doing so. Nor can we transfer a booking from our own North Tyneside office to our Newcastle office.
The Department noted that sub-contracting could be useful in “emergency situations” such as when a car breaks down on an airport pick-up. It described the illegality of subcontracting as “anomalous” and said it wished to address the issue when PHV legislation was next reviewed.
Is new legislation necessary?
10. The issues raised with us about cross-border hiring, and the increas- ingly complex pattern of case law on taxi matters, raise questions about the legislation applying to taxis and PHVs and the differences in licensing standards between different local authorities. The National Taxi Association said it did “not believe that there is any pressing need or indeed any at all for a change in legislation” applying to taxis. It drew attention to other elderly pieces of legislation which it argued were generally thought to be working well. This was a minority view. Most other witnesses argued that the legislation applying to both taxis and PHVs was in need of reform.
11. There were numerous suggestions of relatively modest changes to the legislation to clear up specific areas of ambiguity. Unite, for example, pro- posed a new clause to be added to the 1976 Act which would require PHVs to return to their home district after completing a job in another area. This “simple change”, based on Scottish legislation, would put an end to PHVs waiting for jobs outside of their home area. David Wilson sent us a schedule of changes to the 1976 Act which he recommended to address all of the issues relating to cross-border hiring and enforcement raised by local authorities. The Minister suggested that the Berwick issue could be dealt with by establishing a linkage between the licensing district of a taxi driver operating as a PHV and that of the PHV operator for which he or she is working.
12. Other witnesses took the view that the two principal Acts needed to be radically overhauled or replaced altogether. James Button, the author of a textbook on taxi law, said:
The existing law is not fit for purpose. The Town Police Clauses Act 1847 predates motor vehicles and telephones; the Local Govern- ment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 predates mobile telephones and the internet. Modern systems are not covered; busi- ness finds it constrictive, preventing business expansion; the public (the users) are confused; and ultimately, the purpose of licensing of hackney carriages and private hire vehicles, which is to protect pub- lic safety, can be thwarted.
Liverpool City Council explained how the use of GPS technology by PHV operators enabled them to “control hundreds, even thousands, of vehicles efficiently by identifying a vehicle which is near to a booking request and dispatching that vehicle via a computer terminal located in each vehicle”. The National Private Hire Association made a similar point about how modern technology had outpaced the terms of the legislation and argued that it did not want “to spend the next 20 or 30 years wasting time and costs in the Administrative Court trying to make sense” of the 1976 Act. Similar sentiments have been expressed by judges who have heard cases brought under the 1976 Act in particular.
13. The Minister, Norman Baker MP, conceded that taxi legislation was “complicated”, “archaic” and had “been built on, higgledy-piggledy, over the years”. He also drew our attention to another flaw in the 1976 Act, fol- lowing a finding of the district auditor in respect of Guildford Borough Council that fees for drivers’ and operators’ licences cannot legally cover enforcement activity. Mr Baker told us that he had asked the Law Com- mission to consider looking at the legislation and that, if this suggestion was accepted, the Commission might report back “with an idea of what we might sensibly do” within 12 to 18 months.
14. In our view, the case for a thorough overhaul of the legis- lation relating to taxis and private hire vehicles is irresistible. The legislation relating to taxis is hopelessly out of date, with its refer- ences to horse-drawn vehicles, “stage coaches” and the regulation of the “placing of cheek strings to the carriages”. Both principal Acts take no account of modern developments, such as the widespread use of mobile telephones and the internet, which have transformed the interaction between customers and operators and eroded the traditional distinction between taxis and private hire vehicles. The proliferation of case law to resolve ambiguities in the legislation demands Government attention.
15. It remains to be seen whether the Law Commission will wish to take up the Government’s suggestion that it study taxi and PHV legislation. How- ever, we are concerned that in referring the issue to the Commission the
AUGUST 2011 PHTM
Government has not properly appreciated the pressing need to reform leg- islation which is proving increasingly contentious and hard to implement effectively. Nor are we persuaded that the Commission is the right body to look at the law in an area where the policy context is so sensitive. As our inquiry has shown, there are plenty of ideas circulating for reforming the legislation and numerous suggestions of how taxis and private hire vehi- cles should be organised. We recommend that, instead of referring reform of taxi and PHV legislation to the Law Commission, the Government should engage with the trade, local authorities and users about the objectives of future legislation on taxis and private hire vehicles and commit to overhaul that legisla- tion during the course of this Parliament. Once these objectives are decided, the detailed work to frame legislation and guide it through Parliament should begin. This need not involve primary legislation: we consider that the swifter leg- islative reform order procedure could be used in this case.
2 PRINCIPLES TO UNDERPIN NEW LEGISLATION
16. In this chapter we set out the three broad principles which we think should underpin new legislation on taxis and PHVs.
Listen to users
17. We were struck during our inquiry by how difficult it is to find out what users of taxis and PHVs want from these services or whether they have been inconvenienced by the cross-border issues raised by some witness- es. We received little evidence from the consumer perspective. Although the National Association of Taxi Users (NATU) gave oral evidence, and argued that users were “confused” by the distinction between taxis and PHVs, it is a new organisation which has yet to build up a substantial membership.
18. The absence of a consumer voice in the debate about taxi and PHV legislation puts an additional onus on the Government to ensure that users’ interests are reflected in decisions about reform. We recommend that, in developing proposals for changing the legislation applying to taxis and PHVs, the Government should commission authoritative research into consumers’ opinions. Particular attention should be paid to the views of vulnerable groups, such as disabled people, who are often most reliant on taxis and PHVs.
Keep it simple
19. Various views were expressed about whether or not it was still sensi- ble to maintain separate legal regimes for taxis and PHVs. In our view, there remains a clear distinction between the two types of service but we see little reason for them to be the subject of separate Acts, particularly given that many firms operate both taxis and PHVs in their fleets. We rec- ommend that Town Police Clauses Act 1847 and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 should be replaced by a single Act or legislative reform order, covering both taxis and PHVs. The distinction between taxi and PHV services could be maintained by providing for two types of vehicle licence under the Act. The separate legislation for PHVs in London and Plymouth should be maintained only if there are specific local justifications for doing so.
Keep it local Local transport plans
20. The Minister told us that taxis and PHVs had a role to play in local transport plans, citing the importance of assisting people complete jour- neys from rail stations to their destinations in order to encourage a shift away from car usage. There was widespread agreement with this view. Philip Soderquest of Northumberland Council described taxis and PHVs as “a huge part of the local transport infrastructure” in the county. Howev- er, Damien Edwards of Liverpool City Council commented that taxis and PHVs had historically been the “poor relations” in transport planning and John Austin of NATU said “we found a number of LTPs which regard taxis and private hire as part of the public transport system and to be planned and taken account of accordingly: others do not”.
21. Although some local transport plans include taxis and PHVs, others do not. The Department’s guidance on local transport plans makes no men- tions of taxis or PHVs, save to suggest that local firms should be consulted when such plans are drawn up. The guidance provided on the licensing of taxis and PHVs goes no further than to suggest some issues relating to these services which local transport plans could contain. We recom- mend that the Government provide clearer guidance to local authorities on how taxis and PHVs should be included in local transport plans.
PAGE 75
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
