21 August 2009

Driver restriction affects few rural people

While the rural lobbyists are concerned about the proposed driving restriction of young drivers, the data shows it will affect few young people in rural areas.

New Zealand’s road toll is horrifying – our fatality rate is double that of the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom. As a country we must make dramatic changes to improve our statistics.

First and foremost, we must raise the driving age, - the evidence supporting such a move is overwhelming. Young people have a road fatality rate double that of the rest of the population and are involved in 37 % of all crashes. New Zealand’s 15-17 year old drivers die more often than any other group in the OECD. And the situation is deteriorating. There has been a 17% increase in young drivers at fault in serious and fatal accidents since 2000.

So why are we putting our young people at risk on the roads, when the rest of the world sees it as a ‘no-brainer’? In fact the justification for our driving age comes from the rural sector, who have long argued that young people need to drive themselves to school and work. The driving age was set when 15 was the legal school leaving age. The school leaving age was lifted more than 15 years ago, but the licence restrictions still do not reflect this.

In 1998 the government attempted raise the driving age to 16 – but the move was rejected, the rural/urban split in Parliament could not be overcome.

It is time to examine the arguments of those in rural areas more closely. The 2006 census shows that 33% of 15 year olds in rural areas were in part-time work and 45 % of 16 year olds were in part-time or full-time work. However, a mere 7% of those 15 year olds and 24 % of the 16 year olds were actually driving themselves to work.

Compare those relatively minor statistics with the fact that young drivers from rural areas are at the highest risk, driving further on a lower standard of road and the argument is all but redundant.

ENDS

© Scoop Media