PETITIONS Please look and support

[Gill Taxis]

Hello this site is an official petition site if you do not know about it please book mark it.

Petitions have long been sent to the Prime Minister by post or delivered to the Number 10 door in person. You can now both create and sign petitions on this website too, giving you the opportunity to reach a potentially wider audience and to deliver your petition directly to Downing Street.

I feel quite strongly about the two petitions below, If you feel that they are correct and feesable please sign the petition. It takes a few mins thats all.
I do not think the petitions are noticed on the site so feel free to spread the word and get these subjects noticed.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/recurring/
AND
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/betterdrivers/

Steve

[Gill Taxis]

I have created a petition that is directed at improving the driving standards in my line of work. The Taxi Trade .
What good it will do I simply do not know but one has to try.
I will post the link to the petition once is is approved by the No:10 team and becomes live.
If the petition is rejected for any reason I have requested a detailed explanation, given the reasons why !
I will post that on here in the event that the petition is rejected.

Steve

[christopherwk]

I agree with the first petition, not so sure about the second one though. If they make it compulsory to take the advanced test after passing the standard driving test, they may as well raise the standard of the standard driving test to the advanced level?

Regards to the first petition, I think five years is quite a long time. I know someone who passed their driving about five years ago, and haven't driven a car since then, and I'm not sure how good his driving will be when he'll get into a car the first time since passing his test, especially as roads have got so much busier since then.

Also another idea, say if you pass the standard driving test, your licence will be valid for 3 years, before you have to take another driving test. If you pass an advanced driving test (IAM/RoSPA etc), then perhaps the time your licence will be valid will be longer due to the advanced nature of the test, say 5 years?

[Gill Taxis]

Also another idea, say if you pass the standard driving test, your licence will be valid for 3 years, before you have to take another driving test. If you pass an advanced driving test (IAM/RoSPA etc), then perhaps the time your licence will be valid will be longer due to the advanced nature of the test, say 5 years?

OK I take your point on the first petition....
What you say about petition 2...yea OK I could live with that.
All I am trying say is that we need to maintain standards on our roads.
Why are people afraid of tests ? They should have nothing to worry about if they can drive correct.
I am telling you periodic testing will "whittle out" the dangerous and incompetent drivers that put all our lives at risk.
I have taken on board all that has been said on this site about re-testing and how hard it would be to carry out and put into force but we are talking about our lives and the lives of our family members so I still say it could be put into place.
MAKE DRIVING MORE PROFESSIONAL and less of a status factor !!!!
You can still enjoy it but do it correct ! But boy racers, old self taught bad habit driver and short sighted near miss drivers think otherwise.
If you can drive...what difference will a mere test make....NONE AT ALL..

Steve

[ipsg.glf]

How much will all of this cost? Let's say £100m

Would that £100m be better spent on:

Traffic Police - so they can deal with dangerous drivers, drunk drivers, mechanical defects
Engineering Solutions - So problems on our roads can be identified and remedied
Targeted Problem Drivers - Insurance companies know who are responsible for collisions (their NCB directly reflects that) - If you have had one at-fault collision, aren't you more likely to more soon thereafter? These are the drivers we should be concentrating on.

To spend £100m on drivers who are not causing collisions is, IMHO, simply absurd.

I vote No and No on both counts.

[Gill Taxis]

How much will all of this cost? Let's say £100m
Would that £100m be better spent on:
Targeted Problem Drivers - Insurance companies know who are responsible for collisions (their NCB directly reflects that) - If you have had one at-fault collision, aren't you more likely to more soon thereafter? These are the drivers we should be concentrating on.

To spend £100m on drivers who are not causing collisions is, IMHO, simply absurd.

I vote No and No on both counts.

Well I don't know if it would cost 100 million pounds !
( Oh you mean by the time you pay the politicians wages then yes )
I can see that you priorities other issues above this, so be it.....that is your decision.
So you don't think road safety is priority ?
So you don't think that by educating people in the use of probably the most dangerous thing apart from "firing a gun direct at a person" is not priority ?
OK/.....Let the fools drive around....un-educated in the skills available to them.....
Let them believe 35 is OK to to do in a 30mph area......let the man that has restricted sight and can not see much drive on our roads......
Why should we let them ? cos they have driven years and years..thats right ( let them fall into a system of habit )/....
B******S
Get every one tested...the government has room to improve road safety and YES the funds as well.
It Will never cost 100m pounds to enforce it will actually give instructors and examiners more work and RAISE THE STANDARDS ON BRITISH ROADS.

So hold on...lets get down to basics here ! are you saying road safety is out of the question ? And is all drivers qualified enough to to be safe on the roads ?
The government blows millions on silly ideas everyday so why not spend a few quid on preserving life on roads when the chance of been killed by the mistake of an idiot behind the wheel of a car is massive ?

