Raising the Driving Age (Again)

MPs have decided that the driving age needs to be increased from the current 17 years to 18 years:

The minimum driving age must be raised from 17 to 18 to stop young people “killing themselves and others”, MPs have said.

I have often harboured the suspicion that MPs are a bunch of brain-dead wankers and now I have the evidence. What, exactly, will happen to the statistics if this wheeze becomes law? Okay, you at the back there, yes, of course, the death and injury figures for 17 year-olds will drop to zero while the same rates for 18 year-olds will rise exponentially. The reason young drivers figure so high in the accident statistics is not purely because they are beset with the indomitable self assurance that comes with a lack of years, it is because they lack experience.

The matter of experience (or the lack thereof) was admirably demonstrated a few years back with the “born again biker” syndrome. In this instance, middle-aged men who, past the first flush of youth and with a now mostly grown family, had a few bob to spend on the latest crotch rocket. A bike so unlike the ones they had in their youth that they proved unable to cope with the power and pranged the things in their hundreds and thousands, skewing the accident statistics for motorcycles alarmingly. These people came a cropper for exactly the same reason as young drivers – they were inexperienced.

So, there is some measure of logic behind the other proposal on the table:

The Commons transport committee also wants learner drivers to spread lessons over a year before taking the test and a complete alcohol ban for new drivers.

Some measure of logic, but not much. Once more, MPs being expert in nothing other than snuffling in the Westminster trough, demonstrate their staggering ignorance of education and how people learn. Everyone learns at their own pace. To have a mandated year-long process will mean that some will become bored and stop learning as the process is too long to meet their learning ability. The process should be matched to the needs of the learner – which for anyone involved with learning is pretty basic stuff. For a bunch of morons in the legislature it is a concept too far.

Novice drivers should be banned from carrying passengers aged between 10 and 20 late at night, the report adds.

And this stupid, ill-conceived piece of ignorance will do what, exactly? How, precisely do these stupid fuckers think they will police it? They assume in all their staggering ignorance that every young novice driver is incapable of driving a vehicle safely at night, so they may not carry passengers.

Transport committee chairman Gwyneth Dunwoody, Labour MP for Crewe and Nantwich, said: “The time has come for a revolutionary change.”

Ah, yes, that venomous old bat.

She added: “I think some males would like to drive at 11. But the reality is that we aren’t talking about people having the odd crunch… but about people killing themselves and killing others.”

So, like other followers of her thoroughly egregious party, she likes the odd strawman or two. I wanted to drive a fire engine when I was 11 as well as flying a fighter jet – perhaps we should legislate for those while we are at it. If Dunwoody and the other MPs involved in this headline grabbing exercise were really concerned about the accident statistics – in that they were really looking for a practical solution, they would think about properly graded licences. If you are going to limit someone why not the capacity of vehicle (much as we do with bikes) and have assessments before moving onto the next stage? That would stagger learning over a period of time while allowing people to gain experience and develop their skills. Then too, further post test assessment and incentives that encourage people to develop their driving skills throughout their driving career. But, no, that’s just a little too difficult for the simple minds lurking in the corridors of the palace of Westminster.