Session 2007/2008

First Report

Purpose

1. This report sets out the Committee for the Environment’s consideration of the Taxis Bill.

Key Issues

2. The introduction of the Taxis Bill was welcomed by the Committee. The Committee considered that the key issues relating to the Bill were:

• Enforcement
• Disability Issues
• Criminal Records Checks
• Training
• Taxi Sharing Scheme
• Taxi Marshals
• Taxi Plates
• Role of Consumer Council
• Informal Appeals Mechanism
• Role of Traffic Attendants
• Fees
• Taxi Touts
• Funeral Cars

3. Members sought a balanced range of views as part of their deliberations on the Taxis Bill and requested evidence from interested organisations and individuals as well as officials from the DOE. The views of the Consumer Council were also sought on the potential impact of the Bill on consumers.

Enforcement

4. A recurring issue of concern to members was enforcement. The Committee heard evidence from taxi drivers and taxi organisations that there was a need for greater levels of enforcement and a need for more resources. The Committee took oral evidence from enforcement officials at the meeting on 18 October and welcomed the news that a bid had been made for more enforcement officers. However, the Committee still had serious concerns about the effectiveness of the current team. The Committee made a recommendation on enforcement, see page 4, paragraph 1.

Disability Issues

5. The Committee took evidence from the Inclusive Mobility Transport Advisory Committee (IMTAC) at its meeting on 27 September and from Disability Action at the meeting on 11 October. Members were concerned to hear about the extreme problems that disabled people had experienced using taxis and to hear that there were real concerns about vehicle standards for wheelchair accessible taxis. The Committee made a recommendation on disability issues see page 4, paragraph 2.

Criminal Records Checks

6. Members were concerned to hear that criminal records checks carried out by the Department did not extend to the Republic of Ireland or to foreign nationals. The Committee felt that it was not sufficient for the Department to merely state that it would only give a licence to someone that it considered to be a fit and proper person and felt that the procedures relating to repute and criminal records checks needed to be tightened. The Committee made a recommendation on criminal records checks, see page 4, paragraph 3.

Training

7. The Committee was fully supportive of the Department’s intention to introduce training for all taxi drivers but were concerned that some drivers of lower educational standards, who may have been taxi drivers for many years, may suffer as a result.

Taxi Sharing Scheme

8. The Committee was generally supportive of the idea of a taxi sharing scheme but was concerned about the workings of such a scheme and how it could be enforced. One member, Mr Clarke, was against the proposals for taxi sharing.

Taxi Marshals

9. Members were concerned about the role of taxi marshals and their possible powers and felt that more thought needed to be given to how this would work on the ground. It was felt that there was an overlap between any potential enforcement powers that they may, or may not, have and the role and powers of enforcement officers and there was a lack of clarity on what the role of a marshal may be in certain circumstances.

Taxi Plates

10. The Committee was concerned to hear evidence from taxi drivers that it could take up to 6 weeks for the issuing of taxi licence plates when a driver changes vehicles. This meant that drivers were unable to work and lost income as a result. The Committee made a recommendation on taxi plates, see page 4, paragraph 4.

Consumer Council Role

11. The Committee took evidence from the Consumer Council who argued that their role should be embedded within the legislation. The Committee agreed with the Consumer Council’s views and asked that the Department provide a greater role for the Consumer Council within the Bill.

Informal Appeals Mechanism

12. The Committee was concerned that there was no informal appeals mechanism in relation to issuing of licenses for drivers and operators. The Committee suggested an amendment to provide for an informal appeals mechanism and the Department agreed to this.

Role of Traffic Attendants

13. The Committee thought that it would be useful for attendants to enforce any parking infringements by taxis at ranks or elsewhere.

Fees

14. The Department wanted to have the potential within the Bill to charge fees in respect of appeals to the Department. Members felt that as taxi drivers were going to be burdened with compliance costs it would be unfair to ask them to pay for appeals in the future. Members did not agree to this proposed amendment by the Department and the Department agreed to withdraw it.

Taxi Touts

15. The Committee was concerned about the definition of taxi touts and sought clarification from Departmental officials. The officials explained that it was trying to set a wide net for the offence of taxi touting but that it needed an exemption for taxi marshals. The Committee was satisfied with the Department’s response on this issue.

Funeral Cars

16. The Committee noted that the National Association of Funeral Directors (NAFD), had requested an exemption from the Taxis Bill. The Committee was content with the Department’s response that traditionally in Northern Ireland, funeral cars have been regarded as public service vehicles and have been licensed as taxis. They are granted many exemptions from certain requirements, such as those for signage and taximeters. The Committee noted that should a strong case be made by NAFD in favour of a complete exemption either now or in the future provision can be made for this by subordinate regulation.

Enabling powers

17. The Committee noted that the Bill would introduce enabling powers to make regulations in a number of areas such as the hiring of taxis at separate fares, the regulation of taxis, taxi operator’s licenses and enforcement. The Committee looks forward to receiving the policy proposals for these regulations in due course, which will be subject to Committee scrutiny.

Recommendations

Enforcement

1. The Committee heard evidence from individual taxi drivers and taxi organisations that resources for the team of enforcement officers were inadequate to allow them to police an industry of 11,000 taxis. The Committee recommends that the Department increases the team of enforcement officers as soon as possible and provides them with the resources necessary to carry out their duties.

Disability Issues

2. The Committee heard evidence from the Inclusive Mobility Transport Advisory Committee (IMTAC) and Disability Action that disabled people were being discriminated against in terms of extra charges for carrying luggage and extra charges for waiting the few extra minutes that a disabled person may need to get into the taxi; Taxi drivers complain that walking aids have scraped paintwork on cars; refusal of some drivers to move seats to give extra leg room; difficulty with storage of mobility enhancements, such as crutches; and extra charges for guide dogs for the blind, or, as is more often the case in Northern Ireland, refusal to transport them. The Committee is extremely concerned at this evidence and recommends that the Department engages urgently with IMTAC, Disability Action and representatives of the Taxi Industry to address these issues.

Criminal Records Checks

3. The Committee was concerned to hear that criminal records checks on licence applicants do not extend to the Republic of Ireland or foreign nationals. The Department confirmed to the Committee that it would review the current driver licensing regulations when it comes to implementing the Taxis Bill. The Committee recommends that the Department review this as soon as possible and extend the criminal records checks to the Republic of Ireland and foreign nationals.

Taxi Plates

4. The Committee heard evidence from taxi drivers that it could take up to 6 weeks for the issuing of taxi licence plates when a driver changes vehicles. This meant that drivers were unable to work and lost income as a result. The Committee recommends that a fast track system is introduced for the issuing of taxi licence plates to ensure that a driver is not prevented from working any longer than is necessary.

Introduction

5. The Taxis Bill (NIA 4/07) (the Bill) was referred to the Committee for the Environment for consideration in accordance with Standing Order 31(1) on completion of the Second Stage of the Bill on 26 June 2007.
6. The Minister of the Environment (the Minister) made the following statement under section 9 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998:

“In my view the Taxis Bill would be within the legislative competence of the Northern Ireland Assembly.”

7. The Bill proposes a new legal framework for the regulation of taxis and taxi services. It covers the licensing of taxi operators, drivers and vehicles, fares and taximeters, hiring of taxis at separate fares, enforcement and penalties.
8. During the period covered by this Report, the Committee considered the Bill and related issues at 17 meetings - on 24 and 31 May 2007; 7, 14, 21 and 28 June 2007; 5 July 2007; 6, 20 and 27 September; 4, 11, 18, and 23 October; 8, 15 and 22 November. The relevant extracts from the Minutes of Proceedings for these meetings are included at Appendix 1.
9. The Committee had before it the Taxis Bill (NIA 4/07) and the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum that accompanied the Bill.
10. On referral of the Bill to the Committee after Second Stage, the Committee inserted advertisements on 29 June 2007 in the Belfast Telegraph, Belfast Telegraph North West edition, Irish News and News Letter seeking written evidence on the Bill.
11. A total of 18 organisations/individuals responded to the request for written evidence and a copy of the submissions received by the Committee is included at Appendix 3.
12. The Committee was first briefed by officials about the consultation stages and policy development of the Taxis Bill on 24 May 2007 and took evidence on the Bill from Departmental officials on 31 May, 7 and 28 June 2007; Mr Samuel Egerton, the West Belfast Taxi Association and Mr Robert McAlister on 13 September 2007; North West Taxi Proprietors and the Consumer Council on 20 September; Inclusive Mobility and the Transport Advisory Committee, London Taxis International, T+G Section of Unite, the Transport and General Workers’ Union and Mr Anthony McCloskey from the George Belfast City Airport Taxi Rank on 27 September; Eamon Grogan and Raymond Dempster from the Accessible Taxi Association NI, Mr Terence Maguire, Mr William Black and Mr James McVeigh and Mr Brian Press, from the International Airport Taxi Co on 4 October; Mr Kevin Doherty, Disability Action and Departmental officials on 11, 18 and 23 October. The Minutes of Evidence are included at Appendix 2.
13. The Committee began its clause by clause scrutiny of the Bill on 18 October and concluded this on 8 November – see Appendix 2.

Extension of Committee stage of the Bill

14. On 17 September 2007, the Assembly agreed to extend the Committee Stage of the Bill to 7 December 2007.

Report on the Taxis Bill

15. At its meeting on 22 November, the Committee agreed its report on the Bill and agreed that it should be printed.

Consideration of the Bill by the Committee

16. The Bill has 6 Parts and 3 Schedules as follows -

• Part 1 on the regulation of taxi operators. This introduces the requirement for a taxi operator to apply for and obtain a taxi operator’s licence and imposes duties on licensed operators. It also introduces requirements and duties relating to the operation of taxi services at separate fares.
• Part 2 on the regulation of vehicles used to provide taxi services. This includes more flexible and extensive powers for the Department to set appropriate suitability requirements for vehicles, as regards their type, size and design. It also gives the Department powers to set the maximum rates and fares that can be charged for the hire of a taxi and to require all taxis to have taximeters and receipt printers.
• Part 3 on the regulation of drivers of taxis. It amends the existing legislation by reducing the period of a taxi-driver licence from 5 to3 years, bringing it into line with taxi-driver repute checks.
• Part 4 on licences: general provisions. This contains the general provisions for the licence that can be applied for and includes provisions relating to fees, applications, suspensions, revocations, curtailments and appeals.
• Part 5 on enforcement. This gives the police and Department powers to stop, search and seize vehicles believed to be taxiing illegally and to inspect premises under warrant where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person is operating an unlicensed taxi service.
• Part 6 on miscellaneous and general matters. This provides for a number of general issues relating to the operation of the Bill, including sharing information, payment of grants and the provision of training.
• Schedule 1 – entries to be inserted in the Road Traffic Offenders (Northern Ireland) Order 1996. This schedule lists the offences and penalties that will be included under the Bill.
• Schedule 2 – minor and consequential amendments
• Schedule 3 – repeals

17. 17. On 31 May, 7 and 28 June and 11 October 2007 the Committee took evidence from Departmental officials on the proposals for the Bill – see Appendix 2. At the evidence session on 31 May 2007, the Committee was advised that the Department had carried out a review of the taxi industry and undertaken a major consultation exercise in 2005. The areas of concern at that time were considered to be the extent of illegal taxi activity; inaccessibility by people with disabilities; the absence of requirements for the training and testing of drivers; under-provision of taxis at peak times; lack of a clear distinction between public and private-hire taxis and the regulation of fares. Members also asked officials about the introduction of a single tier system; enforcement; the regulation of stretch limousines and emission tests.
18. 18. On 7 June, the Committee took evidence from the Department on the consultation exercise it had carried out in 2006 on the proposed legislation and was advised that as a result of the initial consultation in 2005, the Department had changed a number of its proposals. These were 1) the introduction of taximeters with receipt printers would now be phased in; 2) there would be provision for exceptions to the general rule that drivers could only be affiliated to one operator as this could be restrictive especially in rural areas; 3) the annual re-issue of taxi plates would no longer be a requirement. The re-issuing of taxi plates will become an operational matter rather than a legislative one. Officials also advised that some of the issues raised by respondents as matters to be included in the Bill were already provided for in legislation such as the requirement for drivers to display identification. The Committee was also informed that were still some concerns about the possible removal of the two tier system. It was pointed out that although the Taxis Bill would allow for a one tier system, it did not rule out a two tier system. That would be a matter for consideration when the subordinate legislation was being drawn up.
19. The Committee noted the results of the equality impact assessment, the regulatory impact assessment and the rural proofing exercise. Members asked officials about the duration of taxi licences, the positioning of taxi ranks, the testing and training of taxi drivers and accessibility of taxis.
20. There was a further evidence session with Departmental officials on 28 June 2007, following Second Stage of the Bill on 26 June 2007, when the Committee was briefed on the main provisions of the Bill. Members asked officials about full cost recovery, enforcement, the revocation of licences, costs of PSV tests, the one tier system, accessibility issues and the delay in providing taxi licence plates.
21. On 11 October 2007, the Committee was briefed by the Department on a number of technical and consequential amendments to the Bill which the Minister intended to table at Consideration Stage - see Appendix 5. The Committee also took evidence from Departmental officials on enforcement issues.

