Click here to go back to the issue outlines list
Related issue outlines: no related issue outlines
Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).
Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis
Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items: Click the icon below to access the Echo news items search engine (2004 file) and enter the following word(s), with just a space in between them.
youth
roads
safety
(see also a list of newspaper items at the end of this outline)
Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald
Sections in this issue outline (in order):
1. What they said. 2 The issue at a glance. 3 Background. 4 Internet information links. 5 and 6 Arguments for / against. 7 Further implications on this issue. 8 Newspaper items used in the compilation of the outline.
2004/21: Should a night driving curfew be imposed on those holding probationary licences?
What they said ...
'As a teenager I find it ridiculous that those under-21s who drive would be prohibited from doing so after 10pm'
Amanda Lyras, published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 9, 2004
'Research suggests that the human brain is only fully formed at 23 years of age. The last part of the brain to form is that which is responsible for risk assessment, impulse control and calming down emotions. At last some sensible policy based on the developmental psychology of young people'
Adolescent psychologist, Dr Michael Carr-Gregg
The issue at a glance
In recent months New South Wales and Victoria have begun at least preliminary consideration of imposing night driving curfews on probationary drivers. This suggestion has also been debated in Western Australia since March 2003.
On August 7 2004 the New South Wales Roads Minister, Carl Scully, announced that his Government wanted to impose restrictions on inexperienced drivers driving at night.
Opinions have been highly divided. Generally young people have opposed the proposal. However drivers associations and others have voiced a variety of views on the issue.
Background
Mr Scully, the New South Wales Roads Minister, has announced that his Government is considering the feasibility of a number of restrictions for drivers under the age of 21.
One possibility is a curfew that would force them off the road between 10pm and 6am. Other ideas include banning young drivers from getting behind the wheel of high-powered cars and stopping them from carrying more than one teenage passenger at a time.
In July 2004 the Pedestrian Couincil of Australia conducted a survey in New South Wales to gauge the level of support for curfews on probationary licence holders. A majority of drivers favoured night-time curfews (53% in favour - 42% against) and passenger restrictions on passengers (54% in favour - 41% against).
Internet information
On July 6, 2004, The Sydney Morning Herald published six letters under the heading, 'More restrictions on young drivers isn't the answer'
The letters can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/07/1089000226305.html?from=storylhs
On July 8, 2004, The Sydney Morning Herald published a news report titled, 'RTA [Road and Traffic Authority] cool on P-plater night curfew'
The item can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/07/1089000229678.html?from=storylhs
On July 9, 2004, The Sydney Morning Herald published an opinion piece titled, 'It's time to apply the brake on P-platers'. The comment supports the imposition of a curfew on probationary licence holders in New South Wales. It was written by Dr Rebecca Ivers, a senior research fellow who works in the injury prevention and trauma care division of the George Institute, based at the University of Sydney.
The comment can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/08/1089000290467.html?from=storylhs
On August 9, 2004, The Sydney Morning Herald published nine letters under the general heading 'Curfew on young drivers unfair and impractical'
These letters can be found at articles/2004/08/08/1091903443077.html?from=storylhs
On April 6 2003 The Perth Sunday Times published a news item titled, 'Ageing drivers a road risk: P-plate not the only wheel of misfortune'. The report compares the risks posed by aged drivers on the road with that posed by probationary drivers. It also looks at the proposal that probationary drivers should have a night driving curfew imposed upon them.
This report can be found at http://ot.curtin.edu.au/TheSchool/MRHLEEST.htm
The NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) of the United States Department of Transportation published a report examining public attitudes to curfews in New Zealand and Nova Scotia. The report was titled, 'Support for graduated driver licensing'
The report can be found at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/newdriver/SaveTeens/sect5.html
On august 19 2004 On-line Opinion published a comment from Sebastian De Brennan titled, 'Curfew could mean getting bashed at the station while waiting for a late train' The piece opposes the introduction of a curfew.
It can be found at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2472
Arguments against night driving curfews
1. Curfews would massively inconvenience young drivers
It has been claimed that a night driving curfew would be highly inconvenient for young people. According to this line of argument it would interfere with their studies, especially those of university or other tertiary students undertaking night-time courses. It would interfere with their employment, especially that of young people forced to take part-time or casual work at odd hours, perhaps to accommodate their education commitments.
It has been argued that even if exemptions were granted the process is likely to be awkward and time-consuming and would not allow for emergency transport needs.
It has also been noted that many young people have no viable alternative to car travel as public transport is infrequent or unreliable in many areas.
In a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 9 Adam Wootton wrote, 'As a young university student I worked pulling beers in a pub, one of the few jobs which can fit with the hours of a student. Does Mr Scully [one of those proposing the curfew] suggest I should have been forced to walk the hour home after starting lectures at 8am? Ill-conceived policies which remove some of the few opportunities for students to earn their keep need to be reconsidered.'
2. Curfews are discriminatory
It has been claimed that the proposed night driving curfews discriminate against young and inexperienced drivers when only a few of their number are likely to be at fault.
