fulfil all these requirements. Even IAM and RoSPA members will be lacking such information, since knowledge of it is not a prerequisite of membership of those organisations. The vast majority of parents and supervising drivers couldn’t possibly tie up all the loose ends. Elsewhere on the site RoSPA says:

[As supervising driver you should not] contradict the driving techniques taught by the instructor, even if you disagree with them. If you are concerned about something, make a note of it and discuss it with the instructor at a later date.

This contradicts the thrust of that first part. In fact, a large percentage of full licence holders DO disagree with what ADIs teach their kids or spouses, and often think that they know best. So in spite of the first quote, the clear implication is that RoSPA expects the supervising driver to NOT be fully competent in terms of the requirements list they have given. Furthermore, they say:

It is very important to maintain good communication with your learner’s instructor.

Aaaargh. Having parents or spouses interfering all the way through is NOT beneficial for the pupil (or the ADI). A quick hello/how’s-he-doing/goodbye is all you or the learner want most of the time, and longer discussions only become absolutely necessary if there is a problem AND if the person you’re talking to can actually influence the resolution. Some parents will happily interfere even when they’re not providing private practice. The worst ones for it are those who can’t cut the apron strings, which is often an underlying reason why little Jonny or Kylie isn’t progressing as fast as they could do in the first place. It is best if the learner is left to get on with their lessons without mum or dad poking their noses in all the time.

Personally, I like to show the parents what to look for – if they’re going to be supervising – by having them sit in on a lesson or two. I get uncomfortable if they want to come more often, like one I had a few months ago whose parents or big sister would invite themselves whenever they felt like it, even though they were not supervising him in any private practice, because they were desperate for him to take his test whether he could drive or not (and they didn’t like the fact I wouldn’t let him because he was dangerous). I know that they are not there for the reasons I’d expect them to be there for.

RoSPA’s site also advises:

If possible, show the learner’s instructor the ‘Driver’s Record’ or the telematics [‘black box’ insurance module if it is fitted] data frequently so they can see how the learner is doing in their practice drives.

This is yet more opportunity for parental demands for little Jonny or Kylie to go to test when the instructor doesn’t think they’re ready. The only people completing any sort of documentation should be the learner and the instructor. The last thing the ADI needs is mummy and daddy filling out driver records and putting ticks in all the boxes on the strength of a successful 5 minute driver every Saturday to Tesco. I’ve lost count of the times where mummy or daddy insists Jonny or Kylie “can drive”, and yet they bloody well can’t when they’re on their lessons. RoSPA needs to have a think about whether or not we should be teaching “safe driving for life”, because involving mummy and daddy in the decision over test readiness is hardly likely to result in Jonny or Kylie taking more lessons.

You can read the rest for yourself. Although some of it is good, RoSPA seems to be looking for solutions to problems which can never actually be solved, and by involving people who the unlikeliest to come up with a solution anyway. As a result, it is offering misleading and ambiguous advice.

Private practice is definitely useful for getting road time, which builds experience and confidence. It is usually not that useful for practising manoeuvres unless the private car is the same model as the instructors car, and it definitely isn’t useful for covering new material (guaranteed to create a bad habits). Most private practice involves driving the same routes to go to shopping or to see their grandparents.

As long as they are picked up on basic faults – and not even always then – learners are benefitting from private practice. It doesn’t need to be of the same intensity as a normal driving lesson.

The Driving Test is 80

The driving test turned 80 years old yesterday. It came in as part of the Road Traffic Act of 1934.

Back then, there were almost 7,500 deaths each year on the roads. The figure is around 1,750 today. The only major changes since 1934 have been the mandatory use of speedometers and safety glass (1937) and compulsory seatbelts (1983). In 1990 it became Law that supervising drivers must be 21 or older and have held a full licence for three years, and this apparently resulted in a major fall in accidents. A written theory test was introduced in 1996, and the Hazard Perception Test in 2002.