Evidence from Mr Samuel Egerton, the West Belfast Taxi Association and Mr Robert McAllister on 13 September 2007

22. On 13 September 2007 the Committee took evidence from Mr Egerton, West Belfast Taxi Association and Mr McAlister - see Appendix 2. Mr Egerton advised that he had serious concerns about the Bill. These covered a number of aspects including the impact of the regulations on single operators particularly in relation to costs; the abolition of the two tier system and the estimated knock-on effect on jobs; problems with enforcement and inadequate taxi ranks. Mr Egerton was also asked about the concerns set out in his written submission to the Committee (see Appendix 3), in relation to the appeals procedure set out in clause 34 and his views that there should be some intermediate system before a referral to court.
23. The West Belfast Taxi Association advised that it recognised the need for the Bill and was a key stakeholder in the consultation that led to its development. It listed a number of concerns which it had about the Bill and suggested amendments to some of the clauses. These included the impact on fares of increased regulatory demands; that there should be a requirement for a check of drivers against the sex offenders register; holders of existing operator licences should not be required to obtain new licences; that applications for additional taxi-sharing schemes, where these already existed, must demonstrate the need for such a scheme; the legislation should provide that there should be no differential in the application of taxi charges irrespective of able bodied or non-able bodied usage and there should be provisions in relation to child safety. The Association advised the Committee that it agreed in principle with the one-tier system for all and considered that the issue of training, which was currently undergoing consultation, should be addressed once this had been completed.
24. Mr McAllister set out his concerns that the proposals would allow private-hire taxis which were not wheel chair accessible to pick up members of the public who had not pre-booked. He advised the Committee that he considered that there were too many taxis in Belfast, not enough public-hire taxi ranks and too few enforcement officers. In his view a one tier system for Belfast would be wrong. It would exacerbate the over abundance of taxis, lead to further reductions in earnings and reduce the availability of wheelchair accessible taxis.

Evidence from North West Taxi Proprietors and the Consumer Council on 20 September 2007

25. The Committee took evidence from North West Taxi Proprietors and the Consumer Council on 20 September 2007 – see Appendix 2. The North West Taxi Proprietors stated that in principle they agreed with almost all of the content of the Bill and welcomed the proposals to introduce operator licences. They considered that as well as setting a maximum fare, the Department should also set a minimum fare and agreed that all taxis should have a taximeter. They pointed out that cost would be an issue with a number of the proposals such as training, accessibility for older people and people with disabilities and this was of concern. In addition, they called for additional information on the costs of the proposals for taxi drivers, a time frame for the implementation of the changes from the Department, a new enforcement strategy and detail on designated areas.
26. The Consumer Council advised that it strongly supported the key objectives of the Bill. Research which it had carried out indicated that consumers had real concerns about charging and that there was a lack of consumer knowledge about rights and protection. The Consumer Council wished to see a more passenger-focused system with accessibility, availability and affordability. It welcomed the reference in the Bill to the need for the Department to take into account any recommendations made by the Council in authorising separate fares and suggested that the Bill should also require the Department to consult the Council on fare setting, passenger information, accessibility standards and the handling of passenger complaints. The proposals in relation to training were welcomed and the Council advised that enforcement was central to the success of the Bill.

Evidence from Inclusive Mobility and the Transport Advisory Committee, London Taxis International and Mr Sean Smyth T+G Section of Unite, the Transport and General Workers’ Union and Mr Anthony McCloskey from the George Belfast City Airport Taxi Rank on September 27 2007

27. The Committee took evidence from these groups at its meeting on 27 September 2007 – see Appendix 2.
28. The Inclusive Mobility and the Transport Advisory Committee (IMTAC) advised the Committee that taxis provided a key service for disabled people. However, disabled people had experienced extreme problems in using taxis, there was a lack of availability of accessible taxis when disabled people wanted to travel and there was evidence of extreme discrimination in relation to charging. It broadly supported the Bill and felt that the Department had come up with a balanced approach to the requirements of taxi users and operators. In particular, IMTAC supported operator licensing, the proposals in relation to setting a maximum fare, taximeters and driver training. IMTAC informed members that they also had real concerns about vehicle standards and vehicle safety and pointed out that while the focus tended to be on wheelchair users, standards of vehicle accessibility were required for a broad range of people. There were also concerns about the lack of accessible vehicles outside Belfast and in rural areas.
29. The Committee also took oral evidence from London Taxis International (LTI) and Mr Sean Smyth, T+G Section of Unite, on 27 September 2007. Mr Smyth advised the Committee that Unite had serious concerns about certain issues. These included the proposed changes in the way in which public-hire taxis would operate in Belfast. Unite considered that these would be to the detriment of the public-hire taxi drivers and would lower the number of accessible taxis in the city. There were also concerns about the delay in the issuing of plates as vehicles cannot operate without plates and this could mean that a driver could be unable to work for some weeks. Mr Smyth informed the Committee that although Unite supported the proposals in relation to taximeters it did not support the setting of a maximum fare and considered that it would be better to have a uniform, single rate that would vary at different times of the day. Fares should be set via negotiations involving the Department and the Consumer Council and the PSNI should have full enforcement rights on taxi legislation. London Taxis International advised that it supported the training of drivers and recognised that there was a need for better standards for taxis. However they had serious concerns about the impact of the Bill in Newry, Cookstown, Enniskillen, Armagh and Belfast. If private–hire taxis were permitted to pick up on the street, that would have a dramatic impact on drivers’ incomes. LTI suggested two amendments to clause 20 which it felt would secure the provision of disabled-accessible vehicles that could be hired on the street and the provision of non-accessible taxis that can operate a pre-booking service.
30. Oral evidence was then heard from the Transport and General Workers’ Union. The Union raised concerns about the effect that it considered the introduction of a one-tier system in Belfast would have on drivers’ incomes and advised the Committee that there were insufficient taxi ranks in the city which affected the ability of drivers to increase their income. The Union also felt that the proposals in the Taxis Bill would decrease the number of accessible taxis in Belfast. The Union pointed out that it did not know what the Department might charge for the proposed taxi driver test; it also had concerns about the use of taximeters and considered that the introduction of a maximum fare would cause chaos. Another area which the Union felt should be given further consideration by the Department was the introduction of guidance for taxi drivers setting out the various rules and regulations.
31. The last person to give oral evidence on 27 September 2007 was Mr McCloskey from the George Best Belfast City Airport Taxi Rank. He advised that his group supported the one-tier system as long as it included wheelchair-accessible taxis. It considered that all taxis should have meters and that a maximum fare should be set at the highest possible rate. It also felt that getting a licence should involve going on a four or five day training course which would include a driving test, aptitude and knowledge tests and IMTAC training. In relation to enforcement, the group considered that the enforcement powers should be extended to the Belfast Harbour police as the airport was part of the harbour estate. Finally, Mr McCloskey suggested an amendment to the Bill which would provide for a zone in Belfast in which the only type of taxi that would be allowed to ply for hire would be an accessible vehicle.

Evidence from Accessible Taxi Association Northern Ireland, Mr Terence Maguire, Mr William Black and International Airport Taxi Co Ltd on 4 October 2007

32. The Committee took oral evidence from these groups on 4 October 2007. The Accessible Taxi Association NI (the Association) advised the Committee that Association drivers are sole traders and that the Bill would place an extra burden on them as they would each, for example, have to pay for an operator’s licence. It also had concerns about the requirements that those holding an operator’s licence would need to keep records, as this would mean that drivers who could not read or write would not be able to meet the required standards. The Association informed the Committee that it had previously been told by the Department that Belfast public-hire taxis would be exempt from having to hold such a licence but that no such exemption was provided for in the Bill. It proposed that the Bill should be amended to provide for such an exemption. In addition the Association was opposed to a one-tier system as this would allow all drivers to pick up on the street and therefore put public-hire taxis at a distinct disadvantage. The Association would therefore like the two-tier system to be retained. Other issues of concern to the Association were the proposals in relation to designated areas, training for drivers as this may pose problems for drivers with literacy difficulties and problems with enforcement.
33. The Committee then heard from Mr Trevor Maguire. He raised concerns about the lack of taxi ranks in Belfast and about the problems which he felt would be created for taxi depots if people were permitted to hail private-hire taxis in the street. He advised the Committee that a one-tier system would be unfair to public-hire taxi drivers and that all taxis in Northern Ireland should be wheelchair accessible. Mr Maguire also raised concerns about enforcement and suggested that this should be a matter for local councils.
34. Mr William Black then gave evidence to the Committee. He advised the Committee that he considered that the proposal to classify all vehicles, including hackney cabs public and private-hire vehicles, as taxis was confusing and did not reflect what was happening elsewhere in the United Kingdom. He also stated that he felt that if the two-tier system was not kept in Belfast it would mean fewer accessible taxis available for hire and pointed out that the Department had advised the Committee that respondents to the consultation exercise had narrowly preferred the two-tier system. In addition he outlined concerns about possible loss of revenue and increased costs which could arise because of receipt printers, meters, training courses, the operator’s licence and PSV tests.
35. The last group to give evidence on 4 October 2007 was the International Airport Taxi Company Ltd. The Company advised the Committee that in addition to the two-tier system there was also a third tier of public and private hire outside Belfast and drivers could operate from a taxi rank, through a depot or by mobile phone. He also drew the Committee’s attention to the overheads which could arise as a result of the legislation. The Company considered that the proposal, that all taxis working from a taxi rank would have to be wheelchair accessible, would put them at a disadvantage and would affect small country areas such as villages and towns. The Committee was advised that the Company had received a letter from the Department stating, inter alia, that the passing of the Taxis Bill would not automatically mean that all airport taxis would have to become accessible nor would the way that taxis are presently operated by immediately affected. Finally, it pointed out that it had a robust complaints system and strict disciplinary code in place and these were lacking in some other parts of the industry.

Evidence from Mr Kevin Doherty, Disability Action on 11 October 2007

36. The Committee took evidence from Disability Action on 11 October 2007. Mr Doherty advised the Committee that disabled people often relied on taxis as their only means of mobility but attitudes, safety, charging, inaccessibility of information and lack of communication made journeys dangerous, uncomfortable and overly expensive. He outlined in some detail the problems which people with disabilities experienced in using taxis and proposed amendments to a number of clauses. These were to clause 2(5) to include a reference to the number or percentage of taxis which should reach an agreed level of accessibility; clause 3(2) which should contain provision that licensed operators should be required to have a designated SMS number, text or other device that would enable deaf people to access the booking system; clause 3(9) which should provide for accessible complaints methods for disabled users; clause 13(3)(a)(ii) should include accessibility as a condition for grating a taxi licence; exorbitant fares charged to disabled people should be challenged by clause 16(1)(b); the highest penalties for overcharging should be imposed under clause 16(3) and a further clause should be added regarding the carriage of assistance animals.

