THE FUTURE OF
His initial response was that no election was ever won or lost on taxi and private hire licensing policy. Therefore, the lack of democratic control wider than that of the local electorate of the chosen Principal Authority would be of no significance. To his consider- able credit, he later amended his proposal during a presentation at PHTM Expo in May this year, to suggest that local authorities could send representatives to the Principal Authority to ensure that it represented, and was accountable to, the national electorate.
I am not sure how this would work in practice. If one representative was appointed by each district council, its number would be over 300. Even if the number of local authorities were reduced to 80, as has been proposed by the current Conservative government under so-called ‘Levelling up,’ that is still quite a sizeable body of presumably elected local councillors serving on a national committee tasked with formulation of a national licensing policy. I am not entirely convinced that this could all take place without any interference or intervention by central government, and without legislative change at national level and/or through devolved powers in Wales. Scotland does not have this cross-border problem to begin with. Would every local council agree to this? Could they be forced into it? By whom? Who chooses the local authority to assume the national role?
Even if it were possible (and, yes, I suppose it could happen without every single existing local authority signing up to it, in which case it would mean that the de-facto national body would be a patchwork affair with a lot of holes), it could not happen overnight. There would have to be a period of transition or evolution from local authority named after its locality to national body under another name, with the elected government in Westminster playing no role in the process whatsoever?
If a current contender for the role currently had, say, around 40,000 licensed drivers on its books, so to speak, if all councils agreed to Mr Button’s scheme, the chosen Principal Authority would then possibly be licensing around 350,000. Half that number would still be a significant increase in workload for one authority. I guess this would be feasible if all those councils eager to sign up formed an orderly queue in order for their admin staff and officers to receive appropriate training in the new administrative systems, policy and scheme of delegation.
62
Perhaps the Institute of Licensing could organise this training on their behalf. Members would likely benefit from a reduced rate.
ARE NATIONAL STANDARDS EVEN NECESSARY?
The advantages of uniformity of licensing standards across the country would obviously serve the interests of operators covering multiple licensing areas. This includes not just the peer-to-peer apps, but also other more traditional operators who happen to cover a large area comprising of more than one local authority.
It
would mean that they would not need to adapt to different requirements in different licensing areas.
Historically, some councils have attached some rather bizarre conditions or placed rather onerous arbitrary burdens upon their local trade. Examples have included colour restrictions on PHVs, a ban on dark glass behind the B-pillar (or just as bad, minimum light transmission requirements which diverge from Construction and Use legislation), the requirement to carry overalls in the boot of the car, but not engine oil (?) A couple of councils even attempted to require that social, domestic and pleasure use be removed from taxi or private hire insurance cover, even for licensed drivers. I know of one council that requires all licensed vehicles to meet a series of minimum internal measurement requirements, complete with diagrams.
However, much of this kind of nonsense can no longer be excused, thanks to a number of guidance docu- ments and papers issued by government and other respected bodies in recent years. The Regulators’ Code 2014 was ground-breaking in that it required councils to play a more supportive and consultative role with those whom they regulate, including the taxi and private hire trade. I suspect that a number of mean- spirited and egotistical licensing managers may have thrown this relatively short and easily understandable paper straight into the waste paper bin at the mere suggestion of having to be nice to us! Nevertheless, it is not a voluntary code. In its introduction it states:
This Code was laid before Parliament in accordance with section 23 of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 (“the Act”). Regulators whose functions are specified by order under section 24(2) of the Act must have regard to the Code when developing policies and operational procedures that guide their regulatory activities.
JULY 2024 PHTM
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
