Should older drivers be forced to retest if young drivers face tougher rules? Join The Independent Debate
Debate is growing over age-based driving regulations in the UK.
Calls for tougher restrictions on young drivers – such as banning them from carrying peer passengers aim to reduce accidents among the most at-risk group.
Campaigners argue that measures like Graduated Driver Licensing could save lives by reducing distractions and encouraging safer driving habits.
But if young drivers are subject to stricter rules, should older drivers be, too?
The Older Drivers Forum, which works with police forces across the UK, has previously urged older motorists to review their skills and any medical issues.
Some have suggested mandatory retesting after a certain age to ensure continued competence, while others argue that driving ability –not age – should determine fitness to drive.
Critics also worry that age-based restrictions could unfairly target older drivers who rely on their cars for independence, especially in areas with limited public transport.
Now we want your opinion: Should the UK tighten driving rules for both young and older drivers to improve road safety, or would this be unfairly discriminatory? Are there better and fairer ways to keep our roads safe?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
3 days ago
- Daily Record
Keir Starmer urged to introduce stricter eyesight testing rules for all drivers
Experts are demanding new eyesight testing rules for drivers. Drivers may have to undergo eye tests to hold onto their licenses after Labour was ordered to introduce "mandatory vision checks' for all motorists, with older drivers told they should have to sit an eye test every three years. The Association of Optometrists (AOP) had previously claimed the current rules around road vision checks are 'out of step' and were in need of a review. Dr Peter Hampson, Optometrist and Clinical and Policy Director at the AOP, said they had been calling for tougher vision checks on UK roads. As it stands drivers are only required to self-certify they are safe to drive to hold onto their driving licence, and are not legally obliged to undertake any assessments. After similar remarks from the Older Drivers Forum and a leading coroner, the remarks pile more pressure on Sir Keir Starmer and the Government to react and change the rules. Speaking exclusively to the Express, Peter said: 'The UK system around drivers vision is out of step with many other countries who instead use a full sight test to ensure vision meets the standard. 'In fact, within Europe, we are one of only five countries that uses a numberplate test and only one of three countries to rely on self-reporting. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. 'We have long called for mandatory vision checks at first licence application and at every renewal – every 10 years for most drivers, every three years for those over 70. 'With over 7,000 optometry practices nationwide, optometrists are well placed to support the delivery of these checks swiftly and effectively.' Dr James Adeley stressed the UK system was the 'worst in Europe" as he looked into the deaths of four pedestrians killed by older drivers. The Older Drivers Forum supports the introduction of compulsory eyesight checks to make sure road users getting behind the wheel are safe. They said: 'The Forum recommend that all drivers have an optician's eyesight test at least every 2 years. Nearly 90% of driving is visual and we need good vision to see hazards and react to them.' It was previously reported drivers who are aged 70 and over and have not renewed their licence are not 'legally allowed to drive', according to experts. That's because 90 days before drivers turn 70, they should receive a D46P application form from the DVLA. Age UK stated that if a person's drivers licence expires and they are unable to apply for a new one within the timeframe then they are not legally allowed to get behind the wheel. The charity states: "Don't forget to apply for any extra categories of vehicle covered on your old licence if you still want to be able to drive them.
-copy.jpeg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C0%2C0%2C0%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
05-03-2025
- The Independent
‘My brother would still be alive': Sister of teen killed in 100mph crash calls for new restrictions for young drivers
'They never stood a chance,' said Mia Pullen, recalling the night her younger brother Elliot was one of three teens killed in a car crash. In the court trial that followed it emerged the driver, 19-year-old Thomas Johnson, had inhaled laughing gas at the wheel and was travelling at more than 100mph on a 30mph road. Elliot, 17, and Daniel Hancock and Ethan Goddard, both 18, were pronounced dead at the scene. Ms Pullen told The Independent: 'The boys were not close friends and were out for a seemingly pointless drive when Thomas lost control of his car.' She is one of 71 signatories to a letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer urging him to introduce reforms targeting dangerous youth driving as part of a road safety strategy being drafted by ministers. Each signatory lost a brother or sister in a collision involving a young driver. The letter, shared with The Independent, calls for Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL), which would introduce a transition period between learner and fully-qualified driver for young drivers. Motorists aged 17 to 24 account for 18 per cent of all fatal or serious car crashes in Britain despite only accounting for 6 per cent of all miles driven. Crashes involving young drivers killed or seriously injured 4,959 people in 2023, the latest year for which data is available. Young men, who account for two-thirds of the total for their age group, are four times as likely to be killed or seriously injured compared with over-25s. Campaigners hope new measures would resemble those in the US, Australia and New Zealand, where newly-qualified young drivers are not allowed to carry similar-age passengers or drive late at night. A study in the US looked at involvement in fatal crashes for different age groups between 1996, when states began adopting GDL policies, and 2016. In that time, the rate fell for 17-year-olds by 61 per cent, and for 18-year-olds by 54 per cent. The number for 30 to 59-year-olds also dropped but only by 29 per cent. Ms Pullen said GDL rules would have stopped her brother from going for the ride that killed him and the others. 'I signed the sibling letter on GDLs because I cannot fathom how the government believes they are not a necessary part of learning to drive as a teenager or young adult,' she said. 'GDLs would've saved them and would have prevented Thomas [Johnson] from having to spend his days in prison, living with what he has done.' The Department for Transport has ruled out including GDL in the road safety strategy, despite roads minister Lilian Greenwood having last year supported a bill calling for its introduction. Ms Greenwood told a Westminster Hall debate last month that youth driver safety will be part of the strategy but the government was 'exploring options to tackle the root causes of the issue without unfairly penalising young drivers'. 'Where is the fairness for our dead siblings?', asked the letter, which was written in response to the minister's dismissal of GDL after The Independent revealed her change of course. Clara Greenwood also signed the letter. She was six when her sister Alice, 12, was killed in a crash caused by an 18-year-old driver, Andrew Sellers, who was driving at a high speed in a convoy of five cars all driven by teenagers. The crash also left Ms Greenwood and her mother seriously injured. Sellers and his passenger died but four other teenagers in the convoy were jailed for causing death by dangerous driving. 'Alice had barely started high school when she was killed, her whole life was ahead of her. 'The teenagers in the other cars were all under 19 years old, and an 18-year-old and his 16-year-old passenger also lost their life: their lives were also ahead of them. 'GDLs would have saved both my sister and the other two young men, and would have prevented all the hurt that their deaths caused my family and their family.' Road safety campaign groups have promoted GDL in Britain for years. In the past year, The AA and the National Fire Chiefs Council all backing it. A DfT spokesperson said: 'Every death on our roads is a tragedy and our thoughts remain with the families of everyone who has lost a loved one in this way. 'Whilst we are not considering Graduated Driving Licences, we absolutely recognise that young people are disproportionately victims of tragic incidents on our roads, and we are exploring options to tackle the root causes of this without unfairly penalising young drivers.'