Evidence from the Department of the Environment on 11 October

37. The Committee took evidence from the DOE Enforcement Officers on 11 October 2007. The officials gave an outline of the utilisation of additional resources that had been made available to the DVTA enforcement team via an increase in taxi-licensing fees in 2003. The officials described the role of an enforcement officer, methods of operation and gave statistics of operations carried out and penalties awarded. They then described how best to approach the current problems that exist by the industry, including the training of officials, education of drivers and operators, and increased awareness within the general public. They advised that a DVA restructure of the enforcement section had taken place, resulting in an increase in the taxi enforcement team. It was acknowledged that existing staff numbers are insufficient and that more are to be recruited when the Bill comes into effect.

Evidence from the Department of the Environment on 11 October

38. The Committee took evidence from Departmental officials at the meeting on 11 October in relation to the technical amendments to the Bill. Members sought clarification on the amendment to clause 42 and the offence of taxi touting. Members also sought further clarification on the proposed role for taxi marshals and their functions. The Committee asked for further information in relation to the proposed amendment to clause 53 dealing with taxi bye laws, and members wished to know if the bye laws covered all of Northern Ireland or only council areas.

Proposed Departmental Technical Amendments

39. The Committee discussed the proposed list of Departmental technical amendments at the meeting on 11 October. These amendments were described by the Department as minor drafting amendments which did not involve any policy changes. A copy of these amendments is attached at Appendix 5. The Committee sought clarification on amendment number 6 but was content with the other technical amendments.

Evidence from the Department of the Environment on 18 October 2007

40. The Committee took evidence from Departmental officials at the meeting on 18 October. Officials briefed the Committee on clauses 1-21 of the Bill and answered members’ queries. The officials answered members’ queries on operator’s licences, training, an informal appeal mechanism, the role of the Consumer Council, the hiring of taxis at separate fares, a taxi sharing scheme, enforcement, taxi plates, maximum fares, taxi marshals and traffic attendants.

Evidence from Department of the Environment on 23 October 2007

41. The Committee took evidence from Departmental officials at the meeting on 23 October. Officials briefed the Committee on clauses 22-58 of the Bill and answered members’ queries. The officials answered members’ queries on criminal records checks, compliance costs, enforcement, taxi touting, taxi marshals, convictions, zoning and the Consumer Council’s role.

Key Issues

42. Having considered the oral and written evidence from the interested individuals and organisations the Committee identified a number of key issues on which further advice was sought from the Department. These were:

Enforcement

Witnesses:

Mr Bill Laverty Mrs Adele Watters

(Department of the Environment)

1. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): The Taxis Bill will be introduced on 11 June, and Second Stage will take place on 25 June. If it is successful at Second Stage, its Committee Stage will begin.

2. We welcome Adele Watters and Bill Laverty from the Department of the Environment. Adele, you will brief us on the Bill, and I believe that next week you will come back to talk to us about the consultation process. Is that correct?

3. Mrs Adele Watters (Department of the Environment): Yes, it is. Thank you, and good morning, Chairman and members. Today I will discuss the slides that members will find in their briefing packs.

4. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to address the Committee again on the Taxis Bill, on which it is carrying out pre-legislative scrutiny. We have been asked to address the Department’s 2005 policy consultation. I understand that copies of the report on the outcome of that consultation are also in members’ packs.

5. I wish to cover three areas. First, I will give the context of the review in order that members may appreciate the outcome of the consultation. It will be useful if I explain briefly how taxis are currently regulated, particularly the two-tier licensing system. Secondly, I will set out the main problems relating to taxi regulation that the policies are intended to address. Thirdly, I will outline the main policy proposals that we consulted on in 2005 and summarise the main responses that we received. I will try to be brief. We will be happy to answer questions, and if there are any questions that we cannot answer today, we will return to them next week when we discuss the 2006 legislative consultation.

6. The slide headed “Taxi Licensing Structure” reduces a lot of complicated information into a relatively simple table. It makes it clear that there are two tiers in the current taxi licensing system: a public-hire tier and a private-hire tier. Essentially, public-hire taxis can do all types of taxi work. They can pick up people at taxi ranks; they can ply for trade on the streets; they can take bookings through a radio network; or they can do contract work. That is quite distinct from private-hire taxis, which can only operate on a pre-booked basis. To engage a private-hire taxi legally, the customer must make a booking by going into a depot or phoning, texting or emailing in advance. That is the broad distinction.

7. In the public-hire system, there are differences between the Belfast area and areas outside the city. Taxis licensed as Belfast public hire are seen, for example, outside the old Robinson and Cleaver building near the City Hall. There are approximately 400 of them in total. Many are London-style hackney cabs, although newer-style vehicles are now operating as well. They can do all types of work: accept bookings; fulfil contracts; stand at taxi ranks; or ply for hire. Although they are called Belfast public hire, as well as working in Belfast city centre, they can operate anywhere in Northern Ireland. However, they mainly operate in Belfast.

8. Taxis licensed as Belfast public hire must be accessible. By that, I mean that they must be accessible to wheelchairs, with a ramp and doors that are sufficiently wide and high to enable a wheelchair to be brought into the vehicle. The Department sets fares for Belfast public hire. Currently, those are the only fares regulated by the Department — fares for 400 vehicles out of an overall total of 10,500.

9. Taxis licensed as restricted public hire account for by far the biggest sector in the industry. These vehicles are typically seen in any town or city outside Belfast. Taxis licensed as Belfast public hire can be identified by yellow taxi licence plates, while those licensed as restricted public hire have white plates. There are between 7,000 and 7,500 restricted public-hire taxis in Northern Ireland; when the table in the members’ pack was prepared, there were 7,400. They can do all types of work outside Belfast, but if they want to operate in Belfast, they can only do so on a private-hire basis. That is because the restricted public-hire licence does not meet the standards required of Belfast public hire; generally speaking, taxis licensed as restricted public hire are not accessible, and the Department does not set their fares.

10. In Northern Ireland, there are just over 2,500 vehicles licensed as private hire, which means that they can only be used for pre-booked fares and contract work. Those vehicles are not permitted to stand or ply anywhere. Although the table states that they operate “anywhere”, that, in a sense, does not apply — such vehicles operate mainly in Belfast. To summarise, vehicles licensed as private hire must operate through advance bookings or contract work: they do not have to be accessible, and the Department does not set their fares.

11. The second slide outlines “Problems with Existing Taxi Regulation”. A number of the issues are fairly self-explanatory, such as the problem of too much illegal taxiing, by which we mean the use of vehicles that are unlicensed or uninsured or whose drivers are not licensed.

12. There is a lack of clear distinction between public-hire taxis and private-hire taxis. I have mentioned the different types of work that they are each permitted to do, but many of their features are similar — for example, they are both called taxis. Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK where what we call a “private-hire taxi” is allowed to be known as a taxi. Everywhere else in the UK, they are called private-hire vehicles to make it clear that they are distinct from the public-hire sector and are permitted only to do certain types of work.

13. Another confusing similarity is that, in Northern Ireland, both public-hire taxis and private-hire taxis can carry roof signs. Under many licensing authorities in the rest of the UK, private-hire vehicles are prohibited from carrying roof signs because that makes them look like public-hire taxis.

14. In Northern Ireland, many private-hire taxis have taximeters. The public-hire taxis in Belfast must have taximeters but, under some licensing authorities in the rest of the UK, private-hire vehicles are not allowed to have taximeters because that would make them look like public-hire taxis.

15. There is, therefore, a great blurring of the possible distinctions between the two types of taxis. That leads — along with a number of other factors — to vehicles licensed as private hire picking up people who do not have bookings. That is often termed as “p-uing” — picking up. P-uing has become increasingly difficult to prevent. Many people who wish to use taxis do not understand the distinction between public-hire taxis and private-hire vehicles. If they do understand that distinction, they do not care about it and they ignore it. People who are out for the night and want to get a taxi home do not care about whether they have a booking — they just want to get in. That means that the two-tier system, as it operates in Belfast, has become increasingly unsustainable. Also, now that people carry mobile phones, the distinction between booking a taxi in advance and immediately hiring one has all but disappeared.

16. Another problem is the lack of effective controls to address overcharging. I have mentioned that the Department regulates only a small proportion of taxi fares and, in the absence of fare regulation, it is difficult to assert a clear concept of overcharging. One could state that a person had been overcharged if he or she were charged more than the regulated fare. However when operators are free to set their own fares — as is mostly the case across Northern Ireland — and they can decide whether they want to charge extra at night, at weekends or on public holidays, it is difficult to address situations in which people feel that they have been overcharged.

17. A common complaint about the taxi industry in Northern Ireland is the lack of immediate-hire taxis at peak times. For example, in Belfast, there are around 400 taxis licensed as Belfast public hire. During peak times, such as at night and at weekends, when not all of those 400 taxis are operating, there is often a much bigger demand for the immediate hire of taxis. That is when vehicles licensed as private hire pick up much of the demand illegally.

18. I shall return to the issue of too few accessible taxis being available regardless of when disabled people want to travel. However, for the purposes of comparison, in the rest of the UK, about 50% of those vehicles equivalent to Northern Ireland’s public-hire taxis are accessible. Even with the size of the overall taxi and PHV fleet, it is an impressive number. At a generous estimate, only 10% of Northern Ireland’s public-hire taxis are accessible. Our accessibility rates are very low.

19. In Northern Ireland, there is no requirement for drivers to be trained or tested — the Department has no legislative powers to require that. Other problems stem from a lack of enforcement powers. For example, there is no power for Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA) enforcement officers to stop a private car that they believe to be taxiing illegally. They can only take such action if they are working with the police, who have the necessary powers.

20. There is also a lack of powers to enforce against taxi businesses. I described a situation with unlicensed vehicles and unlicensed drivers. Sometimes, these drivers operate alone — they are individuals who have cars and think that they will do some taxiing to pick up some easy money. However, an awful lot of illegal taxiing goes on under the auspices of what local people think are reputable firms. These firms have depots, and the cars operating from those depots have the company names all over them and carry roof signs. Some of the drivers may be legal and licensed and their vehicles may be legal and licensed, but quite a number will not be. At the moment, in the absence of operator licensing, the Department’s power to prosecute those firms is very limited. Operators walk away from the problems, with the attitude that the illegal behaviour is nothing to do with them and the Department should go after the drivers.

21. That was an overview of some of the extensive problems with the existing taxi-regulation system. Last week, I mentioned the key players in the taxi review. The information that members have received on taxi users is fairly self-explanatory.

22. Also last week, we discussed the number of different taxi associations in the taxi industry. It is useful to recognise that in the taxi industry, there are very strong divisions between the different sectors. The sectors comprise Belfast public hire; restricted public hire; private hire, which operates mostly in Belfast; and the west Belfast taxibuses, which are licensed as a form of private-hire taxi. Each of those sectors has its viewpoint on taxi regulation issues. It is important to realise that they all come with their own agendas and vested interests.

23. Members have been given copies of the ‘2005 Policy Consultation Report and Summary of Responses’. We did not include copies of the consultation document, because it is quite a weighty tome. However, we can provide members with copies, and the document is available on road safety division’s website — www.roadsafetyni.gov.uk. The consultation document sets out 50 proposals, which cover all aspects of taxi regulation. For the benefit of the Committee, I have highlighted 12 that pick up some of the key points.

24. When we were devising the policy proposals, we grappled with two particularly difficult issues. First, what structure should the licensing system have? Should we keep the two-tier system? At the moment, we do not think that it works very well, but can we keep it and fix it? Alternatively, should we move to a one-tier system where there is no longer a distinction between private hire and public hire? The second issue is what measures could be put in place to increase the number of accessible taxis? At the moment, expecting taxi drivers to supply accessible vehicles voluntarily is not delivering an acceptable number.

