South Meath Driving School

THOUSANDS of learner drivers have been caught driving without L-plates or unaccompanied by a qualified driver.

Almost 14,000 ‘L’ drivers have been summonsed for driving without L-plates or a qualified driver since the new laws were introduced in July 2008.

The Irish Independent has learned that many of these drivers have been hit with minimum fines of €1,000 for dangerous driving, driving unaccompanied or having wasted the “second chance” they were given.

As part of their campaign, gardai have mounted “Operation Permit” to target learners driving unaccompanied to secondary school. It has been credited with leading to a large reduction in this activity.

The head of the Garda Traffic Corps, Assistant Commissioner Kevin Ludlow, said there was a “real purpose” to the clampdown, adding that inexperience and levels of competency directly lead to fatal accidents and serious injuries.

Although statistics on the number of ‘L’ drivers convicted were not available from the courts service, it is understood that it is easier to prosecute the two offences than more hotly contested ones such as drink-driving.

“Either they are driving accompanied or not, and either the accompanied driver is qualified or not,” said Asst Comm Ludlow.

Latest figures from the Road Safety Authority (RSA) show that learner drivers were responsible for nearly one in five fatal crashes in 2008 — the latest period for which such detailed statistics are available. They accounted for 18 out of 103 road deaths attributable to driver error.

Enforcement

“Local gardai would have the discretion to caution individuals known to them and can escalate to one of the options of enforcement should the offender continue to drive unaccompanied,” said Asst Comm Ludlow.

“Driving on motorways and driving between nought to six months (on a learner permit) are certainly a no-no from our perspective.”

A breakdown of the figures show there has been a substantial push in enforcement compared with the period before the introduction of the laws, when Transport Minister Noel Dempsey said gardai would adopt a “common sense approach”.

There were 2,807 drivers charged with driving unaccompanied in the 18-month period to July 2008 — an average of 155 per month. But since the new laws came into force on July 1 2008, 7,128 ‘L’ drivers were charged with driving unaccompanied– an average of 339.

An additional 3,160 drivers were charged with driving without ‘L’ plates in the 18-month period up to July 1 2008 — an average of 175 per month. But this number has more than doubled since: 6,816 learner drivers were charged

The RSA said long waiting times for driving tests were no longer an excuse to break the law as they had dropped to an average of 10 weeks.

Learner drivers accounted for 13pc of all drivers killed on the roads in 2008 — 17 out of 125 driver fatalities. And around 32 learner drivers were injured in serious crashes

The Public Against Road Carnage group want the gardai to prevent learner drivers from driving unaccompanied.

Spokeswoman Susan Gray said she had been contacted by a mother who had lost her daughter in a road crash.

“Her daughter was a learner driver who had no driving lessons, no L-plates and was driving alone. The gardai stopped her twice before she died but didn’t prosecute her for any of these offences,” she said.

Source

A regulatory sign is one that shows the course a driver must follow and an action that’s required to be taken. One such sign is the ‘yield’ sign, identified internationally as an inverted triangle, usually with a white background and red surround and showing the word ‘yield’. In Gaeltacht areas the sign reads ‘ Geill Sli’ and in the UK ‘Give Way’. The original yield sign was designed by a policeman named Clinton Riggs from Oklahoma and it was first used there. Accompanying road markings, in white, will have a solid line in the centre of the road with an inverted triangle in the centre of the exiting carriageway and a broken line at the yield point. A driver does not necessarily have to stop at a yield sign or line, the requirement being that you slow down and let oncoming traffic pass. The main difference between the yield sign and a stop sign is that a driver must stop at the STOP sign whether or not there’s any oncoming traffic. Note, too, that the stop line is solid, not broken. Road engineers from the County Council  analyse the dangers involved in deciding which sign should be erected and that decision is approved  by the Garda Commissioner and Minister thereafter.

Yielding is  all so easy for drivers when the sign and road markings are in place. The problem arises when there are no such signs in place on some minor back roads but more commonly in housing estates and their exits.

Who has right of way?  Among other circumstances, the following are noteworthy –

(a)    Traffic travelling straight ahead along a major road,

(b)   At a junction where roads are of equal importance, traffic approaching from the right has right of way.

(c)    On the approach to a T-junction, one must yield to traffic already on the road

you’re joining.

(d)   Turning right at a cross junction, you must yield to traffic coming from the opposite direction and turning left or going straight on.

It is important to note that right of way is not an absolute right; one should proceed with caution, showing regard for other road users. Even a green traffic light does not always give you right of way.

