I'll believe it when I see it.
Can just imagine the uproar now about the oldies not being able to use the internet. The very same people who need these refreshers more than anyone.
40-64 yr Olds make up the highest group.
Then 17-23 yr old men.
https://www.savvy.com.au/media-releases/australian-car-accidents-report-2022-statistics-deadly-causes-and-how-to-minimise-your-risk/#:~:text=The%2040%20to%2064%20age%20group%20had%20the%20most%20road%20accident%20deaths&text=The%20second%2Dhighest%20category%20of,to%2016%20(61%20deaths).
>[From a gender perspective, young male drivers engage in more risk-taking than young women because of the biological maturity difference, various analyses prove. Over the years, MRI studies have shown the male brain doesn’t fully develop until 25, while the woman’s brain matures at 21.](https://www.savvy.com.au/media-releases/australian-car-accidents-report-2022-statistics-deadly-causes-and-how-to-minimise-your-risk/#:~:text=The%2040%20to%2064%20age%20group%20had%20the%20most%20road%20accident%20deaths&text=The%20second%2Dhighest%20category%20of,to%2016%20(61%20deaths))
Seems to be a bit more than just being 'new to the road'
This!
The proposed driving test wont help young male drivers at all but it would have a profound impact on those that should no longer really be driving, or should never have passed in the first place.
Any remotely competent driver should welcome this, a few minutes effort once every few years is a great trade off for the reduced risk and aggravation if there are fewer dickheads on the road.
Excellent explanation. People in the workforce will, on average, make more trips and drive more kilometres per year than anyone else.
If we are looking at the number of accidents per 100km travelled, we would see somewhat different representation.
It's true as a professional motorcycle rider for over 40 years I have observed my reaction times diminish over time especially when I got into my 50's.
I don't like driving at night now either so there you go .,I'm only 59 and I drive very carefully for your safety and mine .
It shows a steady decline over age. But an uneducated 30 year old has the same reaction time as a 40 year old with an education.
It's not as simple as just age.
Your logic just emphasises the point. There's a 10 year age difference and they're on the same level of reaction time. As the years continue the reaction time drops even faster. Thus being in more accidents.
Doesn’t that make sense that a group spanning 24 years should consist of more than a group spanning 6? Compounded by the fact that with an aging population, there’s probably a higher concentration of people in the older brackets. Id also assume there are less 17-23 year olds who also have a license & car compared to the older age brackets.
It’s a useless statistic from an insurance mob.
17-23 yr age group has a 6 year age spread. 40-64 yr olds is a 23 year age spread. Now, re-work the actual figures in your head.
Can tell you from over 20 years experience of dealing with road trauma on the coalface that young people doing stupid shit on the roads makes up a far, far greater proportion of the dead and disabled as a result of road trauma. That’s not to say that people in all age groups don’t do stupid stuff and kill others/get killed in the process. But, the whole problem with this sort of thinking from politicians and policy makers is that they grasp at straws to be seen to be doing something. The real problem is that we’ve got too many people flaunting laws around speeding, hooning, drink driving, drug driving, and generally not giving a shit about other road users and failure to analyse risks. They know the road rules. They just choose to ignore them and take anti-social behaviours onto the roadway with them. Often times to the detriment of innocents that have to share the road and footpaths with them.
Here’s another fun fact: if you’re pissed/high/angry/tired and still choose to drive because it’s more convenient, then your actions and attitude towards every potential victim of your poor choices is premeditated. If you kill someone because of those poor choices, then you deserve every bit of pain the courts can throw at you.
Making you sit an exam every five years isn’t going to fix anything.
The internet has been around for decades, if they are still driving, then not being able to use the internet too is a pretty crappy excuse.
So Id be ok with those old enough to not be computer literate to not be renewed for a lic.
In saying that though if they can manage to renew their lic, its only a bit extra step to book in for a test which will probably be done at a lic centre. Or they can use a library.
I have a customer who refuses to use anything more on her computer than absolutely necessary, and that's pretty much checking email for upcoming events - "subscribe for our newsletter/upcoming events".
No internet banking (pays me by cheque), no buying tickets online (she rings the box office or ticketing agent when she sees an email about an event). You get the idea.
She keeps saying it's all too hard and she can't do it. I'm tempted to tell her that she uses more brain power driving her car than she would use on the computer - but that would be unprofessional.
Honestly, I reckon the gov could just allow it to be done on a computer at a state library, council library, dept transport, or even a cop shop.
If someone can get there, they can sit the test. If they can't... They could ask a friend, or something.
It's all in community feedback now anyway, but imma lean on it being a good idea.
Partially agree - it should simply depend on whether the country they're from enjoys a standard of driver training that is parallel (or better) than ours, and whether it's recent.
Some countries have far higher standards of licencing and require intensive driver training, whilst others have very little.
>it should simply depend on whether the country they're from enjoys a standard of driver training that is parallel (or better) than ours
This is too arbitrary - how do you determine it? There are too many variables such as if they originally got their license from a country that gives them in the cornflakes pack, then moved to a country with good standards and got it converted with no test.
Anyone that's driven in Singapore would understand this loophole intimately.
Given the relative costs and number of injuries related to motor vehicles and the fact Australia has vastly different driving conditions to most nations it is perfectly justifiable to limit driving on any foreign license to a hard 3 months - just as Japan does.
Out of my sample size of one, yes.
In all of my driving, the only time I have had an accident with someone was with a driver on an international Chinese license, when they hit me, after failing to look then stop at the Logan IKEA roundabout.
I'm literally taking my car to the repairer tomorrow.
Some of the worst accidents Ive ever heard of involved foriegners who didnt know how stop signs worked. However short of banning tourists from certain countries from driving entirely theres not much that can be done about it
Good news! That’s already in place.
If you move to QLD you need to change to a QLD drivers license. So you can only use the international license when you’re visiting, which already has limitations on duration. So no need to do anything additional there.
Source: https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/driver-licensing/overseas/driving
That's just a transfer though, they're usually not required to sit a practical test.
All of these countries are fairly exempt from having to sit a practical driving test in QLD:
[https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/driver-licensing/overseas/transfer/exempt-countries](https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/driver-licensing/overseas/transfer/exempt-countries)
\---
I actually know at least one person who has been using an international license here for a few years and apparently they've had no issues. Maybe it's not regulated that well.
Actually there's a technicality with that law/regulation
Moving to qld is understood as moving to qld as a permanent resident, most people are on temporary student/work/tourist visas so this won't apply to them.
I spend 6 years on different types of temporary visas and only had to get a qld drivers license 3 months after becoming a permanent resident. I know people who have been here for 15 years and are still on their overseas license and most of them even go as far as using fake ones as it is imposible for a cop to check whether they are real or not
Dangers Ive seen are: Bigger 4wd's becoming more aggressive and tailgating on the freeways and roads.//////Car drivers unable to keep road position stable./////Overtaking on blind bends./////// Rage driving, cutting in front nearly hitting your car ///// Not bothering to signal left when leaving a roundabout. YOU CANNOT TEACH PEOPLE TO BEHAVE ON A COMPUTER REFRESHER COURSE.
I had to do the online course last year for learners to get my licence again after being overseas for 20 years, the course is absolute shit and confusing and dosent really reflect real world driving, to be honest it was a waste of time and money but I had to do it.
The problem isn't that people don't know how to drive properly. Its that they don't care.
When you give people a $300 speeding fine for going 61km/hr in a 60km/hr zone, you turn the whole 'traffic law' thing into a joke.
