TRANSPORT FOR GTR MANCHESTER AIMS TO BAN VEHICLES LICENSED ELSEWHERE!
The extremely hot topic of crossborder working has hit the press again, the latest push being from TfGM. Let’s take a look! NPHTA comments in italics.
The Manchester Evening News reports that TfGM will ask the government about further devolution to introduce new regulations enforcing a ban on any vehicle that is not licensed by one of the ten Greater Manchester councils.
Devolution actually means reducing the number of councils, amalgamating the ten councils into one single licensing authority, is this what we are discussing here? The three- licence, or triple lock rule does not allow for a collection of councils or licensing authorities, it states clearly that all three licences, (operator, driver, and vehicle) must be issued by the same single local authority.
To clarify, you cannot ban some vehicles which are not licensed by Manchester City Council, but allow others, you must either ban all…or none, it really is that simple.
The ten local authorities have been looking to introduce minimum licensing standards for all taxis and private hire vehicles, drivers, and operators in all ten boroughs.
We suspect that this is a mere stepping stone towards becoming one single authority, doing away with the current list of GM councils: Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford, and Wigan, making them one - which may adopt the name of TfGM or GMCA, who knows, but all controlled by the mayor.
In fact, there will be a DfT consultation released shortly which discusses this very topic, entitled “Levelling Up” which looks to reduce the number of local authorities from the current figure of over 300, down to just 80 “regional” licensing authorities - one to watch out for!
TfGM claims that banning out-of-area private hire bookings would help councils control pollution levels locally and keep the air clean. It argues that such a move would give local authorities ‘stronger regulatory tools’ to improve the emission standards of taxis operating in the city-region. This approach will legally require that all private hire journeys within the Greater Manchester boundary must be undertaken by a driver and vehicle which are both licensed by one of the ten local authorities in the city-region.
Hmmm, a few issues with this one: firstly, such a move would do nothing to affect air pollution, since many local authorities are already Euro 6 compliant, or hybrid, which simply means they would not have been subject to the charges anyway.
Secondly, it’s not possible to ban any vehicle from entering the region, without having silly things like border control which would ban anyone from outside the region, not just taxis and PHVs. Can anyone see that happening at all?
Thirdly, there is no such thing as a ‘city-region’ it is either the ‘city’ of Manchester, or it is the ‘region’ of Greater Manchester.
26
Fourthly, it is completely impossible to make such a condi- tion, since any member of the public can ring whoever they choose for a trip. Can anyone see a ban on members of the public making a phone call to anyone of their choosing?
And finally, ‘legally’ any journey carried out by a PHV, must be dIspatched by an operator licensed by the same council, not region, single council, it cannot be a case that a passenger requests a trip from one operator, who then passes a job on to a vehicle licensed by another.
The draft document says: “As it stands, out-of-area operation enables the evasion of fair, safe and democratically deter- mined local licensing standards, which undermines public safety as well as local measures to progressively improve driver and vehicle standards.”
Sorry but it does nothing of the sort, it actually enables licensees to find a faster, more efficient, more reasonably priced and streamlined licensing process. Every council in the land has its own ‘democratically determined’ licensing stan- dards, all of which are specifically designed to enhance public safety, which are also reviewed regularly in order to improve driver and vehicle standards.
Manchester Evening News source:
bit.ly/3nB8pek
Maybe the ten councils within GM should review their fail- ings before pointing fingers and ask why licensees are moving to Wolverhampton and other local authorities. It has nothing to do with offences or lower standards, it has every- thing to do with efficiency, professional approach and cost offered by the licensing regimes in other regions.
One of the other reasons for such moves is quite simple, there is a nationwide shortage of drivers available to operators, which is further impacted by severe delays locally in process- ing applications. This leaves operators with no option other than to look elsewhere in order to efficiently run their businesses and provide a service to their customers.
Councils could learn a lot from this, find ways to improve their own procedures, encourage local drivers to come back to local authorities. The ball is in your court; how are YOU going to recover your lost drivers? How are YOU going to improve YOUR service?
Can a local authority dictate who the public calls for a journey? Not at all, but it would be fun to watch them try.
Can a local authority, or even a group of them, ban vehicles from entering their area? No, not under any act of legislation.
Would such a move improve air quality? No, since most other regions are already Euro 6 compliant anyway.
Watch Granada Reports on this subject, broadcast on 1st July - where NPHTA points out why this is nothing more than a red herring, a false flag, a diversion and is not going to happen anytime soon - by clicking here.
A hot topic indeed! - Dave Lawrie, Director NPHTA JULY 2022
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 |
Page 89 |
Page 90