25. The Department proposed that a two-tier system should be retained, albeit revised to differentiate to a much greater extent between the two tiers of public hire and private hire. For example, we proposed that what are currently termed “private-hire taxis” be renamed “private-hire vehicles”. We also proposed that roof signs on private-hire vehicles be removed.

26. There is a feeling that taximeters are a positive feature and that, when private-hire operators choose to use them, we should not stop them. We, therefore, proposed that public-hire vehicles must have taximeters and that private-hire vehicles could have taximeters if their drivers or operators wished.

27. The second key proposal was that all new public-hire taxis that come into service from 2008 must be accessible and that, over a relatively long period, we would work towards all public-hire taxis being accessible. Unlike taxis, private-hire vehicles would not have to be accessible. We were concerned that if we raised the standard for taxis to the extent that they must all become accessible, many operators would choose to move from the public-hire sector to the private-hire sector. Therefore, we proposed powers that require taxi operators to ensure that a percentage of their private-hire vehicles be accessible. In a sense, that was a fallback measure, which we did not propose initially to implement.

28. We wanted to require all taxis, but not PHVs, to work to regulated fares, and to require all taxis to have taximeters, but allow PHVs the option to have them.

29. Another key proposal was that all taxi businesses must have an operator’s licence. We proposed that an exemption could potentially be allowed for operators, particularly sole operators, in the rank-and-hail sector — those who work from taxi ranks and who pick up passengers in the street.

30. We proposed that it be an offence for an operator to use unlicensed vehicles or drivers. We further proposed that all new drivers be required to pass a taxi-driving test and do job-relevant training, and that all drivers — including existing ones — be required to complete disability training.

31. I have already mentioned the proposal that roof signs be removed from PHVs. Enforcement officers will be given powers to stop cars that are suspected of being involved in unlicensed taxiing, and there will be tougher penalties for taxi-licensing offences.

32. I turn to the responses to the policy proposals. When we asked directly whether respondents would prefer a one-tier system or a two-tier system, the two-tier system was narrowly preferred if the alternative was that all taxis — public hire and private hire — must be accessible.

33. The accessibility proposals were, generally, opposed by the taxi industry. Its strong view was that people with disabilities do not need to use taxis because a lot of transport is specially provided for such people and, therefore, there is no need for any additional accessible vehicles.

34. On the other hand, section 75 groups, such as the Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee (Imtac) and the Equality Commission, were in favour of better provision for people with disabilities. However, they were concerned that a requirement for a 100% accessible public-hire taxi fleet would be too much of a burden on the taxi industry. As a result of the consultation, both the taxi industry and groups that represent people with disabilities asked whether we could come up with proposals on accessibility that form a unique Northern Ireland solution to that problem. I shall revisit that later.

35. Proposals on fare regulation were broadly supported. In fact, those who supported those proposals asked why — if they are such a good idea — apply them to public-hire taxis only. The view was expressed that those proposals should apply across the board to taxis and private-hire vehicles. Similarly, the proposals on taximeters were supported, but some respondents said that we had not gone far enough and that those proposals should apply across the board.

36. Operator licensing proposals were welcomed widely. Indeed, of all the proposals, almost everyone was keen on and signed up to operator licensing. However, concerns were expressed about costs.

37. There was strong support for the proposals on operator-licensing offences and for the Department’s being able to pursue operators who use unlicensed vehicles and drivers. The Department proposed that there should be a due diligence defence when drivers or vehicle owners present operators with licences that appear to be valid but turn out to be fake. Operators must be protected.

38. Respondents were keen to go even further than the proposals on the taxi-driving test and training. At present, new drivers must undertake disability training, and respondents felt that all drivers, not only new drivers, should take full training courses.

39. There was strong opposition to the removal of roof signs from private-hire vehicles. Both taxi operators and taxi users have become accustomed to roof signs. When people are leaving a club, for example, signs are helpful because the taxis that those people ordered can be identified. Respondents were not interested in signs appearing along the sides of vehicles.

40. New powers for enforcement officers and stiffer penalties were also welcomed.

41. When the Department examined the outcome of the policy consultation, it set out to revise its key proposals. Respondents were asked:

“Do you agree with the proposal to keep a revised two-tier system as described?”

42. Respondents came down narrowly on the side of a two-tier licensing system. However, they also stated that they wanted all taxis to be able to pick up fares, have roof signs, work to regulated fares and have taximeters, which sounds like a one-tier system. Therefore, the Department interpreted the responses as saying that people were in favour of a one-tier system, which is the system that I have just described.

43. If a one-tier system is in operation, no one, including people with disabilities and those representing them, wants all taxis in Northern Ireland to be accessible. The Department proposes that all operators should have a percentage of accessible vehicles.

44. There was broad agreement on the proposals that all taxi fares should be regulated, all taxis should have taximeters, and operator licensing should be introduced. Sole operators who work in the rank-and-hail sector supported proposals for their exemption from operator licensing. All other respondents disagreed with that proposal, stating that everyone who provides a taxi service should be included in the operator-licensing system.

45. If a one-tier system is implemented, the Department proposes to retain roof signs on all taxis.

46. The Department decided to keep its options open on driver testing and training for existing drivers. There has been subsequent consultation on that.

47. The Department believes that the revised package of measures that emerged from the consultation process addresses the main concerns about taxi regulation and has achieved the best possible balance between competing interests. The Department will never keep everyone happy all the time, but it feels that it has gone a long way towards satisfying most interested parties. Most stakeholders welcomed the proposals, which were viewed as being uncontroversial. Costs are still a concern, and the Belfast public-hire sector does not support any of the proposals that they feel would open up the city’s taxi industry to more competition.

48. That ends my rather lengthy presentation.

49. The Chairperson: Thank you for your comprehensive presentation.

50. Mr I McCrea: I have a couple of concerns, but I am sure that the answers to those will be teased out as the change to the one-tier licensing system takes place. First, I am concerned that private-hire firms will be forced into the new single-tier licensing system. One must accept that some taxis from the private-hire sector are operated illegally as public-hire taxis — it would be silly to think that that does not happen. However, some firms operating solely on a private-hire basis will have no desire to be part of the new system because they feel that it will have an adverse effect on their businesses. As things stand, private-hire firms are content to set their own fares, and if passengers want to pay those, or higher, fares to other firms, so be it.

51. Secondly, I am also concerned about the condition and age of some public- and private-hire vehicles. I know that there is nothing that the Department can do about how old a taxi is, but, perhaps, we could introduce age discrimination legislation for cars. [Laughter.]

52. The Chairperson: Section 75 for vehicles.

53. Mr I McCrea: There must be a limit on how old a car can be before it is deemed inappropriate for public or private hire. Has an agency been set up to enforce that?

54. Mrs Watters: Even though it has been said that private-hire firms will be forced into a system with which they are not happy, the one-tier licensing system would permit them to do public-hire work. However, some private-hire firms might say that their preferred mode of business is through pre-booked work and fulfilling contracts. They would be permitted to carry out public-hire work if they wished, but they would not have to do so.

55. When we talk about private-hire companies, we are — for the most part — talking about companies in Belfast. At present, the majority of those companies have a large percentage of vehicles licensed for public hire. The Department is not getting a lot of feedback from the industry indicating that firms do not want to move into the wider regulatory regime.

56. The Department proposes to regulate the maximum fares that firms will be permitted to charge. An upper price limit will be set, and charges higher than that limit will be considered as being too much. The Department also wants to consider ways in which it can allow firms the freedom to charge lower fares. Therefore, if operators are setting their own fares at present, the only change would be that the Department would tell them that they could continue to do so as long as those fares are not greater than the limits set.

57. The Chairperson: What would be the consequences for an operator who charges more than the limits set by the Department?

58. Mrs Watters: They would be committing an offence under the regulations, which would be made under the provisions of the Bill. The Bill would give the Department the powers to set limits, and anyone who charges more than those limits would be committing an offence.

59. In its consultation paper, the Department did not state any specific proposals to bring in age restrictions for vehicles. The Department did propose a measure in the 2003 initial draft proposals discussion document, but it was quite complex and did not get a good response. The Bill would give the Department powers to introduce age restrictions for taxis, but, at the moment, there is no intention to exercise those powers. The Department might want to consider age restrictions as a means to improve vehicle standards.

60. Under the current arrangements, DVA and the PSNI are jointly responsible for the enforcement of taxi regulations. DVA can draw on a team of 21 enforcement officers who have overall responsibility for bus, lorry and taxi enforcement. However, within that team of 21, a dedicated team of five is responsible purely for taxi enforcement. There is no need for a new enforcement body, because such a body exists.

61. Mr I McCrea: The issue of taxi enforcement must be examined across Northern Ireland; it is not specific to Belfast. Given that there are 10,000 taxis in Northern Ireland — and that number may increase if the changes are introduced — I cannot see how five people can make a big difference should taxi drivers continue to operate under the existing system.

62. Mrs Watters: That is true. However, when I said that five people are dedicated to taxi enforcement, all 21 members of the team can be drawn on for enforcement exercises in which large teams take part. DVA is conscious that taxi enforcement must not simply be a Belfast issue; it must apply throughout Northern Ireland.

63. The Department envisages that the introduction of new IT systems, which are required to support the provisions in the Taxis Bill, will facilitate much more from-the-record enforcement by DVA using information that it holds on taxis. Enforcement does not have to be all about men in yellow coats out on the roads.

64. Mr I McCrea: Or women.

65. Mrs Watters: Indeed.

66. Mr Boylan: Much of the information on the consultation process relates to Belfast. What kind of response did you receive from rural areas?

67. Mrs Watters: The Department received many written responses from taxi operators and drivers in rural areas. As part of the consultation, a big effort was made to engage with the taxi industry. Some 1,800 full consultation documents were sent to taxi operators and statutory consultees, and a summary of the consultation document was sent to every licensed taxi driver, which, in 2005, amounted to approximately 18,000.

68. The Department made a conscious effort to ensure that all interested parties in rural and urban areas were aware of the consultation. During the process, many of the 13 consultation meetings were held outside Belfast. Although they were advertised as public meetings, members of the public did not attend. The main attendees were people from the taxi industry.

69. Mr Boylan: I asked the question because I am conscious that unlike full-time taxi drivers in the cities, most taxi drivers in rural areas have other occupations and taxi only on a part-time basis.

70. Mrs Watters: It was not a Belfast-centric consultation; it was held across Northern Ireland.

71. Mr T Clarke: All in all, the proposals must be welcomed. As someone who lives in a rural community, I know that taxi drivers there are under pressure from illegal taxis. Therefore, I think that they will, in general, welcome the proposals.

72. The single, probably minor, issue that concerns me is driver testing and training. The Department’s suggestion to keep the options open for existing drivers is wrong. Testing and training should apply to existing drivers. Otherwise, there will be an influx of people wanting to get their licences before the new regulations come into force.

73. Mrs Watters: That has already happened.

74. Mr T Clarke: It has happened, and that is why I mentioned it. When the taxi-driving test was abolished in the past, people rushed out to get licences. New training programmes should be introduced, with the requirement for refresher training every three to five years.

75. Mrs Watters: Today’s presentation captures where we were at the end of the 2005 taxi consultation process. The Taxis Bill, as it stands, has powers to require drivers to undergo training or testing, and that applies to drivers across the board. The Department could decide to apply those powers to new drivers or to new and existing drivers, as the Bill has the full range of powers. Earlier this year, DVA consulted on how it proposed to use those powers. The consultation proposals included the suggestion that there should be periodic training for existing drivers.

76. The Chairperson: Consultees from the taxi industry have called for stretch limousines to be subject to PSV requirements and to conform to type-approval standards. Is that not the case already?