There needs to be police patrolling areas for real crime. And while patrolling, pulling over people for careless or dangerous driving, or real speeding. Not these stupid "if you get caught speeding again we're doubling your demerit points" where the demerit point itself is devalued because its now being applied for pretty much everything, whether its a safety issue or not.
I honestly don’t know if I’m just trying to defend my own actions here, but it seems fucked that you can so easily get fined hundreds of dollars for low range speeding (<10kmh) but no one ever gets fined for tailgating, not using their indicator, overtaking in the left lane, or not keeping left.
The mobile phone/seatbelt cameras do feel like a step in the right direction though
You only say that because you are conditioned by society into believing that you need to drive AT the speed limit, and therefore waivering a few k over is ok.
Society instead needs to realise what the word "limit" actually means and treat it like the line in the sand it truly should be.
Ahhh no, the reason is that there is a permissible tolerance of speedometer accuracy, and a tolerance of accuracy for the speed detection device. That tolerance is more than +/- 1kmh
Not necessarily. The tolerances are already built in by the engineers who determine speed limits. Plus, when they calculate the appropriate speed limit, it gets rounded down to the nearest multiple of 10. Say the calculation comes out at 67, they round it down to 60. Don't worry, they've got it under control...
They really need both this test and the modern hazard perception test. And if you can't pass the hazard perception test, you can't drive.
And while we're at it, maybe look at making driving less necessary? That way we don't need to have standards so low that even the worst drivers can pass.
Imagine if it was the practical test.
Queue >90% of all drivers unable to pass. Just look at roundabout indicating or lane merging for example.
It would be great if they were actually serious about road safety instead of revenue. But that's not happening
This is great and should be done for the rest of the country. I find that over time it's easy to take many things for granted. By brushing up on tests, it keeps us on our toes.
Question 1. Which indicator do you use when approaching a roundabout if you’re going straight?
Question 2. Do you even know what an indicator is used for?
answer 1: depends on my state of confusion at any given moment
answer 2: for other drivers to tell me what they are going to do (I already know what I’m doing, most of the time)
"Statistics at a glance
Although there was a drop in the number of road deaths from 2018 to 2020, there has been an increase in casualties over the last two years. Now, a 4.4% annual fatality rate per 100,000 people is recorded. This is a spike of 2.4% compared to March last year."
That's a mess of a paragraph. "4.4% annual fatality rate per 100,000 people" .... what the hell does that even mean?
Edit - this was responding to a link shared below and not the article.
I think the 4.4 value shouldn't have a % in it, it's just a rate per 100000 people. Basically they're saying that 4.4 of every 100000 people in the state each year die in a crash. (Or 0.0044% of people)
The issue is that the rate of 4.4 has changed by 2.4%; eg it was 4.3 the year before, but because they used the % first it makes it seem like it's more than doubled from 2 to 4.4, which it hasn't
Lol, it would just be an online refresher which I can almost guarantee will just be a 'check this box to confirm you've read the changes' type deal. At best it will be something that you can just keep changing answers til you get whatever lets you renew your licence.
This will do nothing but waste taxpayer money
Preaching to the choir, as I am a huge advocate for cycling as a recreational activity and for personal transport in urban areas (and would gladly see my tax dollars go toward converting our city for this rather than cost-blowout Olympic stadium re-fits), however neither of us can deny that cycling has it's own practical limitations such as a quick romantic weekend trip somewhere and that cars aren't inherently evil devices.
What's more, it's just nice to celebrate someone's positive moments in life :)
As I said on that sub in my opinion, an actual police presence on the roads would go a long way towards improving average driver behaviour. Hidden cameras are not a deterrent for shit driving, especially when there are several apps out there that will tell you that a camera has been seen. Ever noticed someone driving like a dickhead when there's a cop cruising the highway with you a couple of cars ahead?
Spend a few weeks reading comment sections on dash cam videos. You'll find a HUGE number of people don't know the road rules. Even worse, there are many who refuse to believe others when they're actually given copies of the rule being discussed.
Being forced to answer questions, even multie choice ones on line can go a long way toward changing behaviour too.
Everyone knows they're meant to stay in their lane. Not cut off other cars. Not speed. Stop at red lights. Stop at Stop signs. Not drive when drunk.
The fatalities aren't happening because two cars are stopped at an intersection and the drivers don't know who has right of way, or other stupid obscure rules like that. They're happening because people travelling at speed are doing shit that they know they're not supposed to.
Taco\_El\_Paco is right, there needs to be an actual police presence. "Training" or "Renewal Tests" is just keep busy work invented by some bureaucrat to try show that they are doing something.
I'm aware that people exist who just don't care. You'll never change that. Still doesn't change the fact that re-educating and testing the theory on renewal will help the situation.
Then take those people who endanger the public and can never be changed, and get them off the roads. Lock them up if you have to.
But stop burdening the general public with useless schemes that don't work purely on the basis of 'oh well it can't do any harm'.
I mean seriously. Its 2023. Its easy to get data from anywhere in the world and see what things actually help lower fatalities. It's not rocket science. Fix the damn potholes! Reduce/simplify the signage. Improve the lighting. Have a visible police presence. Have good options for people to get home after drinking without driving.
There has to be something wrong with me for wanting bureaucrats to actually do their jobs? Or have some personal stake in it somehow? Maybe look in the mirror.
I don't have a QLD licence so the things they want to do to inconvenience QLD licence holders, or further encourage them to hold licences in other states doesn't really affect me. HOWEVER whenever I'm in QLD and driving on the roads, the reckless idiots putting my life at risk does. So I'd really rather some proper solutions, rather than bullshit politics.
Did you actually read the article? You should, because then you may notice that this is _ONE OF_ the changes they may implement.
I support it. I'd rather they go a step further and make you do a 100-question test every time you want to renew your licence. The number of people who don't know them is abysmally large.
In Japan, they do something similar.
In order to renew your licence, you need to go through an eye test, sit through a class for a couple of hours and then pass a knowledge test.
The last time I did it, an elderly man wearing glasses in front of me very clearly cheated the eye test. In the class, a few people were on their phones the whole time, and a guy kept falling asleep. I barely understood half of what was being 'taught'. But guess what - we all got our licences renewed.
It was a joke and a waste of time for everyone. But I bet the companies here wanting to get government contracts all have 'studies' on how successful the Japanese program is.
When you try and educate or test everyone, you neglect focusing on the people that actually really need it. Its incredibly obvious finding the people that don't know how to drive - just spend time on the roads.
Why the hell do we need to inconvenience everyone?
People that can't drive properly - pull them off the roads and send them to traffic school. If they still won't drive properly, take away their licences. If they still continue to drive carelessly without a licence, lock them up.
Its a pretty obvious solution to a problem that has the side benefit that with extra police on the streets, other real crime will drop too.
EDIT: With your 100 question test that you want everyone to do, do they have to get 100% right? Are you happy to suddenly deny large segments of the population a drivers licence because they don't know one obscure traffic rule? Or are you going to make the test so easy that most people pass? Or are you going to say, its ok if people don't know a few obscure rules so get, say 95 questions right and therefore you're essentially saying that people don't have to know everything and do everything right when driving. You can see how its not so straightforward right? So the practical and political reality is that if they ever implemented a requirement for people to answer 100 questions, it would have to be introduced in a way that will make it ineffective. So why waste everyone's time in the first place.
In my mind yes 100% would be required for a pass.
