Relieve practical driving test queues with accredited assessors
Two Australian jurisdictions already let an accredited instructor assess competence instead of a government examiner. In those systems the applicant never joins a testing queue at all.
Steps this would change
Rationale
This is the only genuinely addressable delay in driver licensing, and the database is unusually clear about why.
Across all eight jurisdictions, the overwhelming majority of elapsed time is
statutory -- legislated minimum periods on a learner or provisional licence.
In New South Wales the profile is 1,460 statutory days
against 49 days of scheduling and 3 days of actual assessment. That is not red
tape in any useful sense of the term. Those periods exist so that inexperienced
drivers accumulate experience under restriction, and no administrative reform
can compress time.
The test booking queue is different in kind. When a learner has held the licence for twelve months, logged their hours and passed the hazard perception test, they are ready. Everything that follows is waiting for an examiner appointment. In August 2025 that wait was reported at six to eight weeks in NSW against a normal expectation of about a week, driven substantially by a rule requiring overseas licence holders to be retested within three months. Service NSW recruited 20 additional testing officers in response -- which is the right instinct, and treats a structural constraint as a staffing incident.
The structural fix already exists domestically. The ACT pathway converts a single government bottleneck into a market of accredited assessors, and an applicant taking that route is not exposed to the queue at any point. South Australia offers the same alternative. Neither is an experiment: both have operated for years, and their novice driver outcomes are measurable and comparable.
Note what this proposal does not touch. It leaves every statutory period, every supervised hour and every restriction exactly where it is. It changes only who administers the competence assessment, and only for jurisdictions that have decided the assessment itself is worth doing.
What is being traded away
The trade-off is real and this site has recorded it before in another domain.
An accredited assessor is paid by the person being assessed. That is precisely the conflict of interest that has driven sustained criticism of the private certifier model in building approval, and the argument for driver testing is structurally identical: the assessor has a commercial relationship with the candidate, often as their instructor, and a financial interest in a steady flow of passes and referrals.
The stakes differ, though not obviously in the reassuring direction. A defective building is discovered eventually. A driver assessed too generously is discovered on the road.
Three things any serious version of this would need, and their absence should be treated as fatal rather than as detail:
- Audit with teeth. Random re-assessment of a sample of passes, with accreditation actually withdrawn on findings. The certifier experience suggests audit regimes announced at launch and not resourced afterwards are worse than no reform, because they add a layer of assurance nobody is providing.
- Published per-assessor pass rates. An assessor whose pass rate is far above their peers should be visible without anyone having to make a request for it. That is a transparency requirement, and it is recorded on the companion project as the kind of gap that has to be closed before a reform rather than after it.
- Evidence from the jurisdictions already doing it. The ACT and SA have run this model for years. If their novice crash rates are indistinguishable from the testing states, the case is close to made. If they are worse, this proposal should be withdrawn.
Point three is the honest position: this proposal is currently an argument from structure, not from outcome. The outcome data exists and we have not yet obtained it.
Precedent
The ACT assesses 23 competencies through accredited instructors under competency based training and assessment, with no government test required. South Australia offers competency based training as an alternative to the Vehicle On Road Test.
Sources
- ABC News, 'NSW L-platers face lengthy wait times to sit their driving tests amid record-high demand', 18 August 2025
- Access Canberra, published competency based training and assessment requirements
- My Licence (DIT SA), competency based training as an alternative to the Vehicle On Road Test