Of course pedestrians have right of way at crossings designed specially for them – Zebras, Toucans, Pelicans and when the ‘ green man’ shows at a crossing. Would someone tell me when does a pedestrian not have right of way? Every yard of road appears to me to be used as a pedestrian crossing with impunity. Time then for a new Fine on the Spot for those causing obstruction. It’s referred to as ‘Jaywalking’ in other parts and, indeed, it is a rarity to see anybody prosecuted for the offence here. Even in the event of a collision between a Jaywalker and a car, who is more likely to be prosecuted or pay up, at least: the poor motorist, again.

As for  the terms ‘Major road’ and ‘Roads of Equal Importance’, the major road is obvious in that it carries the greater volume of traffic and there’s yield or stop signs on approach roads. Those of ‘equal importance’ are more anonymous , harder to define or remain undefined. It just might take two senior counsels, two juniors, a few solicitors offices and a High Court judge to come to a conclusion as to who has right of way on certain unmarked and signless roads. ( Ably supported by a few insurance companies – all financed by those who drive cars.) So, whether it’s a ‘Y’ or a ‘T’ junction, approach and negotiate with caution. Protect your ‘no claims bonus,’ the 3 second cautionary delay will have been worth it.

The reshaping, streetscaping and reregulation of Loman Street is spectacular but it has thrown up a few noteworthy aspects. Firstly, the old ‘yield’ sign at Mill St – Loman St. (former) junction remains in place despite the new through road to Watergate St. The position of the pedestrian crossing as one enters Loman St. is so close to the junction mouth, that it is somewhat dangerous, especially as a driver enters from the Watergate St direction – there’s very little view.

The new Toucan crossing at the Priory pub is amazing. It is designed as a pedestrian crossing – the two white parallel lines across the road. But this one is supported by a STOP sign. It would be acceptable, were it not located a few yards from the mouth of the junction with Haggard St at which point there’s a yield sign. A pedestrian has a common law right of way when crossing at such junction (correct me if I’m wrong.) So, is the crossing supported by the STOP sign really required? And, incidentally, on a one-way street that forms into two lanes at that point, there should be a second STOP sign on the right side of the road, to properly complete the signage, if it’s required at all.

I have observed that nearly all drivers pass through this crossing, ignoring it – but not deliberately. It’s just not recognisable as a pedestrian crossing to any driver approaching.  It may all seem harmless enough for drivers to ignore the STOP sign when there are no pedestrians on the crossing. But what if a dutiful Garda placed a camera on the spot and prosecuted all those who had failed to STOP. I hazard a guess that 95% of all who cross the spot don’t stop. It would be woefully unfair. The STOP sign should be removed. It’s a serious violation under  the Road Traffic Act not to stop at a Stop sign  Should any such sign be deemed necessary, it should be replaced  with a zebra crossing which would have much greater visibility than the existing sign that is actually stuck in amongst poles and hardly noticeable. I warn you, someone will come to grief there, soon!

Joe has all the semblance of a contented man. He was like W.B’s

“… The freckled man who goes
To a grey place on a hill
In grey Connemara clothes..”

His mode of transport is a bicycle. The dynamo, bell, pump and mobile shopping basket fit in comfortably for him with the modern era of iPods ,e-mails and mobile phones. He may know a lot about those wonder ‘toys’ now enjoyed by some, even as old as 50, but, he won’t allow himself to succumb to the temptation of actually owning them.

Joe rides into town every day without having to display any discs that are compulsory for the car owner. He hasn’t to worry about which pole he chains his bike to as he ambles through the town to shop or visit the library. For him a single or double yellow line doesn’t matter a hoot. Safe from Cathal who can cast a cold eye on his parking methods but Joe’s two-wheeler gives him the ‘freedom’ of the town , ticketless – like a modern day plane flight. The unsociable machines that stand on every street corner inviting the shopper to put the first Euro in that slot doesn’t bother our Joe either, no, neither do traffic jams or even one way systems.
Joe listens attentively to the radio and puts on a wry smile when he hears the news of another tax on motorists, a carbon tax; for he knows that his bike emits no carbon dioxide, it won’t pollute the air that the towns-people breathe, it’s eco friendly.

But Joe has to breathe the air that’s emitted from the poisonous exhausts of some 15k or 20k vehicles that pass locally each day. Then he heard on the wireless that a car produces its own weight of CO2 for every 6,000 miles it travels and that transport is the 3rd biggest generator of Co2 emissions.
When white man was first encountered by American Indians, their greatest fear was well expressed when they exclaimed that he would pollute the pure air and the water.