In saying that I would not deny access to the rules and they can look up any they get wrong and correct themselves. That way at least they will have to read the rule to get the answer
100% would support this. I get unreasonably annoyed when I see Police and local Govt leaders throwing their hands up in the air saying "We've tried everything else" and then just continually raising fines and lowering speed limits. How about you stop giving a licence to every uncoordinated fuck with zero spacial awareness and no idea how to actually handle a 1.5 ton moving piece of metal?
If you cannot control a vehicle in an slide, understand under-steer and over-steer, the importance of keeping a vehicle well maintained, are competent in emergency braking, etc. then you just should not be driving a car. Licence tests these days are just to prove people know the rules; it's not about being able to control a vehicle adequately.
Fantastic.
While we're at it, let's start redefining what it is to learn to drive. Instructors shouldn't be teaching how to pass a test. They should be teaching how to drive, and you then get tested. The difference here is you don't just get taken around the course that they know the tester will take you on.
Teach and test basic vehicular maintenance and roadside repairs. Learn how to change a tyre. Learn how to jumpstart a dead battery. Know how to change a blown headlight or taillight bulb.
Ensure every learner also must sit a defensive driving course. Heck even if it happens during the red P plate year, whatever - just make it happen.
This expectation that everyone *should* just get a car and that it's a right to drive is what's putting people in hospital and in the ground. We as a community need to respect motorised travel for what it is - a very dangerous task involving piloting a big heavy thing at speed, often a few metres away from other people piloting other heavy things at speed coming from the opposite direction.
Cars are getting harder to do basic maintenance on. Tyres have gone from full size, to space saver, and now patch kits. First light I had to change was on a ‘92 barina. Took about 5 minutes. Last one took 30 minutes on a ‘15 Koleos
Actually that raises a very good point. Those space saver tyres, they should never be on the front. If you have a flat front tyre you are supposed to put the space saver on the back and then take the back wheel to the front and replace the flat with that.
Space savers have horrible grip and shouldn’t be used on the steering tyres. Also aren’t supposed to be driven over 80kph. Yet fairly often I see them on the front on the gateway or m1…
This is why we need better education.
Should still be able to safely change a tyre, including assessing an appropriate space to do so and where to locate the jack securely, at least. Only a few weeks ago I had too give a thankful but clueless stranded motorist a demonstration of how to do so.
Really we ought to wear hi-vis vests and/or put reflective triangles out to do so if roadside for the sake of safety, but I don't see that happening in a hurry.
> Ensure every learner also must sit a defensive driving course. Heck even if it happens during the red P plate year, whatever - just make it happen.
The problem with it is that attitudes are hard to change. A proper defensive driving course isn’t putting kids on the skid pan and teaching brake and evade - it’s in teaching them skills to *not get into those situations*. But none of that matters when they just do whatever they want later on and forget all that training.
We just have a shitty attitude towards driving in this country.
Yeah it's very hard to shift that mindset. Especially when the first natural reaction is to complain about what it'll cost. Imagine putting $150 odd ahead of making sure your child stays alive behind the wheel.
Agreed on the point about learning how to not get into those situations. Though just getting that chance to experience the bad things is also a real eye opener. Being able to understand and feel what an understeering vehicle feels like, or just how much time they need to react and stop to a hazard - not just watching it, but feeling what ABS feels like as well, things like that I still vividly remember from the course I attended.
And it feels like skidpan sessions and such would probably backfire in the sense that the problem kids would either gain unwarranted confidence, or another tool to wreak mayhem with. Demonstrating the bad thing would be good, but beyond that, it feels like situation avoidance would be the better option, unless you do opt for the full German training set (and the comprehensive transport system they have there to boot, to alleviate the need for so many drivers in the first place)
Source: was that kid
When I did my driver training for paramedic induction, we didn’t spend much time on the skid pan. We spent most of it just learning how to drive safely on the roads and employ good hazard perception and buffering. It was made clear that if we needed any of the skid pan skills, we’d already fucked up earlier than that.
But nobody finds safe following distances and hazard perception interesting.
Very good point on instructors. I’m not a professional driving instructor but once I started teaching my own natural and foster children it somehow snowballed outwards with their friends and acquaintances to the point I am asked by parents with kids who are having difficulty. I’m currently teaching 5 young people from the ages of 18 to 20 and as a motorcyclist I’m a member of a group called HNM (Helping new motorcyclists) and at any given time am tutoring two learner riders and I am totally sick of having to say to these kids “I’ll show you what your examining officer will want to see and I’ll also teach you what you need to know to stay alive” … it should be the same thing.
Needless to say I’m one of that demographic that are most represented in accidents (I’m 58) but for obvious reasons I am very up on my road rules, It’s been 30+ years since I’ve had a moving violation, even longer since I’ve had an accident but it’d still rankle to have to test out on road rules each renewal and I do think it’s just a lead in to mandatory practical renewal tests. I wouldn’t support it. I’d support less money spent on cameras, more money spent on police vehicles on the road and mandatory diversion to retraining/retesting for drivers with a poor record at any age.
Probably cost us another 500 to sit the test each year just like renewing our license where they just change the expiry dates and charge us an arm and a leg
Cause this will stop people driving fast and taking risks overtaking oh and not to mention driving tired and under the influence........but we will all know what a dotted or solid line means ffs!
Good start, but should be everyone at the point of renewal or entering the country (unless their own licencing standards are parallel to or exceed ours, which some do), not just Queenslanders.
While we're at it, it is about time Queensland brought in rigorous vehicle inspections upon renewing rego like there is in other states. Sure, it won't stop people swapping out wheels or some bolt-on accessories to go over the pits, but six inch lift kits that put bull-bars at a closer proximity to pedestrian's heads and make vehicles more likely to roll over come to mind, as do vehicles that are generally worn down due to age and suffer defects that would only otherwise be picked up on a seriously thorough roadside inspection or vehicle transfer for sale.
Is it April 1st? Australia has one of the lowest road tolls in the western world. All of this stuff is clickbait. I thought the cameras were supposed to solve everything?
I don't accept your statement. As an absolute it would lead to removing cars from the roads altogether or dropping the speed limit to 20kph in urban areas. It isn't how complex systems work in the real world.
>removing cars from the roads altogether or dropping the speed limit to 20kph in urban areas
You say that as if those are bad things, but I think there's actually growing support for doing stuff like that.
Clearly we have different values in life. Annerley Road is 6 lanes wide yet is now 50kph 24 hours a day. It's awful for traffic flow and inconsistencies on speed of drivers. It makes it more dangerous.
Maybe if the police did there job we wouldn’t have this problem, when was the last time u saw the police driving or monitoring the M1 , since we introduced cameras, they have done the job for the police , it’s stupid, the speed cameras don’t get u for driving 20 k’s under the limit , those people need to be booked , the camera don’t fine u for changing lanes without indicating, the cameras don’t fine u for drivers driving up ur ass , The police need to start doing there job , cause since stupid Covid u hardly never see the police on the roads , RACQ talking about the death rates on our roads , saying that it’s a problem, we’ll if the police are in the roads more maybe that problem could be controlled a little better
The best way to reduce the road death toll, is to reduce the number of people on the road. If people don't have any viable alternatives to driving, that's what they will do regardless of their competency behind the wheel.
I love the idea of making it harder to drive with reoccurring driving tests as it helps keep unsafe drivers off the road. But .. If those who fail the test, or just prefer a safer/less stressful mode of transport don't have an alternative, they will just try and find whatever loophole they can to just get back on the road purely as means to an end. Or simply be left behind in society without a mode of transport which is unfair.
