ANNEX
Letter from the Clerk of the Committee
to the Head of Buses and Taxis Division,
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
The Deregulation Committee has begun its consideration
of the proposal for the Deregulation (Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles)
Order 1998. At its meeting on 16 December, the Committee expressed
concern over a number of aspects of the proposal.
Although it was acknowledged that by no means all
taxis and buses were currently accessible for disabled passengers,
and indeed some private hire vehicles were accessible, it was
noted that the proposed Order could have implications for disabled
passengers. The Explanatory Memorandum notes that the Government
intends to introduce regulations under the disability Discrimination
Act 1995 to require taxis to conform to prescribed accessibility
standards. There was no suggestion that such requirements would
apply to private hire vehicles. It would therefore appear that
by allowing the provision of substitute rail services by private
hire vehicles the proposed Order could undermine the protection
for disabled passengers that would otherwise be introduced by
regulations under the 1995 Act.
The Committee therefore wish to know what guarantees
there would be that accessible transport would be provided for
disabled passengers in the event of an interruption or discontinuation
of their rail service, and also whether any such guarantees are
currently provided by rail companies.
The Committee expressed surprise that there was no
consultation undertaken with organisations specifically representing
the disabled. The issue of provision for disabled passengers
was raised by a number of the consultees, and it was argued that
such organisations should have been approached. The Committee
would like to know why these organisations were not consulted.
The Committee questioned who would benefit from the
removal of a burden under the proposed Order. The Explanatory
Memorandum states that the proposed Order would remove a burden
from the companies that provide train services because it would
enable them to utilise the services of private hire vehicle companies.
On this specific point, the Committee would like to know whether
rail companies do at present have difficulty in providing a substitute
service for their passengers when necessary without the option
of using private hire vehicles. They wished to know whether representations
have been received stating that provision of cover by licensed
taxis was ever unable to meet demand. A number of consultees
stated that this was not the case.
The proposed Order also raises questions about the
necessary protection for rail passengers arising out of the relative
safety of taxis and licensed private hire vehicles. The Explanatory
Memorandum stresses that licensing authorities are able to obtain
the criminal records of applicants for licences for both taxis
and private hire vehicles, and as a result there is no reason
why the public should be any less safe travelling with a licensed
private hire vehicle driver. The Committee would like to know
whether there are differences between the requirements for applicants
for taxi and private hire vehicle licences.
The Committee also wish to know what assessment has
been made of the potential for abuse of the new provisions resulting
in rail passengers being carried by unlicensed drivers when rail
services are discontinued or interrupted. The Transport and General
Workers Union argued that private hire companies frequently employed
unlicensed drivers and unlicensed vehicles on contracts. They
believed that the proposed Order would increase the risk of rail
passengers being driven by such drivers or in such vehicles.
The Explanatory Memorandum also notes that local licensing authorities
are responsible for inspecting licensed taxis and licensed private
hire vehicles to ensure standards of maintenance.
It was unclear to the Committee whether the standards required
for both categories are the same and also whether regulations
relating to the maintenance of the vehicle vary across the country.
The Committee would also like to make certain that the insurance
requirements relating to the carriage of passengers are the same
for drivers of licensed taxis and licensed private hire vehicles.
The proposed Order only applies to areas where private
hire vehicles are licensed. The Committee wishes to know which
local authorities outside London do not license private hire vehicles.
As has been mentioned, a number of the points raised
above were noted by individuals and organisations who responded
to the consultation exercise expressing opposition to the proposed
Order.
The Committee resolved at its meeting on 16 December
that it would raise the points of concern listed above, and that
they would then decide on whether it was necessary to take oral
evidence on the basis of the response.
17 December 1997
| 