One comment in this news source intrigued me:

…the fatality figure last year stood at 1,754, and although there is still some way to go before we see an end to deaths on our roads, the figure proves that legislation works.

So it appears that someone somewhere is expecting – in all seriousness – that road casualties will eventually reach 0%. People really do talk nonsense sometimes. I’ve got more chance of winning the Lottery every week from now until the day I die than that has of happening. It’s a totally unrealistic target. Someone needs to look up the meaning of the word “accident”.

Who’s Driving On Britain’s Roads

A new documentary is scheduled to be shown on 10 April 2014 on ITV (10.35 pm). It promises to “delve into the murky world” of test fraud and illegal driving. It follows the DSA’s Fraud & Integrity Team and the press release suggest the problem is far deeper than you’d imagine, and that the people behind it will go to any lengths to commit such fraud.

Oracles With Crossed Lines (And Personal Agendas)

I saw something recently where someone was blaming the fall in numbers of those seeking to become driving instructors on the recession (i.e. the last two years) and, naturally, on RED Driving School – who were actually sold and became a completely different company to the one reviled by most know-it-alls way back in 2010 (i.e. over FOUR years ago).

In actual fact – and it IS a fact – the numbers seeking training began to fall off at least 4 or 5 years ago (not two), which is probably part of the reason why the original RED got into difficulties in the first place. What has actually happened is that the recession has caused many struggling ADIs to quit the job altogether, which has in turn created a market for those who are thinking about becoming ADIs themselves. Indeed, the recession has also created a pool of such people as its effects have not been confined to just the driver training industry. In essence, the recession has created a market and supplied the consumers all in one go. I commented on this a few months ago in the ADI News version of the blog (the New Year issue, I think), and predicted a run on those wishing to become instructors. From what I’ve seen, this is already happening, and even on forums the number of new members asking for advice (and being given given lots of the negative variety) is noticeably greater.

The effects of the recession (particularly the rise out of it) don’t end there, either. I am picking up a new pupil typically every other day at the moment. I’m not exaggerating when I say I may have to close my books for a while to new pupils – and considering that I work weekends and evenings if required, it takes a lot to fill my diary to the level that it’s at right now. This time last year was very quiet – that’s when the recession finally hit me – and it lasted until the summer. Since then it’s just been upwards.

I do find it surprising that so many so-called “professionals” can continue to fail to understand that RED is not the company it used to be in all sorts of different ways. and essentially just retains the name. To keep trying to use the RED name as some sort of dirty weapon – as if all this didn’t happen – is just foolish, and betrays a very bitter outlook.

Scammers From On High

I recently recounted my experiences with a scammers’ collective, consisting of private scammers sending out bogus parking tickets to car park users, and higher level scammers posing as a city council denying all responsibility – presumably so long as they’re reaping the benefits of any ground rent from the scammers themselves.

Well, this story reveals that Coventry City Council appears to dwell at roughly the same level in the slime at the bottom of the pond as these scammers I’ve had dealings with. It appears that two drivers (instructors, actually) were ticketed for driving in a poorly marked bus lane. Cutting a long story short, they took it to a traffic penalty tribunal and won – yet the appeal was uncontested by Coventry City Council.

This is the proof that Coventry City Council – and all others involved in these scams – need their wings clipping sooner rather than later. I’ve had my own dealings with Rushcliffe Borough Council when I once accidentally typed in “61” instead of “62” when I bought a parking ticket and they refused to overturn the fine. All of these people are lying, cheating, thieving scam merchants. All they want is your money, and they’ll twist and manipulate the regulations in order to beat it out of you.

Incidentally, Coventry City Council changed the markings after the appeal process started. However, they deny it had anything to do with the markings being wrong!

We are not considering refunds. The lines have been altered because of the pilot with motorbikes using them, not for any legal reason, and the signs were compliant legally.

Well, obviously they weren’t legal, were they? Otherwise the appeal would have failed, or Coventry City Council would have contested it. As it is, they have effectively admitted it was bogus by not arguing their corner. And in just one month from the date when the bus lane opened, the council snatched nearly £100,000 from those it had scammed with its incompetent road marking scheme.