77. Mrs Watters: No.

78. Mr Bill Laverty (Department of the Environment): At present, stretch limousines do not meet PSV requirements. Every taxi is subject to annual PSV testing. The requirements state that a vehicle must be right-hand drive. As stretch limousines do not meet that requirement, they cannot be awarded a PSV licence.

79. The Chairperson: Given that many EU nationals are coming to live in Northern Ireland, and are bringing their cars with them, the requirement that a vehicle must be right-hand drive to be granted a licence must be changed.

80. Mrs Watters: A left-hand-drive vehicle can be licensed here in the normal way for private use. It simply cannot be licensed as a taxi.

81. The Chairperson: I appreciate that. However, some of the people who operate stretch limousines here import them from Germany and the United States. Those people should not be disadvantaged by a quirk in the legislation.

82. Mrs Watters: Under the Taxis Bill, the Department would have powers to make regulations for taxi vehicles. It wants to determine whether American stretch limousines, or other unusual types of vehicles, could be granted PSV licences where it is safe to do so and where appropriate conditions can be attached.

83. Mr Laverty: The Taxis Bill would give the Department enabling powers to make regulations to license taxis by class and use, and that would include different types of vehicles, such as vintage wedding cars, stretch limousines, and so on. Obviously there would be regulations appropriate to those vehicles, providing that they were safe and roadworthy.

84. Mr T Clarke: That those vehicles cannot be included is an unfair caveat. Just because they are left-hand drive does not mean that they are unsafe. If a left-hand-drive vehicle can pass an MOT test, it should be able to pass a PSV test also. The Committee should not bury its head in the sand and ignore the number of left-hand-drive vehicles that are on our roads. Taxi operators run good businesses and are very enterprising, and I have absolutely no problem with that. The DOE must recognise that such businesses exist, and some way should be found to make it easier for those operators to keep their businesses in line, as opposed to operating illegally. The majority of the vehicles are probably illegal because they do not meet the requirements for a PSV licence.

85. A left-hand-drive vehicle can pass an MOT test. If a left-hand-drive vehicle has passed an MOT test, it is considered safe and roadworthy. Therefore, it is unfair to assume that such vehicles are unsafe simply because they happen to be stretch limousines.

86. Mrs Watters: There are several problems with stretch limousines. It is not just the fact that they are left-hand drive. There are concerns with visibility, the turning circle and other technical matters. The Department must be confident that it is appropriate and safe to license those vehicles as taxis. Mr Clarke made the point that if a vehicle is good enough to pass an MOT test, it should be good enough to be used as a taxi. However, the issue is that the Department would be licensing stretch limousines in order that they could be hired out to members of the public. It is appropriate that there be a distinction.

87. The Chairperson: To be fair, that is not the issue here.

88. Mr T Clarke: That is not what I meant. A PSV test differs from an MOT test in that the PSV test checks the appearance of the interior and the exterior of a vehicle and requires the vehicle to be equipped with a fire extinguisher. If a car were in a reasonable condition, it would not be hard to bring it from MOT test standard to PSV test standard. The process would involve only simple measures. We cannot hide behind the excuse that it is much more difficult for stretch limousines to meet regulations. For example, Chambers Coach Hire Ltd in Magherafelt has brought in new vehicles, American Humvees, and it would be ludicrous to assume that they could not be brought up to the necessary standard. The vehicles under discussion are so similar that no difference can be made between them.

89. The Chairperson: We want to facilitate safe business; we do not want to place obstacles in the way.

90. Mrs Watters: Absolutely. The Taxis Bill would provide much more flexible and extensive new powers that recognise the many new types of vehicles that wish to work in the industry.

91. Mr T Clarke: A range of vehicles should be included.

92. Mr Boylan: Are there any other proposals relating to emissions tests and environmental concerns? They would be key as well.

93. Mrs Watters: Our proposals contain nothing to suggest that taxis should have to meet higher emissions standards than those for other vehicles. In due course — perhaps in five or 10 years’ time — new powers may be introduced that could permit the Department to set higher standards. We were conscious of ensuring that the fees system was sufficiently flexible so that, in future, cleaner, greener taxis could be treated more favourably and could, for example, be subject to lower licence fees.

94. As part of the policy process, we talked to our colleagues in the air quality unit of the Department of the Environment about whether it was necessary and appropriate to improve the air quality standards for taxis. In essence, the response that we received was that the pollution problems in Belfast are not caused by cars or by taxis particularly, and that it was not an issue that really needs to be addressed.

95. Mr I McCrea: Given that these vehicles cover many more miles than normal cars over the MOT or PSV period, the issue of emissions testing should be examined more closely — and sooner rather than later. The Committee must also keep an eye on the stretch limousines issue.

96. Mrs Watters: The Department has consulted on the licensing of stretch limousines. The taxi review team did not carry out the consultation, but it was aware of it.

97. Mr Laverty: We estimate that some 100 stretch limousines operate in Northern Ireland, and there were calls for them to be legalised. Therefore, about a year and a half ago, in response to calls from the trade, the Department issued a consultation paper that included proposals for the licensing of American stretch limousines, which would involve setting aside some of the requirements under the current PSV regulations. The proposals were well received, and the Department is considering the responses with a view to possibly amending the current PSV regulations. Alternatively, the Department may wait for the introduction of the Taxis Bill, which will result in an overall review of all the PSV regulations that apply to taxis. That would give the Department an opportunity to consider emissions standards for taxis.

98. We are aware that Transport for London introduced emission standards. Therefore, a precedent has been set that could be taken into account when the PSV regulations are being reviewed.

99. The Chairperson: Thank you for coming. The Committee Clerk has reminded me that you will be appearing before us next week. The consultation on the taxi industry has been done well.

Thursday 7 June 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Billy Armstrong
Mr Trevor Clarke
Mr David Ford
Mr Tommy Gallagher
Mr Samuel Gardiner
Mr Alex Maskey
Mr Ian McCrea
Mr Daithí McKay
Mr Peter Weir

Witnesses:

Mr Bill Laverty Mr John McMullan

(Department of the Environment)

The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): Mr Bill Laverty and Mr John McMullan, you are very welcome. You are going to provide the Committee with a briefing on the Taxis Bill, the 2006 consultation exercise, the equality impact assessment and the regulatory impact assessment.

100. The Bill will be introduced in the Assembly on 11 June 2007, and its Second Stage will be on 26 June 2007. The Bill will progress to Committee Stage if it passes its Second Stage.

101. Mr John McMullan (Department of the Environment): I am head of the Department of the Environment’s (DOE) road traffic legislation branch. I was involved in drafting the legislation for the Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, which, given the devolution of powers to the Assembly, has become the Taxis Bill. My colleague, Bill Laverty, has worked on policy development for the legislation. I hope that, between the two of us, we can answer the Committee’s questions. If not, we will contact the Committee in writing to clarify matters.

102. We welcome the opportunity to bring the Committee up to speed on the outcome of the consultation on the Order. Last week, the Committee was briefed on the policy consultation. The legislation was drafted once the policy had been settled. I will not go into the detail of the legislation today, because there will be opportunity for full scrutiny when the Bill moves to the Committee Stage, assuming it passes its First and Second Stages.

103. I will mention, briefly, some key points in the Taxis Bill that differ from current legislation governing the taxi system. First, there is the proposal to introduce operator licensing for taxi businesses. There are more than 800 taxi businesses in Northern Ireland; they are not regulated and there is no requirement for them to obtain operator licences. That situation causes anomalies in that taxi businesses can, without committing an offence, employ unlicensed vehicles and unlicensed drivers. The Department wishes to use the Taxis Bill to address those anomalies.

104. Secondly, the Department proposes to allow all taxis to pick up passengers in the street without the need for pre-booking. The proposal was welcomed widely in the responses to the policy consultation and will remove the current two-tier system, whereby only public-hire taxis may pick up passengers in the street. The general public does not understand the current restrictions on taxis picking up passengers in the street.

105. Thirdly, the Department wants to set a maximum fare level for all taxis in Northern Ireland and require all taxis to have taximeters. At present, the requirement to fit taximeters applies only to those vehicles licensed as Belfast public hire. However, many drivers and operators choose to fit taximeters in vehicles licensed as private hire. Taximeters work well, especially for consumers who can see the fares that they will be charged.

106. We propose to reintroduce a taxi-driving test. The previous taxi-driving test was removed in 1996 under deregulation legislation. During the consultation process, the reintroduction of a test was widely supported, and the Department’s Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA) recently consulted on what form the taxi-driving test should take. As it is important that the taxi industry is seen to be professional, the Department also wants all taxi drivers to receive relevant training in how to deal with customers, particularly people with disabilities.

107. It is proposed that taxis be allowed to operate shared services. At the moment, when someone hires a taxi, he or she is the sole hirer of that taxi, and whether it is acceptable for a driver to admit another passenger is a bit of a grey area. We want to regulate that practice, and there are a number of ways to do so. For example, we could set up a taxi-sharing scheme from Belfast City Airport, with a flat-rate fare dependent on to which zone of the city the taxi is travelling. Alternatively, we could legislate that passengers, who agree in advance to share a taxi, pay a cheaper than normal fare. Also, we could allow operators to provide taxibus-type services similar to those offered by the west Belfast taxibuses.

108. We wish to provide more accessible taxis for elderly and disabled people by requiring that a percentage of each taxi operator’s fleet must be made up of accessible vehicles.

109. We want to address an existing loophole in the Department’s enforcement powers, which means that its enforcement officers do not have the power to stop private cars that are suspected of illegal taxiing. The Taxis Bill would give the Department’s enforcement officers the power to stop a private car, to seize it if necessary and to remove any relevant equipment. We also want the power to enter premises from which it is suspected an illegal taxi business is operating.

110. Once the Order was drafted, it was subjected to an extensive 12-week consultation period. The consultation document was sent to the 800 known taxi businesses. Each of the 17,000 licensed taxi drivers received notification of the consultation and the 10 public meetings that were held throughout the Province. We held 16 meetings with other representatives. In total, over 1,600 consultation documents were issued.

111. As a result, the draft legislation has been subject to intense scrutiny by the industry, and we have taken two general points from that exercise. The first is that the majority of the taxi industry is supportive of the proposals and wants the legislation to be in place sooner rather than later. The Department is pleased, therefore, that the Taxis Bill will be introduced prior to the summer recess. The second point is that there are no fundamental flaws in the legislation. It is one thing to draft legislation at your desk, but it must work on the street, and there have been no suggestions that any of the proposals will not work.

112. However, not everyone was happy with the proposals, and a number of their suggested changes were accepted and have been made to the legislation. Some of the points that were made were accepted but were not included in the Taxis Bill, as we felt that it contained sufficient powers already. Other points that were made were either deemed not to have merit or the issues were settled during the consultation process.

113. As I said, some of the points that were made during the consultation period were accepted and were drafted into the legislation. At all the meetings, a recurrent theme was the need for tough enforcement to cut down on illegal taxiing. The new powers contained in the Taxis Bill will increase the available fine for taxi-driving offences from level 4 to level 5, which is a maximum £5,000 fine for anyone who commits a serious breach of his or her licensing requirements. We have also extended to enforcement officers the power to stop private cars suspected of taxiing illegally, which means that when the Taxis Bill is introduced, enhanced enforcement powers will be available.

114. There was concern that the Department would be unable to enforce the regulation that states that only accessible vehicles can use taxi ranks. The Department has been able to amend the Traffic Management (Northern Ireland) Order 2005 — the legislation that brought in the new traffic attendants — to allow traffic attendants to patrol taxi ranks to ensure compliance with the law and to issue penalty charges for infringement.

115. The industry is always concerned with costs. The Taxis Bill includes a provision that, subject to the approval of the Department of Finance and Personnel, will allow DOE to provide grants to persons or bodies in the industry. We have not raised expectations by doing that: the industry has been told that there is no money to hand out at this time. However, if money were to become available, unless those powers are included in the Taxis Bill, the Department would have no legal mechanism whereby it could award grants to the industry.

116. A further point on costs is that, for the first time, road traffic legislation has been drafted to allow fees to be paid in instalments. Allowing operators and drivers to pay fees over a period of time should, in some ways, offset their costs.

117. Some of the larger taxi businesses were concerned by the proposal for taximeters to be connected to receipt printers. They argued that they had invested a lot of money in taximeters without printers and really wanted to see a return on that investment. Therefore, we adjusted the legislation slightly, thus allowing the phased introduction of receipt printers. Ultimately, all taximeters will have to have receipt printers, but we recognised that the taxi operators had a fair point.

118. Consultees expressed concern over the proposal stating that drivers could be affiliated to one operator only. If a driver is affiliated to an operator, he or she does not have to obtain an operator’s licence. The consultees’ point was that that could be restrictive, particularly in rural areas, where, for example, a driver might work as a taxi driver for one operator but drive wedding cars for another. The legislation, therefore, now allows for exceptions to the general rule.

119. Another point raised during the consultation process was that taxi plates should not have to be issued every year. It is an extensive exercise for the Department to re-issue 10,500 plastic plates every year, and it is not very environmentally friendly. We have changed the legislation so that an annual re-issue is no longer a legal requirement. The re-issuing of taxi plates will become an operational matter rather than a legislative one.

120. There was some confusion over what type of services an operator’s licence will allow a business to provide. The legislation now states that the Department will prescribe on the operator’s licence the sort of services that each business can provide.

121. Meeting with taxi industry representatives was very useful. It allowed us to improve the draft Order and to add further elements to what is now the Taxis Bill.

122. Other consultation responses and suggestions were accepted as being equally valid but the outworking of them required no further change to the Taxis Bill. For example, there was concern that people with disabilities, including those who rely on assistance dogs, should not have to pay extra for a taxi. Ensuring that that does not happen did not require an amendment to the Taxis Bill as, under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, it is unlawful to charge disabled persons higher fares or to charge for the carriage of a guide dog.

123. There were some concerns about the “good repute” requirements for operators and drivers. To be a taxi driver or operator, one must be a fit-and-proper person, which can involve the Department’s taking into account any previous convictions. In the Taxis Bill, we have stated that the Department must be satisfied on that point. We have deliberately kept it flexible. We want to be able to take into account the guidelines that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister issued on recruiting people with conflict–related convictions. We want to be able to consider all information when deciding whether someone is of “good repute”.

124. Some drivers felt that operators would simply pass on the high cost of compliance to them. Under existing legislation, the conditions on those costs that can be imposed on taxi operators can also apply to drivers.

125. Some consultees suggested that the non-display of driver identification should become an offence. However, under current legislation, it already is. It was also suggested that insurance requirements should be stricter, but the current legislation states that all taxis must be appropriately insured, and it allows the Department to make further requirements. Therefore, the Department can make tougher requirements, if necessary, through existing regulations.

126. Other respondents stated that it should be an offence for taxis to carry signage that advertises services for which they are not licensed to provide. The Department already has the power to regulate on that issue.

127. The Department did not take some of the other changes suggested during the consultation through to the Taxis Bill. It was argued that the number of taxi vehicle and taxi drivers’ licences should be capped, but the Department does not intend to introduce limits to the number of licences in circulation. Doing so would immediately prevent new owners or drivers from coming into the industry, and it would almost immediately create a trade in licence plates.

128. I want to raise standards, and anyone who comes into the industry will have to pass the new taxi-driving test and be properly trained. Some local authorities in England have set restrictions on the number of taxis permitted in their areas, but that measure is becoming less common. A report by the Office of Fair Trading stated that there should not be a cap on the number of taxis in an area, so we do not propose to introduce such a measure in Northern Ireland.

129. There is still some contention about removing the two-tier system, but, when the policy was being developed, the consensus was that it should be removed. However, although the Taxis Bill permits a one-tier system, it does not preclude a two-tier system. Therefore, a two-tier system may be introduced or retained in certain areas if that is considered necessary. However, the argument about the two-tier system is academic in any discussion of the Taxis Bill. It will, however, become more pertinent when the Department decides what the new regulations will do.

130. It was suggested that sole taxi operators should not need to conform to operator licensing. The Department seriously considered that suggestion during the consultation process, but officials felt that exempting sole operators from the operator-licensing regime could potentially undermine the whole system. A situation might arise in which an unscrupulous operator, with a collection of drivers, will state that his or her drivers are sole operators, thus meaning that he or she does not need an operator’s licence. Operators will have to conform to certain standards and duties. That should apply across the board. Sole operators will have to pay considerably less for their licences than an operator who runs 100 or 200 cars.

131. It was suggested that the Department should set a minimum rather than a maximum fare limit. However, the Department is proposing that it sets a maximum fare to ensure that users know that they are not being overcharged. That proposal would also allow operators to charge less than the maximum fare, thus introducing some competition to the industry. The maximum fare would not be a flat-rate charge; it would be a multi-tariff charge. For example, it could cost more to hire a taxi on Christmas Day or New Year’s Eve than it would on any other day of the year. Part of the multi-tariff charge is likely to include an initial charge — which, to all intents and purposes, would be a minimum fare — that a customer would be liable for as soon as the taxi is hired. That should satisfy concerns on that issue.

132. One consultation response suggested that, for safety reasons, stretch limousines should not be licensed as taxis. However, last week, the Committee said that they should be licensed. The Department shares that opinion. There are 100 stretch limousines in Northern Ireland, and they have been operating here over the past 16 or 17 years. In that time, there has been only one serious collision involving a stretch limousine, and the accident was not attributable to the driver of the limousine. The Department is content with the construction and use of stretch limousines, and we know that they have a good road safety record. However, we want to ensure that they conform to certain safety standards.

133. Last year, we completed a consultation on stretch limousines, and we hope to introduce regulations that include stretch limousines in the licensing system. Provision for that could be included in the Taxis Bill, but it is more likely that separate regulations will be made, which will, in time, come before the Committee.

134. An equality impact assessment was carried out on the draft proposals, and it was determined that the proposals will have a positive impact on equality of opportunity, particularly for people with disabilities, the elderly and their carers. More vehicles will be available for those people, and for young people aged 16 to 24, who tend to use taxis more often. Those groups will all benefit from the provision of safer and higher quality taxi services. There is no evidence to suggest that there would be any adverse or negative impact on any of the nine equality groups listed under section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

135. Moreover, we carried out a regulatory impact assessment to identify the costs, benefits and risks associated with all the proposals, and more detailed regulatory impact assessments must be carried out on the regulations that will arise from the Bill. It is likely that operators and consumers will face increased costs, but they will be based on the cost of licensing and running taxis and what consumers can reasonably afford. An entire economic exercise will have to be carried out. The reduction in illegal taxiing will open up the market, allowing operators to get a better return on their investments and consumers to benefit from the increased standards and greater availability of various types of taxi.

136. A rural-proofing exercise was carried out. Such an exercise was important, as rural dwellers rely on taxis more than urban dwellers, and they tend to make longer journeys. Just as in urban areas, the disabled and elderly in rural areas need accessible taxis. The proposals to allow taxis to provide bus-type services and to set up taxi-sharing schemes in rural areas should help rural communities, and the increased provision of accessible taxis will be of benefit. None of the provisions was thought to have an adverse impact on rural communities.

137. That is where the legislation currently stands. The Taxis Bill that will be introduced in the Assembly on Monday is the same as the draft Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006.

138. Mr I McCrea: An issue that was raised with me in the past week, and which was also raised at the Cookstown consultation meeting, is the reduction of the period of the taxi licence from five years to three years. There are concerns that people who depend on taxiing for their income could fall into the category of those who might not be able to renew their licences. An extra couple of years on the licence would make a difference to, for example, 63-year-old drivers who are close to retirement age.

139. Last week, we discussed stretch limousines, and I am not sure whether the Committee agreed that they should be allowed to provide taxi services. However, issues were raised about MOTs and PSVs for limousines.

140. Mr McMullan: The reduction in the term of the licence from five years to three years is in keeping with best practice throughout the rest of the UK. It also ties in with the system for criminal records checks, which are carried out on taxi drivers every three years. We are not considering the introduction of any age discrimination measures in that regard. If someone were retiring or approaching 65, they could still apply to renew their taxi licence.

141. Although stretch limousines cannot pass the current PSV test, we want them to be properly tested. No one envisaged the use of those hybrid vehicles, and appropriate legislation is required. We are drafting legislation to govern those limousines and to ensure that they are safe.

142. Mr Gardiner: I found Mr McMullan’s presentation informative, and I thank him for it.

143. I am concerned about the positioning of taxi ranks. That is a problem in my constituency of Upper Bann, where there are no designated areas in the town centres where local people and visitors can get taxis. If people see a sign with a telephone number on it, that is fine — they can telephone for a taxi. Craigavon Borough Council is revamping the centres of Lurgan and Portadown, and I would like DOE to ensure that areas are reserved for taxi ranks, if that matter has not been brought to its attention already.

144. Mr Bill Laverty (Department of the Environment): The taxi review team recognised that there is a need for more taxi rank provision, particularly in rural towns. The provision of taxi ranks is a traffic management matter and falls under the remit of the Department for Regional Development’s (DRD) Roads Service. The taxi review team has made strong representations to DRD about the provision of taxi ranks. The sub-regional transportation plan has recognised that planners of rural towns will have to look critically at the provision of taxi ranks, particularly since the taxi review team has recommended that there be a greater number of accessible taxis. Given that only eligible taxis — those that are accessible — would be allowed to stand at taxi ranks, provision of more taxi ranks would be an incentive to owner-drivers to supply accessible taxis.

145. Mr Gardiner: DRD currently sponsors a door-to-door transport scheme. Does that programme cut across what DOE is trying to do with vehicles licensed for private hire? Passengers of a certain age, or who suffer from a disability, can avail of the door-to-door transport service free of charge. They are collected at their doors and brought to their destinations, whether that is to a hospital or to visit people — within a designated area, of course. Passengers can also telephone the drivers to say when they want picked up again. That is a good scheme, particularly for the elderly and those who suffer from a disability. Some of the buses that provide that service are new and are excellent, and I welcome that scheme.

146. Mr Laverty: We believe that taxis — particularly accessible taxis — would be appropriate for the provision of those services. Some of the door-to-door transport services use accessible taxis, and our legislation envisaged that type of scheme.

147. Mr Gardiner: So, you believe that such schemes would work.

148. Mr Laverty: Yes.

149. Mr Ford: I wish to tease out two points that Mr McMullan made in his presentation. First, he mentioned the reintroduction of the taxi-driving test, and I would like to hear more about those proposals. Secondly, he mentioned the percentage of accessible taxis that operators would be required to have. What percentage is envisaged, and would there be any variation, depending on the size of the operator’s fleet?

150. Mr McMullan: The reintroduction of the taxi-driving test was supported widely at consultation stage. DVA consulted on the test because it wanted to know whether it should apply to new drivers entering the industry, new and existing drivers, or only new drivers and those existing drivers who did not pass the previous taxi-driving test. The test will comprise practical requirements and a theory test. Consultation finished on 27 April, and the responses are being considered in detail. I do not know what the outcome will be.

151. Mr Ford: Do you know when your colleagues will come to the Committee to discuss that issue?

152. Mr McMullan: The taxi-driving test cannot be introduced until the Taxis Bill becomes law. The nuts and bolts of the taxi-driving test should be in place when the Taxis Bill becomes law, and I expect that to happen later this year or early next year.

153. Mr Laverty: The required percentage of accessible taxis has not been decided. For larger operators, the figure could be about 10%. Obviously, a proportionate level would be applied to operators of smaller fleets.

