WEDNESDAY 28 FEBRUARY 2007

MS JOOLS TOWNSEND, MS BRENDA PUECH AND MRS JAN BERRY

  Q40  Mr Martlew: Is it not 15 or 16?

  Ms Townsend: I have a couple of cases here. In North Carolina, you can start the learning period at aged 15, so, yes, they do start earlier than we do. In Washington, I believe they can start learning at 16, so again it is slightly earlier than us, but I do not think that detracts from the impact that these schemes have had and there is scope for transferring similar schemes to the UK.

  Q41  Clive Efford: I was going to ask Mrs Berry about the practicalities of enforcing a graduated licensing scheme.

  Mrs Berry: We need to have a visible road policing presence on the roads to enable us to do that and we do not have as much of that as we need at the moment. We would need to have a far more sophisticated driving licence to demonstrate what part of the test you are at at that particular stage. It is not difficult but, just to build on the point that you have made, we have to be wary about what has worked in other countries because there is a variety of different ages involved and a different set of limitations in place. What is interesting from some of the research is that in some countries something has worked, which when applied in another country has had a different response. We need to test it in this country to see what happens with our drivers. As was said earlier, this is not peculiar to the UK; this is happening around the world, and we are all striving to find some solutions. Clearly, age, experience and skills are going to be at the root of solving or certainly reducing the problems.

  Q42  Clive Efford: Technology is not a way of enforcing this system then? ANPR and techniques like that would not be sufficient?

  Mrs Berry: ANPR will only test the actual vehicle registration with insurance and whether it is test certificate appropriate. It does not go down to driving licences unless the person is going to be restricted as to which vehicle they can drive when ANPR could have an impact, but otherwise it would not.

  Q43  Chairman: Then you are talking about a very wide extension and a much more complicated system.

  Mrs Berry: Yes.

  Q44  Mr Hollobone: It is interesting to read that Brake have conducted a survey of 4,500 young people in schools and colleges with some staggeringly alarming statistics that one-third have driven without a licence, one in five has been a passenger with a driver who they knew was unlicensed, 40% do not always belt up, 30% have been a passenger in a car driven by a driver on drink or drugs, and one in five drive after drinking alcohol. Does not it all come down to the attitude of the novice driver when he gets behind that wheel? Given that the insurance industry effectively in quite a detailed way profiles the risk of somebody driving a car with different insurance premia, given the sophistication in the data and data profiling, could that not be taken into account when somebody presents themselves for a test? In other words, if you are at greater risk, according to the insurance criteria, of crashing, you therefore need to have an extra period of tuition before you pass your test.

  Ms Townsend: I am not sure if there is scope for doing that. That is possibly a question for the later session with the Association of British Insurers. Coming back to the idea of psychometric testing, that follows the same basic principle of measuring levels of risk among learners and potentially using that to tailor the training that follows, but I agree that the results from our survey are extremely shocking. I think that tallies with the casualty statistics that we are looking at.

  Q45  Mr Hollobone: Is there any support from our witnesses for steeper penalties for novice drivers involved in traffic offences, almost like a `one strike and you are out' sentence, to act as an extreme deterrent for young drivers, who we know are more likely to be involved in crashes?

  Mrs Berry: Any deterrent has to be an advantage but it has to be part of a suite of different things. The law makers have a role to play; the policy makers have a role to play; the manufacturers and the insurance companies have a role to play, but so does education. Deterrents and rehabilitation I think come together. There is no point having a harsh penalty unless you do not then add to that the education to get a person to improve their skills and understand the dangers of driving and the impact it has on others.

  Q46  Mr Hollobone: I put to you that three points on a young person's licence might be regarded in some quarters as bad luck, whereas if they have committed an offence and lost their licence, that might be more effective.

  Mrs Berry: We have not seen a tremendous difference in the six points and then go back to be tested. There has not been any reduction in the casualty fatality figures for the young novice drivers as a result of that change, and we have had that for nearly seven or eight years now, so points are not making a difference. A deterrent sentence may well do. I think it has to be coupled with education as well.

  Q47  Clive Efford: Are you aware of any statistics that demonstrate any link between having been convicted of a driving offence and then going on to be involved in a serious accident?

  Ms Puech: There is a strong link. If you have been convicted of a speeding offence, then it is much higher.

  Q48  Clive Efford: Is this for novice drivers?

  Ms Puech: No, for any driver. If you have had one speeding conviction and one motoring conviction, you are much more likely to re-offend and to re-offend more seriously.

  Q49  Clive Efford: Does that suggest to you, in relation to novice drivers, that the penalties are not severe enough to stop people from doing it again?

