Transportation of goods pose a significant threat to the safety of other motorists and pedestrians if the driving competency of the heavy vehicle’s driver is at an unacceptable standard. To ensure the safety of the public, some contend that an annual driving assessment is mandatory for the drivers. I strongly believe that an annual assessment would be futile and would result in an inefficent usage of resources.
Primarily, it is unlikely that a motor skill such as driving would deteriorate profoundly over the course of a year. In fact, due to the constant practice, it is probable that a higher standard of driving would have been achieved. For example, a driver who has multiple years of experience has a much higher chance of getting hired by a corporation than an amateur driver due to his expertise in driving.
In addition, a driving test is a formal evaluation carried out by the state and hence, it would require resources such as examiners, time and motor roads. In general, the driving authority of a state, like the DVLA in the UK, has a backlog of large nuumber of candidates who had applied for the assessment and are awaiting the driving test for many weeks. Implementing annual driving test for drivers would overburden the already fragile system, impacting the general public in a detrimental manner.
However, proponents of yearly driving test argue that the accidents in the road are mainly due to the drivers not abiding by the road safety rules, which is brought about by negligence and complacency of the laws in place. This could be addressed by having an annual driving evaluation.
In conclusion, despite acknowledging the tangible benefits from an annual driving assessment, I firmly assert that it would lead to a wastage in government resources and would be redundant.