If anyone has ever tried to wade through the slime that conceals the structure behind these schemes they will know that it is often easier just to accept the fine and walk away. Coventry City Council knows that, the scammers at that UKCPS car park in Leeds know it, as does the Leeds City Council, and Rushcliffe Borough Council (aka Nottingham City Council) knows it. And those are just the ones I have first hand knowledge of. It’s deliberate obstruction.

Steel Panther @ Nottingham Rock City 2014

I’d had my tickets for this gig on order from the moment they went on sale last year. Having seen Steel Panther at Rock City back in 2012 I just had to go again. To be honest, this show was even better than last time.

To begin with, the support band was The Cringe, who hail from New York. It made a pleasant change for a headliner to bring their own support – it’s become quite common for touring bands to hire a local group for each city they play in, and as the recent Haim gig showed, this doesn’t always come off. The Cringe were a good old rock and roll band with an alternative twist.

The Cringe at Rock City 2014

Strangely, it took a long time for the audience to warm to them (at the Haim gig, the crowd went nuts over the very average support). I always feel sorry for bands in these circumstances, but I guess they are used to it.

Steel Panther’s set up was over the top, as usual. The drums are on a four foot high plinth, and there were microphones on it either side for Lexxi Foxxx and Satchel to use as needed. Foxxx also had his dressing table and spent a lot of time preening and putting on make-up.

The lyrics to nearly all their songs are virtually unprintable (and, in most cases, unplayable on the radio because of their lewd and totally unambiguous content). Their set always includes a lot of talking (and swearing) because it’s a complete show, and it is always very funny indeed.

Steel Panther at Rock City 2014

Steel Panther are a brilliant rock and roll band. They could cut it on their music alone, but as I say they are a complete show, and the lewdness is a huge and additional part of what they do.

Towards the end of the main set they did their usual trick of inviting girls on to the stage. They already had one girl in the audience bare her boobs, and they got two more to do it on the stage. There were maybe 15 girls, all wearing very little.

Steel Panther at Rock City 2014

And no, I didn’t try to take any photos of the girls who got their boobs out (though I almost got arc eye from all the people who did). I can’t believe those girls weren’t paid performers, but Starr insisted that they weren’t, and that they turn up to their shows dressed like this.

Steel Panther at Rock City 2014

There was a distinct change in the crowd compared to last time. There seemed to be a lot of bald-headed men who looked like amateur boxers, and there was a lot of stuff being thrown around (beer, beer glasses, and so on). To be honest, anyone who throws anything at a gig is a complete and utter wanker – but, as I said, there was a distinct change in the demographic, and so there were a lot of wankers present.

The floor at Rock City wasn’t quite as sticky as last time, but it was still TOO sticky. I’m taking a bag of sand next time so I can sprinkle that wherever I’m standing.

Some great photos for the collection, and all rounded off with a decent curry at the Mogal-e-Azam (they aren’t under new management, but they DO have new chefs).

Foreign Language Tests End 7 April 2014

As was reported in October last year, the option to take theory or practical tests in languages other than English or Welsh will no longer be available from 7 April 2014. This means that theory tests will not have voiceovers, and practical tests will not be conducted with interpreters. English and Welsh theory test voiceovers for special needs candidates will still be available, and it will still be possible to use a BSL interpreter if you require it.

The DSA has sent out a reminder that the deadline date is fast approaching.

Just to emphasise. At the moment you can have the theory test in the following languages:

  • Albanian
  • Arabic
  • Bengali
  • Cantonese
  • Dari
  • English
  • Farsi
  • Gujarati
  • Hindi
  • Kashmiri
  • Kurdish
  • Mirpuri
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Pushto
  • Spanish
  • Tamil
  • Turkish
  • Urdu
  • Welsh

From 7 April 2014 the list will look like this:

  • English
  • Welsh

And from 7 April you will only be allowed to have a BSL interpreter. No other interpreter will be allowed.