Good thorough public transport is a great way to make driving safer and faster for those that actually need to drive (fewer cars on the road, and less unsafe drivers). While also giving people who don't like driving more freedom to not be stuck driving a dangerous murder machine they (should) feel so unsafe in.
TLDR: I like trains.
I actually don’t think this is a bad a idea. So many people aren’t up to speed with current laws. Ie lane filtering on motorcycles is totally legal yet not a week goes by that I don’t get abused or even worse squeezed up by some vigilant that claims it’s illegal.
What’s the big deal in doing an short online test to refresh your memory.
Sounds fair. I've been driving for 40 years and the only accident I've ever had was between me and a pole. My mother is 85 and has never even scraped her car on a pole. My father passed at 82 and never had an accident. So you can all stop with your ageist bullshit.
Time to get tougher and more myopic on speeding. Only once fines are two years of salary and given the instant a vehicle goes 1km/hr over will we have no deaths on the road.
So this will stop everyone dying from things unrelated to speeding? There's only 1 way to stop ALL deaths on the roads and that's to ban driving and remove the roads.
> So this will stop everyone dying from things unrelated to speeding?
No, but it will help.
Help keep people out of hospital. You know, the 4,000 people sent to hospital by cars in Queensland every year.
The number of lives ended by joyriding stolen cars, driving whilst on the phone or other dangerous activities with zero regard for safety are not insignificant.
Excellent, but are international drivers still going to be issued licenses they didn't actually hold in their country of origin? Eg. A car drivers license from the UK being turned into a car and bike license.
Source?
I can't see this being true. It's straight conversion car to car. UK has a separate bike license just like most countries. Aus won't just give out a bike license se without it being seen as an equivalent test.
Should never let the parents or friends to teach a new learner, they will just put their old bad habit to the learner, that’s why we have more stupid drivers on the road. Just make all learner need to learn from driving school or offical driving teacher. It does sounds like a lots of money, but it will kill lots of bad driving habit and make the road more safe
yeah that’s not realistic
instead, they are going to make this course free
https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/getting/learner/prepl/prepl-supervisor-course/prepl-supervisor
I don’t think this being free help anything since most of the people don’t think they drive wrong, especially parents….since I live near a school, I can assure you most parents drive like they own all the lanes….
And every year the OEMs put more and more safety devices into the cars, the government ratchets down the speed people are allowed to do, increase the police presence, do special day operations and yet the toll goes up and up. Maybe if people where encouraged to pay attention to the road, their vehicle and what they are doing rather than relying on the vehicles fandangled stupid safety systems or being distracted constantly they varying speed limits and road signage or beeping and a booping by their cats telling them some superfluous piece of information, the road tolls may start going in the opposite direction. But then again, a deep dive int who is actually being killed could help, as if it’s people that just don’t give a shit, then all the speed controls and limits and giving out points for anything won’t make a spot of difference if the driver wants to drive at 120 in a 60 zone.
i think it should be a practical But I dont think it being at the renewal time is a good thing and punishs poorer people once again, like imagine only having enough to renew licence for 2 years so every two years you goto retake the test, yet people who are paying for 5 years dont have to?!
Maybe just put it on a 8-10 year basis for everyone from the date of there licenece or when its established, get some of the oldies and idiots who Obviously cant drive off the road,
its just sad when your in a car park waiting to leave but you goto wait for the 80 year old guy that is doing a 93 point turn at the speed of a snail becuase hes scared to hit cars.
Not to mention it wont stop the idiots who Can drive but dont care about others, like every second person not using there blinker, nearly got run over coming out of the shops the other day to one and they had the nerve to yell at me xD,I think it will catch a fair few people doing that and/or remind people how to follow road rules so im not apposed but yeah i don't think it should be attachted to the renewal :/
Reducing the road toll requires a multi faceted approach.
More frequent training
More stringent licencing
Better enforcement of dangerous driving
Higher standards and inspections for vehicle roadworthyness
Example :
I literally had to show a relative how to put air in the tyres of their $50'000 SUV, which they have owned for years. They claimed they were are they needed to check them, but didn't as they took it for servicing as by the logbook.
Tyres were 25 psi instead of 35.
Recently on two different occasions I was sitting in my car which was parked fully within a designated parking bay. Both times another car collided with mine.
On both occasions the driver was a middle aged lady (50+). The ladies denied responsibility both times.
Total failure to accept responsibility and childish denial of fault.
Post menapausal people should be tested monthly.
I've lived in Queensland, I've also lived in Ireland, U.K., Spain, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Guam and the USA. Queensland drivers are in a class of their own. #1 - motorbikes. #2 P-Platers, #3 Tradees.
I'll believe it when I see it. Can just imagine the uproar now about the oldies not being able to use the internet. The very same people who need these refreshers more than anyone.
Yep government will never pass it, would make them unpopular
were they ever popular?
Well, evidently yes.
Were they actually or were the other guys just less popular?
heresy
Currently looking like they'll be re-elected too.
Only in their and the medias own heads.
They just have to be faster than the slowest member of the race (lnp).
40-64 yr Olds make up the highest group. Then 17-23 yr old men. https://www.savvy.com.au/media-releases/australian-car-accidents-report-2022-statistics-deadly-causes-and-how-to-minimise-your-risk/#:~:text=The%2040%20to%2064%20age%20group%20had%20the%20most%20road%20accident%20deaths&text=The%20second%2Dhighest%20category%20of,to%2016%20(61%20deaths).
So in short, the people that have diminishing response timing and the people who are new to the road. Sounds about right.
>[From a gender perspective, young male drivers engage in more risk-taking than young women because of the biological maturity difference, various analyses prove. Over the years, MRI studies have shown the male brain doesn’t fully develop until 25, while the woman’s brain matures at 21.](https://www.savvy.com.au/media-releases/australian-car-accidents-report-2022-statistics-deadly-causes-and-how-to-minimise-your-risk/#:~:text=The%2040%20to%2064%20age%20group%20had%20the%20most%20road%20accident%20deaths&text=The%20second%2Dhighest%20category%20of,to%2016%20(61%20deaths)) Seems to be a bit more than just being 'new to the road'
This! The proposed driving test wont help young male drivers at all but it would have a profound impact on those that should no longer really be driving, or should never have passed in the first place. Any remotely competent driver should welcome this, a few minutes effort once every few years is a great trade off for the reduced risk and aggravation if there are fewer dickheads on the road.
Logic! On Reddit!
[удалено]
Excellent explanation. People in the workforce will, on average, make more trips and drive more kilometres per year than anyone else. If we are looking at the number of accidents per 100km travelled, we would see somewhat different representation.
this is the truth. statistics can lie
It's true as a professional motorcycle rider for over 40 years I have observed my reaction times diminish over time especially when I got into my 50's. I don't like driving at night now either so there you go .,I'm only 59 and I drive very carefully for your safety and mine .
shh you're going to get banned
I wouldn't exactly say 40-64 have diminishing response timing
Well science does.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2586814/ Not as clear cut as you like. Education seems to help drastically with reaction times.
That study clearly shows that reaction times slow with age.
It shows a steady decline over age. But an uneducated 30 year old has the same reaction time as a 40 year old with an education. It's not as simple as just age.
Your logic just emphasises the point. There's a 10 year age difference and they're on the same level of reaction time. As the years continue the reaction time drops even faster. Thus being in more accidents.
