THERE can be no argument that teachers have a heavy responsibility when it comes to imparting knowledge to the next generation. If done right, students can go on to become the leading lights of their generation. If done wrong, they could become the leading blights.
But, either way, how much responsibility should a teacher take for how the student turns out? That is something that law enforcement should consider, especially in light of the Road Transport Department (RTD) director-general's proposal last week that driving schools and instructors be punished if their former students end up being bad motorists.
If the DG was trying to nip in the bud the perennial problem of "lesen terbang" (driving licences obtained through corruption rather than competence), surely a more accurate method would be to look at the officer who passed the student at the testing stage? After all, in an honest setting, the incompetent student of an incompetent teacher cannot possibly pass the examination.
The trick, of course, is in proving the case. But, if evidence or witnesses cannot be found, would it be fair to make the assumption of corruption based solely on the skills of the driver? And even if there is no corruption involved, is it fair to punish driving instructors or schools for the future conduct of their students once they have passed their test, obtained their licence, and moved on with life?
If engineers don't do their jobs properly and a structure collapses, should the engineering school be penalised? That argument may be debatable when it involves the kind of learning for which students study for years to obtain their qualification. But how much knowledge can be imparted in the few hours that student drivers learn about traffic rules and pass the written test, and the score of hours spent learning how to drive? Is that enough to set good habits for a lifetime?
Good habits take time to form. And what habits are formed depends on the road-safety culture that is shared by a community. A new driver may set out on the road with the lessons and wisdoms set by the instructor, but, where the driver goes from there, and whether good habits are adopted or retained, also depends on the examples set by other drivers.
For, good driving is not just about the law, it is also about being a considerate member of the motoring community. Giving way and taking turns at merging lanes, not driving under the influence of alcohol, sleep deprivation, or distraction — how we conduct ourselves depends on whether we take into consideration the consequences of our actions as imperfect drivers.
Law enforcement also has a role to play in shaping good motorist behaviour. The impact of traffic summonses is watered down when everyone waits for the annual year-end discount, instead of feeling the pain immediately. And what has happened to the Kejara Demerit Points System?
If the penalty is considered resolved once the summons has been paid, with so many motorists delaying paying their summonses until the year-end, has anyone had their licence suspended on account of too many traffic offences? Is it even effective to have a demerit system if one can buy one's way out of it? If only things could be as easy as punishing just the teachers.