A motorist produces an average of 140 grams of Co2 for every kilometre he travels. So what does that all matter when there’s a cure at hand – the carbon tax, up to 5 cent on a litre of petrol and diesel being mooted. That will be so much the better for all, because it will cut travel by 1/24!
Our Kyoto agreement stands at limiting greenhouse gases to 13% by 2012. So, the motorist will be playing his part, thanks to this reduction in travel. Rubbish. Not a scintilla of truth lies therein. For it is not, truly, a carbon tax, it’s just another form of taxation of the beleaguered motorist, who has been savaged by taxation from the initial purchase of the new car starting with VRT. If the proposed €500m – take in this carbon tax were to be spent in the area of designation, well and good: but will it. Fix potholes , purchase of more electric cars, a grant for the insulation of homes and more solar panels on the roofs, or for other house energy efficiency: lay on a bus service especially for the rural community. Wasn’t there an additional 8 cent put on a litre of petrol in the last budget . Did it matter to the motorist that there was no mention of it being a ‘carbon’ tax? No. Did anyone drive less miles as a result? No. Therefore, putting a further increase on the stuff will not be a move to making the air cleaner, rather a subtle way of a certain party attempting to make us believe they are making our world greener.

In the next year or two the American economy is expected to gain momentum, the dollar rising in value against the Euro and interest rates will rise. Our oil is purchased in petrodollars which suits us now because of the weighted value of the Euro. That keeps the price of oil artificially low here, but for how long? In a few years time, I predict that a litre of petrol will be about €1.50 plus. The State’s profit at present is 70% odd – how much more can a motorist suffer. Will the state reduce their take when the dollar increases substantially against the Euro?

Joe, keep smiling while you pedal home and don’t look around corners to search for big brother, for it is still legal for you to make or take a call on your new mobile phone with just one hand on the handlebar!

In the first six months of 2009, 127 people lost their lives on the Republics roads. That figure is 14 deaths less than the corresponding period for 2008. But nobody is celebrating that fact. It’s good news that the statistics are favourable from the point of view that our roads are getting safer by the year, yet, for the 127 families who are grieving, there isn’t much solace. Those deaths categorized were 63 drivers, 21 passengers, 20 pedestrians, 19 motorcyclists and 4 cyclists. Male deaths accounted for 80% of the total and, again, one third of those were aged between 17 and 25. The highest risk time was Saturday night between 8pm and 8am.

The setting up of the Road Safety Authority (RSA) in 2006 has proved an outstanding success and our local minister, Noel, can take the kudos for his Departments delivery on that most important agenda. In previous years there was a high profile Garda crackdown at Public Holiday weekends and Christmas time. Here, the first of the three ‘Es’ was introduced – Education. The introduction of the road safety strategy made people aware of their responsibilities and a change in attitude and behaviour was wrought. Schools and the media were targeted and the RSA maintains a high profile in those areas. The driving test system was changed greatly with a much higher standard of training and testing.

Next, Engineering is the key: motorways and dual carriageways are by far the safest routes to take. Vastly fewer fatal crashes occur on those in comparison to winding country roads. The elimination of ‘black spots’, the introduction of traffic calming measures, road markings, warning signs and improved public lighting has played a large part in reducing death and injury.

Whatever about education and engineering, the third E, namely enforcement is vital where us humans are concerned. This was best demonstrated when the penalty points system was introduced in 2002. In the 12 month period following, road deaths fell by 19% while serious injury fell by 21%. Therefore, drivers took seriously the message that was pouring out through the media that a licence might be lost should the penalty points accumulate. Then something else happened: it soon became apparent that the enforcement levels weren’t there to the degree that was first envisioned, too many reverted somewhat to their old habits. This cements the idea that stricter enforcement pays off. As we have seen, it was revealed that more than half the speed cameras erected around the country had no recording data and so some carelessness was afforded, as it were. An area of enforcement that has returned large dividends was the introduction of mandatory alcohol testing. That really put the frighteners on the tippler who had driven to his local for the previous 50 years and always got home safely according to his word.

The effectiveness of the RSA must be maintained but they have taken a heavy knock with the withdrawal of their 3 million euro advertising budget much to the chagrin of one Gabriel Byrne who insists on trundelling on despite such setback. If you were at the Scurlogstown Fair in Porchyfields of late you may have paid a visit to the RSA trailer- stand there. It was a homely, userfriendly system of introducing to younger folk the world of driving on a public road. There were information leaflets available, simulators and plenty of interactive gadets to get the message of road safety across. So, pulling up on the budget of the RSA is most unwise when one counts the cost of a road crash at 3m euro a time to the State. Then count the human and emotional cost.

With all strands of the road safety strategy at work, the aim of reducing the annual road death toll below 250 by 2012 should bear fruit. Take care!