Some individuals are of the opinion that drivers being tested annually is the most optimal method for road security enhancement. Personally, I firmly disagree with this suggestion due to the lack of trustworthiness and the significant financial burden on public revenue of driving assessments.
Primarily, driving tests might not be able to accurately evaluate people’s driving skills in real life. Despite being decent drivers in daily circumstances, candidates with low mental resilience could endure severe anxiety or loss of concentration under the heavy pressure of time-constraints and rigid surveillance, leading to underperforming. In contrast, there are candidates who can feign their casual driving habits for the test. For instance, a driver who usually deliberately takes part in illegal behaviours such as running the red light or speeding could score perfectly on the driving test by learning rules by rote for the theoretical section and pretending to drive carefully in the practical section.
Moreover, this approach to road safety insurance seems to be relatively unfeasible, given the immense amount of monetary allocation needed. Most of the mature demographic own a motorbike or a car. Presently, people often only have to head to driving test institutions to renew their license every 10 years. In some countries, even lifetime licenses are guaranteed so drivers only need to participate in the test once. Thus, the current infrastructure is adequate to serve candidates. However, if a yearly driving test is required to maintain the legitimacy of licenses, several construction and expansion would be necessary as not only do they have to satisfy the demand of both drivers but also the constantly growing number of people who want to be drivers per year.
In conclusion, I believe that drivers having to take driving tests each year would not holistically ameliorate road safety due to their unreliability and the tremendous operational expense.