TAXI & PH BILL OBSERVATIONS


This is not what is being stated here. The proposal is for a national standard for both sectors, not the elimination of one or the other.


l Be the final step in delivering on the commitment to legislate in response to Baroness Casey’s National Audit on Group-based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse. It will:


o Fix a fragmented system that has not always protected passengers as it should.


We will be suggesting that “and drivers” is added here.


l Strengthen public safety and accountability by setting clear requirements for obtaining and holding licences.


l Improve the efficiency of licensing and the use of strong, consistent enforcement powers, with funding for enforcement matched to where services are delivered.


Many people will have heard me repeatedly state that national standards aimed only at drivers, vehicles, and operators - without also regulating efficiency, processing times, and fees for local or unitary authorities - will do little to end or reduce licence shopping, because that is not what “shopping” actually means in practice. It would appear this issue is now being recognised.


We have already seen proposed amendments suggesting national powers to suspend licences with immediate effect for 48 hours, which raised nationwide concerns over who would fund such measures. Here we now see suggestions that funding will be implemented to cover those costs.


Baroness Casey was clear that inconsistent taxi and PHV licensing creates vulnerabilities that can be exploited by


grooming gangs. Reforming the


system is therefore considered essential to strengthen safeguarding and disrupt potential exploitation.


l Give regulators stronger enforcement powers so swift and effective action can be taken when drivers or operators breach licence conditions, helping to raise standards and tackle poor or unsafe practices.


l Improve transparency and information sharing nationwide by mandating the use of a national database of all licensed vehicles, drivers, and PHV operators, enabling licensing authorities to better


PHTM JUNE 2026


protect the public and giving passengers greater confidence in the system.


I must admit that I had previously misunderstood this issue in recent meetings, genuinely believing that “NR3” referred to a national register covering the three licence types. In fact, it does not. I therefore raised the question: why not, and could it not be expanded to do exactly that? Here we see that idea becoming part of the proposed new framework - excellent news.


l Deliver more accessible services for disabled passengers by strengthening existing protections and removing barriers to travel, helping to ensure that those who rely most heavily on taxis and PHVs are not left behind.


We can only hope this approach will be supported by matched funding, as such vehicles are extremely expensive to purchase and insure, while often experiencing little to no actual demand or use. We also hope that the comments made by Transport for All during the Transport Select Committee inquiry - specifically that “in rural areas, the supply should be proportionate” - are properly considered.


We have published several articles on this topic over the years, explaining why there is no justification for 100% wheelchair-accessible vehicle (WAV) policies.


l Provide a consistent customer experience wherever people travel, so passengers can expect safe, reliable, and properly regulated services whether travelling locally or across local authority boundaries.


In honesty, this effectively means “no major change”, as this is already largely the case. Policies and conditions are already reasonably aligned, with only minor local adjustments permitted under the relevant sections of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 to cater for regional differences.


l Support a thriving, professional sector by creating clearer rules to enable fair competition while supporting the wider economy - from the night- time economy to shift workers and local businesses.


This section echoes the Regulators’ Code 2014, which states that regulators must support and encourage the development and growth of small businesses within their region.


7


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