Taxi Driver Online

Round and Round the Radical road the radical rascals ran



Transport


The Scottish Executive aims to promote economic growth, social inclusion and sustainable development through a safe, integrated and efficient transport network.

This section provides information on:

Road tolls and pricing, road safety and local roads
Bus and taxi policy and rural community transportFreight transport policy, grants and funding
Aviation policy
Ferry services, ports and inland waterways
Co-ordinating a national transport strategy and developing a sustainable transport policy
Regional transport partnerships.


http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/


Correct me if I am wrong but was the OFT report actually relevant to Scotland, I seem to recall it being firmly rejected and as I also recall that position has remained unchanged.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2004/03/5190

Taxi services and fair trading
10/03/2004

Scottish Ministers today confirmed their support for the retention of local authorities' powers to impose quantity controls on taxis.

Commenting on the Scottish government's response to the main recommendations in the Office of Fair Trading's (OFT) Report on the regulation of licensed taxi and private hire car services in the UK, Minister for Finance and Public Services Andy Kerr said:

"We do not consider that the evidence contained in the OFT's Report makes a sufficiently robust case to justify the removal of local authorities' powers to restrict the number of taxis in their area. Case studies indicate that the quality of service can fall when quantity controls are removed.

"We also believe that removing quantity controls would not necessarily improve the availabity of taxis to the public. Consequently, we continue to take the view that local authorities are best placed to determine whether quantity controls are in the best interests of the travelling public. However we recognise that the frequency and nature of surveys used by local authorities to assess whether there is any demand for taxis which is unmet, needs to be examined and this is something we will be giving further consideration to.

"We do agree, however, with the OFT that quality and safety of taxis and private hire cars must be regulated in order to protect consumers. The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 already provides local authorities with a flexible framework within which to do so but we now intend to work with the Department for Transport and other key interested parties to ensure that such regulation is both effective and proportionate.

"We also agree that maximum fares are required to protect passengers from possible exploitation and over-charging. The existing legislation already requires that local authorities set maximum fares for taxis operating in their area. We intend to seek views on how best customers can be made aware that they are free to negotiate a lower fare. We will also consider what steps can be taken to encourage fare competition in the taxi trade."

The Office of Fair Trading published their report on November 11 last year.

It contained three main recommendations:

That legislative provisions allowing local authorities to impose quantity controls on taxis should be repealed
That quality and safety of taxis and private hire cars requires to be regulated and central government should promote and disseminate best practice to assist local authorities to apply such regulations in a proportionate and effective manner
That local authorities should set maximum fare tariffs for taxis, but that it should be made clear that these fares represent the maximum which can be charged, and are not fixed or minimum fares and consumers should be free to negotiate on fares, for example, when ordering a taxi over the telephone
While there was no obligation on Scottish Ministers to respond to the OFT report they agreed to do so within 120 days of its publication. Taxi and private hire legislation is a devolved matter and it is for Scottish Ministers to determine what action, for example legislative changes, should be made as a result of the OFT Report.

To assist with their evaluation of the OFT Report Scottish Ministers sought the views of local authorities, consumer groups, the taxi and private hire car trades, the police, consumer groups and other stakeholders.

Sections 10-23 and Schedule 1 to the 1982 Act provide local authorities with a legislative framework for the licensing of taxis and private hire cars which gives them considerable discretion in determining the exact quality and safety standards which require to be met in their area.

Section 17 of the 1982 Act requires local authorities to review taxi fares and to set maximum fares for their area. Section 10(3) of the 1982 Act states that an application for a taxi licence can be refused by a local authority for the purpose of limiting the number of taxis if, but only if, it is satisfied that there is no significant demand for the services of taxis in their area which is unmet.


And then


Taxis

The Scottish Executive is responsible for the formulation of policy and dissemination of guidance in relation to the powers of Scottish local authorities to license taxis and private hire cars and their drivers under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982.

Responsibility for administering the licensing arrangements for taxis and private hire cars in their areas rests with local councils as licensing authorities.


http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Trans ... andTaxi#a2


It looks like taxi policy is firmly in the hands of the Executive, does it not?

The OFT report was relevant full stop, otherwise Aberdeen would not have mentioned it in their deregulation report. The fact that the Scottish executive decided to take no action on the report is neither here nor there. The same policy applied in England and Wales to that of Scotland in respect of councils determining their own policy. The big difference in Scotland is that the courts have sealed their fate because the courts don't recognise surveys as having a shelf life beyond a very limited period of time and if a council wishes to retain numbers control an authority MUST keep itself regularly informed. To a greater degree authorities in Scotland are far worse off than those in England.