100million....LOL...
Give instructors the right to re-assess the ability of a driver ,,,simply book an appointment and they will assess the pupil at the cost of the driver.
THIS IS A LIFE AND DEATH SITUATION
If you can not drive a car correct you can KILL other road users.
It is a dangerous activity in the hands of an un-trained or undereducated individual.
Whats wrong with you lot ? This is our lives at risk and our kids and generations to be....
GET the road standards raised now....Stop been silly.
Steve

[Darren]

Well I don't know if it would cost 100 million pounds !
( Oh you mean by the time you pay the politicians wages then yes )
I can see that you priorities other issues above this, so be it.....that is your decision.

Being realistic, I suspect it would cost more than 100m to do this. Not just in actually training and providing instructors, but the cost to the treasury due to the loss of people paying road tax because they failed to pass a retest would be catastrophic. Any politician who backed a scheme would be likely to loose their seat I expect. I must dig out a piece Andrew Howard, former head of the AA motoring trust (now the IAM motoring trust) did on this, it outlined in detail the problem of retesting and was reasonably well thought out with some figures produced by the DSA.

So you don't think road safety is priority ?
So you don't think that by educating people in the use of probably the most dangerous thing apart from "firing a gun direct at a person" is not priority ? OK/.....Let the fools drive around....un-educated in the skills available to them.....Let them believe 35 is OK to to do in a 30mph area......let the man that has restricted sight and can not see much drive on our roads......Why should we let them ? cos they have driven years and years..thats right ( let them fall into a system of habit )/....Get every one tested...the government has room to improve road safety and YES the funds as well. It Will never cost 100m pounds to enforce it will actually give instructors and examiners more work and RAISE THE STANDARDS ON BRITISH ROADS.

There aren't enough instructors and examiners to do this. It has already been researched by many as to the feasibility of providing compulsory retesting, it is not a new idea and is not straight forward. I believe this 100m that's being quoted is actually a drop in the pond compared to the real cost.

I suspect if this came in, approx 1/4 of people would fail a retest first time round (maybe thats an exaggeration). Thats, approx what 10m people off the roads. 10m people not paying road tax, or car insurance. A portion of them would still drive anyway, but there wouldn't be enough police to cope with catching them. 10m people who couldn't get to work in the same way and would probably lose their jobs.

The figures aren't accurate and maybe exaggerated, but the cost to society would be huge. Its not as simple as just saying retest everyone. I would love it! would make my day infinitely easier and a more of a joy but in reality it 's more likely I suspect that we'll be visited by aliens.

So hold on...lets get down to basics here ! are you saying road safety is out of the question ? And is all drivers qualified enough to to be safe on the roads ?

Nobody is saying road safety is out of the question. What is being said is that there are ways and means of going about it, which have to be a compromise to achieving reduction in accident rates, in the right demographics without killing off a large section of the economy, putting people out of work etc.

Lets face it, if this was a real proposal, I would love to see the estimate from the treasury as to how much our tax's would have to go up to support it and as someone who believes I pay far too much tax already and have seriously considered dropping the UK for somewhere much more tax friendly and taking my skills elsewhere I would not support a tax hike.

100million....LOL...
Give instructors the right to re-assess the ability of a driver ,,,simply book an appointment and they will assess the pupil at the cost of the driver.
THIS IS A LIFE AND DEATH SITUATION
If you can not drive a car correct you can KILL other road users.
It is a dangerous activity in the hands of an un-trained or undereducated individual.
Whats wrong with you lot ? This is our lives at risk and our kids and generations to be....
GET the road standards raised now....Stop been silly.
Steve

I don't think ADI's are the right people to be doing the assessment, otherwise they would be assessing L test to start with. There is also huge variation in the standards of ADI's, they have a 6 point grading system. How do we choose which ADI's should do it?

There is nothing wrong with us lot, just some of us have been working on this for the best part of 10 years and have seen and heard the arguments many times and looked and re-looked at reasons and feasibility into doing particular things.

Lastly, can we mind language please? I don't really want to sit having to edit posts, this is a family site you know

[ipsg.glf]

How much will all of this cost? Let's say £100m
Would that £100m be better spent on:
Targeted Problem Drivers - Insurance companies know who are responsible for collisions (their NCB directly reflects that) - If you have had one at-fault collision, aren't you more likely to more soon thereafter? These are the drivers we should be concentrating on.

To spend £100m on drivers who are not causing collisions is, IMHO, simply absurd.

I vote No and No on both counts.

Well I don't know if it would cost 100 million pounds !
( Oh you mean by the time you pay the politicians wages then yes )
I can see that you priorities other issues above this, so be it.....that is your decision.
So you don't think road safety is priority ?
So you don't think that by educating people in the use of probably the most dangerous thing apart from "firing a gun direct at a person" is not priority ?
OK/.....Let the fools drive around....un-educated in the skills available to them.....
Let them believe 35 is OK to to do in a 30mph area......let the man that has restricted sight and can not see much drive on our roads......
Why should we let them ? cos they have driven years and years..thats right ( let them fall into a system of habit )/....
B******S
Get every one tested...the government has room to improve road safety and YES the funds as well.
It Will never cost 100m pounds to enforce it will actually give instructors and examiners more work and RAISE THE STANDARDS ON BRITISH ROADS.

