Another hot story is the one about raising the age at which people can take their tests to 18. As I mentioned in this article, there are plans to introduce a graded licence system and to introduce various restrictions on new drivers. So it is a little surprising to hear what the AA president, Edmund King, has to say after casting doubt on the plan:
What we’d like to see is to teach people to drive more carefully before they pass their test.
I think Mr King is about as far above the actual process of teaching “people to drive” as it’s possible to get. In other words, totally out of touch with reality. No one down at the sharp end with an ounce of intelligence would believe it were that simple. It’s wishy-washy nonsense.
The fact – and it IS a fact, Mr King – is that new drivers have already been taught how to drive properly. They’ve already been taught how to drive carefully. The fact that they do not is down to their experience, maturity, and upbringing. It is impossible to reconcile the first two without the passage of time. Experience takes time to develop, as does maturity.
The most mature 17-year old in the world could still be involved in an accident because of inexperience. And the most experienced 17-year old (if such existed) could still have an accident as a result of immaturity. It is a basic Law of Nature. It has held true since the first written records of human history, and it has persisted until the present.
And still you get people who think that a few namby-pamby words can make it all all right.
New drivers need to be kept out of certain high-risk situations until they have developed experience and maturity. It’s not as if these new proposals want to wrap them in cotton wool or anything – the aim is just to keep cars full of immature prats off the roads, especially at night, in the face of overwhelming evidence to support it.
That previous (well, previous to the previous) story about tests only being carried out in English from next year is hot news at the moment. A follow up story from the Beeb tells how Allyson Ng cheated on tests she was acting as interpreter for by giving the answers to pupils. The licences of 94 people were revoked as a result. Her operation was mainly based in Cardiff, with a small number in Birmingham.
Ng was charging people £110 a time for her “services”. DSA staff became suspicious when there was a sudden upturn in those using her.
She was jailed for 12 months for fraud.
However, this story illustrates one big reason why it is important that foreign language tests are eliminated as soon as possible.
Much of it is a rehash of what has been said before. However, it is worth taking a look at the TRL paper it’s based on, because that is quite new and it outlines all the proposals to be considered. I just wish they’d talk in English instead of convoluted gov-speak. Attempting to sift out the important bits, we have:
graduated driving licence
minimum learning period
mandatory daytime and night time lessons
mandatory training log book
12-month probationary licence on passing the test at age 18+
mandatory P plates during probationary period
night time 10pm-5pm curfew unless accompanied by someone 30+ years old
ban on carrying passengers under age 30
lower alcohol limit
ban on use of mobile phones (including hands-free)
Let’s hope they get off their arses and do something before we all die of old age!
An email bulletin from the DSA states that from 7 April 2014, candidates will no longer be able to take Theory Tests with foreign language voiceovers, or Practical Driving Tests using an interpreter. This action follows the consultation carried out earlier this year, the results of which can be read here.
Note that Special Needs candidates will still be able to take their Theory Tests with English or Welsh voiceovers, and hearing-impaired candidates will still be able to take the Theory Test in British Sign Language (BSL) and use a BSL interpreter on their Practical Test. Other candidates will still be able to take their tests in Welsh (though Lord knows why they should have to, except in order to make some sort of political statement).
I fully support this action. However, I don’t think we’ve heard the last of it just yet…
And I also predict a rush of people hurrying to take tests before the deadline, so anyone learning to drive should bear this in mind as it is possible waiting times will increase.
Can I use an interpreter on my Practical Test?
Yes, until 7 April 2014. After that time you will have to do the test in English or Welsh.
Can I do my Theory Test with a voiceover in my first language?
Yes, until 7 April 2014 – and assuming that your language is one of those supported. After that time you will have to do the test in English or Welsh.
The story reports that police in London – the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) – have made 27 arrests in connection. The article says:
Police say those most often targeted are young people who are normally forced to pay such large amounts for genuine insurance that they jump at the chance to get what appears a good deal.
Reading into that, one has to conclude that those arrested were guilty of just that. However, I’d be very surprised if there wasn’t another common denominator involved.
An American story from the newsfeeds has concluded that car crashes are a “leading threat” to pregnant drivers. My understanding is that their next major aim is to report on the fact that water is wet and fire is hot.
Being a mother on the go isn’t easy, or without risks. In fact, motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of trauma to pregnant women. Plus, crashes during those nine months result in higher rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes such as preterm birth, stillbirth, and placental abruption, according to a new study by the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
I love that word “preventative”. Because prevention – at the least in the obvious sense – is absolutely the last thing on their list of recommendations. In fact, the only thing they do seem interested in is stating the bleeding obvious.
The results found that 2.9 percent of pregnant drivers were involved in one or more crashes. After one crash there was an increased rate of adverse outcomes and a second crash saw that rate increase.
You can hear the collective sound of millions of people slapping their foreheads and going “Of course! How could we have been so stupid?” Or not, as the case may be.
It appears that not much is needed to impress the Americans, and concluding that you increase the risk of a problem if you’re pregnant each time you have a crash is obviously one of them. Of course, any sensible person would realise that it is a risk that cannot be eliminated unless you don’t drive in the first place.
