Like many this past week, my blood pressure spiked when I read about another serious accident, traffic being diverted and one or more people being taken to the hospital with injuries being described as serious.

We quietly hope that it is not someone we know, a reality for many of us that have grown up on this beautiful island. During the joint press conference last week, Darrin Simons, the police commissioner, laid out the facts: “Bermuda has historically averaged around 12 road deaths each year. We have now exceeded that number in little more than seven months.”

Thirteen deaths in eight months is excessive and unacceptable. The transport minister, Owen Darrell, confidently stated that: “Enforcement, legislation, education, safer roads and vehicles, and changing behaviour all matter.” He is not wrong.

The Minister of National Security, Ryan Robinson Perinchief, demonstrated a clear view of the scope when he said: “The evidence is clear that increasing enforcement alone does not solve the challenges we face, when it comes to road safety.”

Everyone speaking at the press conference broadly agreed that the enduring problem is behaviour and culture. Yet all the measures being promised are based on enforcement.

If we consider what happens next, then we are likely to see more tickets issued, more appearances in court, more penalties and suspension of driving licences. What this whole exercise misses is that financial and punitive measures are not enough to change how people drive.

My own experience in driving education came from the police driving school at Prospect, as part of my role as aide-de-camp to the Governor. The course covered roadcraft, defensive driving and driver mentality among other topics. A quote from the manual, “Quiet efficiency is the hallmark of the expert”, still sticks in my memory a decade later.

What our instructor shared during the classroom phase has been nagging me over the last few weeks. He said: ‘We assume that approximately 2 per cent of the motoring public are either bad or irresponsible drivers. My experience is that it’s more like 20 per cent.”

While I cannot verify this statistic myself, it is worth asking ourselves; which is it? If we assume that it’s 2 per cent, then more enforcement may be the answer, but if it’s closer to 20 per cent, then we are not just talking about behaviour and low standards, we’re fighting underlying culture.

Commissioner Simons stated that during the previous day, “ … Officers issued more than 60 tickets, the majority for speeding.” That number should raise eyebrows given the size of the island, but the part that no one talked about is how many people did not get caught speeding?

Police action is operational; ministers are responsible for legislation. The Opposition recently tabled a bill targeting road safety. The shadow national security minister, Jarion Richardson, has highlighted penalties, disqualification and demerit points in the Bill. Criticism from the Government categorised the Bill as reactive punishment that does not address how people drive. It is worth pointing out that initiatives around speed cameras and increased police activity are also reactive measures. The question that remains unanswered is: how do we change how people drive?

A quick thought experiment: imagine that a young man appears in court to answer for speeding offences. Four months have passed since the ticket was issued and during that time he was caught twice more for speeding, the third time over 80km/h. The sentence is 18 months off the road for all vehicles and a $1,000 fine. The magistrate berates the defendant for excessive speed and the case is closed. Eighteen months pass and the driver is allowed to operate vehicles again. No further orders from the court, no mandatory training or retesting, and no barrier to getting back on the road. Is that really enough to stop the driver from behaving in the same way the next time they are behind the wheel? Probably not.

The good news is that one option involving remedial training already exists in legislation. Section 35K, of the Road Traffic Act 1947, allows the court to order a reduction in time for disqualification from driving by three months, following a conviction for impaired driving, but only if it is the first offence and the sentence is 18 months. It also hinges on a place being available in an approved impaired driving programme and only if the offender agrees to pay for the programme beforehand, after being informed by the court. If it seems convoluted, that’s because it is.

One solution could be an amendment of Section 35K, to cover more offences, not just impaired driving. In searching for a jurisdiction with similar legal traditions, I found the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 in Britain. Under that legal framework a court can order a driver to complete a test before a licence is returned and a more rigorous examination needed for more serious offences. In fact, our Road Traffic Act already gives the transport minister power to approve a body or organisation to deliver and certify remedial training. But as it stands now, that option is limited to impaired drivers and is not mandatory, merely optional.

If we agree that successful police action and more court appearances are inevitable, then a barrier to re-entry in the form of a mandatory remedial training and retesting could fill a need for influencing how that offender uses the road going forward. Does it change the driving population that is already in the habit of driving dangerously? Of course not, but it’s action at the legislative level where the basic framework already exists.

Funding this plan should not be down to the taxpayer alone, the person who wants to get their licence back should pick up the bill for the course. To be clear, this is not a perfect solution, but the aim must be to try and change how people think about driving on our roads, because alcohol is not the only reason for dangerous driving.

Training and retesting for convicted traffic offenders as a condition for being allowed back on the road needs to be mandatory and not optional.

Enough words have been used to describe what we should do to people who drive dangerously. It is time that we focus on what we should teach them.

• Paolo Odoli is a captain in the Royal Bermuda Regiment, who is on leave of absence in Italy