When confronted with a major problem such as terrorism, our government is quick to advise other nations to look for the 'root causes' of the problem in order to address it. But at home they seem to have forgotten their own advice with a glaring example being the recent attempts in changing the law to reduce fatal road accidents.

The question to be asked is whether the powers-that-be have looked hard or have they just come up with some harebrained ideas that just sound good? To me, their remedies to reduce road accidents seem more like ad hoc attempts at finding a solution. We will never be the wiser until a more systematic and scientific approach is made.

If I may suggest, the most obvious place to start is the Road Transport Department where licences are issued to road users to drive their vehicles be they motorcycles, cars, buses or lorries. Has the new driver been tested for competent mastery of the vehicle and - equally important - on the laws of the road before he or she is allowed to join the burgeoning number of road users?

Has sufficient training been given to promote safe and defensive driving and also to instill respect in new motorists for other road users? These measure sound simple enough and if carried out without fear or favour, I can guarantee you an immediate reduction in the number of road accidents.

Then there is the question of enforcement. Are there adequate resources for our authorities to ensure that lorries are not overladen or that the motorcyclist does not beat a red light? If so, are they then discharging their duties conscientiously - who checks the checker?

Have the lawmakers studied and observed any trend in fatal road accidents? It can be observed, for example, that most accidents happen on trunk roads and usually involves heavy vehicles. Is the heavy vehicle driver at fault or is it the recklessness of the other motorist?

A few years ago the 'black box' was introduced for buses. Has it been scrapped due to lax enforcement? Another one of those ideas that sounded good at the time, wasn't it?

What are the statistics for accidents on say, Plus highways as opposed to rural roads? Is it justifiable to spend most of our enforcement resources on nabbing speeders along the major highways?

And from a legal standpoint, surely the punishment should fit the crime. Just because you happen to be caught speeding 120km/h and you do not have the cash to pay the summons, does this make you a criminal to be thrown into jail for a day?

Not to mention the inconvenience and the trauma that you and your loved ones will have to go through.

I will put up my hand and admit that I have been guilty of speeding at one time or another and I'm sure 90 percent of all road users have also been guilty of it at some time as well. Are we now supposed to leave it to the traffic policemen's discretion that we do not end up in jail? Is it supposed to work this way?

Now we are being told that we may have to renew our driving licences annually. Maybe the police do not appreciate the inconvenience of such a task. Someone please remind them that not all of us are as lucky to have an office boy or driver to run errands for us.

And what happens if by some chance, in being human, we forget to renew our licence - another custodial sentence in the works?

Instead of trying hard to show us that they mean business, our respective authorities and leaders should instead spend more time and effort to ensure that their programmes and remedies are in touch with reality and are workable.

There is nothing wrong with our present laws, it is the system that has gone to sleep. The ordinary rakyat is forced to suffer just because some parties have not been doing their jobs properly and want to make changes for their own convenience.