Last week we had a party to celebrate a friend's brand new PhD. At age 45, it was a particularly momentous occasion for her, not just because she had left school at 15 and returned to college in her late 30s, but because she had -- and still has -- a fear and dread of exams.

Despite gaining every award and accolade going for her essay and thesis work, exams threw her into a tizzy. So much so that one year I found her wandering the campus in a panic, after walking out on an exam she was expected to top the class in. "I just panicked," she said. "I thought of how much depended on the next few hours and I froze, my mind went blank."

Luckily most colleges now recognise that the yearly exam is not the best way to test whether a candidate is proficient in a particular subject.

Even the Leaving and Junior Certificates are being overhauled as it is finally admitted that continual assessment and not a one-off 'test' is the best way to assess a student's ability in a particular subject. Which brings me to this week's controversial topic: provisional drivers and that test.

Before I begin, let me make it clear that I am not in possession of a second or third provisional licence. I am not one of those thousands of people who depend on their car to get from A to B and for whatever reason do not hold a full driving licence. So I won't face being put off the road next week for the simple reason that I have never been on it.

I purposely bought a house in inner city Dublin so I didn't have to depend on a car to get around.

However, I know that sooner or later my little darlings will need mammy to collect them from ballet/ basketball/soccer practice, so I know that I will, eventually, have to bite the bullet and take the test. (Or make enough money to hire a chauffeur). Which is fair enough. I know before I start driving what I need to do -- and I have not been lulled into a lifestyle that has suddenly been pulled from under my feet.

Over the last few days I have chatted to many members of the driving public that I know. They fall into two distinct categories: the young men and women who have passed their tests and are vociferous in their support of the new laws, and disdain for provisional drivers and the people (mainly older women) who say nothing but look terrified as they think about their new status of State criminal Number One.

As a non-driver, I have sat in many a passenger seat and, though I hate to make assumptions, I have generally found the safest drivers to be in the latter category.

All over the country there are older women (and men) who have driven quite happily to the school, the shops, the local disco to collect their kids and have never even had a scrape with another car, let alone an accident that resulted in human injuries.

"So, why don't they shut the f**k up complaining and just take the damned test?" says a friend who passed her test on her second try.

"This is the only country in Europe where a person can take their driving test, fail the thing, then get right back into their car and drive off again," says another.

"If that's what it takes to make the roads safe then I'm all for it".

And yes, we all want to reduce road fatalities. There is no argument here. There have been far too many deaths, far too many young lives ruined or ended by reckless or drunk drivers. So the powers-that-be have decided to ensure that from now on only those people who have passed a driving test -- both theoretical and practical -- can be allowed out on their own. (That is of course, apart from all those people who were granted a full licence without having to do a test at all: people like Gerry Ryan, or my friend's mother, who is in possession of a licence to drive an articulated lorry but still can't manage to steer a bicycle).

Determining ability to drive after passing a test may be acceptable if you're dealing with young people who are just getting out on the road.

They know that they have to take a theory test and a practical test before they can drive on their own. Even though we accept that tests are not the best way to assess a person's ability to do anything, (particularly drive a car safely) all these youngsters will be in the same boat and will grow up knowing what is expected of them if they wish to drive on Irish roads.

But what about people who have been driving without accident for years? Surely it should be possible to take a person's safety record into consideration when assessing their ability to drive a car?

Isn't solid, empirical evidence of good driving equally as important as the ability to perform perfectly in front of an examiner?

And I can hear the response from all you licence-holding drivers out there: if they're so bloody safe, then let them take the test!

Well, you know something; it's not actually as black and white as that.

Like my friend who baulked at exams but ended up with a doctorate, there are many people who have driven safely for years but who freeze during the official test.

Perhaps it's because they feel intimidated by the bright, young, confidence of the (mainly male) testers. Perhaps it's been so long since they took an exam of any kind that they instinctively persuade themselves that they will fail, despite their excellent driving record.

Would it be so awful if people who could prove that they had a spotless driving record after a certain amount of years on the road be granted an amnesty and awarded their licences? It could just be a once-off -- I'm not suggesting that new provisional drivers should qualify (I accept that I will have to take the test), just that those people who have already proven themselves to be competent, safe drivers.

Most road accidents and tragedies are caused by speeding and drink driving.

Yet many of those people who are responsible for such accidents only receive penalty points, a fine or perhaps a couple of months with their licence suspended.

It is these dangerous drivers who should be taken off the road, not the careful widow who needs her car to get to play bridge with her friends, or the elderly man who has driven the same country road without incident for years to meet his pals for a game of cards.

A 'one rule fits all' approach to the driving licence dilemma appeals because it seems simple: it's black and white.

But, you know, life's just not like that ...

- CAROL HUNT