In a letter published in The Herald Sun on July 16, 2004, Tony Grigsby of the Road Trauma Support Team asks, 'Is it reasonable that the actions of a few lawless and anti-social individuals should mean draconian laws for all new drivers?'
It has also been argued that young drivers are not the most at-risk group on the road and so it is not fair to target them. In a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 8, 2004, John Kramer has written, 'Every study of accident rates per kilometre driven shows that while young drivers have a slightly higher accident rate than those in their 30s and 40s, the really dangerous age group on the roads are the over 65s with an accident rate of two to three times that of young drivers. Why no calls for stricter license testing and curfews for the elderly?' The New South Wales proposal has been seen as particularly discriminatory as it targets specifically young drivers aged between 17 and 21.
It has further been claimed that what is at issue is the skill and common sense of the driver, not their age or experience and so the current proposal, it is argued, acts unfairly against probationary drivers.
In a letter published in The Herald Sun on July 16, 2004, Lea Lade argued, 'There is but one single class of bad driver. They are called idiots. You can be any age, sex, race or religion ... and still belong to the class of idiot driver.'
3. Curfews are likely to prove ineffective in reducing the road toll
It has been claimed that curfews, especially in the form proposed for New South Wales, would be ineffective in reducing the road toll. It has been suggested that night driving curfews would be applied in NSW for new drivers from when they get their licence at 17 or 18 through to when they are 21.
Critics have maintained that all this will do is forestall when new drivers will be able to get night driving experience so that rather than being night driving novices at 17 they will be night driving novices four years later.
Those who hold this view maintain that such a curfew does not solve the problem, it merely postpones it.
In a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 9, 2004, Samuel McSkimming wrote, 'The young drivers getting their licences now at 17 will turn 21 - with no experience driving at night. At the risk of introducing common sense to this foolishness, wouldn't this just mean more 21-year-olds were having accidents at night, rather than 17-year-olds?'
4. Curfews would be difficult to implement
It has been claimed that night driving curfews will be very difficult to implement.
According to this line of argument, many young people will find these restrictions so impractical that they will ignore them. It has been claimed that they will simply remove their P-plates and take the chance that they will not attract the attention of the police.
In a letter to the editor published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 9, 2004, Amanda Lyras wrote 'As a teenager I find it ridiculous that those under-21s who drive would be prohibited from doing so after 10pm ... Let's face it, many of those drivers who have accidents are going to be on the road anyway, whether there are laws prohibiting it or not.'
5. Other measures are likely to prove more effective
Many critics of the curfew proposal argue that there are other measures that would more effective. One of the most favoured of these measures is improved driver education. In a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 9, 2004, Annabelle Boyd Jones wrote, 'Perhaps a more effective and socially responsible solution to young driver fatality would be an enhanced learning and testing process.
Compulsory [night] driving lessons with a qualified instructor or a requirement to have driven at different times of the day, and in different road conditions at the learner licence stage of driving, would go a lot further than any more restrictions on our youth.'
Arguments in favour of night driving curfews
1. Inexperienced drivers have a disproportionate number of accidents
In Victoria people under 25 account for some 20 per cent of road deaths each year while last year most of the 39 young drivers killed had accidents between 8pm and 6am.
In New South Wales, in 2003, drivers aged 17 to 25 accounted for 34 percent of speeding drivers involved in fatal crashes.
A study by the University of Western Australia's Injury Research Centre found that nearly 25 per cent of crashes involving probationary drivers occurred between 10pm and 6am, compared with 16 per cent for adults. Earlier research found that probationary drivers were six times more likely to be involved in serious or fatal crashes.
It has been claimed that the psychological development of most young drivers is such that they are ill-prepared for the risks associated with driving. It is therefore claimed that the law should protect them from their own delayed development. Adolescent psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg has noted, 'Research suggests that the human brain is only fully formed at 23 years of age. The last part of the brain to form is that which is responsible for risk assessment, impulse control and calming down emotions. At last some sensible policy based on the developmental psychology of young people.'
It is further claimed that in addition to age, experience is a crucial factor in allowing drivers to adequately assess driving risks.
The RACV's manager of public policy, Ken Ogden, has said of new drivers, 'What they desperately need to learn is not the mechanical skills of driving a car, but how to read traffic.'
2. Night curfews have proved effective in other countries
It has been repeatedly claimed that curfews have been highly effective in reducing the road toll in other nations.
New Zealand, 37 states in the United States and many provinces in Canada have all imposed curfews on inexperienced drivers.
A variety of studies have found that night curfews have the capacity to reduce casualties among inexperienced drivers by 10 to 30 percent.
In some areas the curfews have been even more successful than this. New York imposes a 9 pm curfew on drivers under age 18. New York claims to have had a 62 percent reduction in the number of road accidents involving young drivers since it has introduced its curfew regulations.
A study by the University of Western Australia's Injury Research Centre found that up to 31 lives could be saved each year in that state with a night-time curfew on probationary drivers.
In New Zealand, where curfews have been in place for more than 10 years, the rate of serious crashes among probationary drivers has fallen by 8 per cent.
In a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 10, 2004, Brian Kelly wrote, 'Having lived in New Zealand and seeing curfews in action, my impression was that they seemed to work ... We have power-to-weight restrictions for new motorcycle riders, why not cars?'