  Ms Puech: Yes. The penalties should be more severe.

  Ms Townsend: We also support the use of driver training schemes alongside penalties. I know driver rehabilitation courses on speeding and drink-driving, for example, are increasingly being used for offenders, particularly minor offenders. That could be used additionally for novice drivers as something that is compulsory, in addition to penalty points so that you have the education alongside the punishment.

  Q50  Chairman: Mrs Berry, I want to bring in something that concerns me and that is the number of drivers who fall out of the system. How do we deal with disqualified drivers who drive unlicensed and uninsured? Although some of this must be guesswork, there have been continuing estimations that we are talking of many hundreds of thousands of people. What do we do about them because they must constitute hazard?

  Mrs Berry: Absolutely, but I do not think we have the figures that can demonstrate just how much of a danger they cause. We talked earlier with regard to having a visible police presence and stronger law enforcement, but also targeting and better community work. Some of the safety partnerships in different local authority areas are really effective in this way. The trick for me is to find those ones which are really effective—what are they doing; how are they analysing the problem; how are they working in co-operation with each other—and then applying that across a wider area.

  Q51  Chairman: How do you do that? Is this anecdotal or is this something that has been brought to your attention through your work? How do we find this? Presumably some of this must be almost individual interpretations, must it not? If somebody is uninsured and unlicensed, how do you find where they are in the system in order to be able to target them?

  Mrs Berry: I think you have to analyse some of the statistics and do that in a geographical way. That will demonstrate which safety partnerships are made more effective than others, and there are some really good ones. The Audit Commission has recently published a paper on changing lanes, which again demonstrates the value of good partnership working. That does not mean that other organisations should be doing our job or the local authority's job, but it is to make sure that people who are responsible for safety on the roads do something about it in partnership with the other key stakeholders.

  Q52  Mr Martlew: On that very point, are you saying that the problem is not spread right throughout the community, that there is a socioeconomic impact on this, that youngsters from poorer areas tend to drive more often more recklessly and are killed more?

  Mrs Berry: I do not have any statistics on that.

  Q53  Mr Martlew: Has anybody done any work on that? That would help the targeting, would it not?

  Mrs Berry: I do not have the statistics to demonstrate that but some of those statistics must be capable of being accessed because we all collect data from a variety of different sources and some of the more effective community safety partnerships share that data in a far more constructive way and then they can work out where the target areas should be. It may well demonstrate that there are socioeconomic factors involved.

  Mr Hollobone: I was trying to get to that point earlier. If you have somebody's postcode, age, make, type of vehicle and the registration number, given that the insurance companies are analysing this information in coming up with their premiums, if that were fed into the licensing system, you would be able to make a pretty good prediction, would you not?

  Q54  Chairman: Is that realistic here because at the moment it seems to me we have enough difficulty getting the sort of information that is useful.

  Mrs Berry: I think it would be very difficult to have a graduated licensing system by postcode, but I take your point that certainly how the community safety partnership works can target areas. Co-operation and education and all the other factors that can improve the situation could be more targeted than is the case at the moment.

  Mr Hollobone: On the point about automated number plate recognition technology, I ask this of Jan Berry. I spent some time with the Northamptonshire police in their ANPR car. It is parked by the side of the road; all of these untaxed vehicles are going past and the computer is pinging every time a car goes past, but the information from DVLA to the police is always three months out of date. If we had more ANPR police cars and more ANPR systems on our major motorways, not on every road, surely you would be able to identify these two million untaxed vehicles quite quickly?

  Q55  Chairman: It is a very good job creation scheme, if nothing else.

  Mrs Berry: I think I have given evidence to this committee in the past on that subject. We do not have the officers now to deal with the number of hits we are getting through ANPR, and therefore we have to prioritise them and we have to look at vehicles which are stolen, vehicles bring driven without insurance, rather than testing in the first instance because that is where the greatest risk comes, particularly from injury.

  Q56  Chairman: If I asked you if you had to choose between the status quo and graduated licensing with a younger start date, 15 to 16 years, which would you prefer?

  Ms Puech: Graduated licensing.

  Q57  Chairman: With a younger start date? Mrs Berry?

  Mrs Berry: Do I have to choose between them?

  Q58  Chairman: I think you do just for the purposes of argument.

  Mrs Berry: In that case, I would go for regulated licensing but with skills assessment so that they can demonstrate that they have the skills.

  Q59  Chairman: Would you support classroom style learning as a compulsory part of the driving tuition?

  Mrs Berry: I think I would support a combination of education plus demonstrating they have the skills both in a simulated way and also in a practical way on the roads.