other issues

I have been repeatedly asked if Learn-2-Live is involved in other issues of road safety? The simple answer to that question is YES! Although motorway tuition for new drivers is the main focus of my campaign, it has allowed me the chance to make my feelings known to various organizations/media etc. on many other issues about which I feel strongly. Perhaps you would allow me to share one or two of them with you.

Cyclists Responsibility. In light of media reports concerning EC proposals on cyclists rights to compensation in accidents with cars, I contacted the DfT in London. It appeared that motorists would have to bear the cost of any accident involving a cyclist, regardless of blame. This would obviously be very wrong. I have now received the DfT reply... "The European Commission propose to introduce a law, which would apply across Europe, enabling a cyclist or pedestrian to claim against a motorist's insurance in the event of an accident (UK law already provides for this). What makes the proposal controversial is the use of the phrase "irrespective of fault". This has caused the media to infer that compensation would be provided irrespective of fault. But the intention is that the right to compensation would still be established by a Court on the basis of liability. The Government is committed to improving conditions for cyclists, however it is by no means clear that introducing a right to compensation for any road user irrespective of fault would benefit road safety. Every road user should be encouraged to appreciate that they must behave responsibly. Tom Roberts, Policy Advisor - LRI DfT" Let's hope that this puts the record straight, and that all road users get a fair deal.

Fog Lights OFF !! Over the years I have become convinced that the standard of motorway driving is declining. Given the fact that the Minister of Transport himself puts the number of people who undergo post-test motorway tuition at between 4-6%, what else can we expect? A few weeks ago I went down to London. The journey down took nearly 7 hours instead of the usual 5-6 hours mainly because of the sheer volume of traffic through Birmingham due to the motor show. We also had the added problem of road works where the mandatory speed limit dropped to 50mph. Why do so many drivers believe these reduced speed limits apply to everybody except themselves? However, the journey home was a different matter. Halfway home we, like many other drivers encountered what I would consider the worst driving weather that I have ever known during my ten years of motoring and yet many drivers continued to drive at 70mph and above, despite the atrocious weather conditions. On both journeys, and many others I have undertaken on these roads, I have become more and more aware of the number of drivers who, no matter what the weather conditions, insist on leaving their rear fog lights switched on. The Highway Code tells us that fog lights should only be used when visibility is less than 100 metres, yet many drivers leave them on for nearly every journey they make. Are these drivers really so oblivious to the problems their fog lights are causing to the motorists behind them? So I ask, or even beg you, for the sake of my eyesight and that of every other motorist who drives behind you, if visibility is not seriously reduced, please switch your rear fog lights off. (Highway Code, Rule 94).

Drinking & Driving. I believe there is only one safe limit - that HAS to be ZERO!! This is one subject which has, by my friends, been labelled as "a little to the right of Genghis Khan". I believe that each and every driver must take responsibility for their actions from the moment they get into a vehicle. Each motorist makes a conscious decision as to whether to drive after consuming alcohol, so they do so in the full knowledge that they are breaking the law and if they are caught they will be punished. Killing someone while driving under the influence of alcohol should be treated as it really is, premeditated murder and should carry the same penalty as anyone else who commits that crime. Over the years I have, in any way possible, backed Police crackdown's on drinking and driving, either at Christmas or during the summer. The police have received bad press on this issue but I have and will applaud them for their action. I have been sickened to my stomach when I have read in the papers or seen on TV, bereaved relatives who cannot understand why the driver involved has been allowed virtually to get away with this crime. Do we really consider life to be that cheap? I know from personal experience what it's like to watch someone you know and love die as a result of the action of these criminals. My Christian faith teaches me that life is a God given gift yet we allow people to be killed and maimed in this way with impunity. Driving a vehicle should not be considered a God given right but a privilege and if this privilege is abused then it should be withdrawn -- not just for 1 or 2 years, but for life.

Professional-only tuition. This is one of the many issues I have spoken about repeatedly over the years. This campaign has always said that unless there is a compulsion for professional tuition only, motorway training should be done post-test. I understand that somewhere around 95% of learner drivers take tuition with an ADI. If that's the case why not make it compulsory for this training only to be done with an ADI?