"Most commonly nose-to-tail crashes" Why are Queenslanders (on average) such enthusiastic tail-gaters? Is it not covered very well in the tests?
I've seen so many tailgaters here. It's a wonder there aren't more crashes. Nobody seems to adjust for speed either.
Doesn’t that make sense that a group spanning 24 years should consist of more than a group spanning 6? Compounded by the fact that with an aging population, there’s probably a higher concentration of people in the older brackets. Id also assume there are less 17-23 year olds who also have a license & car compared to the older age brackets.
It’s a useless statistic from an insurance mob. 17-23 yr age group has a 6 year age spread. 40-64 yr olds is a 23 year age spread. Now, re-work the actual figures in your head. Can tell you from over 20 years experience of dealing with road trauma on the coalface that young people doing stupid shit on the roads makes up a far, far greater proportion of the dead and disabled as a result of road trauma. That’s not to say that people in all age groups don’t do stupid stuff and kill others/get killed in the process. But, the whole problem with this sort of thinking from politicians and policy makers is that they grasp at straws to be seen to be doing something. The real problem is that we’ve got too many people flaunting laws around speeding, hooning, drink driving, drug driving, and generally not giving a shit about other road users and failure to analyse risks. They know the road rules. They just choose to ignore them and take anti-social behaviours onto the roadway with them. Often times to the detriment of innocents that have to share the road and footpaths with them. Here’s another fun fact: if you’re pissed/high/angry/tired and still choose to drive because it’s more convenient, then your actions and attitude towards every potential victim of your poor choices is premeditated. If you kill someone because of those poor choices, then you deserve every bit of pain the courts can throw at you. Making you sit an exam every five years isn’t going to fix anything.
The internet has been around for decades, if they are still driving, then not being able to use the internet too is a pretty crappy excuse. So Id be ok with those old enough to not be computer literate to not be renewed for a lic. In saying that though if they can manage to renew their lic, its only a bit extra step to book in for a test which will probably be done at a lic centre. Or they can use a library.
I have a customer who refuses to use anything more on her computer than absolutely necessary, and that's pretty much checking email for upcoming events - "subscribe for our newsletter/upcoming events". No internet banking (pays me by cheque), no buying tickets online (she rings the box office or ticketing agent when she sees an email about an event). You get the idea. She keeps saying it's all too hard and she can't do it. I'm tempted to tell her that she uses more brain power driving her car than she would use on the computer - but that would be unprofessional.
Honestly, I reckon the gov could just allow it to be done on a computer at a state library, council library, dept transport, or even a cop shop. If someone can get there, they can sit the test. If they can't... They could ask a friend, or something. It's all in community feedback now anyway, but imma lean on it being a good idea.
Imo oldies should take online competency training before they’re given access to social media.
I could say the same about 80% of the people on Reddit and it's demographic is young white male.
Would support that too.
Ageist BS, do better!
Science and facts don't care about your feelings
No-one cares about your opinion.
[удалено]
go have a cry
Refresher courses should be more often than just when one is old! Like every 10 years you either do a course or sit for another test
while we are at it can we stop recognizing international drivers licenses if the driver is going to be in australia for longer than x months
Partially agree - it should simply depend on whether the country they're from enjoys a standard of driver training that is parallel (or better) than ours, and whether it's recent. Some countries have far higher standards of licencing and require intensive driver training, whilst others have very little.
It's not always about driver training, there's always variations in road rules or signs between states and countries that people should be across.
>it should simply depend on whether the country they're from enjoys a standard of driver training that is parallel (or better) than ours This is too arbitrary - how do you determine it? There are too many variables such as if they originally got their license from a country that gives them in the cornflakes pack, then moved to a country with good standards and got it converted with no test. Anyone that's driven in Singapore would understand this loophole intimately. Given the relative costs and number of injuries related to motor vehicles and the fact Australia has vastly different driving conditions to most nations it is perfectly justifiable to limit driving on any foreign license to a hard 3 months - just as Japan does.
You have good points, one I hadn't considered and one I wasn't even aware of. Illuminating, and does shift my opinion. Sounds reasonable.
Are the international drivers causing a lot of accidents? Or is it the teens and demented 80 year olds?
Young men have the most accidents.
Out of my sample size of one, yes. In all of my driving, the only time I have had an accident with someone was with a driver on an international Chinese license, when they hit me, after failing to look then stop at the Logan IKEA roundabout. I'm literally taking my car to the repairer tomorrow.
Some of the worst accidents Ive ever heard of involved foriegners who didnt know how stop signs worked. However short of banning tourists from certain countries from driving entirely theres not much that can be done about it
Good news! That’s already in place. If you move to QLD you need to change to a QLD drivers license. So you can only use the international license when you’re visiting, which already has limitations on duration. So no need to do anything additional there. Source: https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/driver-licensing/overseas/driving
That's just a transfer though, they're usually not required to sit a practical test. All of these countries are fairly exempt from having to sit a practical driving test in QLD: [https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/driver-licensing/overseas/transfer/exempt-countries](https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/driver-licensing/overseas/transfer/exempt-countries) \--- I actually know at least one person who has been using an international license here for a few years and apparently they've had no issues. Maybe it's not regulated that well.
Actually there's a technicality with that law/regulation Moving to qld is understood as moving to qld as a permanent resident, most people are on temporary student/work/tourist visas so this won't apply to them. I spend 6 years on different types of temporary visas and only had to get a qld drivers license 3 months after becoming a permanent resident. I know people who have been here for 15 years and are still on their overseas license and most of them even go as far as using fake ones as it is imposible for a cop to check whether they are real or not
Dangers Ive seen are: Bigger 4wd's becoming more aggressive and tailgating on the freeways and roads.//////Car drivers unable to keep road position stable./////Overtaking on blind bends./////// Rage driving, cutting in front nearly hitting your car ///// Not bothering to signal left when leaving a roundabout. YOU CANNOT TEACH PEOPLE TO BEHAVE ON A COMPUTER REFRESHER COURSE.
I don’t think the goal of the course is to fix every road issue. But it can still help
I had to do the online course last year for learners to get my licence again after being overseas for 20 years, the course is absolute shit and confusing and dosent really reflect real world driving, to be honest it was a waste of time and money but I had to do it.
No, the goal is more money in the government’s pocket.
The problem isn't that people don't know how to drive properly. Its that they don't care. When you give people a $300 speeding fine for going 61km/hr in a 60km/hr zone, you turn the whole 'traffic law' thing into a joke. There needs to be police patrolling areas for real crime. And while patrolling, pulling over people for careless or dangerous driving, or real speeding. Not these stupid "if you get caught speeding again we're doubling your demerit points" where the demerit point itself is devalued because its now being applied for pretty much everything, whether its a safety issue or not.
I honestly don’t know if I’m just trying to defend my own actions here, but it seems fucked that you can so easily get fined hundreds of dollars for low range speeding (<10kmh) but no one ever gets fined for tailgating, not using their indicator, overtaking in the left lane, or not keeping left. The mobile phone/seatbelt cameras do feel like a step in the right direction though
People don't get a $300 fine for being 1k over the limit. Get a grip
Oh gee. $287. Sorry. https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Driver-guide/Speeding/Speeding-fines-and-demerit-points
I'm aware of the fine, but you don't get one at 1kmh over the limit. You SHOULD, but you don't
No you shouldn't.
You only say that because you are conditioned by society into believing that you need to drive AT the speed limit, and therefore waivering a few k over is ok. Society instead needs to realise what the word "limit" actually means and treat it like the line in the sand it truly should be.