The Independent
24-02-2025
- The Independent
Regular tests, refresher courses, and age limits – Independent readers debate the future of road safety
Calls for tougher restrictions on young drivers – such as banning them from carrying peer passengers – have sparked debate among Independent readers. This week, campaigners argued that measures like Graduated Driver Licensing could save lives by reducing distractions and encouraging safer driving habits among the most at-risk age group. In light of this, we asked whether you supported more age-focused restrictions or if broader changes should be made to improve road safety. Many readers backed calls for mandatory retesting and regular training to ensure all drivers meet required standards. Others supported routine eyesight tests every few years to prevent unfit drivers from staying on the roads. Some rejected a focus on older drivers and instead suggested raising the minimum driving age to 20 to curb reckless behaviour. Others proposed reaction time tests as a fairer way to assess all motorists. Overall, readers agreed that road safety needs reform, but opinions varied on the best approach. Here's what you had to say: Mandatory driving tests for all There needs to be radical changes to make our roads safer. The implementation of mandatory driving tests will filter out those people who do not drive to the required standard. There should be regular training for all drivers. No self-assessments. Make our roads safer for all. Alex Regular eyesight tests They should test the eyesight of drivers at least every three years, like some states in America. But as an over-60s driver, I feel I drive better than many young drivers. I do not drive with headlights out, I use my indicators, and I know how to stop behind give-way lines rather than two to three feet onto the roundabout or junction. I know how to keep turnings clear when in queuing traffic. I know how to control the speed of my vehicle. In 42 years of riding and driving, I have had only one accident (not my fault) and no points on my licence. Hairyferrit Raise the driving age I'm not in favour of a retest for older people. What I would like to see is the age for eligibility to drive rising to 20 years of age, by which time most youngsters will have more common sense and less of a 'boy racer' attitude. All this 'picking' on older drivers is a disgrace and mostly unwarranted, in my opinion. Drivers of any age should be honest and take the responsible decision to stop driving if they have a condition that merits it. All these people who are so keen to get the older drivers removed from the roads need to remember that they will reach that stage in life quicker than they think. Will they then still advocate for such measures as they're suggesting now? Max Reaction time tests We all think we are the best driver and have no faults. I would hate to have a full retest, but having proper eye tests is sensible, and perhaps a reaction time test would sort out the incompetent or slow-thinking drivers. If an older driver commits an offence, like due care and attention, this should be explored more, as should tailgating and undertaking for anyone. Hoodies or any type of restrictive face coverings should not be worn in a vehicle; they do restrict peripheral vision. Martyn Refresher training like Japan In Japan, drivers have to attend refresher training every five years. We should do something similar for all drivers, regardless of their age. Johnniewon The future of self-driving cars Hopefully, this will all soon be moot. Many drivers on the road are poor, distracted, even dangerous from either overconfidence or excessive timidity. The technology for self-driving cars to get these drivers off the roads will be mature enough soon, likely within a five-to-ten-year timescale. Then everyone can be in a better place. Currymonster Inadequate eyesight checks My father-in-law was 90 a few years ago and was asked to take some sort of retest. A guy phoned him up and asked him if he could read a number plate outside. He replied that he could and was given a clean bill of health. This was despite being almost blind in one eye and having to have injections in the other for degeneration. He was never a great driver anyway. Seventy-odd years behind the wheel does not always make you proficient and sensible. Likewise, young people do not always drive like maniacs. There should be mandatory, rigorous eyesight testing every 10 or 20 years, possibly more frequently at ages where we know it deteriorates quickly. I don't think that's unfair or ageist. diafol Modern cars compensate for bad driving In a modern car, you're more likely to brake in time or survive the crash. Use that to break even with the lower driving skills of an ageing population. And the young have had enough of living like an old woman in the lockdown. If everything was made super safe by not really being able to do anything in the real world, would it even be safe? Can you promise that society and the economy won't just fall apart in a mad way? TheRedSquirrel The conversation isn't over. To join in, all you need to do is register your details, then you can take part in the discussion. You can also sign up by clicking 'log in' on the top right-hand corner of the screen.