It might be worth looking at the reasons why the Scottish executive chose to disregard the OFT report. In my opinion it is significant that the Scottish executive didn't offer any evidence to support their claim on the following points?

"We do not consider that the evidence contained in the
OFT's Report makes a sufficiently robust case to justify
the removal of local authorities' powers to restrict the
number of taxis in their area. Case studies indicate that
the quality of service can fall when quantity controls are
removed.

When the Scottish executive mentions quality of service it means available supply of hackney carriage vehicles and not quality of vehicles or standards of drivers. The reason being is that quality control is down to each individual council and only an imbecile would suggest councils would water down quality simply because of deregulation. In fact the overwhelming evidence from England and Wales proves 100% that vehicle quality improves with deregulation. Anytime the Scottish executive wishes to avail themselves of the facts they only need to look in the direction of England and Wales.


The executive has never offered any evidence or example on what they based their opinion and I suppose they never will. However, the Scottish executive now has a golden opportunity to gather such evidence by using the model of Dundee?

"We also believe that removing quantity controls would
not necessarily improve the availability of taxis to the
public. Consequently, we continue to take the view that
local authorities are best placed to determine whether
quantity controls are in the best interests of the
travelling public. However we recognise that the frequency
and nature of surveys used by local authorities to assess
whether there is any demand for taxis which is unmet, needs
to be examined and this is something we will be giving
further consideration to.

Again the Executive doesn't offer any examples but perhaps it used the Lincoln model where according to jimbo there are no double shifted vehicles, or the Trafford model which restricted numbers for over twenty years and then found they were selling the public short by at least 18 cabs. Or perhaps the reading experience where they were short by 30 cabs or even the Wakefield experience who were short by 29 cabs. Whichever model they based their information on they should have had the decency to inform the public on what they based their decision and not let it appear that they made their decision on hearsay?

JD

I can't recall ever suggesting otherwise?



I'm not sure that the question is really relevant - or on the other hand it's as relevant as asking you/Sussex/Skull when you think derestriction should start.



Yes, the problem is that it's difficult to give a soft landing to one group and not to another, thusto that extent the soft landing would apply to all.



Again, I don't think these things can be quantified precisely, but if precise quantification is required then it would depend on the profits that plates were yeilding - ie the higher the yield, the shorter a 'fair' derestriction period.



Of course, I don't doubt that it's a gamble from the external perspective, but the point of the article was to look at it from the subjective perspective of the purchaser and what it might be reasonable to expect them to know.



You're preaching to the converted here Or perhaps 'converted' isn't the appropriate term.



Ditto.



Ditto. Again.

But what about someone who bought a plate last week in good faith because he thought he was buying a business, doesn't hire other drivers (these guys are the norm in some areas) and was misled by the T&G into thinking all was rosy in the restricted numbers garden?




Again, that's written from the perspective of someone who can write pages on the subject, not from those whose knowledge of the situation could be contained on fag packet.



Me?

I think your post is an eloquent example of the caveat emptor perspective, but the aim of the article was to balance this with an alternative perspective.

But perhaps not very successfully.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

But what's interesting is that the Captain seems to have a less sympathetic position on this than me

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Competition policy and enforcement is not devolved and thus the OFT is the UK's competition watchdog therefore to that extent it's as relevant to Scotland as England and Wales.

The OFT can make recommendations to both Government and LAs, and it duly did with respect to its taxi and PHV recommendations.

Thus its recommendation was still relevant to CEC, and of course it still stands and therefore cannot really be dismissed in any pertinent discussion, surely?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Round and round it goes.

One things for sure though the Politicians will decide for us whats best for us, whether they trample all over our rights or not.

I think at the end of the day Dusty we are at the mercy of those who reside in the seat of power, whether they be politicians or judiciary? I appreciate your view on a soft landing and I suspect so do many others but at the end of the day we are all going to have to live with change, no matter what form it takes and how it is delivered?

Regards

JD

Yes, but on the other hand it was interesting that, when the OFT discussed the issue and basically adopted the caveat emptor approach it then seemed to backtrack slightly when it said:



Which to me looked like a hint that the OFT thought that the Govt might consider some kind of soft landing if it did derestrict nationally.

Also, at the local level some LAs (Trafford) seem to be taking a 'soft landing' approach.

And I think you yourself have said that in effect the quality control approach provides a soft landing of sorts - there's more than one way to skin a cat!

If national delimitation does occur in the future then in effect the Govt laid the ground for a soft landing because it clearly intimated that the issue would be revisted in 3 years time and sent a clear signal that derestriction was a distinct probability. Indeed, I've often entertained the idea that this might have been some kind of roundabout way of providing a soft landing, but of course to the extent that most people are probably in the dark about this then it hasn't worked, and that again comes back to my point about people being ill-informed.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk