Provisional Licence D-Day

[passinginterest]

Do you mean guaranteed a test ?
I wouldnt have much confidence in a system where anyone could walk away with a licence within a few weeks
Where is this more poulous country - India perhaps

We've already been given the Austrian example in this thread. Intensive training with a qualified instructor and a licence earned in 99% of cases in about 3 weeks. It's the ridiculous idea that 35 minutes with a tester in a completely artificial driving environment can decide whether or not a person is fit to drive that's the main bone of contention. I don't think the majority of posters here have a problem with the enforcement of the law or respect for the law.

[John83]

Is there a few hundred thousand with 2nd provisionals? For all the hullabaloo, they were the only one's effected by the law change (which goes back to my point about enforcement).

There are over 200k 2nd provisionals, and slightly fewer people on their first. It's a lot of people - well over one driver in ten.

[Macy]

Actually, the (newly free online?) Irish Times are quoting 92,000 2nd Provisionals...

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...857997329.html

[John83]

Actually, the (newly free online?) Irish Times are quoting 92,000 2nd Provisionals...

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...857997329.html

You're right. There are 300k-350k learners*. Maybe I saw just over 100k on their second and slightly less on their first. That's close enough to your figures to make sense.

*There was a table of numbers of drivers on each provisional licence with that article in the paper, which I can't find now. It had 15 people or so on their tenth or later provisional licence. Those people shouldn't be forced to take the test. No, I think they should have their hands removed surgically, so they can't do any harm with a car. Well, unless they're like this guy.

[Bald Student]

You're right. There are 300k-350k learners*. Maybe I saw just over 100k on their second and slightly less on their first. That's close enough to your figures to make sense.

*There was a table of numbers of drivers on each provisional licence with that article in the paper, which I can't find now. It had 15 people or so on their tenth or later provisional licence. Those people shouldn't be forced to take the test. No, I think they should have their hands removed surgically, so they can't do any harm with a car. Well, unless they're like this guy.

One of those 15 is an aunt of mine who's given up on driving after failing another test recently. The new rules mightn't be perfect but I think that they're knocking a bit of cop on into the system.

[kingdom hoop]

(newly free online?)

Yeah since yesterday, at irishtimes.com

Press release.

Plenty of time in some places maybe but in those 7 months [from the changes being announced to now] I've gotten 1 test date

You said elsewhere that you're an experienced driver, why didn't you do your test a year ago?

I know our system is poor but like John, if less extreme, I've no sympathy for people who say, "shur I've been driving for years like, I'm a grand driver; I don't need anyone with me." Then how come you didn't pass your test before now? Answer 1: "There was no urgency to have my skills authenticated as I could continue to drive and be insured." Answer 2: "Yerrah why would I wait months to be called to a test when I know I can drive?"

For now the changes are a necessary improvement that may leave some inconvenienced but with little weight to their arguments IMO. However long-term I'd go for a more collaborative (ie focussed on overall education rather than just passing a test) route to competence where people are taught by qualified instructors who can give them little tips and such so that they become good, mannerly drivers. That said, a test should remain, as much to see how people drive under pressure as anything else.

Just one other point. The accompanied requirement might be a blessing in disguise as I think most people (based on a sample of me) don't drive as fast/angrily when they have someone else in the car. I tend to be much more relaxed anyway.

[GavinZac]

You said elsewhere that you're an experienced driver, why didn't you do your test a year ago?

I'm only driving since last April! I don't know if I referred to myself as "experienced" but experience is measured in miles, not time. Working around the county I've driven more in that space of time than my full licensed mother who doesn't have the confidence to drive outside Cork City and takes up to 5 minutes to park has in several years. I'm not claiming to be the world's best driver but I've never had an accident, I don't break the law (well, enforced ones up to this point...) and only unfortunate circumstances means I haven't got a full license yet. I've applied again and am waiting a while and still have not even been given a guideline as to when I can take my test. As a recent graduate that is a bloody killer when applying for jobs. The current system is only a racket and the sooner we implement a modern system the better.

[kingdom hoop]

I'm only driving since last April!

Long enough to have passed the test long 'go so. I suppose you might argue that you wanted to build up your mileage before applying, but you've also argued that one should, like in other countries, only have to wait a few weeks to get a licence!

I've applied again and am waiting a while and still have not even been given a guideline as to when I can take my test.

If you're doing your test in Cork you'll have about a 10-week wait. http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/...pdf&images=yes



Enjoy the cycle to feed the turtles.

[KevB76]

We've already been given the Austrian example in this thread. Intensive training with a qualified instructor and a licence earned in 99% of cases in about 3 weeks. It's the ridiculous idea that 35 minutes with a tester in a completely artificial driving environment can decide whether or not a person is fit to drive that's the main bone of contention.

Yeah I agree that the test in its current format is not adequate, and I also agree that intensive training as described above would be much better, but its not the answer to all the problems.

For example, I did an intensive training course to get my bike licence a few years ago. I never sat on a bike before the course, it lasted 7 full days, culminating in a test, and hey-presto theres your full licence in a week. However at the end of it I knew I wasnt really able to handle a bike, i had just enough control to get through a test. That is why I dont believe a short intensive course is the complete answer.

I see this no unaccompanied L driver thing as a long overdue first step in the right direction in improving the standard of driving in this country, but it is only one small part of a whole raft of things that need to change. Compulsory intensive training would be like the next step up on improving the driver training side of things, but as Gavinzac explained in a previous post its not just the learners or newly qualified drivers who are putting other peoples lives at risk every day.

While tightening up on L-driver laws and improving driver training are all welcome and necessary steps, it must be accompanied by better policing of the the roads in general, and better enforcement of the laws. Also road quality and design would be a major factor that needs more work - improvements can be seen but theres a long way to go.

[gilberto_eire]

I'm just reading this thread for the 1st time and I'm gobsmacked. Any driver of any age or 'miles' under their belt should NEVER be allowed to drive without a qualified driver unless they have passed a test. I don't give a damn about where you have to go or no alternatives available etc.
I use the road every day and often carry the kids with me. What right has an unqualified driver to put our safety in jeopardy? How dare any such person try and justify it.
Everybody has to start somewhere in learning to drive but do it with the minimum possibility of harming themselves or others. Check the death toll on our roads from now until this day next week and them let me have your reasoned argument.

I suppose with a statement like that you never drove without a full-license driver with you until you passed your test?

[reder]

Check the death toll on our roads from now until this day next week and them let me have your reasoned argument.

The death on our roads are due to irresponsible aggressive driving. Very few, if any of these deaths involve learner drivers.

[Macy]

The death on our roads are due to irresponsible aggressive driving. Very few, if any of these deaths involve learner drivers.

Source?

[Billsthoughts]

Source?

We will see over the next few years whether road deaths reduce dramatically with all the L drivers off the road. Personally I dont think it will. We may see a reduction in small collisions tho but not road deaths the majority caused by speeding. Source - Road Saftey Authority.

[Macy]

We will see over the next few years whether road deaths reduce dramatically with all the L drivers off the road. Personally I dont think it will. We may see a reduction in small collisions tho but not road deaths the majority caused by speeding. Source - Road Saftey Authority.

I'd actually be surprised if it's actually bloody enforced, for us to make the judgement one way or the other.

[Billsthoughts]

I'd say it will be enforced alright but in all honesty how many times do you encounter a police checkpoint? personally about twice before I moved to crumlin. (About once a month sincetho )

[Macy]

I'd say it will be enforced alright but in all honesty how many times do you encounter a police checkpoint?

That they've checked my driving licence? 1999, just after I'd moved (and that's because I was on UK plates!).

[oldyouth]

I suppose with a statement like that you never drove without a full-license driver with you until you passed your test?

Of course I did, my point is that with experience comes wisdom. I would have agreed with many of the comments here AT THAT TIME. Having driven approx 25k miles per year for the last 15 years, I can safely say that the roads are no place for inexperienced drivers and the only way we have of cutting out some of the dangerous ones, is the current testing system. And before anyone hops down my throat, I thinks us auld fellas should be re-tested every 10 years or so as well

[oldyouth]

. It's the ridiculous idea that 35 minutes with a tester in a completely artificial driving environment can decide whether or not a person is fit to drive that's the main bone of contention. I don't think the majority of posters here have a problem with the enforcement of the law or respect for the law.

Passing, if you have shown the tester enough bad driving techniques in 35 minutes that he/she has decided to fail you, how many do you think can be expected during a typical week