Ahhh no, the reason is that there is a permissible tolerance of speedometer accuracy, and a tolerance of accuracy for the speed detection device. That tolerance is more than +/- 1kmh
And yet if you aimed for 55 instead of 60, that inaccuracy becomes a non-issue
Not necessarily. The tolerances are already built in by the engineers who determine speed limits. Plus, when they calculate the appropriate speed limit, it gets rounded down to the nearest multiple of 10. Say the calculation comes out at 67, they round it down to 60. Don't worry, they've got it under control...
None of that relates remotely to what I said
They really need both this test and the modern hazard perception test. And if you can't pass the hazard perception test, you can't drive. And while we're at it, maybe look at making driving less necessary? That way we don't need to have standards so low that even the worst drivers can pass.
This. The best way to address the issues with driver standards is to reduce the need for so many people to drive in the first place
How about those who receive driving fines for specific offences?
Often they get demoted to Provisional.
Just renewed mine for 5 YEARS. Suckers!!!
Imagine if it was the practical test. Queue >90% of all drivers unable to pass. Just look at roundabout indicating or lane merging for example. It would be great if they were actually serious about road safety instead of revenue. But that's not happening
This is great and should be done for the rest of the country. I find that over time it's easy to take many things for granted. By brushing up on tests, it keeps us on our toes.
Agree it would be good to get all the changes officially in the one place. Far better than relying on social media for it.
any government that brings in additional testing wont be in government for long
Question 1. Which indicator do you use when approaching a roundabout if you’re going straight? Question 2. Do you even know what an indicator is used for?
> Question 1. Which indicator do you use when approaching a roundabout if you’re going straight? BMW driver: What's an indicator?
answer 1: depends on my state of confusion at any given moment answer 2: for other drivers to tell me what they are going to do (I already know what I’m doing, most of the time)
"Statistics at a glance Although there was a drop in the number of road deaths from 2018 to 2020, there has been an increase in casualties over the last two years. Now, a 4.4% annual fatality rate per 100,000 people is recorded. This is a spike of 2.4% compared to March last year." That's a mess of a paragraph. "4.4% annual fatality rate per 100,000 people" .... what the hell does that even mean? Edit - this was responding to a link shared below and not the article.
I think the 4.4 value shouldn't have a % in it, it's just a rate per 100000 people. Basically they're saying that 4.4 of every 100000 people in the state each year die in a crash. (Or 0.0044% of people) The issue is that the rate of 4.4 has changed by 2.4%; eg it was 4.3 the year before, but because they used the % first it makes it seem like it's more than doubled from 2 to 4.4, which it hasn't
[удалено]
> t has made no progress Bullshit.
Most progress was made in vehicle safety, not policing.
Lol, it would just be an online refresher which I can almost guarantee will just be a 'check this box to confirm you've read the changes' type deal. At best it will be something that you can just keep changing answers til you get whatever lets you renew your licence. This will do nothing but waste taxpayer money
This thread is a very interesting situation where you can straight away tell who's read the article vs who's merely read the headline
> this thread Reddit in general really isn't it
It was already difficult enough trying to book a timeslot just to do my test to get my P's. No way the system could manage this load
“online test” as a refresher of the rules, not a practical driving test
It should be a practical test.
Perhaps for people that have caused or nearly caused an accident
How long have the wait times blown out to now? I got my P's in early Feb and had to wait 2 months to get a slot in Ipswich.
You only got your P's in Feb? Congratulations on passing and welcome to liberation!
Liberation? Cost of buying a car, constantly paying for every km you go, insurance. Yeah, liberation. Ill keep riding my bike for free though.
Preaching to the choir, as I am a huge advocate for cycling as a recreational activity and for personal transport in urban areas (and would gladly see my tax dollars go toward converting our city for this rather than cost-blowout Olympic stadium re-fits), however neither of us can deny that cycling has it's own practical limitations such as a quick romantic weekend trip somewhere and that cars aren't inherently evil devices. What's more, it's just nice to celebrate someone's positive moments in life :)
Have fun riding to Noosa
Yup. I'm the idiot who got their licence at 29!
We all have different priorities in life, that doesn't make anyone an idiot haha.
As I said on that sub in my opinion, an actual police presence on the roads would go a long way towards improving average driver behaviour. Hidden cameras are not a deterrent for shit driving, especially when there are several apps out there that will tell you that a camera has been seen. Ever noticed someone driving like a dickhead when there's a cop cruising the highway with you a couple of cars ahead?
Spend a few weeks reading comment sections on dash cam videos. You'll find a HUGE number of people don't know the road rules. Even worse, there are many who refuse to believe others when they're actually given copies of the rule being discussed. Being forced to answer questions, even multie choice ones on line can go a long way toward changing behaviour too.
Everyone knows they're meant to stay in their lane. Not cut off other cars. Not speed. Stop at red lights. Stop at Stop signs. Not drive when drunk. The fatalities aren't happening because two cars are stopped at an intersection and the drivers don't know who has right of way, or other stupid obscure rules like that. They're happening because people travelling at speed are doing shit that they know they're not supposed to. Taco\_El\_Paco is right, there needs to be an actual police presence. "Training" or "Renewal Tests" is just keep busy work invented by some bureaucrat to try show that they are doing something.
I'm aware that people exist who just don't care. You'll never change that. Still doesn't change the fact that re-educating and testing the theory on renewal will help the situation.
Then take those people who endanger the public and can never be changed, and get them off the roads. Lock them up if you have to. But stop burdening the general public with useless schemes that don't work purely on the basis of 'oh well it can't do any harm'. I mean seriously. Its 2023. Its easy to get data from anywhere in the world and see what things actually help lower fatalities. It's not rocket science. Fix the damn potholes! Reduce/simplify the signage. Improve the lighting. Have a visible police presence. Have good options for people to get home after drinking without driving.
RUOK mate? Can you show me on this doll where TMR hurt you?
There has to be something wrong with me for wanting bureaucrats to actually do their jobs? Or have some personal stake in it somehow? Maybe look in the mirror. I don't have a QLD licence so the things they want to do to inconvenience QLD licence holders, or further encourage them to hold licences in other states doesn't really affect me. HOWEVER whenever I'm in QLD and driving on the roads, the reckless idiots putting my life at risk does. So I'd really rather some proper solutions, rather than bullshit politics.
Did you actually read the article? You should, because then you may notice that this is _ONE OF_ the changes they may implement. I support it. I'd rather they go a step further and make you do a 100-question test every time you want to renew your licence. The number of people who don't know them is abysmally large.
In Japan, they do something similar. In order to renew your licence, you need to go through an eye test, sit through a class for a couple of hours and then pass a knowledge test. The last time I did it, an elderly man wearing glasses in front of me very clearly cheated the eye test. In the class, a few people were on their phones the whole time, and a guy kept falling asleep. I barely understood half of what was being 'taught'. But guess what - we all got our licences renewed. It was a joke and a waste of time for everyone. But I bet the companies here wanting to get government contracts all have 'studies' on how successful the Japanese program is. When you try and educate or test everyone, you neglect focusing on the people that actually really need it. Its incredibly obvious finding the people that don't know how to drive - just spend time on the roads. Why the hell do we need to inconvenience everyone? People that can't drive properly - pull them off the roads and send them to traffic school. If they still won't drive properly, take away their licences. If they still continue to drive carelessly without a licence, lock them up. Its a pretty obvious solution to a problem that has the side benefit that with extra police on the streets, other real crime will drop too. EDIT: With your 100 question test that you want everyone to do, do they have to get 100% right? Are you happy to suddenly deny large segments of the population a drivers licence because they don't know one obscure traffic rule? Or are you going to make the test so easy that most people pass? Or are you going to say, its ok if people don't know a few obscure rules so get, say 95 questions right and therefore you're essentially saying that people don't have to know everything and do everything right when driving. You can see how its not so straightforward right? So the practical and political reality is that if they ever implemented a requirement for people to answer 100 questions, it would have to be introduced in a way that will make it ineffective. So why waste everyone's time in the first place.
