Fremantlebiz - Paul's Letter from Australia

The driving test

Over the years my wife and I have taught our three eldest sons to drive, and they passed their driving tests without problems. Since then they have been safe, conscientious drivers.

When it became time for son number four (18) to go through this ritual, we decided that he should have professional instruction. Our vehicles were getting a bit daggy. Plus there had been a degree of criticism in the media that amateur instructors like us were not doing as good a job as professionals.

Number four went through the hoops, and when his instructor had extracted sufficient tuition fees at $30 a time, he was deemed ready to take the test. The examination fee to the government for a learner’s permit and test costs a further$52.40. Well he failed because of a bit of a trick on the part of the examiner. There is a law here that between certain times the speed limit in the vicinity of schools is automatically lowered. It was a few minutes into this period and our lad got caught out. An immediate fail.

So an application was made for another test, several weeks away. Plus further $26.80 fee for a re-test. This also meant more lessons, but then the driving instructor’s car had a serious fault a week before the test. So a new driving school was engaged. They took him for a couple of lessons and deemed him competent to retake the test.

It was the same examiner. At the completion, our son was told he “nearly” passed, but the examiner had been concerned that he had accelerated too hard at one point when he was told to cross some busy traffic. So it was another fail. Thus there was another $26.80 fee to have a third attempt in a few weeks.

The second instructor revealed to our son that this examiner has only passed three of his previous fifty students. Now this is a significant figure statistically. Something was wrong. Then our boy learned from his school mates that this same examiner is nicknamed “The terminator.” Furthermore, the man had apparently had someone close to him killed in a road accident involving another young driver a few years back and there had quite a bit of publicity in the media. It sounded to me like the examiner was now imposing his own subjective standards in driving tests.

I was in a mind to make enquiries, but thought better of it. There is a small-town mentality in various jurisdictions in this state, and it can be very unwise to rock the boat.

So yesterday was attempt number three. Our son had also engaged a third driving school. The very experienced instructor thought his driving okay too, and had suggested only two extra lessons were needed to keep in practice. But yesterday suggested to me that passing driver’s tests here still requires an element of luck. The instructor was aware of the reputation of the examiner in question, but suggested it was unwise to complain, for the same reason I had concluded. I was reassured there was only a one in four chance of getting the same examiner.

So guess what. Three times a winner. The examiner yesterday thought he recognised our son and asked him if he had taken him before. Our young man told him it had been twice, and reminded him that the last time he had said it was a borderline situation.

The examiner said he would see what he could do to rectify the situation this time. And so the good news is that number four passed his practical assessment. He had heard on the school grapevine only last week that third timers usually got through with this bloke. The pass has allowed payment of a new fee of $24.70 to take him to the next stage.

Now he has to have 25 hours of supervised driving alongside experienced drivers. Every detail has to be entered in a log book. The entries could easily be faked, but we will comply with the requirements. When this is done, he will have to sit a computerised “Hazard Perception Test.”

Yesterday he was given a sample CD of the test and so I tried it out. The first criticism is that it is fine for people with tunnel vision, but bears little comparison to realities of the road. They use short, blurry, jerky, Quicktime movies and the viewer has to make a decision about a particular situation. A mouse click for things like when to slow down, speed up, turn at an intersection, or do nothing. There seems to be an element of trickery in some test questions I tried. Subjectivity is high. Feedback insufficient. One answer in particular I would say actually encouraged recklessness by overruling caution. (Question 4) More than anything the test demonstrates to me the futility of trying to transpose real-life three dimensional driving situations to a two dimensional simulation on a computer screen. The designers seem to have had no understanding of how human perception works.

If my son passes the “Hazard Perception Test” then he will be allowed pay another hefty fee of $33.10 and he will be granted a “P” (for provisional) license. He will have to display a red “P” on the front and rear of any vehicle he drives for the following two years. If he fails the test he can cough up another $15.20 to try it again. My view of the test is that it is probably a revenue raiser for the government.

Will all this rigmarole make him a better driver? Probably not. Good driving habits like so many social activities begin at home. He has taken a responsible attitude from the outset. I have no doubt our son will be a responsible driver in the future, like his older brothers. I also have no doubt there will be people who go through all these inconvenient procedures and still drive irresponsibly. There will still be a death toll.

At my request, my son has calculated what this has all cost him since he started out in March. How about $920. Almost enough for a deposit on a brand new car. He earned the money from his late-night part time job with KFC. That he persevered with his job through winter is a credit to him.

One of the serious social problems we have in this state is the number of unlicensed drivers of all ages in motor accidents. I suggest that if his experience has been anything to go by, we should not be surprised that others take the risk and break the law.

Bear in mind I speak with 42 years driving experience gained in 29 countries – and I have no convictions.

Stop Press: 7am – The car of the bloke living across the street has just rolled backwards down his driveway, crossed the road and smashed the wall of the house next door. He had left his engine running and the handbrake off. Duh!

© MMIV Paul R. Weaver.

About the writer

Check out the index of my "common-man" monologues about survival in 21st century Australia – plus a little history occasionally. An original essay is added most days. Topical – often humorous – no swearing – no porn – no spam – no soliciting – no religious mania – no smoking – no catches.

Advertisement

Advertisement