I also pointed out that NCC had already decided it was going to do this, no matter what people thought about it. They said as much in the leaflets they sent out (click the image to see one for the Wilford area). So it initially came as a bit of surprise to discover motorists were being stopped along Haydn Road – where 20mph has already been imposed – and being canvassed on their opinions. This was happening about two weeks ago albeit months after the leaflet went out.
But now we have moved a little further. NCC apparently didn’t like the results it was getting from the canvassing.
As I pointed out in that last article, RoSPA recommends 20mph limits on roads where the average speed is already below 24mph, and where the road looks like it should be 20mph in the first place. Haydn Road doesn’t fit that bill in any way, shape, or form, and I suspect that NCC has now realised this and is anxious to regain lost ground.
So last week, I noticed that traffic monitoring devices have been installed on all the roads where NCC is planning on introducing 20mph limits. You will note that these devices – those double-black wires across roads, which are used primarily to monitor traffic speeds over a period of time – have gone in at least a week after the Haydn Road canvassing exercise, and therefore several months after NCC announced it was going to do this anyway by sending out its stupid leaflets.
This apparent attempt to gather the right sort of data after a decision has already been taken is bad enough, but let’s take a look at where they’ve put these monitoring devices. Firstly, on Ruddington Lane, which is now a major thoroughfare after the closure of Wilford Lane. Instead of the hundreds of cars that used to go along that road, you now have many thousands each day, and in the extended rush hour created by the tram works and other idiotic road improvements and utilities works everywhere else (it now lasts anywhere from 3.30pm until 7pm) Ruddington Lane is gridlocked by people trying to pass through Compton Acres to West Bridgford and beyond. Traffic is at a complete standstill for the busiest part of the day.
Maybe those responsible are not as dumb as you might think. I suspect that they know full well that the average speed of traffic being monitored now is going to support their moronic 20mph policy, and that’s why they’re doing it. They know that no matter what speed people drive at along Ruddington Lane when it’s quiet (or when Wilford Lane was open), the huge number who are virtually stationary now will pull the average speed right down. I’m sure this will come out in their “public consultation meetings”. Of course, if they are as dumb as you might think, then they are just producing highly inaccurate and flawed data.
If we rule out the “dumb” card, it only leaves vindictiveness towards the motorist as the motivating force.
They’ve also put a set of wires in on Gregory Boulevard through Hyson Green. This road is also busy during rush hour, but in the last week – running as it does alongside the Goose Fair, with the numerous road closure and restrictions that last for a week as a result – the road has been gridlocked for much of the day. Again, highly misleading traffic speeds will have been recorded.
In fact, the mass of road works which are causing chaos in the City at the moment have pulled the average speed down on ALL roads, and these monitoring devices are installed in multiple locations where traffic used to move freely, but doesn’t anymore. It is totally pointless trying to get a measure of normal road speeds under these artificial conditions. Pointless – unless you are deliberately trying to obtain misleading results for some purpose.
Tonight, a lesson overran by half an hour as a result of the rush hour lasting until well after 7pm on the Ring Road. London Road into the City was at a standstill for some reason (and a sign at Trent Bridge proclaimed a lane closure for still more road works). The Aspley Lane works on the Ring Road are far from complete – the official end date is December – but a sign has now gone up outside Wollaton Park (Middleton Boulevard) advising of delays there when “junction improvements” commence later in October there. So the idiots have sanctioned yet another set of major road works amidst all the other incomplete works still in progress.
And through it all, they will be monitoring average traffic speeds in order to justify their idiotic 20mph plan.
I will say again:
20mph is too slow for many roads – and add that creating purposely inaccurate data to support the plan isn’t fooling anyone
Well done Bryn, who passed first time today with just 5 driver faults. He shared the same sense of humour as me – sarcasm – especially when he’d done something wrong, so he’s been a great pupil to teach. We’ve had a lot of laughs.
It was a good start moving away from his house. I said, “when you’re ready, off we go”, and nothing happened. Then, nothing happened some more. He went for the ignition key, and I said “it’s on – unless you’ve stalled it” (he hadn’t). Then, nothing happened one more time. I leaned over and said “it goes better if you use the gas instead of the brake!” And then, later, there was that cardinal sin which is guaranteed to open my sarcastic floodgates – following other traffic.
I can never explain why perfectly competent drivers – and I know they are competent – do silly things like this, but Bryn is an excellent driver and was nervous as hell. So it all worked out well in the end.
The reason for my nostalgia is that I can remember the term “active transport” from when I used to do Biology both at school and at Uni (as a minor part of my Chemistry degree). It always frustrated me because it explained nothing – and I can’t recall anyone ever saying “no one knows” when I asked questions. Even the current Wikipedia entry is vague. Mind you, people still prevaricate over things today – probably more so than in the past – even when “I don’t know” is really what they should be saying.
I’m a bit late putting this up, but well done Matthew, who passed first time on Friday with just 3 driver faults. He’s been a nice guy to teach – and we got that serious case of “bungee leg” under control, after all!
Anyway, he keeps my pass rate at 60% for the year to date, and he gets me back on track after two recent fails – one of which is unfortunately a serial failer, with 5 fails to date, always for something different (we’ll get there, though, no matter how long it takes).