3. Exemptions can be made for study and work
It has been claimed that concerns about the inconvenience that curfews would impose on young drivers have been exaggerated. Dr Rebecca Ivers, a senior research fellow who works in the injury prevention and trauma care division of the George Institute, based at the University of Sydney, has noted, 'Exemptions from the restrictions for work and education would be an essential part of such a system.'
In a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 10, 2004, Brian Kelly, who has seen night curfews in operation while living in New Zealand, wrote, 'They ... had a system of exemptions based on need, such as work. Those exemptions were mainly targeted at rural kids and uni students.'
In the US, the night-time rules generally apply only in the first six months of driving, and exemptions are granted for particular needs like employment.
4. Curfews are generally imposed on all new drivers irrespective of age
Generally curfews are not intended to discriminate against young drivers. In most areas where they have been imposed, curfews are intended to acknowledge and try to protect against the inexperience of new drivers. Thus any curfew that is imposed generally applies to all probationary licence holders, irrespective of their age.
In a letter published in The Sydney Morning Herald on August 10, 2004, Brian Kelly, who has seen night curfews in operation while living in New Zealand, wrote, 'They did not just apply to young drivers but anybody with a new licence.'
5. A multi-faceted approach, including legislation and prohibition, is needed
It has been claimed that a curfew on night-driving for inexperienced drivers should form part of a multi-faceted approach. According to this line of argument, no single strategy for reducing the road toll among new drivers is likely to be effective. Instead, it is claimed, what is needed is a 'combination of legislation, policing and community education'.
Dr Rebecca Ivers, a senior research fellow who works in the injury prevention and trauma care division of the George Institute, based at the University of Sydney, has noted, 'Changes in behaviour relating to drinking and driving were brought about by [just such] a combination of legislation, policing and community education.' Dr Ivers goes on to conclude that the same mixed approach is necessary to reduce fatalities and casualties among new drivers. She argues that education only will not achieve results. She has written, 'Education and training alone will not significantly reduce risk-taking among new drivers.'
Further Implications
It is no foredrawn conclusion that the New South Wales Government will proceed with its apparent intention to introduce a night driving curfew on young drivers. The Government intends to conduct a widespread community consultation process before it frames any legislation regarding driving curfews.
Overall, despite the inconvenience it may cause, it is difficlt not to support the curfew proposal. In all those areas where curfews have been imposed they seem to have been highly successful in reducing the incidence of accidents and deaths among young drivers.
Interestingly, in areas where they have been imposed young people who are not yet drivers and young people who have been restricted by the curfews appear to support the curfews.
Teenagers in New Zealand were interviewed at age 15 (before they received their license) and again at age 18. At both ages, more than 70 percent of them supported the driving restrictions in place.
Sixty-seven percent of Nova Scotia teens with restricted licenses said they approved of the graduated driver licensing system. In general, older teens looking back on their inexperienced years are even more supportive than those currently under restrictions.
Parents often look forward to the time when their teenager is licensed so they are released from the burden of chauffeuring their children to school, jobs, sports and other activities. But parents also recognise that teen drivers are at risk, no matter how 'good' their children otherwise might be. Support for graduated driver licensing and its components is generally high among parents of teenagers where such rstrictions are in place.
It will be interesting to see whether any of the Australian states which have considered the proposal will actually put it into law.
However, no matter how effective curfews may be they are not the only solution that should be sought to the problem of casualties among young drivers. Improved driving instruction, including experience of night driving; restrictions on the types of cars young drivers may drive; restrictions on the number of passengers they may carrying and more rigorous enforcement of the laws that apply to young drivers all have a place in combatting this problem. Laws are a low-cost solution, however to be optimally effective they need to be part of a more comprehensive package.
Sources
The Age
20/7/04 page 10 editorial, 'How to end a culture of road carnage'
23/7/04 page 1 news item by Darren Gray, 'P-platers flout no-drink rule'
The Herald Sun
29/6/04 page 20 comment by Penny Martin, 'How to cut the carnage'
13/7/04 page 7 news item by Ashley Gardiner, 'VicRoads looks at curfew idea for P-platers'
16/7/04 page 19 letter from Lea Lade, 'Any bad driver is an idiot'
16/7/04 page 19 letter from Tony Grigsby, Road Trauma Support Team, 'Education better than a curfew'
19/7/04 page 19 comment by Bob Watson, 'Inadequate training costs lives'
20/7/04 page 16 letter from Jodie Parker, 'Driver curfews not the answer'
21/7/04 page 16 four letters under the heading, 'Try tougher ideas that work overseas'
21/7/04 page 16 vox pop, 'Is enough being done to reduce the road toll?'
22/7/04 page 18 letter from Mary Butt, 'Ignorant of what death means'
28/7/04 page 13 news item by Elissa Hunt, 'P-plater kills girl on 19th birthday'
29/7/04 page 18 comment by Ken Ogden, 'Building a road to a lower toll'
20/7/04 page 19 comment by Neil Mitchell, 'Toll horror: it's up to us'