The following story appeared in taxitalk a couple of issues ago, what are your thoughts?
A third way? Or the next Battle?
By
The Reiver
'Politics' is made up of two words. 'Poli,' which is Greek for many,
and 'tics,' which are bloodsucking insects.
Quote attributed to Vidal Gore.
People often tell me their Licensing Authorities are considering deregulating numbers control of hackneys. It would seem to me, firstly, that we now have a new word, 'delimit,' although it is more accurate that deregulate, it has one key advantage, it is different to that nasty Conservative term of 'deregulate,' the end result, however is the same, more taxis. Obviously, spin-doctors at a local level have had their dictionaries and thesauruses out for a few years now.
On a national level taxis are a political problem, one could actually envisage the government coming up with a screwed up new licensing system, one with three tiers. This would try to ensure we had a fully accessible wheelchair hackney fleet, a private hire fleet that was private hire as we currently know it for 18 hours per day, but one that could legally ply for hire at throwing out time, with the third tier, a full time private hire fleet, that is actually executive cars and limousines. I didn't come up with this idea all by myself, a friend did actually mention it to me in an email, of course the best journalists in the world tend to keep their sources closely guarded, but as I realise the guy will be reading this. However, he may of course, given the editor's permission, do an article for us all.
Initial thoughts are that a third tier is unacceptable, however you must consider we have in many areas a virtual third tier already. The same hackney trade say that delimitation is unacceptable, then ignore private hire picking up during periods they cannot cope. I'm very sorry to wake you people up, but we cannot have it both ways, we are very often the first people to point out that private hire, when illegally plying for hire, are not insured, we say this when, of course, it suits us. Double standards I think you call it?
It has been blatantly obvious that in some areas there are not enough taxis, the very price of the hackney licence premium tells you this, yet the trade through greed and the potential loss of the premium, fights delimitation.
The trade have been quite vociferous in their attacks on ambulance cars and American stretched limousines for being unlicensed, a revamped system that would include these vehicles would seem to be a sensible route, alleviating the fears of the hackney trade and the general public alike.
In all of this, if the government are considering a third tier, it is surely an indictment of delimitation and deregulation, it would seem to say to all intents and purposes that deregulation is a misconceived and failed route for local authorities to follow, as it does not work.
As a conspiracy theorist, it would seem to me, coming so close from the OFT report that there has been a degree of pressure from the private hire trade and operators. Face facts, and if you read my article last month one of the biggest losers in delimitation are private hire operators. Hackney carriage drivers, when self employed, are free spirits, working the hours they choose and not the radio circuits preferred hours, often switching off radios and data systems, preferring to work ranks. The loyalty of the hackney owner to the radio circuit is obviously less than a private hire owner-driver, who needs the umbrella of the private hire operator and the operator's licence. The majority of new hackney owners, when delimitation takes place, come across from private hire - is one inescapable fact of delimitation.
It could well be that a third tier, one that will permit PHVs under a special licence to ply for hire during a specified period of a few hours during peak-time, would be to the ultimate advantage of PHV operators, and indeed to the hackney trade, as it will keep the majority of licensed vehicles under operator control.
At a time when one so called trade group had apparently gone back to sleep after the OFT. Another part of the trade is in turmoil because their 'magnum opus' has been all but destroyed, and others are so blind to the reality of the trade, that they prefer not to make comment either way, wait, and then blame everyone else`. It would seem that we need a national body to step into the breach and ask the relevant people if this is being considered or mooted around Whitehall, I sincerely hope that body would be the NTA. If this is being considered, then as a profession do we support it or castigate it, moreover, are we in a position to say anything?
I leave it to you to decide
|
