Meeting of the Parliament 25 March 2014
It has been an extremely interesting and high-quality debate in which we have heard a range of ideas, including some quite original ones. However, the key problem at the heart of the issue remains. As I was making notes for my closing remarks, I found that I had a very clear idea in my head. I hope that members will come with me on it.
In this year in which we celebrate the 100th anniversary of the start of the first world war, we have seen a lot of television programmes looking at the history of that period. One hundred years on, we find it very difficult to understand how such huge numbers of our young men would volunteer to go to off to war with guns over their shoulders. Their reason for doing it was a simple one that we all know: young men believe deep down that nothing can harm them. They believe that they can do anything and that they will survive, but we know only too well that that is not the case. Although our young men no longer go off to war in the same way, when they get behind the wheel of a car, it is quite often that same deep-seated emotion that takes control of them.
We do mean young men, because so often it is a young man who has the steering wheel in his hands when an accident happens. However, it is also about young women; so often, in the cars are young women who are injured or killed as a result of such accidents. The problem is no respecter of gender.
Tavish Scott gave a very good speech with which I agreed almost 100 per cent, but there is one issue on which my view varies slightly from his. That issue is the potential for introducing more significantly difficult levels of testing. I believe that we should test our young drivers to ensure that they are absolutely at their best, but the problem that I perceive is that no level of testing will ever identify those who are at greatest risk, because those who are at greatest risk are those who are most confident and able, and who are most likely to pass any test that we put before them.