So hold on...lets get down to basics here ! are you saying road safety is out of the question ? And is all drivers qualified enough to to be safe on the roads ?
The government blows millions on silly ideas everyday so why not spend a few quid on preserving life on roads when the chance of been killed by the mistake of an idiot behind the wheel of a car is massive ?

100million....LOL...
Give instructors the right to re-assess the ability of a driver ,,,simply book an appointment and they will assess the pupil at the cost of the driver.
THIS IS A LIFE AND DEATH SITUATION
If you can not drive a car correct you can KILL other road users.
It is a dangerous activity in the hands of an un-trained or undereducated individual.
Whats wrong with you lot ? This is our lives at risk and our kids and generations to be....
GET the road standards raised now....Stop been silly.
Steve

Steve

Put simply I do not understand why you think it is a priority to target all drivers for additional training when we need to focus on those drivers that are actually causing collisions.

You do realise that the vast majority of drivers go about their daily business without incident?

[SLine]

I agree with ipsg.glf. Retesting is a nice ideal, but too onerous to implement and enforce, when the mojority of drivers get on with driving without hurting anyone.

A DSA retest only shows you are capable of controlling a car safely and legally for 30 minutes - and is a repeat of what you have done before.
More effective is some additional driver training following driving offences, such as the awareness courses being trialled by some authorities.

I have a friend who was annoyed at having to attend one of these as an alternative to points for speeding, but admitted that she did find it useful and an eye opener.

[Gareth]

Put simply I do not understand why you think it is a priority to target all drivers for additional training when we need to focus on those drivers that are actually causing collisions.

Agreed.

As a policy, how about a greater readiness by the courts to require retesting by drivers that have shown themselves to be below par, but then also to require that the test they must pass is broadly equivalent to either the IAM or RoADAR advanced driving tests ...?

[TripleS]

Hello this site is an official petition site if you do not know about it please book mark it.

Petitions have long been sent to the Prime Minister by post or delivered to the Number 10 door in person. You can now both create and sign petitions on this website too, giving you the opportunity to reach a potentially wider audience and to deliver your petition directly to Downing Street.

I feel quite strongly about the two petitions below, If you feel that they are correct and feesable please sign the petition. It takes a few mins thats all.
I do not think the petitions are noticed on the site so feel free to spread the word and get these subjects noticed.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/recurring/
AND
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/betterdrivers/

Steve

Thanks for mentioning them Steve, but I'm afraid I can't support either of them in their present form.

Testing all drivers at five yearly intervals would be an enormous task, and it would take a long time to assemble the resources, deal with all the candidates first time round, and then maintain the routine into the future. It doesn't sound to me like a practical proposition and I don't feel it would be an efficient use of resources.

I think we would get far more benefit from a programme of well publicised educational campaigns directed at all road user groups - and this could be implemented quite quickly - allied to more specific assessment/training/testing of those who are causing the problems, and those who look most likely to be an excessive source of trouble. IMHO there has to be some form of targeting, and that's what we should be focussing on.

With regard to the second petition, I can see more justification for this one, but I would much rather we have a fundamental look at the new driver training system from first principles. This means looking at what kind of drivers we should aim to have on our roads, and what kinds of attitude and approach we would like them to have. It then means looking at the existing syllabus, how it is implemented, and what parts (if any) we could take out in favour of introducing more effective elements into the programme. Should we, for example, get rid of the Hazard Perception Test, which, from what I've heard, sounds a bit tricky and more of a game for which one needs a certain knack, or can we usefully retain it in an improved form?

In conjunction with all this, we should have an eye to the training currently being offered by the IAM, and see how much of that can be incorporated into the initial standard training programme for all drivers. No doubt this would make the new driver training system more protracted and expensive, though perhaps not dramatically so, but I think it would be a good investment overall, and it is certainly the way I'd like us to be going - and without delay, too.

I'm inclined to feel that would make a very useful contribution to improving driving standard generally, but especially in the context of the worrying situation with new young drivers. The potential benefits of this could be very extensive, and it infuriates me that the government and local authorities are wasting so much time and effort, and our money, and achieving so little. It is disgraceful and tragic, and we should be giving them hell about it.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Gromit37]

ipsg.glf, I do not follow your logic. It seems you think it is only a small percentage of the UK drivers that repeatedly have accidents, and therefore only they need education.

In fact, while there are repeat offenders, every day, somebody is having their first (and perhaps only) 'accident'. It may be a BIG accident, it may not, but targeting only the repeat offenders is not going to solve the problem for the vast majority.

[ipsg.glf]

ipsg.glf, I do not follow your logic. It seems you think it is only a small percentage of the UK drivers that repeatedly have accidents, and therefore only they need education.

In fact, while there are repeat offenders, every day, somebody is having their first (and perhaps only) 'accident'. It may be a BIG accident, it may not, but targeting only the repeat offenders is not going to solve the problem for the vast majority.

It is about focussing our attention on people with the greatest need. Why go to the trouble and expense of people who are not being involved in collisions?

TrafPol can deal with those drivers who exhibit risky behaviour and a re-testing regime could be put in place with better liasion between the insurance companies and the DVLA.