Help Us

The Cost of Petrol. Mention the cost of petrol and nearly every motorist will tell you their story about how the price just keeps on rocketing. Unleaded petrol is getting towards £4 per gallon and in some parts of the country more than that. I usually fill my car up when it gets down to just under half full, putting about 28 litres in at a time. The cost of this is about £3 more than I was paying last year. If this increase was because of the world price of oil, I like most people, although not happy, would accept it. However it's not world prices, it's our own chancellor who finds the motorist an easy target. We are continually being told that by raising the petrol prices it will encourage people to leave their cars at home and use public transport. We might consider it if we had a reliable transport system but the fact is that the public transport system in this country is a disgrace. Privatisation has meant that the bus and train system in this country is unreliable to say the least and in some cases non-existent. I can only speak from personal experience and I'm sure many of you will have encountered similar problems. My husband doesn't drive, and until recently worked 4 set shifts at a television-manufacturing firm, which was about 7-8 miles from our home. During the week there was a bus to take him in for the 6-2 shift but that bus didn't run at the weekend. For the 2-10 there was also a bus to take him in. However the last bus to take him in on nights left Burnley at 8.30pm. The last bus to Burnley came past his factory at 9.30pm. How was he supposed to get to and from work late at night if I didn't take him? For us the car is an essential, as it is for many other people. In many parts of the country the bus and train services have been severely cut back so people have to rely on their cars. I, like most people, don't mind paying a fair price for things but what I'm sure we all object to most strongly is being ripped off by the people who are supposed to represent us.

The Theory Test. As from 14th November 2002, the new driving theory test will incorporate a test, which comprises a selection of film clips, showing real road scenes and potential hazards. People sitting the test will be assessed on how soon they spot the dangers. Each candidate will be tested on 14 film clips chosen at random from a series of two hundred. Over one million people take their driving test every year. However, one in five new drivers has an accident in the first 12 months following their test. Research has shown that new drivers take up to two seconds longer to recognise hazardous situations, compared to more experienced drivers. Driving techniques such as scanning the road ahead and looking for potential hazards can help learner drivers improve their awareness of dangers when driving. Alistair Darling said "Too many accidents involve new drivers and it is therefore essential that they are aware of road hazards from the very start. Nearly 10 people die on our roads every day - and we are committed to reducing that number. By concentrating on these danger awareness skills as soon as people start to drive they are given a valuable lesson for life - making the road safer for them and all road users". Gary Austin, Driving Standards Agency's chief executive, said "Hazard perception testing will encourage learner drivers to spend more time developing danger-awareness skills that are second nature to more experienced drivers. We are committed to ensuring that the driving test is a rigorous assessment of a person's proficiency to drive and cope with the challenges of being a driver. The danger awareness dimension of the test will be an additional check to ensure that new drivers are fully prepared". The new hazard perception test will form part of the current screen based theory test. Failure to pass either the existing multiple-choice section or the hazard perception test will result in failure of the whole test.

Pass Plus. When this idea was first mooted prior to introduction in Feb.1995, an ADI friend of mine showed me a copy of the syllabus of this scheme and asked me to read it and then to give him my initial reactions. Parts 1-5 are concerned with all aspects of driver training which I felt are, or should be, taught as part of the basic driving test. My feeling was then, and still is, that this training should be done pre and not post-test. Part 6 states that "some form" of motorway tuition should be given, and in places not easily accessible to these roads it would be left to the ADI to decide what form this training should take. By including this section they have effectively removed the only original stumbling block to compulsory motorway tuition. My initial reaction to this scheme was, and still is, that it is an insult to every registered ADI on the road today. In the first year of this scheme only 1.5% of new drivers underwent this training, so the scheme has been re-launched and the number of people completing this training has doubled, to around 3.5%. I leave you to draw your own conclusions from these figures! Many insurance companies do give discounts to those who have completed this training. The majority are young drivers who would be paying more for insurance, sometimes, than their cars are worth. One question I have to ask of these insurance companies offering cheaper insurance for these who do Pass Plus… "Why do you not give the same to those of us who have gone on to do advanced driving tests, such as IAM or DIAmond?"