jwatkins wrote:Let's be honest. There's one reason, and one reason only, why people are against retesting: They're worried their driving standards have slipped, and they'll lose their license!
If someone's no longer at the required standard, then they shouldn't be driving, whether they're 70 years old or 30.
It's time we had a serious reform of the current system. A driving license should permit you to drive for a finite amount of time, not for life!
How are you defining the "required standard"? The "L" test has always been predicated upon satisfying the examiner that the candidate can safely control the vehicle and is not a danger to other road users. Having passed the "L" test a licensed driver is deemed to meet these requirements until such time as he doesn't, ie. has a crash or injures someone. At that point his suitability to hold a driving licence is reviewed by the courts.
So, the problem surrounding the devising of a re-test is what does one re-test. It would be very simple to re-test for vehicle control and lack of danger to other road users, but what would it demonstrate during that 30 minutes of testing? Nothing more than that 99.99% of all licence holders, who will of course be on their best behaviour during those 30 minutes, can pass the test. It's pointless testing 100% of a population in order to identify the unacceptable 0.01%. Or, to express it statistically, one would have to test 30,000,000 licence holders in order to identify maybe 3,000 who are unable to pass a test. It would be neither practicable nor politically acceptable.