This time it's about MoT tests. The Government is considering bringing MoT testing into line with the minimum European requirements, which would be:
- First test after four years from new (currently three)
- Subsequent tests every other year after that (currently annual).
I use any one of three testing stations, and all of them know that I will be taking the car or bike away, doing the work myself, and re-presenting it, so there's no danger of the make-work brigade finding faults that aren't there, although I appreciate that this is a problem with some places who might see a gullible or non-technical customer as an opportunity to get some workshop time when things are slow.
As for reducing the fequency of testing from 3+1 to 4+2, I am not sure. Most modern vehicles will still be in as roadworthy a condition after four years as they are after three. The regs were brought in when vehicles were much less reliable than they are today, and I doubt if that extra year will make much difference. Once a vehicle gets to 5-6 years old and has perhaps 60-70k miles on the clock, however, my instinct tells me that an annual check is a good idea. That's when things start to fail, and some of them are safety-critical.
Anyway, go and have your say. Unlike Mr Cameron, the IAM are keen to get the opinions of as many people as possible. You don't have to be a member, etc.
UPDATE: Having done the survey, and learned that 27% of cars fail their first MoT at three years old, I am inclined to say keep things as they are. Getting a 3-year-old car tested, and then testing every year thereafter, is hardly onerous.