---

Road Safety

Those initiatives may have been seen as bold plans when they were introduced, but they are seen as plain common sense nowadays. The use of motorcycle helmets is another example; that is something else that people see as just plain common sense. We certainly want to address the issue of driver safety and to look at how we can change the attitudes of drivers, because driver safety is not just about drivers' skills. In fact, some of the evidence that I have seen shows that the young men who fly through their driving test with flying colours are the drivers killed in accidents, not the drivers who have difficulty passing their tests, possibly including the nervous girls who fail their test because they are an absolute bundle of nerves. If we make the test harder, we need to be very careful that we do not prevent those types of people from passing it; they may ultimately be the girlfriend driving the car rather than the boyfriend who has passed his test with flying colours and who, judging by the statistics that I have seen, would be more likely to be a dangerous driver. We also need to address the drink-drive limit, and my party is looking closely at the evidence on that issue. I certainly do not support those who advocate a zero alcohol limit; there are all sorts of issues about that proposal, particularly in respect of people driving the morning after they have been drinking. Certainly, people should be aware that if they have had a drink the night before they may be over the limit the morning after, but there needs to be some degree of balance in setting the alcohol limit. It is also very important indeed that, unlike other European Union countries that have lower alcohol limits, we do not have a lower penalty. In many EU countries, getting caught at the lower alcohol limit is equivalent to being caught speeding in the UK; drivers get points on their licence and are fined. The evidence from our country shows that the threat of points and a fine does not stop people speeding; record numbers of people are being caught speeding. We need to look at whether we can fine-tune the drink-drive limit to target people who are not only learning to drive and getting experience of driving but also learning to use alcohol responsibly. Many young men see themselves as good drivers, and it is difficult for various reasons to get it through to them that, in fact, nobody is a perfect driver—that anyone could be a statistic. I am rather nervous about saying this, but I am critical of some of the media; for example, people such as Jeremy Clarkson, who glorify speed and danger. Many of his road tests take place on airfields and off the public roads, but there is no doubt that many young men see him as a role model and may indulge in reckless behaviour that they would not otherwise indulge in. In many cases, those young men's perception of their abilities exceeds their abilities. Another way to move forward is to improve people's awareness of hazards. I have accepted an invitation from the British School of Motoring to try one of its hazard awareness simulators next week. In many cases, such training tends to involve town driving, but we must not forget that many fatal accidents do not happen in towns, on roads with speed cameras or on motorways, which are our safest roads; they happen on country roads where a tree on a corner can cause disaster. Should we make the driving test harder? We need to be careful about that. We must ensure that we test not just basic skills but the attitudes that often lead to disaster. I hope that the consultation comes up with suggestions that we can support. We are dubious about the 12-month learning period, which, in effect, would make the driving age 18. Many young people—certainly those in rural areas—rely on a car to get to school or work. Any policies that the Government introduce must be rural-proofed, because not everybody lives on a bus route. Not everybody can access their work or education using public transport. It is important that people have experience of various driving conditions, but we must bear in mind that while some young learners will have access to a family car and will be able to get experience in that way, others get driving experience only with a qualified driving instructor. We must ensure that the cost of getting experience is not so prohibitive that it prevents them from learning to drive. We can learn lessons from other countries. Sweden, for example, has an enviable road safety record. It uses a matrix to outline driving tasks and correlate them with driving skills and competencies. The aim is to"““make learner drivers realise their own limitations and thus counteract overestimation of own ability and skill. A second aspect is to become aware of the influence of personal preconditions, social norms and motivational factors on driving behaviour and risk. Yet another aspect is the concept of risk perception and risk awareness””." Those are all important matters to bear in mind. An issue that has not been raised today is motorcycling, which comes under driving. If we make it harder for people to learn to drive and make it more expensive to use cars, people will often revert to using motorcycles or mopeds to get to work. As we all know, motorcyclists make up 1 per cent. of road traffic but 19 per cent. of fatalities. Motorcyclists are vulnerable, so I would be concerned if anything that we did forced more young people to use motorcycles rather than cars for journeys that may be dangerous. It is not just the born-again bikers we read about in the papers—the 40 and 50-year-olds who buy a 750 cc bike and go back to motorcycling—but the many young people who rely on motorcycles to get to work. If I have one criticism of the Government, it is the way that the new motorcycle driving test will be administered after 28 September, and the long distances that people will be expected to travel to take the test—and not only to take the test: it is human nature to want to practise in the town where they will take the test and to get used to the routes, particularly if, as the Minister has suggested, they will be told to ““Go to the station”” rather than simply ““Turn left at the next junction””. If I had never been to Hull before, I would be petrified if the examiner said, ““Go to the station,”” because I would not have a clue where it was. I have heard what the Minister has said on previous occasions about not testing people's ability to drive around a driving course, but people will want to take their lessons in the place where the test will be given. In my constituency, for example, a 50-mile trip to Hull—or even farther to Darlington—may discourage many young people from taking the test and lessons, particularly in bad weather conditions and they are on a small moped and do not fancy driving along a main road with lorries thundering past. I hope that such things will not be borne out by the statistics in the autumn, but I predict that many young people will not take the driving test or the instruction that they need. They will take the compulsory basic training and drive on L-plates for two years. At the end of that time, if they still want to ride a motorcycle, they will take the compulsory basic training again. I hope that I am wrong, but I expect that after September there will be a dramatic decline in the number of young people taking driving tests, and thus fewer well-qualified and well-trained people on our roads. We are told that because the Department missed the fact that 50 kph is over 30 mph, the driving test could no longer be carried out on public roads. The majority of roads around driving test centres are in built-up areas with a speed limit. It is unrealistic to expect people to make long journeys to the new test centres. For example, there will not be a test centre on the Isle of Wight, which means that a ferry journey will be required. As I said before, we are considering whether there is a case for lower alcohol limits for young drivers, and we are determined that the punishment for drink driving should continue to be a ban. We should not water down the approach to drink driving—drivers might think that it had been demoted to speeding. I hope that we will be able to engage constructively with the Government. We welcome the consultation, and we think that there are some good ideas; for example, the driver's logbook, and allowing drivers to experience night driving and driving in the rain and so on. However, we should be aware of the risk of taking a something-must-be-done attitude and doing something that looks as though it should work but may not work in practice. That has happened too often. I hope that the consultation will not fall into that trap, and that the Government will introduce evidence-based proposals. I also hope that the insurance industry will play its part. Many young people take the pass plus test not because they want to be better drivers but because they want lower premiums, and pay-as-you-drive schemes make it prohibitively expensive for young people to drive at night. I welcome this opportunity to discuss the issue, and I hope that the proposals that emerge from the consultation on driver testing will be constructive and that we will be able to support many of them.