Contact the Telegraph
Send us your news tips, photos and videos Text LT and your message to 80360 or click here for more ways to contact us »
Big boost for Telegraph campaign
10:35pm Thursday 27th December 2007
By David Watkinson »
THE Lancashire Telegraph's Wasted Lives campaign is on the brink of an important breakthrough with government sources indicating that the driving age is likely to effectively be raised to 18.
Whitehall sources have confirmed that the move will be recommended in an impending government consultation document.
It is understood that learners will still be granted their provisional licence at 17 but, according to national newspaper reports, will have to spend a specified number of learning hours behind the wheel.
In practice the high number of hours means they would be unable to get their full licence before the age of 18.
Hyndburn MP Greg Pope said: "It will make a real difference if the age you can hold a full driving licence rises to 18.
"There is now pressure on the government because there is a wealth of opinion that we need to act now. Raising the driving age is an important part of that.
"I welcome this consultation and a big reason that it is being held is because of pressure from the Lancashire Telegraph. The Wasted Lives campaign has done a lot to prompt the government into action.
"I am hoping to secure a debate in the Commons in February, or March, and I will be seeking a meeting with Roads Minister Jim Fitzpatrick and Lancashire Telegraph editor Kevin Young to discuss the issue further."
Ribble Valley MP Nigel Evans said: "Raising the age to 18 is something that the government should not only consider, but enact. It would singularly do more for road safety that virtually any other measure."
Terry Hannon, whose 22-year-old son Matthew died when his Renault Clio smashed in to a wall in Livesey Branch Road, Blackburn, said he was pleased that the driving age could effectively be set to be raised.
He said: "The younger you are, the more naive you are. The extra life experience people have between 17 and 18 years old can make all of the difference. If the government are seriously consid-ering this change, then that is great news. Any step that makes young drivers more experienced and more aware of the challenges of driving is very welcome."
The document signals the start of a three-month consultation, which will be followed by a sweeping Department of Transport action plan.
According to media reports, the consultation document will see the new learner scheme concentrate on issues such as over-confidence amongst young drivers, hazard perception and avoiding reckless behaviour.
The government has already published its interim response to the Commons transport select committee's proposals - many of which are in line with the Telegraph's Wasted Lives campaign aims.
In it, the government agreed there should be a structured syllabus for young drivers, and it will consider a graduated licence scheme.
However, the interim response document was less encouraging on other key aims of the Wasted Lives campaign.
It stated that it had no evidence at present of drivers under 25 representing a greater threat to passengers than other age groups.
However, it aims to seek further information on the subject in the forthcoming consultation.
One of the key Telegraph aims is to create a two-part driving test with various modules, including night driving and driving on dual carriageways.
Under this learning process novices would not be able to travel above 50mph, or to drive a car above 1600cc until the Part Two test is passed. The government's interim response did not directly address these issues.
It also pointed out some of the practical difficulties to a zero alcohol limit for young drivers, but says it will continue to explore the issue.
One of the government's concerns is that as drivers are not required to carry their licences by law, restrictions such as a zero alcohol limit, or a no passengers rule, would be difficult to enforce because an officer would not know the person's driving status.
The Telegraph has also called for a range of stiffer penalties for young drivers who break the law, but the government's interim response appears to fight shy of this issue.
The Wasted Lives campaign was launched eight months ago in a bid to cut the carnage created by young drivers on East Lancashire's roads.
Last year 22 people under the age of 25 were killed in the county.
Lancashire Telegraph editor Kevin Young said: "It looks like there is a very good chance of the driving age being raised - in practice at least - to 18 and we very much welcome this.
"However, this can only be a part of the solution. Other key aims of our campaign are just as important.
"Given the appalling statistics surrounding the carrying of passengers, this must be addressed as must the limiting of engine size and speeds for young drivers with minimal road experience."
A spokesman for the Department for Transport said all interested parties would be able to have their say when a consultation document was published as part of its three-year road safety strategy review.
The document is expected to be published in January.
Members of the public, as well as road safety groups, motoring organisations, and campaigners will be able to have their say throughout the 12-week consult-ation.
When all responses are received, they will be analysed by the Government before any decisions are made about possible changes to the law.
The review of current road safety laws is set to last for a further two years.
Your Say YourTelegraph
lee, blackburn says...
3:31pm Fri 28 Dec 07
StopWastedLives, Clitheroe says...
2:31am Fri 28 Dec 07
Once again the government feel they can generalise motoring issues for the greater good, when really missing the point. Fortunately, they have totally dismissed some of the LT's loonier suggestions (ie. thinking that slowing down young drivers to far below a roads natural speed will make them safer and give them better driving experience, despite the slowest 10% of drivers being the most dangerous group after the quickest 10%). Yet whilst raising the driving age to 18 is one of the suggestions of 'Wasted Lives' I am least opposed to, I still have concerns about it.