154. The Department envisages that vehicles run by sole operators should be accessible. By operating such a vehicle, sole operators could provide a range of services, including contract work, picking up at taxi ranks, and bus-type services. The Department feels that the bus-type services operating at present will remain accessible in the future.

155. Mr Armstrong: Are there plans to make taxi bays more accessible to shoppers and visitors to towns? How will people who want to move from one part of a town to another find a taxi easily and how will they be able to identify that taxi?

156. Mr McMullan: As mentioned earlier, taxi ranks and taxi bays are a traffic management issue, for which DRD has responsibility. It is an important matter, and we will be engaging with DRD to ensure that there is sufficient provision throughout the Province. The taxi-plating scheme identifies clearly the services that vehicles are licensed to provide and shows which taxis are accessible.

157. Mr Armstrong: The current taxi-plating scheme is not that visible to passengers: are there any ideas to improve it?

158. Mr McMullan: Roof signs are very visible. Therefore, it might be better if taxi plates were integrated into roof signs. Mr Armstrong is correct: at the moment, one needs to focus below eye level to be able to read a taxi plate. Integrating taxi plates into roof signs might make the information more easily identifiable.

159. Mr Armstrong: Would it be possible to have a universal sign for all taxis, with integrated taxi plates?

160. Mr Laverty: PSV regulations govern roof signs, which must be of certain dimensions, with particular signage, giving information such as the name of a taxi firm, its telephone number and the type of taxi being operated. Signs are colour-coded to distinguish the type of work the vehicle’s licence permits. The public may not appreciate that the taxi plate corresponds to the type of taxi being operated, and the Department would seriously consider incorporating taxi plates into roof signs. We have seen examples, and they appear to do the job quite well.

161. Mr Armstrong: That could be an easier way of making the information more visible.

162. The Chairperson: The Department’s summary of key issues on the consultation states: “it should be an offence for a taxi to carry signage for services it is not licensed to provide.”

163. Will you please clarify what that means? Does it refer to advertising?

164. Mr Laverty: No. At present, some taxis display advertising, and the Department intends to introduce guidelines to ensure that any advertising is appropriate and does not cause offence.

165. The Chairperson: In that case, to what does that point refer?

166. Mr Laverty: I can answer that with an example. Some of the accessible vehicles that are currently in operation have signage that describes them as taxibuses. Under the Taxis Bill, the term “taxibus” has a particular meaning: a taxi that is licensed to provide a bus-type service. Where an ordinary taxi operates in that way, but does not have a licence authorising it to do so, it clearly infringes the regulations. That operation would, therefore, be an offence.

167. The Chairperson: I understand. Thank you.

168. Does any member wish to add anything? On behalf of the Committee, I thank Mr Laverty and Mr McMullan for giving up their time this morning.

28 June 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Billy Armstrong
Mr Ian McCrea
Mr Daithí McKay
Mr Peter Weir

Witnesses:

Mrs Adele Watters Mr Bill Laverty)

(Department of the Environment)

169. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): Welcome, Mrs Adele Watters and Mr Bill Laverty, and thank you for attending today, for what, I think, is your fourth time.

170. Mrs Adele Watters (Department of the Environment): Yes, indeed it is.

171. The Chairperson: I also thank you for the concise way that the documentation has been presented to the Committee. It is very readable, which is useful when distilling the legislation into the pros and cons of what is to be achieved.

172. Mrs Watters: I thank the Chairperson and members for the opportunity to address the Committee as it starts its detailed scrutiny of the Taxis Bill. I proposed that we brief the Committee on the main provisions of the legislation, so a summary of the provisions has been provided for members.

173. However, before I outline the provisions and answer questions that members may have, it would be useful to mention a few key points that the Department had in mind when drafting instructions to the Office of Legislative Counsel in preparation for the Bill. Some of those points will pick up on themes that were mentioned by Alan Rehfisch in his briefing earlier and will help members to understand why the legislation has been drafted in this way.

174. The first point concerns linkages in the licensing system and the licensing framework; the second concerns uniformity, but with flexibility; the third relates to the need for forward-looking legislation; the fourth relates to the range of sanctions that are available in the Bill, and the fifth and final point relates to fees. I will cover all of those quickly.

175. First, with regard to linkages in the licensing system, I will recap some of our previous briefings on the main problems in the taxi industry. One of those problems is the extent of illegal taxiing that is taking place — and a lot of it happens through taxi depots that engage unlicensed vehicles and drivers. Another problem is that there are too few accessible taxis, and there is also a lack of accountability for service standards, which, in practice, often results in poor customer service. The Department believes that the one key measure that will allow it to make substantial headway in addressing those problems is the introduction of operator licensing, and that is why powers to introduce operator licensing are a key aspect of the Bill.

176. Furthermore, the legislative framework recognises that to achieve the objectives of fewer instances of illegal taxiing, more accessible taxis and better customer standards, it is vital to establish taxi operators as legal entities and link them legally to the drivers that they engage and, separately, to the vehicles that they use.

177. It is also worth pointing out that the legislation contains no legal linkage, as such, between a taxi driver and the taxi vehicle that he or she drives. Although many taxis are owner-driven, that is not necessarily the case. The Department has no difficulty with the idea that someone — maybe a car dealer or taxi dealer — can own a taxi but allow it to be driven by someone else, or even by two people alternately. It is important to get those linkages in place, because the Bill does not comprise a series of completely unrelated parts. The provisions interlink like pieces of a jigsaw.

178. The Department is seeking to achieve uniformity across the licensing system. The Bill provides for a one-tier licensing system across Northern Ireland; the same basic requirements for operators, regardless of the size of their operations; the same basic rules for drivers, regardless of the types of taxis that they drive; and the same basic requirements for vehicles, at least for those providing normal, non-specialist accessible and non-accessible services.

179. It is also important that the legislation enables the Department to provide flexibility where needed — through measures that can be applied differently, according to circumstances and cases, or by way of exemptions. For example, clause 18 requires all taxis to have taximeters, but it also gives the Department the power to make regulations establishing exemptions to that rule.

180. Another example of the legislation’s flexibility is that it gives the Department the power to require all operators to provide a certain percentage of accessible vehicles. However, the conditions, and, therefore, the percentage of accessible vehicles required could differ depending on the size of a taxi operator’s fleet. For example, the figure could be 10% for a large fleet but 100% for an operator who has only one vehicle.

181. Clause 54 provides further flexibility. It permits the Department, where it deems it appropriate, to apply regulations made under the Bill to a specific area or areas rather than to Northern Ireland as a whole. The Bill has been developed on the premise of providing a one-tier system. However, it contains a great deal of flexibility to allow the Department to vary those basic rules. For example, clause 54 enables the Department to retain the two-tier system in Belfast, if it considers that to be appropriate.

182. The Bill must be forward looking. The Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981, under which taxis are currently regulated, is over 25 years old. The Taxis Bill may not have to last quite as long as that before, in due course, it is also replaced. However, we should anticipate that it will provide the licensing framework for the next 10 to 15 years. The Bill must be capable of anticipating developments that are on the horizon but whose impact is not fully known and for which the Department is not necessarily thinking actively about the development of policies.

183. The Department has included in the Bill matters on which it does not necessarily intend to act. They include: restrictions on age; the ability to regulate for taxi marshals; and provision for in-car security equipment, such as CCTV, which is not used in Northern Ireland but is installed in some taxis in GB. The Department at least wants the powers to regulate that. The increase in the number of applications for taxi-driver licences from people from the rest of the EU is also an issue, and the legislation must be flexible to enable the Department to deal with it.

184. A range of sanctions must be put in place. To an effective regulator, prosecution should be, if not quite the last resort, certainly not its first resort. Enormous importance should be attached to education, persuasion, warning letters, the potential for civil penalties and enforcement notices. Next should come criminal penalties, and the final stage should be the suspension and revocation of licences. That is why the Bill contains a broad range of sanctions. It is important that all those are available to the regulators, who must use them effectively to target the main areas of risk.

185. A fundamental tenet of licensing systems, such as taxi licensing, is that they should, as far as possible, be run on a full cost-recovery basis. The cost of the licensing service should be met through the income generated from fees. Typically, the powers to charge fees must appear in primary legislation and must be specific. Without a clear primary power to charge a fee, regulations on fees cannot be made. A prime example of that, which has caused difficulty for the Department, relates to the introduction of taxi plates in 2004.

186. Although the Department took the policy decision to introduce taxi licence plates, it does not have the power to charge a fee for issuing them. Therefore, the costs of producing and issuing the plates had to be rolled into that for the PSV test. Ideally, the Department should be able to charge for all items that need to be produced as part of the licensing system.

187. In addition, the Department needs to be able to charge for the services that it provides, including the work involved in processing applications that may end up being rejected. At the moment, if the Department processes a driver’s application, which, for some reason, is rejected, the fee has to be returned to the unsuccessful applicant. There is no opportunity for the Department to state that because it has completed its work, it will hold on to the fee.

188. The fees issue is not all one-way traffic. The Department is conscious that it does not have the powers to refund or remit fees in cases where, for example, a person has booked a PSV test — the fee for which includes the cost of the taxi licence plates — but finds that he or she cannot attend the appointment. The fee would be lost, and the applicant would have to pay a second fee for a subsequent test. In effect, drivers can pay twice for one set of plates, which means that quite a significant amount of money is involved.

189. Many people in the taxi industry say that the Department is mostly interested in fees. Therefore, the Department must ensure that every aspect of the fees issue is covered in the legislation.

190. The Committee will be glad to know that I will not be going through all the briefing material that has been provided. The Bill comprises six parts, with 58 clauses and three schedules. It is a significant piece of legislation.

191. Part 1 deals with the regulation of taxi operators. It introduces the requirement for a taxi operator to apply for, and obtain, a taxi operator’s licence, and imposes duties on licensed operators. It also introduces requirements and duties relating to the operation of taxi services at separate fares.

192. Part 2 of the Bill deals with the regulation of vehicles used to provide taxi services. It includes more flexible and extensive powers for the Department to set appropriate suitability requirements for vehicles, as regards their type, size and design. Part 2 also gives the Department powers to set the maximum rates and fares that can be charged for the hire of a taxi, and to require all taxis to have taximeters and receipt printers.

193. Part 3 of the Bill deals with the regulation of taxi drivers. In particular, it amends existing legislation by reducing the period of a taxi-driver licence from five years to three years, bringing it into line with taxi-driver repute checks, which are repeated every three years.

194. Part 4 of the Bill contains general provisions for the licences that can be applied for, and includes provisions relating to fees, applications, suspensions, revocations, curtailments and appeals.

195. Part 5 of the Bill makes provision for enforcement. It gives the police and the Department powers to stop, search and seize vehicles believed to be taxiing illegally, and to inspect premises, under warrant, where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person is operating an unlicensed taxi service.

196. Part 6 provides for a number of general issues relating to the operation of the Bill, including sharing information, payment of grants and the provision of training.

197. The Bill contains three schedules. Schedules 2 and 3 deal with minor and consequential amendments, and repeals. Schedule 1 will probably be of most interest, as it lists the offences and penalties that will be included under the Bill. The most serious licensing offences — all of which, on conviction, will attract a maximum fine of £5,000 — include: driving a taxi without a taxi-driver licence; operating a taxi service without an operator’s licence; a taxi operator’s using unlicensed vehicles or drivers; and using a taxi, or permitting a taxi to be used, without a taxi licence.

198. That completes a quick overview aimed at familiarising members with some of the detail of the Bill. I am happy to take questions.

199. The Chairperson: Thank you. I am sure that many questions will emerge when the Committee’s consultation begins. Do members wish to ask any questions either on Adele Watters’s briefing or on the information that Alan Rehfisch from Research and Library Services provided earlier?

200. Mr Weir: Alan Rehfisch mentioned the financial elements of the legislation. Although the Bill is enabling legislation, one of the aims of the taxi-licensing system is full cost recovery. How will the cost of enforcing the legislation — such as the checking of licences — be worked out? Are there costings for that, and how will those costs be met?

