Young drivers are in the news again, see BBC News where a load of figures are spouted and bandied about as if this is new news. It is not new news, and never has been. The young have only ever learnt how lethal a car is as a killing machine by pushing the limits too far. But it the government that is at fault, not the young drivers.
Why?
Because all the government insists on is that non-drivers have to pass a driving assessment called The Driving Test. This is monitored by the Driving Standards Agency, a government quango set up to monitor and enforce driving standards. The result is that driving schools only teach non-drivers how to pass the driving test. They are not taught how to drive. It is assumed that they will learn that once they have passed the driving test and are allowed out on the road.
And that is the problem, or part of it.
There are now driving theory and hazard awareness components to the test that have to be passed before the non-driver can become a driver. But none of these, nor the "training" that ensures they pass the test itself, actually teach anybody how to drive. Awareness or surroundings, reacting in a correct and safe manner to what is perceived, handling the vehicle in a "situation" should not be learnt on the road AFTER passing the basic driving test. That is all it is, enforcement of a basic minimum standard and IT IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH for today's highly congested roads.
To become a motorcycle "driver" (i.e. rider) you have to undertake Compulsory Basic Training (CBT). This is followed by training and the equivalent to the car driving test, and then a progression through various sizes of motorcycle engine size and power outputs - effectively a motorcycle rider has to "earn" his/her stripes. So why is it different for car drivers?
Restricting young drivers to who they can take as passengers, or, how many simply is unenforceable. There are not enough policemen (or women) employed to make that work as an option. But making them start with a 2 seater car under 800cc before moving to a 4 seater car of up to 1100cc, then a 4/5 seater of up to 1500cc before allowing them to drive a car with an engine larger that 1500cc, with re-tests at each engine break - now that will result in the sort of results the government is looking for.
How can I be so sure? Because the statistics for motorcycle accidents and fatalities prove that it is an approach that has already worked. But, as there are so many more non-drivers that want to become drivers and who ARE voters then it won't happen because it will be seen as an election loser.
Saturday 17 November 2012
PCC Voting
So the voting is over, the votes have been counted and now the post mortem begins....
The voting process is reported as having cost £100m but only 15% of those eligible actually bothered to vote (for the record, yes I did and so did my wife).
Why did I vote? Simply because I cannot be shot down when I comment on the result for abstaining from the process.
Why did most people not vote? My view is a number of factors came together...
1. We (the British public) do not need another layer of bureaucracy put in place during a time of austerity which will deliver no additional benefit but will incur significant additional cost.
2. The level of additional cost will not be limited to paying a salary to the new commissioners, they will require administrative staff, and a whole shed load of facilities (office space with furniture, computing power, communications, and that's just for starters) and none of this will be cheap. When people are struggling to pay household bills and the government wants to reduce it's borrowing, why are we as tax payers being lumbered with this expense?
3. The choice of candidates - to say it was poor was an understatement. Most people received no communication about the candidates standing in their area. We got hold of a leaflet that was worthless.
4. If policing in the UK now needs Commissionaires then they should be appropriately qualified AND experienced AND politically independent - not as we saw on the balot papers, members of the UK political parties.
In my mind there was more wrong with what has been done and the way it was done than there was that was right with it, for example:
At a local level: Our local Polling Station is in a sports hall, and there are 3 stations in the one room. Each of these for local elections is normally 1 presiding officer and 1 poll clerk, sometimes 2. That in itself is over staffing based on normal the normal turn-out of voters (around 30% - 35%). Yet for this vote each Presiding Officer had 3 clerks for a turn-out of less than 10%.
Across the Country: Communication was so poor it bordered on abysmal. This was a classic example of politicians creating "jobs for the boys" and barely bothering to tell the public at large who was being put forward, why and what they were bringing to the table.
And the result: A damp squib. Even the press and media couldn't work up any enthusiasm for the biggest political non-event overseen and delivered by David Cameron's coalitian government. 15% average turn-out by British voters meant more cast their vote with their feet than did with the pen.
Many more correspondents considered more worthy than I will be picking the bones over this and already it has been announced that there will be an official enquiry into the whole thing. One thing is certain - the boys that got the jobs will keep them far longer than we will have any use for them.
The voting process is reported as having cost £100m but only 15% of those eligible actually bothered to vote (for the record, yes I did and so did my wife).
Why did I vote? Simply because I cannot be shot down when I comment on the result for abstaining from the process.
