As someone who will be 71 in a few days time (no cakes please

) and an IAM advanced driver/observer I have no issues with being told I have to have an eyesight test to renew my license. I wear varifocal glasses and get my eyes tested every two years but if my eyesight isn't up to scratch then it doesn't matter how good my mechanical driving skills are I'm a danger to other road users and should not be behind the wheel of two tons or metal capable of travelling at 100+ mph. Also, as a road cyclist I would rather approaching drivers were able to see me.
I do, however, take issue with the way this is being implemented and it smacks of underhand dealings between DVLA and Specsavers. Having a single provider for this important test is a rather contentious position which is being challenged by Age UK, with a likelihood it will end up in court. It is also suggested that Specsavers have neither sufficient stores (approx. 900) nor qualified Optometrists to be able to handle the volume of tests needed annually. Of course, if they fail enough in year one that potential problem will be reduced/go away. The DVLA contract states that only qualified optometrists who have been specifically trained to carry out the test are authorised to conduct it but, as anyone that uses Specsavers will know, it is usually a shop assistant that carries out the visual field and intraocular pressure tests. This will be something that will be watched carefully when I go for my test in a couple of years time.
The Government are clearly intent on removing older drivers from our roads, despite all of the evidence that they are far less likely to cause a collision that other age groups. Is imposing this test on the over-70s ageism? I don't know, but it is creating yet another us and them conflict with the "news" media stoking the fires as they do with anti-cycling rhetoric. TBH, if my wife wasn't disabled and reliant on us having a car I'd probably hand in my license in a couple of years anyway.
PS: Not only are older drivers less likely to cause collisions but they are more likely to pay their VED, insure their cars and have a valid MOT than many younger drivers - it's a generational thing - the older generation are generally more law-abiding. No offence meant to any younger, law-abiding, drivers reading this