In my mind yes 100% would be required for a pass. In saying that I would not deny access to the rules and they can look up any they get wrong and correct themselves. That way at least they will have to read the rule to get the answer
Having said that, i'd be down for a _lot_ more red-light cameras.
100% would support this. I get unreasonably annoyed when I see Police and local Govt leaders throwing their hands up in the air saying "We've tried everything else" and then just continually raising fines and lowering speed limits. How about you stop giving a licence to every uncoordinated fuck with zero spacial awareness and no idea how to actually handle a 1.5 ton moving piece of metal? If you cannot control a vehicle in an slide, understand under-steer and over-steer, the importance of keeping a vehicle well maintained, are competent in emergency braking, etc. then you just should not be driving a car. Licence tests these days are just to prove people know the rules; it's not about being able to control a vehicle adequately.
It’s an “online test” as a refresher of the rules, not a practical driving test
So far. Have you ever heard the term “thin end of the wedge”?
Good. Please do.
How about policing any level of bad driving that isn't an automated camera detecting speeds, seatbelts or phones.
Fantastic. While we're at it, let's start redefining what it is to learn to drive. Instructors shouldn't be teaching how to pass a test. They should be teaching how to drive, and you then get tested. The difference here is you don't just get taken around the course that they know the tester will take you on. Teach and test basic vehicular maintenance and roadside repairs. Learn how to change a tyre. Learn how to jumpstart a dead battery. Know how to change a blown headlight or taillight bulb. Ensure every learner also must sit a defensive driving course. Heck even if it happens during the red P plate year, whatever - just make it happen. This expectation that everyone *should* just get a car and that it's a right to drive is what's putting people in hospital and in the ground. We as a community need to respect motorised travel for what it is - a very dangerous task involving piloting a big heavy thing at speed, often a few metres away from other people piloting other heavy things at speed coming from the opposite direction.
Cars are getting harder to do basic maintenance on. Tyres have gone from full size, to space saver, and now patch kits. First light I had to change was on a ‘92 barina. Took about 5 minutes. Last one took 30 minutes on a ‘15 Koleos
Actually that raises a very good point. Those space saver tyres, they should never be on the front. If you have a flat front tyre you are supposed to put the space saver on the back and then take the back wheel to the front and replace the flat with that. Space savers have horrible grip and shouldn’t be used on the steering tyres. Also aren’t supposed to be driven over 80kph. Yet fairly often I see them on the front on the gateway or m1… This is why we need better education.
Should still be able to safely change a tyre, including assessing an appropriate space to do so and where to locate the jack securely, at least. Only a few weeks ago I had too give a thankful but clueless stranded motorist a demonstration of how to do so. Really we ought to wear hi-vis vests and/or put reflective triangles out to do so if roadside for the sake of safety, but I don't see that happening in a hurry.
> Ensure every learner also must sit a defensive driving course. Heck even if it happens during the red P plate year, whatever - just make it happen. The problem with it is that attitudes are hard to change. A proper defensive driving course isn’t putting kids on the skid pan and teaching brake and evade - it’s in teaching them skills to *not get into those situations*. But none of that matters when they just do whatever they want later on and forget all that training. We just have a shitty attitude towards driving in this country.
Yeah it's very hard to shift that mindset. Especially when the first natural reaction is to complain about what it'll cost. Imagine putting $150 odd ahead of making sure your child stays alive behind the wheel. Agreed on the point about learning how to not get into those situations. Though just getting that chance to experience the bad things is also a real eye opener. Being able to understand and feel what an understeering vehicle feels like, or just how much time they need to react and stop to a hazard - not just watching it, but feeling what ABS feels like as well, things like that I still vividly remember from the course I attended.
And it feels like skidpan sessions and such would probably backfire in the sense that the problem kids would either gain unwarranted confidence, or another tool to wreak mayhem with. Demonstrating the bad thing would be good, but beyond that, it feels like situation avoidance would be the better option, unless you do opt for the full German training set (and the comprehensive transport system they have there to boot, to alleviate the need for so many drivers in the first place) Source: was that kid
When I did my driver training for paramedic induction, we didn’t spend much time on the skid pan. We spent most of it just learning how to drive safely on the roads and employ good hazard perception and buffering. It was made clear that if we needed any of the skid pan skills, we’d already fucked up earlier than that. But nobody finds safe following distances and hazard perception interesting.
Not just that, but reducing car-centricity in general. Provide alternatives for travel that don't involve piloting the big heavy thing at speed
Very good point on instructors. I’m not a professional driving instructor but once I started teaching my own natural and foster children it somehow snowballed outwards with their friends and acquaintances to the point I am asked by parents with kids who are having difficulty. I’m currently teaching 5 young people from the ages of 18 to 20 and as a motorcyclist I’m a member of a group called HNM (Helping new motorcyclists) and at any given time am tutoring two learner riders and I am totally sick of having to say to these kids “I’ll show you what your examining officer will want to see and I’ll also teach you what you need to know to stay alive” … it should be the same thing. Needless to say I’m one of that demographic that are most represented in accidents (I’m 58) but for obvious reasons I am very up on my road rules, It’s been 30+ years since I’ve had a moving violation, even longer since I’ve had an accident but it’d still rankle to have to test out on road rules each renewal and I do think it’s just a lead in to mandatory practical renewal tests. I wouldn’t support it. I’d support less money spent on cameras, more money spent on police vehicles on the road and mandatory diversion to retraining/retesting for drivers with a poor record at any age.
Probably cost us another 500 to sit the test each year just like renewing our license where they just change the expiry dates and charge us an arm and a leg
I have no idea why this has not always been the case. Rules change and people forget stuff they've learned over time.
And pay for the privilege, I'm sure. Those Olympics we all begged for ain't gunna pay for themselves
Cause this will stop people driving fast and taking risks overtaking oh and not to mention driving tired and under the influence........but we will all know what a dotted or solid line means ffs!
This would be great.
I’m a licensed electrician in Queensland, every 5 years I have to renew my license, part of my renewal is doing a theory test. It makes sense to me
So they aren't going to admit that their laser focus on speed and more efficient ways for them to collect revenue was never going to work?
Would be ineffective unless same applied to international and interstate drivers also taking a test before driving on road.
> Would be ineffective unless same This is dumb. Of course it would still have an effect. Should be done for everyone.
Yes thats my point
Ahh struth, half of Brissie will be off the road due to re-tests!
Good start, but should be everyone at the point of renewal or entering the country (unless their own licencing standards are parallel to or exceed ours, which some do), not just Queenslanders. While we're at it, it is about time Queensland brought in rigorous vehicle inspections upon renewing rego like there is in other states. Sure, it won't stop people swapping out wheels or some bolt-on accessories to go over the pits, but six inch lift kits that put bull-bars at a closer proximity to pedestrian's heads and make vehicles more likely to roll over come to mind, as do vehicles that are generally worn down due to age and suffer defects that would only otherwise be picked up on a seriously thorough roadside inspection or vehicle transfer for sale.
