By Jonathan Duffy BBC News Online

The driving test is about to get harder, with candidates having to pit their wits against a video simulation. It's tougher than you might think. Clearly I'm a menace on the roads. My full no-claims bonus, clean licence and years of driving experience count for nothing when it comes to this latest addition to the driving test.

I might be the sort of motorist who would slow down to spare the life of a dozy pigeon, but try telling that to an impassive computer monitor which has just announced your total points score out of 25.

I scored a measly... let's just say I failed. Abysmally.

Sitting the new test

From November, the new "hazard perception test" will become a compulsory part of the standard driving test. It is designed, according to the Department of Transport, to help new drivers cope with everyday dangers on the road.

Every year, 3,400 people are killed on Britain's roads and many of these accidents are caused by those with little experience behind the wheel. One in five new drivers has an accident within the first 12 months of passing their test.

Attending the launch of the new test, Transport Secretary Alistair Darling expressed his wish that it would help sharpen the awareness skills of those new to the driving seat.

Quite what it will do for any experienced motorist who happens to give it a spin, is another question. In my case, it was a confidence-zapping experience.

The red circles don't feature in the simulation

The electronic test is taken in front of a normal computer monitor. There are no pedals or steering wheel, just a mouse. The "driver" watches a series of video clips, each about a minute long, filmed on all sorts of roads, from country lanes to suburban high streets to motorways. Candidates need to click the mouse button as soon as they see a hazard.

Click here to see the test in action

It sounds easy enough. But as I set out on this virtual test drive, I became increasingly unsure exactly what qualified as a "hazard".

For example, is a woman running along the pavement a hazard or just a woman running along the pavement? I clicked when she started to veer out into the road, but found out later I should have acted as soon as I clapped eyes on her.

What exactly is dangerous?

Other "hazards" include a lollipop lady standing by the side of the road, a class of schoolchildren walking in crocodile, a motorcyclist pulling in and a roadside tree-cutting team.

The problem is that if all these are judged to be potentially dangerous, then isn't just about everything?

Tatiana: "Totally and utterly not impressed"

Is a parked car not perilous, since its door could suddenly swing open into the road? Is a green traffic light not "hazardous" since it will, at some point, turn to red? And what about a simple bend in the road - dangerous perhaps because you can't see round it?

On that basis, you might as well just merrily click away at everything you see on screen. And that, apparently, is the secret to the whole thing.

While you will be penalised for clicking furiously and completely at random, the basic message - remember this all you learner drivers who have a test booked for after 14 November - is that you can't be too careful.

Beware skylarks!

Every video clip has one crucial hazard you need to spot (candidates will be tested on 14 clips, randomly selected from a total of 200).

But it seems you won't be punished, if you decide that a seemingly innocuous hedgerow poses a threat since, who knows, it might be home to a nesting skylark which, panicked by your approaching vehicle, darts into the road, and hits an on-coming pedal cyclist who swerves into your path. After all, it could happen.

Alistair 84% Darling

Learner driver Tatiana Moufarrige, who was at the demonstration to voice a view, agreed.

"I'm totally and utterly not impressed," said Tatiana, 17, who has her test booked for early November.

"It was very confusing to know what I was supposed to click. It's experience on the road that counts, not sitting in front of some plasma screen."

Her instructor Thomas Lloyd thought the new test a good idea, but agreed that a few problems needed to be ironed out.

Pass mark

"I think it will make people more cautious because the fact is you need to see almost everything as a hazard."

Which seemed to be Mr Darling's approach, after he gallantly agreed to sit the test (it was his second go) in the glare of the assembled media. He scored an impressive 21 out of 25 - far in excess of the pass mark, which is 14.

And more than double my score, which, I confess, was an embarrassing nine.

However, I'm comforting myself with the belief I've just been another hapless victim of downgrading exam results.