The UK Government is missing a trick on road safety

I was a late bloomer when it comes to driving. I only got around to getting my license in my late 20s, having lived in a city since I turned 18 where I had little incentive to get behind the wheel.

I had started to learn when I was 17 but never got around to the test. Looking back, I’m really glad that teen me was so lazy about the whole thing. In the decade between my first and second lot of lessons, I had forgotten just about everything. I was also much more blasé about being in command of a 1.5 tonne metal box back then.

I can only imagine that combination of a 10-year gap in driving, my inexperience and my rather more laid-back attitude to learning how to drive safety could have led to an accident, potentially a serious one.

Even today I’m not a regular driver. I still live in the city so have no need for a car day to day, relying on the local carshare club and rentals when necessary. But I’m a much better driver today than I ever was in my teens. A big part of that, I think, is better risk assessment and more patience.

The UK Government’s new Road Safety Strategy has a great deal in it worth welcoming. With an overarching aim to reduce deaths and serious injuries on Britain’s roads by 65 per cent in the next 10 years, it includes specific measures to tackle the young driver problem. One fifth of road deaths and injuries involve a young driver so it makes sense to put the focus here.

The central proposal is to introduce a minimum learning period, requiring up to a six-month gap between the theory and practical tests. This would, according to the government, increase the amount of “constructive feedback” they get while driving under supervision, as well as ensuring learner drivers “experience different driving conditions”. Another option could be mandating a minimum number of supervised hours and having a syllabus.

This would all help to improve the skills of drivers from day one. Evidence from around the world suggests there is a link between longer learning periods and fewer collisions.

These measures are one part of graduated driver licensing (GDL), all focused on the pre-test period. The other side mentioned in the government’s consultation but not among the active proposals are measures which would put restrictions on newly qualified drivers. This seems to be a missed opportunity.

The consultation seems to suggest post-test restrictions are not under consideration due to polling indicating they typically garner less support than pre-test restrictions. But if chosen carefully, there is no reason why these couldn’t become the norm.

There are already examples in place in the UK of post-test restrictions. Drivers in Northern Ireland, for example, must use R-plates for a year after passing a test. These impose a speed restriction on new drivers, with the aim of reducing collisions, and also signal to other road users that the person behind the wheel is relatively inexperienced.

While slightly different, P-plates can be used in a similar manner elsewhere in the UK. These do not impose speed restrictions but do let other road users know you are newly qualified. I used these myself for about a year and found, for the most part, that others were more patient and gave me more space. Perhaps P-plates could be made mandatory.

Post-test GDL campaigners have suggested a number of other restrictions, such as a ban on driving at night or not allowing them to carry passengers.

Restrictions like these may seem heavy handed and it is important that they are balanced with the personal freedom gained by driving. Rural teenagers, for example, may find not being able to drive friends to the cinema or a gig to be overly restrictive and could end up increasing the number of cars on the road in total. But it is important such measures are considered if targets on reducing fatalities and injury are to be met.

Many of the measures also sit well with the Scottish Government’s existing Road Safety Framework, which set an aim to reach zero road deaths by 2050. That strategy also highlighted young drivers aged 17-25 were more likely to be in a fatal or serious collision than others. While licensing is reserved, it argued that “lifelong road use learning” was necessary, with lessons on road safety starting in school. But it acknowledges such education is “inconsistent” across Scotland and committed to ensuring resources were provided to better support road safety education as part of the curriculum for excellence.

Giving young people the ability drive is an important step towards adulthood and freedom, especially for those living in areas not blessed with good public transport links. But as someone who learned to drive both at 17 and at 27, I approached those lessons very differently when I was older. Lifting the age at which people can drive would be disproportionate, but the statistics on young driver deaths are clear: the current regime is not protecting people enough from inexperience – or, dare I say, the confidence that comes with being young.