Please provide details of the requirements you wish to be exempted from and why you wish to be exempt from them The new age of 17 and six months to get a full licence (w/ approved course) I understand that the exemption will apply from the [date I will have had my restricted licence for a year]
What have you done to mitigate the risks to road safety? As of [x] I will have help my restricted licence for 12 months. I have completed an approved course (cert attached) I have not committed any traffic offending (including speeding or breaching licence conditions)
Question 5: What events have been occurred to make the legislated requirements unnecessary or inappropriate in your case? Change of the age to get a full licence was not well publicized. If I had booked my licence test before the age changed, the new age wouldn’t have applied to me.
“For more than a decade, California and other states have kept their newest teen drivers on a tight leash, restricting the hours when they can get behind the wheel and whom they can bring along as passengers. Public officials were confident that their get-tough policies were saving lives.
Now, though, a nationwide analysis of crash data suggests that the restrictions may have backfired: While the number of fatal crashes among 16- and 17-year-old drivers has fallen, deadly accidents among 18-to-19-year-olds have risen by an almost equal amount. In effect, experts say, the programs that dole out driving privileges in stages, however well-intentioned, have merely shifted the ranks of inexperienced drivers from younger to older teens.”
Basically, since the program started in 1996, there were 1,348 fewer fatal crashes involving 16-year-old drivers, which looks great on the surface. But, there were 1,086 more fatal crashes involving 18-year-old drivers, which could be because young drivers are waiting until they are 18 to bypass restrictions.
This could support that inexperience is a greater factor in young driver accidents as opposed to immaturity–if there were more unrestricted novices on the road at 18.
It’s seems unlikely that this would be the case in New Zealand, because the only exception to our graduated licence system based on age is reducing the time you have to stay on your restricted licence, if you’re over 25, before being able to apply for your full licence.
At 16 and 18 there are differences of who is involved with the driver, which is more relevant to New Zealand. Is a 16-year-old’s parents while they are living with them more likely to be involved with their driving, compared to an 18-year-old who is likely not at home and away from parents?
Bonus points for spotting the similarities with consuming alcohol responsibly.
Maybe the real question is why is driving our own cars such a non-negotiable?
“If reducing car injuries and fatalities is the purpose, this can also be achieved – and for all ages – by providing and promoting ubiquitous, affordable and on-time public transport systems. A nice plus would be the benefits to the environment, a decreased [dependence] on oil and a firm middle finger to Big Oil’s influence on politics and society as a whole.”
On August 1st changes were made to the graduated driver licensing system in New Zealand. The minimum age to apply for a driver licence changed from 15 to 16. That change and that the restricted age was going up with it was fairly well publicized, but what wasn’t was that the age to get a full licence also changed. This Nelson Mail/Stuff article [now offline] doesn’t mention changes to the full licence age at all. This Timaru Herald article stops at the restricted changes too. The latest AA magazine, the Winter 2011 edition of AA Directions, only talks about the changes to the learner age. Not surprisingly, people are confused. I’ve written about the NZTA being unclear before.
However, if someone already paid for their licence test before August 1st, they get around the changes. If you missed out by ~10 days, you have to apply for an exemption to get your licence in the previous time frame, which seems simple at first. The NZTA says they “will grant you an exemption,” basically if you would have been able to get your licence under the guidelines before the changes and if you have a “clean driving record.”
You have to pay a non-refundable $27.20 fee, which covers the processing(???) of the application.
Not everyone is a lawyer
The exemption form (PDF) contains some complicated questions. It seems unfair to expect teenagers to be able to competently answer them.
What have you done to mitigate the risks to road safety? and
How has the legislative requirement been substantially complied with and why is further compliance unnecessary? or What action have you taken or provision have you made that is as effective or more effective than actual compliance with the legislative requirement? or How are the legislated requirements clearly unreasonable or inappropriate in your case? or What events have occurred to make the legislated requirements unnecessary or inappropriate in your case?
Can someone just write “I have a clean driving record?”
With the texting ban there were advertisements in newspapers, plus it was covered well by the media. A couple of days ago I saw a Facebook ad about the new blood alcohol limit for young drivers. Excellent. But I had no idea that the changes to the driving age could affect people on their restricted licence from moving to their full licence until after the changes came into effect, and I’m in that target audience.
“The NZTA issued a media statement and launched a new web page with information when the changes were announced, followed up by reminder statements over the past couple of weeks – the changes were flagged as one of the main news stories on our website homepage for several weeks.”
The media didn’t seem to pick up on the affect the changes have on restricted drivers until after the changes. I think the new web page meant is Safe Teen Driver, which is a site for the parents of restricted drivers. Unless that site has been modified since the changes, it doesn’t seem like, after a quick browse, there is any mention of the changes. Teenagers aren’t checking the NZTA website. The Practice website is for learner drivers and my issue is the with lack of communication to restricted drivers about changes that affect them.
Now I understand why articles end up saying something along the lines of “there was no response after repeated requests for comment.”
Questions I asked via email on whether the NZTA thought the exemption questions were reasonable to be asking young people, whether having a clean driving record is a good enough reason for getting an exemption, whether information about changes was advertised in newspapers, on TV and through social media, and what the money from the fee for applying for an exemption actually goes towards remain unanswered. I was directed to the NZTA website for full information on applying for exemptions.
I did, however, get sent statistics that in July there were around 17,500 learner licence tests conducted compared to around 10,000 in “a normal month” and that there was a 15% increase in 15-year-olds applying to sit learner licences since May when the change was announced. I’m not sure if this takes into account the fact that there were school holidays in July. The pass rate was also up from “the recent average of around 60%” to 67%. I asked for statistics on restricted and full licenses because I think there was a lack of attention given to those age changes, not the learner licence age change. I am yet to have been sent those statistics.
I have to apply for an exemption to get my full licence. What should I write, and what second question should I choose?
Anyone who has driven on New Zealand’s roads knows that there’s a lot of drivers who don’t seem to know the rules surrounding indicators in roundabouts.
This is from a NZTA brochure called Know your way around roundabouts from 2005. Well intentioned as it is in trying to simplify the roundabout rules, the diagram seems to suggest that in the middle of the roundabout, when going around the roundabout, drivers can just stop indicating. If someone actually followed this advice, a car waiting at the opposite side of the intersection might think that this car was going straight (which is when you don’t indicate on entry and indicate left on exit) and pull out in front of it. When turning “right”, like in the picture, the driver should really be indicating right until the picture shows to indicate left.
Drivers who don’t know the actual rules probably think they’re doing it right. It wouldn’t hurt to look at the clarity of material released by NZTA.