I ask the LT these questions and FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER expect a reply. I have constantly challenged them on issues in the past yet have been completely ignored. If no reply is received within 2 days, I will once again assume that you have no sufficient answers to these questions.
1. Is the KSI rate of new drivers who pass aged 18 significantly lower than those who pass aged 17?
2. What do you think about the proposals for a harder test being aimed at all new drivers, instead of purely the young?
3. At an average of £20 per hour of driving lessons, what do you think about that fact that learning to drive purely with an instructor for 500 hours as recommended (I learnt for 30 hours, and 18 months later not even a scrape, go figure) will cost around £10,000, forcing about 95% of potential drivers off the road? I thought DSA advice was currently around 50 hours.
4. Continuing from question 3, what do you estimate the impact of the proposals will be upon employment prospects of young people, especially those from low income backgrounds who i) Will be less likely to be able to afford to drive and ii) Are more likely to require a car for work at an earlier age? Will this lead to 'social exclusion' of lower income households?
5. Also continuing from question 3, what do you estimate the impact will be upon illegal uninsured, unlicensed driving as a result of this proposal? Surely you agree that these problems will increase due to more desire to drive/rebel/cost issues? Do you agree the number of 'rogue' 17 year old drivers on the road will skyrocket? Do you not feel that the more difficult, expensive and time consuming it becomes for young people to become qualified drivers, the more will be likely to drive illegally?
6. At the moment, with no guidelines on time spent learning to drive, learning times vary hugely? Is this because people rush through a test that is too easy, or is it because some people learn far more easily than others? Do you think that a 17 year old who possesses greater driving ability than an 18 year old is less deserving of a licence?
8. What are your views on a comment I read that states 'this is just another case of, "The answer's a bigger restriction. What's the question?"'
9. Do you see a problem relating to the fact that young people can drive as soon as they can legally drink alcohol?
10. (Still relating to article) Why do you still demand a ban on young passengers, yet claim that nightclub 'Liquid's Designated Driver scheme falls in line with your campaign?
11. Will this lead to more young people using mopeds, with even higher accident rates than cars?
12. Have you considered the economic and social cost of such a move? Will this inconvenience parents having to drive young people around? How will the money and time lost because of this scheme damage the economy? Will having far more Learners on the road increase congestion and traffic patterns?
13. How do you explain the government target of slashing road deaths by 1000 with this scheme, which accounts for more than the proportion of young drivers on the road with regards to total accidents? This to me appears impossible, unless the number of people on the road decreases considerably (which the proposal might in itself achieve).
I doubt I will receive a reply, or that anyone at the LT considered any of these points before making their proposals. However, as the LT has forwarded their ideas and support, they must surely have views upon the consequences.
NjoY, BBurn says...
1:42am Fri 28 Dec 07
The campaign that would get my 100% backing would be to raise the age of buying alcohol to 21. THAT will cut teen death on the roads!! By a larger percentage than raising the driving licence age by a year!!!
And cut a out a lot of other anti social problems all in one law!!
Upping the driving age/learning period is not the answer.. I think it will just move the statistics, not cut it!!
An 18yo who has just passed is test (after a year of driving at legal limits) will still like driving fast (see what his new baby can do... etc...)
It doesn't stop a newly qualified driver getting into a high performance car (that will help if it did)
Best of luck LET tho
Your sayYourTelegraph
Register for a FREE Lancashire Telegraph account and you can have your say on today's news and sport by adding comments on articles we publish. The best comments may even get published in the paper.
Please register now or sign in to continue.
RAISING DRIVING AGE?: Government sources are indicating that the driving age is likely to effectively be raised to 18. Picture posed by a model.
In this section
- Nelson school worker suspended over claims she punched parent
- Blackburn teacher's riots drama
- Duo rescue neighbour from Haslingden house fire
- Burnley schoolboy Josh makes goalscoring return
- Blackburn man starts his own wind farm
- Accrington boy, 3, battles leukaemia
- Rain doesn't stop Blackburn celebration
- Darwen scooter club's big push for paralysed girl
- Burnley primary school praised by inspectors
- 'Albino' bird lands in Trawden
What's On Live Travel YourTelegraph
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
StopWastedLives, Clitheroe says...
5:36pm Fri 28 Dec 07
* Inattention: 25.8%
Failure to judge other person's path or speed: 22.6%
Looked but did not see: 19.7%
Behaviour: careless/thoughtless
/reckless: 18.4% Failed to look: 16.3%
Lack of judgement of own path: 13.7%
Excessive speed: 12.5%
Remember of these excessive speed accidents, most are too fast for the conditions, without breaking the limit.
So in response to 'lee,' most accidents are not due to going too fast. Even if it were true, how can a speed limiter of 45-50mph determine what too fast is. On a motorway or dual carriageway this is probably too slow, potentially dangerously slow in fact.