|
CTC the national cycling organisation put the following appeal before the Transport select committee for introducing pedicab legislation.
2. PEDICABS
At the present time, the main value of pedicabs is as a form of entertainment and a tourist attraction. However, they also have the potential to serve as a complement to public transport networks in towns and cities in the future as the twin pressures of climate change and fuel insecurity arising from declining oil reserves drive up the price of carbon-based fuel supplies.
CTC believes that pedicabs, if properly regulated, can make a positive contribution to the cultural life of major cities. However, at present in Britain, London is the only city where they are managing to operate on a "ply for hire" basis, taking advantage of the different regulatory framework which applies there. The resultant situations in both London and the rest of the country are unsatisfactory. In London, pedicabs are only able to operate as "stagecoaches", which makes it impossible for the authorities to regulate them to ensure that they are operated safely and professionally. Outside London they are classed as "hackney carriages" which, in practice, makes it almost impossible for them to operate at all on a ply-for-hire basis, regardless of how supportive the relevant local authority may be.
Regulating pedicabs as "hackney carriages" causes the following obstacles for operators:
— It requires pedicab riders to be licensed for three-year periods. This requirement may be reasonable for taxi drivers (whose work is generally a long-term commitment) but is not believe that it is necessary or appropriate for the pedicab industry, given the nature of the work and the people most likely to undertake it. If pedicab regulatory regime were being designed "from scratch", we very much doubt that a three-year licensing term would be imposed.
— It requires pedicab fares, like taxi fares, to be charged "per vehicle" for a given journey, rather than "per passenger". Carrying an additional passenger makes very little difference to a taxi driver (the cost of a small amount of extra petrol is very marginal indeed). However, for a pedicab rider, a second passenger almost doubles the effort involved, as well as slowing down journey times. Pedicab riders would have to work a lot harder for a lower rate of pay. Like the 3-year licensing term, the "per vehicle" charging requirement serves no useful purpose.
— Perhaps most seriously, the requirement to obtain licensing "complying with Part II of the Road Traffic Act 1930 as amended..." effectively forces pedicabs to obtain the same kind of insurance as motor vehicles, yet insurers themselves are not able to offer this (this is a concern raised by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) themselves).
To provide a bit more detail: in London, taxis operate under the London Cab Order of 1934, which in turn is secondary legislation under the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869. Elsewhere, hackney carriages operate under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847.
Section 4 of the 1869 Act covering London refers to "stage carriage" as well as "hackney carriages". It defines "stage carriage" as meaning, "...any carriage for the conveyance of passengers which plies for hire in any public street, road or place within the limits of this Act and in which the passengers, or any of them, are charged to pay separate and distinct or at the rate of separate and distinct fares for their respective places or seats therein." The same section also defines a "hackney carriage" as "Any carriage for the conveyance of passengers which plies for hire within the limits of this Act and is neither a stage carriage nor a tram car."
Pedicabs began to appear in London in around 2001, operating as stage carriages. There have been three court cases where complaints have been brought against the drivers of pedicabs, alleging that their vehicles were in fact "hackney carriages", but in all three cases the courts held that they were entitled to operate as "stage carriages".
This has led to a proliferation of pedicab operators and riders in London, prompting concerns about the lack of adequate regulation to ensure the safety of the vehicles, the riding skills and topographical knowledge of the riders, the soundness of pedicab operators and the mechanisms for enforcing road traffic laws against offending pedicab riders.
It was against this background that the Public Carriage Office (PCO), the division of Transport for London (TfL) which regulates taxis, carried out a public consultation last year on proposals to introduce pedicab regulations.
CTC, in common with the London Cycling Campaign (LCC) and the London Pedicab Operators Association (LPOA, who are themselves keen to come under some form of regulation to protect the reputation of their industry) all agreed with the broad thrust of this consultation, namely that there is a need to regulate the pedicab industry, to ensure high standards of operation and safety, customer service and satisfaction and the reputation of the industry. We also agreed that such regulation needs to cover:
— The safe design and maintenance of pedicab vehicles;
— The age, character, medical fitness and riding ability of pedicab riders;
— The topographical knowledge of riders, and/or the area within which they may ply for hire (but not necessarily both); and
— The running of pedicab businesses, including the means of identifying licensed vehicles and riders.
We were also in broad agreement with the consultation document's proposals as to the terms on which many of these issues should be regulated.
The one major issue where we felt the consultation document was flawed was the proposal that the legislative framework for regulating pedicabs should be as "hackney carriages". We also regret that, in parallel with the consultation, TfL has begun an action in the High Courts, seeking a "declaratory judgement" that pedicabs in London are in fact "hackney carriages", contrary to three past rulings.
This is a risky strategy, as there is no obvious reason why the application should succeed when three previous rulings on the same point have reached the opposite conclusion. If the courts rule once again that pedicabs are in fact "stage carriages", then TfL would have no means of forcing pedicabs to operate under its proposed licencing regime. The growth of unregulated pedicabs, and the associated risks, would continue unchecked. This, we believe, is not in anybody's interest other than the more irresponsible pedicab operators who would prefer to remain unregulated (and who are therefore not represented by LPOA).
For all these reasons, we believe that a better approach would be to use the opportunity presented by Part 3 of the Local Transport Bill (which already deals with taxi and private hire vehicle licences), to introduce a licensing regime for pedicabs (and perhaps for other forms of non-motorised carriages used for hire and reward), which would cover not just London but the rest of Great Britain as well.
We therefore urge the Committee to support our call for the Bill to include powers for the Secretary of State to introduce regulations governing the licensing of pedicab operations, defining their scope as covering the issues in the bullet-point list above.
June 2007
_________________
Copyright notice © The contents of this post are copyright of JD and are not to be reproduced outside of TDO without written permission.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
