Editorial Tests are too simple
Page 4
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
SPEED limiters, front under-run guards and the possible use of tachograph charts as evidence in court are but a few of the proposals contained in a report from the House of Commons Transport Select Committee. The first two of the proposals are technically possible, the third — if ever adopted — would be a breach of faith and create unnecessary animosity.
During the now almost forgotten tachograph war, the Government gave an undertaking to the unions that tachograph charts would not be used retrospectively as evidence in the courts. The unions are unlikely to take calmly a reversal of that undertaking.
The all-party committee has to be commended for the way it has tackled its task. It is probably the most comprehensive to emanate from that source.
However, its objective — to improve road safety — could be achieved more methodically and effectively by going to the source of the problem.
Vehicles do not cause accidents, nor do road conditions. Drivers do.
We believe the driving tests are much too simple. They do no more than provide licences to go on to the highway, unaccompanied, to gain experience and improve skills.
In the recent snow and ice spell tests were cancelled. Yet drivers who passed their tests hours before the snow came were entitled to drive on unsafe roads.
There is no test of a driver's ability to drive in the dark, on motorways or at speeds beyond the 40 to 50mph mark. Yet once given the pass certificate, all things become possible.
The committee has suggested a more comprehensive test. We suggest this above all else should receive priority.