Driving tests ‘dumbed down?’ – a crash course around the supermarket? You must be off your trolley.

OK, I’m finding myself on the opposite side of the fence than usual here, but there could be benefits from this. Waiting lists for driving tests can be ridiculous (I think three months is a fairly standard time). Which means you either have to guess when you’ll be ready, or wait till you’re ready then sign up to a three-month waiting list. Even worse if you’re booking a retest.

If the private sector can sort this out with screwing things up even more, then more power to them. And it’s about more than frustration on the part of people who can drive but aren’t allowed: if we’re trying to boost the economy, we should probably not make people wait ages to be able to use a vehicle, as this makes job hunting a lot easier (and many people learning to drive are of the age where you’re also looking for your first full-time job).

In one of the documents, transport minister Mike Penning told four MPs on 2 November 2010 he was looking at “whether [driving tests] could be provided more efficiently at a lower cost; and whether they could be undertaken by other organisations inside or outside of the public sector”.

Erm, isn’t this what we want ministers to be doing? Or should they only be looking at providing services less efficiently and/or at higher costs? Seems a strange thing to object about to me.

The memo goes further in suggesting private firms could use more ‘delegated examiners’ – private testers whose pass rates are 20% higher than DSA examiners – leading to fears the driving test will be dumbed down as an incentive.

Hang on – so private testers presumably already exist then? Or has someone just been making numbers up (I see no link to substantiate the nice round figure here. And to be honest, you haven’t made a case for the driving test not being too difficult (incidentally, easier (which is implied by a higher pass rate) does not equal dumbing down (a value judgement) – although equating the two without any evidence is an undoubted case of dumbing down).

Still, the PCS has a responsibillity to its members, so I suppose we can overlook their poor press release and lack of understanding of the role of government. But as I don’t belong to the PCS (or a PCS-represented field) I can safely point out that this is simply a case of protecting member’s interests without either considering the role of government (understandable) or proving their rhetorical points (which is not so good – since these documents were leaked the PCS had time to work on their presentation).

“And to be honest, you haven’t made a case for the driving test not being too difficult.

I don’t think there is a case for that, unless the writer believes that a perfect (and achievable) test system would lead to a 0% traffic accident rate.

When I took the test, it demanded a standard of driving far higher than anyone uses in real life. It had recently had a written section added to make it harder, and since then had a reflex test added to make it harder still. I doubt it’s too easy, unless the aim is to keep all but the most skilled drivers off the road.

As this is a press release it’s hard to get a grasp of the detail: any readers out there PCS members/driving testers/etc wanna comment and enlighten us? Particularly with reference to Watchman’s points.

More corporate welfare.

By the time this bunch of liars and crooks have finished the vast majority of tax payers money will be going straight into the pockets of big business.

It will create a new dependency culture, where the rich stand in line for their hand outs. Banana republic Britain

sally,

I can actually see the possibility of that being right, rather worryingly.

To be fair, I didn’t really pick up on the supermarket reference in the original post, which would be worrying (and not only because I’d prefer my car not to get hit when parked in supermarket car parks any more than it does already).

“I suppose we can overlook their poor press release”

Watchman, I have yet to come accoss a trade union press release that wasn’t poor

No problem with this idea really. Might even make the traffic in supermarket aisles flow a bit better (trolley manners are one of my pet hates)

@ 8

“Might even make the traffic in supermarket aisles flow a bit better (trolley manners are one of my pet hates)”

Good luck. Despite decades of driving on the left, apparently half of the population can’t grasp the idea of standing on the left on escalators, instead of side-by-side so nobody behind you can get past. They can’t all be non-drivers.

That’s because on the tube, for reasons I’ve never fully understood, signs tell you to stand on the right, so that people can pass on the left

@ 10

The convention elsewhere seems to be the opposite. Either way, it doesn’t matter: if you’re not walking, stand on the same damn side of the escalator as the person in front of you. Or suffer me thinking nasty things about you!

Lol….it’s a hoax…