Some people think that the best way to improve road transport safety is to let the deiver test each year. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is argued that the ideal method of making progress in maintaining roadway safety is for

drivers

to be obliged to have a driving examination annually.

This

essay will disagree with

this

statement and discuss how it generates inconvenience for

drivers

and the high cost for the

traffic

department. High frequency in making an appointment for driving questions triggers motorists to spend redundant time and money on passing a test.

In addition

, all

traffic

rules are similar, so it is not the main idea to confirm whether a driver knows

traffic

restrictions.

On the contrary

, it should propose an efficient way to punish illegitimate

drivers

who break the rules. As an illustration, Singapore's heavy fine for disobeying the

traffic

law maintains the lower probability of car accidents without testing an automobile license every year. Abundant testing requirements escalate officers' workloads, which are paid by the national tax income. With the intention of repeated driving assessments, employees in the transporting bureau are obliged to scrutinize whether participants meet the requirement. For

this

reason, staff increase their job volume, but

this

protocol does not correlate to the risk reduction of road safety.

In particular

, the authority in our country has required

drivers

to retake a driving test in a short period, but it did not trigger any diminished probability of car accidents. In conclusion, having the same test year after year squanders citizens' time and money without cracking the street safety issues and excessive quizzes causing officers' heavy work is not the chief reason to prevent tragedy for pedestrians.

Hence

, I can't entirely agree that people should have annual driving examinations to alleviate car crashes.