Debate contribution: Driver Testing and Licensing Reforms
Debate contribution by Ms Liz Kimmins on .
- MLA
- Ms Liz Kimmins
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 27 January 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Question for Urgent Oral Answer
- Heading
- Driver Testing and Licensing Reforms
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5345388
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Yes, absolutely. The fundamental objective of graduated driver licensing is to protect lives, and we need to bring people with us. Therefore, we have to help people, particularly young people, understand what the measures are and why they are in place. You cannot replace a life. Ensuring that young and new drivers are experienced enough on the roads is crucial, and this will help to do that. As parents and as citizens, we all have a role to play in sharing the information and helping people to understand the rationale for the change. There is nothing that can argue with the fact that no one wants to get the knock on the door to say that their child or someone close to them has been killed in a road traffic collision. That is the ultimate way that we can help people to understand the importance of the measures and why new and young drivers should abide by them.
That is not one of the restrictions. The restriction is around how many passengers they can carry. We have seen that a high number of collisions occur at night-time when there may be a group of young people in a car and the driver can be easily distracted. The evidence suggests that that is one way of improving safety. For six months post test, new drivers aged 17 to 23 can take only one passenger aged between 14 and 20. They can have other passengers who are over 21 and who have held a full driving licence for at least three years or who are immediate family members. So, there are some exceptions. I am glad to have had the opportunity to clarify that, because we recognise that many young drivers rely on a private car, particularly if they work in hospitality, the health service or whatever it may be. It is not about taking them off the roads at certain times but about restricting who they can take with them.
We will be increasing the speed limit for R-drivers on motorways. That has been considered for some time, given the related safety aspects. It allows them to build up their experience at a more appropriate speed on motorways. It is about giving people the opportunity, post testing and in a natural environment, to gain better skills in a lower-risk situation so that drivers can gain experience and be more aware of the risks that can occur. The key part for me is that, in the long term, we will have safer drivers on our roads throughout their driving career, for want of a better word.
I do not think that anyone is saying that graduated driver licensing will solve all the problems in DFI. Members are very aware of the significant pressure that the Department is under. Just look at what the Department is dealing with today. We are continually looking at how we can secure more investment to deal with the issues on our roads. We have seen a significant deterioration in their condition, particularly over the past few weeks, following the very cold weather in December and this month, which has naturally caused the roads to deteriorate. That is not something that has started to happen in 2026. It happens every single year. Significant work is under way to deal with the issues as best we can, and I will continually try to get more money to do that. The scale, however, is huge, and our staff are working extremely hard. The roads maintenance strategy looks at how, in the longer term, we can make our road network more resilient so that we are not having to deal with this situation year in, year out. I am committed to finding ways in which to improve the network to strengthen our roads so that we are not dealing with potholes everywhere all the time and so that we can fix longer stretches of road. That work is ongoing. The weather that we have seen over the past 12 to 24 hours will have a further impact, and our teams will be out on the ground as normal dealing with the aftermath in the coming days and weeks.
The Member was in post when the Bill started its passage through the Assembly, and I think that my colleague Chris Hazzard was in post when it got Royal Assent, so that tells Members how long ago the legislation came to pass. As I said, we are looking at a range of options to help improve road safety. We have done work on mobile phone use while driving. The speed limit review consultation is under way. I can speak to officials to see where the drink-driving limit work is at, as I am not sure off the top of my head. As I said, however, I am willing to look at all options that are available to me.
The bottom line is that graduated driver licensing reduces fatal collisions. That, for me, is the ultimate evidence base for doing anything, because it is our key road safety objective. We do not want any more families to get a knock on the door to hear that their child, sister, brother, mother or father — whoever it may be — has been killed in a road traffic collision, particularly where it could have been avoided. It has therefore been well worth the time that it has taken to get to this stage. The change will ensure that we have much safer and much better drivers in the long term, and I hope that its legacy will be that we are all much safer on our roads.
941 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.88).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.88 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.51 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.48 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:21 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.