It is believed that there is no better approach to improving the well-being of commuters than introducing an annual mandatory driving exam for every vehicle user. While taking a driving test more regularly can be beneficial for everyone on the streets, I disagree that this suggestion is realistic and effective.
On the one hand, it is true that a repeated testing system would bring about better awareness and obedience to traffic laws. The prime advantage of this program is that it guaranteed a better understanding of traffic-related regulations among drivers. This enhanced awareness helps them recognize their own rights and protect the safety of all travellers on the road, including themselves. It would be absurd to see someone actively driving on the streets in 2025 with a driver’s licence that was issued three decades ago in 1995, when virtually all laws and rules were completely different from what we have in the modern world.
Despite these arguments, I am convinced that it is unreasonable to require drivers to commit to an annual test. Firstly, this initiative presents an impossible logistical challenge for the government, as they have to allocate adequate resources to operate a test for what could be over half of the nation’s population. This is extremely labour-intensive and financially demanding, making it potentially disastrous if the whole idea is proven to be ineffective. Secondly, having to attend such a frequent test will definitely compromise people’s morale, as the majority of drivers on the streets are adults, who are already responsible for their own, if not their family’s, lives.
In conclusion, it seems to me that to improve overall road safety, governments should not implement a reassessment every year on vehicle users due to the associated risks and drawbacks of this approach.