Garth Rattray
A FEW of the planned changes, new requirements, stipulations and restrictions of the National Road Safety Council's Graduated Licensing System draft proposals concern me. Although they were obviously well researched, well thought out and well intended, I see them as unfair to adult (mature) learners and new drivers.
The NRSC proposes that learner drivers wait a mandatory six months between applying for the learner's permit and taking the driving exam. Successful applicants will be issued a six-month restricted licence wherein he or she cannot drive on any highway or after a 'certain hour' (usually no later than 10 p.m. in some North American states). I didn't notice restrictions on the number of passengers that new drivers can carry and I don't know how commercial drivers fit into all of this.
In all my investigations (and I must add that although my search was extensive, it was not exhaustive), it appears as if a mandatory six-month span between applying for the driver's licence and taking the exam is quite uncommon. Some places stipulate 30 driving lessons, while others stipulate 50 hours of behind-the-wheel driving experience, 10 of which must be at night.
A six-month waiting period does not guarantee six months of lessons, six months of practice or six-months of learning. Ensuring that learners spend some lessons under the guidance of a certified instructor is, however, an excellent idea.
PROPOSED RESTRICTIONS
The NRSC-proposed restrictions for newly-licensed drivers are based on the learning curve. However, paradoxically, the restrictions themselves will preclude many drivers from starting on their individual learning curve until after the stipulated six-month (restricted licence) period because highways now connect most out-of-town communities (where many people live) with the metropolis (where many people work). Therefore, a variable number of newly-licensed drivers will simply sit out the six-month waiting period and learn nothing.
If this proposal becomes law, it would mean that new mature/adult/ working drivers living in any area that necessitates commuting via any highway (I assume that this includes the Mandela Highway) will be prohibited from driving himself or herself (to work, for instance) for six long months. Some may even lose employment opportunities if their jobs depend on their ability to drive.
I have only seen such stringency applied to new drivers under 18 years of age, and, in any event, it's unlikely that new drivers (who actually take the driving exam) are causing our deadly crashes. Per-haps the NRSC could recommend that new drivers display a green 'N' sign (similar to the learner's red 'L') for six months after they acquire their licences. This way, seasoned drivers will make allowance for their neophyte status.
We should focus instead on 'bandoolu' drivers and existing dangerous road hogs. We therefore need to aggressively target the problem of generalised bad driving above all else.
NRSC Executive Director, Paula Fletcher explained that highway driving is dangerous for new drivers given the increased speed and the hazards that other drivers present when they refuse to drive left and pass right. However, I beg to respectfully disagree. Highways should be safer (than regular roads) because they usually have medians and several lanes in any given direction.
Interestingly, some studies have shown that new (usually timid) drivers crash less than those with over one year of driving experience because the latter become overconfident and take risks. This goes back to my argument that the real problem lies in bad driving practices learnt from and practised in our hostile road environment.
Next week: Zoom, zoom, boom!
Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice.
