The driving test (2)

I wish that Mr Attard and others who complain about the failing rate of those taking a driving test would provide some personal information. Nothing serious, just items like the last time they read the Highway Code and were honestly satisfied that they were knowledgeable, competent and responsible drivers.

Just sit down and think how many times in this last week you shook your head at the stupidity, selfishness and irresponsibility of other drivers. Think hard, maybe you were one of those drivers.

I do not know what the failing rate is but we must accept that, like all tests, the results are subjective. At the same time the examiner might have noticed two or more causes for failure and only commented on one.

We all know how many serious incidents we have at pedestrian crossings and a higher number of miracles.

Then it's typical to accuse the authorities of fleecing the public. Perhaps what is needed is to call 'experienced' drivers for testing.

Start with those who have proved to be irresponsible, nothing subjective about that. Then call some other drivers at random, when their licence is up for renewal, or when reaching a certain age.

The ADT will get its revenue and driving skills might improve. Examiners should then be less harsh, if indeed they are, on new drivers because they will know that the rest of us are doing much better on the road.

I agree that it should be just the examiner and examinee in the car during the test. The duty of the instructor is to get the new driver ready for the test. If there are doubts the student should not be allowed to be a danger to himself, the examiner and other road users.

Let's cut out this nonsense of having a witness and lodging a complaint. If an examiner behaves improperly, by all means, otherwise trust that they and driving instructors are both highly competent, fair and professional. It's up to us to make sure that they are before we trust them by using our democratic rights to demand that they meet and maintain certain standards.