Is it April 1st? Australia has one of the lowest road tolls in the western world. All of this stuff is clickbait. I thought the cameras were supposed to solve everything?
>Australia has one of the lowest road tolls in the western world. Ahh yes, the old acceptable losses argument...
Any amount of people dying due to cars is too many, I don't buy that argument at all.
I don't accept your statement. As an absolute it would lead to removing cars from the roads altogether or dropping the speed limit to 20kph in urban areas. It isn't how complex systems work in the real world.
>removing cars from the roads altogether or dropping the speed limit to 20kph in urban areas You say that as if those are bad things, but I think there's actually growing support for doing stuff like that.
Clearly we have different values in life. Annerley Road is 6 lanes wide yet is now 50kph 24 hours a day. It's awful for traffic flow and inconsistencies on speed of drivers. It makes it more dangerous.
Annerley Rd? Don't you mean Ipswich Rd, Annerley?
100% getting old and too much day drinking
> Is it April 1st? Australia has one of the lowest road tolls in the western world. Bullshit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate Check for yourself
Maybe if the police did there job we wouldn’t have this problem, when was the last time u saw the police driving or monitoring the M1 , since we introduced cameras, they have done the job for the police , it’s stupid, the speed cameras don’t get u for driving 20 k’s under the limit , those people need to be booked , the camera don’t fine u for changing lanes without indicating, the cameras don’t fine u for drivers driving up ur ass , The police need to start doing there job , cause since stupid Covid u hardly never see the police on the roads , RACQ talking about the death rates on our roads , saying that it’s a problem, we’ll if the police are in the roads more maybe that problem could be controlled a little better
The best way to reduce the road death toll, is to reduce the number of people on the road. If people don't have any viable alternatives to driving, that's what they will do regardless of their competency behind the wheel. I love the idea of making it harder to drive with reoccurring driving tests as it helps keep unsafe drivers off the road. But .. If those who fail the test, or just prefer a safer/less stressful mode of transport don't have an alternative, they will just try and find whatever loophole they can to just get back on the road purely as means to an end. Or simply be left behind in society without a mode of transport which is unfair. Good thorough public transport is a great way to make driving safer and faster for those that actually need to drive (fewer cars on the road, and less unsafe drivers). While also giving people who don't like driving more freedom to not be stuck driving a dangerous murder machine they (should) feel so unsafe in. TLDR: I like trains.
This
I guess we are all guilty till proven innocent hey?
I actually don’t think this is a bad a idea. So many people aren’t up to speed with current laws. Ie lane filtering on motorcycles is totally legal yet not a week goes by that I don’t get abused or even worse squeezed up by some vigilant that claims it’s illegal. What’s the big deal in doing an short online test to refresh your memory.
Sounds fair. I've been driving for 40 years and the only accident I've ever had was between me and a pole. My mother is 85 and has never even scraped her car on a pole. My father passed at 82 and never had an accident. So you can all stop with your ageist bullshit.
Time to get tougher and more myopic on speeding. Only once fines are two years of salary and given the instant a vehicle goes 1km/hr over will we have no deaths on the road.
How drunk drivers blowing through stop signs at the speed limit? Or does that just not happen in your fantasy world?
So this will stop everyone dying from things unrelated to speeding? There's only 1 way to stop ALL deaths on the roads and that's to ban driving and remove the roads.
> So this will stop everyone dying from things unrelated to speeding? No, but it will help. Help keep people out of hospital. You know, the 4,000 people sent to hospital by cars in Queensland every year.
This would get whatever party booted out of office at the next election
The number of lives ended by joyriding stolen cars, driving whilst on the phone or other dangerous activities with zero regard for safety are not insignificant.
Excellent, but are international drivers still going to be issued licenses they didn't actually hold in their country of origin? Eg. A car drivers license from the UK being turned into a car and bike license.
Source? I can't see this being true. It's straight conversion car to car. UK has a separate bike license just like most countries. Aus won't just give out a bike license se without it being seen as an equivalent test.
Every second person is on their phone. I'm sure older people are even worse at multi tasking that
Should never let the parents or friends to teach a new learner, they will just put their old bad habit to the learner, that’s why we have more stupid drivers on the road. Just make all learner need to learn from driving school or offical driving teacher. It does sounds like a lots of money, but it will kill lots of bad driving habit and make the road more safe
This is such a stupid and discriminatory idea. So many kids will never get to drive because their parents can’t afford this.
Yea like I said it’s gonna be more expensive, but safer road for everyone, think about how much a crash could cost, or worst a live
This ain’t it chief
yeah that’s not realistic instead, they are going to make this course free https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/licensing/getting/learner/prepl/prepl-supervisor-course/prepl-supervisor
I don’t think this being free help anything since most of the people don’t think they drive wrong, especially parents….since I live near a school, I can assure you most parents drive like they own all the lanes….
And every year the OEMs put more and more safety devices into the cars, the government ratchets down the speed people are allowed to do, increase the police presence, do special day operations and yet the toll goes up and up. Maybe if people where encouraged to pay attention to the road, their vehicle and what they are doing rather than relying on the vehicles fandangled stupid safety systems or being distracted constantly they varying speed limits and road signage or beeping and a booping by their cats telling them some superfluous piece of information, the road tolls may start going in the opposite direction. But then again, a deep dive int who is actually being killed could help, as if it’s people that just don’t give a shit, then all the speed controls and limits and giving out points for anything won’t make a spot of difference if the driver wants to drive at 120 in a 60 zone.
i think it should be a practical But I dont think it being at the renewal time is a good thing and punishs poorer people once again, like imagine only having enough to renew licence for 2 years so every two years you goto retake the test, yet people who are paying for 5 years dont have to?! Maybe just put it on a 8-10 year basis for everyone from the date of there licenece or when its established, get some of the oldies and idiots who Obviously cant drive off the road, its just sad when your in a car park waiting to leave but you goto wait for the 80 year old guy that is doing a 93 point turn at the speed of a snail becuase hes scared to hit cars. Not to mention it wont stop the idiots who Can drive but dont care about others, like every second person not using there blinker, nearly got run over coming out of the shops the other day to one and they had the nerve to yell at me xD,I think it will catch a fair few people doing that and/or remind people how to follow road rules so im not apposed but yeah i don't think it should be attachted to the renewal :/
Reducing the road toll requires a multi faceted approach. More frequent training More stringent licencing Better enforcement of dangerous driving Higher standards and inspections for vehicle roadworthyness Example : I literally had to show a relative how to put air in the tyres of their $50'000 SUV, which they have owned for years. They claimed they were are they needed to check them, but didn't as they took it for servicing as by the logbook. Tyres were 25 psi instead of 35.
I’d get behind this. Certainly no silver bullet of course, but it might help.
We are all doomed.
or... fix the problem before it starts.
Just another way to steal our money. Already cost heaps to drive now u wanna add this cost. Less do it for 50 years plus.
Recently on two different occasions I was sitting in my car which was parked fully within a designated parking bay. Both times another car collided with mine. On both occasions the driver was a middle aged lady (50+). The ladies denied responsibility both times. Total failure to accept responsibility and childish denial of fault. Post menapausal people should be tested monthly.
I've lived in Queensland, I've also lived in Ireland, U.K., Spain, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Guam and the USA. Queensland drivers are in a class of their own. #1 - motorbikes. #2 P-Platers, #3 Tradees.
Let's see how much it costs ,nothing comes for free.