Why did most people not vote? My view is a number of factors came together...
1. We (the British public) do not need another layer of bureaucracy put in place during a time of austerity which will deliver no additional benefit but will incur significant additional cost.
2. The level of additional cost will not be limited to paying a salary to the new commissioners, they will require administrative staff, and a whole shed load of facilities (office space with furniture, computing power, communications, and that's just for starters) and none of this will be cheap. When people are struggling to pay household bills and the government wants to reduce it's borrowing, why are we as tax payers being lumbered with this expense?
3. The choice of candidates - to say it was poor was an understatement. Most people received no communication about the candidates standing in their area. We got hold of a leaflet that was worthless.
4. If policing in the UK now needs Commissionaires then they should be appropriately qualified AND experienced AND politically independent - not as we saw on the balot papers, members of the UK political parties.
In my mind there was more wrong with what has been done and the way it was done than there was that was right with it, for example:
At a local level: Our local Polling Station is in a sports hall, and there are 3 stations in the one room. Each of these for local elections is normally 1 presiding officer and 1 poll clerk, sometimes 2. That in itself is over staffing based on normal the normal turn-out of voters (around 30% - 35%). Yet for this vote each Presiding Officer had 3 clerks for a turn-out of less than 10%.
Across the Country: Communication was so poor it bordered on abysmal. This was a classic example of politicians creating "jobs for the boys" and barely bothering to tell the public at large who was being put forward, why and what they were bringing to the table.
And the result: A damp squib. Even the press and media couldn't work up any enthusiasm for the biggest political non-event overseen and delivered by David Cameron's coalitian government. 15% average turn-out by British voters meant more cast their vote with their feet than did with the pen.
Many more correspondents considered more worthy than I will be picking the bones over this and already it has been announced that there will be an official enquiry into the whole thing. One thing is certain - the boys that got the jobs will keep them far longer than we will have any use for them.
Sunday 11 November 2012
Choose My PCC
This week, on Thursday, we are expected to elect a Commissioner to advise the local police constabulary on policy and policing priorities.
Last week we received one of their standard flyer communications to the public. Now I have to ask, what hope is there, and what faith can we have in the ability of the PCC when the job of putting together a simple leaflet cannot be successfully accomplished. The item I received through my letterbox is a waste of rate payers money - an obvious photo copy, somebody had done the photo copying double sided but had alternately flipped the copy along short and long edges, meaning that when put together it didn't read from start to finish but every which way.
Now one can suggest that somebody should check communications to the public, but once elected we cannot in any way check the work that the PCC (or the police) are doing.
This election is pointless and simply adds another layer of cost and bureaucracy to the policing in this country. And it is not as if these appointments will reduce the jobless in the country because these people already have paid jobs, so now they will have 2, with an even higher standard of living. It doesn't seem right on any level.
Last week we received one of their standard flyer communications to the public. Now I have to ask, what hope is there, and what faith can we have in the ability of the PCC when the job of putting together a simple leaflet cannot be successfully accomplished. The item I received through my letterbox is a waste of rate payers money - an obvious photo copy, somebody had done the photo copying double sided but had alternately flipped the copy along short and long edges, meaning that when put together it didn't read from start to finish but every which way.
Now one can suggest that somebody should check communications to the public, but once elected we cannot in any way check the work that the PCC (or the police) are doing.
This election is pointless and simply adds another layer of cost and bureaucracy to the policing in this country. And it is not as if these appointments will reduce the jobless in the country because these people already have paid jobs, so now they will have 2, with an even higher standard of living. It doesn't seem right on any level.
Thursday 1 November 2012
My Fitness Pal
Right now it seems as if every man and his dog is on a diet, and our family is no exception. As we now all have either i-phones or Galaxy S2 android phones it seems sensible to go about loosing weight in an organised manner. To this end we are all using an app called My Fitness Pal, and I have to say that it is working. I have been using it for some 8 or 9 weeks and over that period I have lost a stone in weight. Mark has lost more than that and Suzie about half that (but then she weighed less to start with). Even Andy has lost a few pounds but he has moved into a new role at Rolls ROyce in Derby where he works and that should see him burn off the pounds a bit quicker than when he was an apprentice.
So although there are times when it is a bit clunky I have to say that My Fitness Pal appears to be working for us.
So although there are times when it is a bit clunky I have to say that My Fitness Pal appears to be working for us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)