201. Mrs Watters: Currently, £20 of the PSV licence fee goes towards funding enforcement. Further funding for enforcement comes directly from the Department.

202. Mr Bill Laverty (Department of the Environment): The Driver and Vehicle Agency’s enforcement team comprises 21 officers. Of those 21, four officers deal with taxi-related matters. The full enforcement team deals with road freight, bus licensing and taxi licensing and, as Adele said, funding for its work comes mainly from the Department.

203. Mr Weir: Presumably, the intention is to expand that team? A much stronger framework, with regulations and a fee structure, will require much greater enforcement.

204. Mrs Watters: Yes, it will. However, some of that enforcement will be supported by the IT systems that are already in place. We will have much more and better information on who is licensed, whose licences have been renewed, and what is going on in general. Consequently, we will be able to make better use of that information.

205. Current taxi legislation is drafted in such a way that the Department has powers and sanctions to deal with those in the taxi industry who are regulated. Most legislative power is directed at the prosecution of offenders, which is very resource intensive. The intention is that the new legislation will provide a range of sanctions that could be used before the prosecution stage is reached, which would mean that enforcement officers would not necessarily need to be out on the roads.

206. Mr Weir: It was mentioned that the more serious offences would, ultimately, attract a maximum fine of £5,000. Is there any provision for the revocation of licences in the event of prosecutions for serious offences? For example, if a taxi operator were to employ unlicensed cash-in-hand drivers, will the legislation provide for the ultimate sanction of revoking that operator’s licence? My thinking behind that is that in the bar trade, if a publican is responsible for a number of serious breaches, his or her liquor licence can be revoked. Will the Taxis Bill provide for similar sanctions for taxi operators?

207. Mr Laverty: Yes. The legislation provides powers to suspend, revoke or curtail an operator’s licence. Curtailing an operator’s licence would reduce the number of vehicles that his or her company could operate. Repeated convictions could affect an operator’s reputation and fitness to hold a licence, and, therefore, could justify the revocation of his or her operator’s licence.

208. Mr Armstrong: If a driver is unable to keep a PSV test appointment, he or she must still pay for a licence. How much does it cost the Department to supply a licence?

209. Mrs Watters: Is the question whether the component costs of a PSV test can be separated out?

210. Mr Armstrong: Yes. If a driver is unable to keep a PSV test appointment, he or she cannot claim the licence cost back. Is there a separate cost for the supply of a licence?

211. Mr Laverty: The Driver and Vehicle Agency, which is responsible for the testing of vehicles, calculates the cost of the test.

212. Mr Armstrong: Yes. There is a cost for the PSV test. However, the Department charges applicants for supplying licences, even if they were unable to attend their PSV test appointments. In other words, are there separate costs for PSV tests and for supplying licences?

213. Mr Laverty: Is that a reference to the administrative cost of issuing licences?

214. Mrs Watters: There is a separate administrative cost.

215. Mr Laverty: The PSV test fee comprises several components: the cost of the taxi licence plates; the cost of administration; and the cost of the test.

216. Mr Armstrong: Is it correct to say that the Driver and Vehicle Agency does not refund the licence part of the application fee if a driver is unable to keep a test appointment?

217. Mrs Watters: The Department does not currently have the power to make such a refund.

218. Mr Armstrong: Should that issue not be examined?

219. Mrs Watters: In cases such as that, the Department wants the legislation to give the Driver and Vehicle Agency the power to refund the licence part of the fee. That is right and fair, and we should be able to do that.

220. Mr Armstrong: Will the Department look into that matter?

221. Mrs Watters: Absolutely.

222. Mr Boylan: In the debate on the Second Stage of the Taxis Bill on 26 June 2007, my party broadly supported a one-tier system for taxi licensing. The Department’s position appears to be that a one-tier system should apply across the board, and the taxi industry has voiced some concerns about that. Will you clarify that situation?

223. Mrs Watters: The Bill paves the way for a move to a one-tier system across Northern Ireland. However, when the Bill was sent out for consultation, we considered the impact that responses in favour of retaining the two-tier system in Belfast would have on the legislation. Consequently, clause 54 of the Taxis Bill gives the Department the flexibility to apply certain rules and regulations to different areas of Northern Ireland.

224. Although the Department’s clear intention is that there should be a one-tier system, the Bill does not close the door entirely on the idea of a two-tier system. It is not that we are in two minds about that — we support the idea of a one-tier system, but we are also saying that that is not the end of the matter.

225. Mr Boylan: There are many taxi operators in rural areas where a one-tier system would not be suitable. It would be unfair, for example, to demand that all taxi firms should have disabled-accessible vehicles.

226. Mrs Watters: That is not the intention of the legislation.

227. Mr Boylan: There are other concerns about a one-tier system, but I wanted clarification on that specific point.

228. Mrs Watters: No one wants a fully disabled-accessible taxi fleet — not even people with disabilities.

229. Mr McKay: If a one-tier system is introduced in Belfast, where all taxis licensed as Belfast public hire are already wheelchair accessible, only those taxis will provide disabled access, with the rest not having to meet that requirement. Would that system be compatible with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995? Will an equality impact assessment be carried out?

230. Mrs Watters: An equality impact assessment has been carried out. It concluded that if the number of accessible taxis could be increased, and the availability of accessible taxies improved throughout Northern Ireland, a one-tier system would be acceptable. If there were accessible taxis that, for example, did not work out of depots with dispatch facilities and, therefore, could not be booked by telephone, it would restrict disabled people’s ability to avail of them.

231. The Department believes that the Taxis Bill will have a positive impact on disabled people. It has worked closely with the Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee (Imtac) to establish whether the Bill conflicts with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Imtac is sponsored by the Department for Regional Development and is the main adviser to Government in Northern Ireland on accessibility and transport for people with disabilities. Certainly, it takes the view that there is no conflict between the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Taxis Bill’s ability to regulate for accessible taxis.

232. Mr Laverty: I should point out that the spirit of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 has been a major consideration throughout the taxi review. By virtue of existing regulations, taxis that are licensed for public hire in Belfast must be accessible. There is a shortcoming in the number of accessible taxis in rural areas. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 gives UK territorial Departments powers to prescribe accessibility for taxis that are available for immediate — in other words, public — hire. The Department has been conscious of that from the start.

233. Mr McKay: Has consideration been given to an increase in the number of taxi ranks, particularly in Belfast?

234. Mrs Watters: Practical responsibility for the provision of taxi ranks is a traffic-management issue, which is the responsibility of the Department for Regional Development. However, through its work with the taxi industry and colleagues in the Department for Regional Development, the Department of the Environment is aware that moves are already afoot to increase the number of taxi ranks in Belfast. The sub-regional transport plan has, I understand, been published. It refers to consideration of the provision of taxi ranks in towns and cities outside Belfast. That is a pressing issue. There are several towns of considerable size where ranks are not provided.

235. Mr I McCrea: During the Committee’s earlier briefing, Mr Rehfisch mentioned the cost implications of taximeters. There is also the issue of taxi divers and operators who want to bring their vehicles up to disabled-accessible standards. That has major cost implications — perhaps thousands of pounds, rather than a few hundred.

236. Part 6 of the Bill refers to “Payment of grants”. Could any specific issues arise from that? Obviously, it is up to the Department of Finance and Personnel to produce any extra money that is required. Does the Department envisage that grants would be made available to improve accessibility or, indeed, for the introduction of taximeters, given that fitting them would lead drivers and operators to incur costs?

237. Mrs Watters: The Department believes that to obtain completeness, and for the Bill to be forward-looking, it would have been remiss to exclude the provision of a grant-making power. Therefore, the legal provision is being included in the Taxis Bill. However, no money is available, and there are no proposals to introduce grants.

238. With the Taxis Bill, the Department has made it clear that it wants to raise the standard of provision for consumers. It is inevitable that that will involve some costs: there will be one-off costs relating to taximeters and receipt printers, and more significant costs from vehicle purchasing. The Department has not indicated what the vehicle specification for accessible taxis will be. It is a complex area, and we are conscious of not being overly prescriptive about accessible taxis. Much has been said about accessible taxis costing between £30,000 and £35,000, but those would be top-of-the-range purpose-built taxis. It is important that there is a range of accessible taxis and a range of prices.

239. The Chairperson: I am conscious that the potential costs to the industry, compared to the incomes of taxi drivers and operators, have become a feature of the debate on the Bill. I would like to see a breakdown of the different tariffs that have been proposed and I would like to be able to compare them with existing tariffs.

240. Costs associated with taximeters and accessible vehicles have been mentioned, although no vehicle specifications have been recommended. I presume that the associated costs have been considered. The Committee would find such figures useful during its deliberations, as this issue will inevitably arise. Projected costs must have been calculated at some point.

241. Mrs Watters: Some costs are easier to calculate than others, and I am referring to compliance costs. Figures for taximeters and receipt printers would be relatively easy to produce. However, the cost of accessible vehicles, or the potential cost of adapting vehicles to make them accessible, would be more complicated, and the Department would not have details on those items.

242. The Chairperson: It seems to me that the Department is not laying down any specifications as regards accessible vehicles. Does the Department anticipate introducing specifications through, for example, section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 or the Disability Discrimination Act 1995?

243. Provision for specifications has been left very loose. There are two ways that that could be resolved. First, the Department could make it easier for taxi drivers to buy accessible vehicles that will meet the required specifications. Secondly, in the future, another agency could say that those specifications are not up to standard and could introduce new provisions for higher specifications.

244. Mr Laverty: The Bill gives the Department the power to prescribe the accessibility requirements for taxis, as does the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The Department envisages that the Taxis Bill will enable it to prescribe accessibility requirements for Northern Ireland. We will take notice of any regulations that may be made in GB under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

245. The Chairperson: Are you satisfied that the Bill’s provisions for vehicle specifications are entirely compatible with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and any other regulatory requirements?

246. Mrs Watters: If the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 requires that regulations be made, the Department for Transport is responsible for them for England and Wales and the Scottish Executive are responsible for them for Scotland.

247. Mr Laverty: The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 gives the UK territorial Governments powers to make regulations.

248. Mrs Watters: The Department for Transport does not make UK-wide taxi-accessibility regulations.

249. The Chairperson: I am trying to ascertain which regulations apply here, other than the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Are you sure that the flexibility that the Bill contains on vehicle specifications meets the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and any other statutory requirements?

250. Mrs Watters: We are.

251. Mr Boylan: I had a question about designated areas, but it was covered in the reply to Daithí McKay.

252. Mrs Watters: Designated areas are a slightly different concept in the legislation. Taxi ranks or stands might be situated in designated areas, and disabled access to taxis in those areas might be required. The term “designated areas” is designed to bring together several matters. We have in mind key instances in which taxis should be accessible to disabled people who wish to make connections with other forms of transport, such as at airports, train stations or ferry terminals. A great deal of money has been spent to ensure that ferries, trains and other forms of public transport are accessible to people with disabilities; however, if those people cannot manage that final leg home, they may not set out on the big journey at all.

253. The Chairperson: Can you provide the Committee with a list of any associated costs that may be incurred by the Department of the Environment or the taxi industry?

254. Mrs Watters: When we become aware of costs, we will provide them to the Committee. Do you also require information about income that will be generated by fees? It will be for the Driver and Vehicle Agency to collate such information, but we will press for it.

255. The Chairperson: Yes.

256. Mr McKay: Taxi drivers have reported that, following a PSV test, it can take the Department up to 10 days to issue a taxi vehicle licence — in other words, the taxi licence plates. That results in the loss of work and money. Have you considered providing drivers with some form of disc to cover those 10 days and to prevent their being out of pocket during that period?

257. Mr Laverty: The taxi review team is conscious that the time between the PSV test’s taking place and the issuing of taxi licence plates has been a major area of complaint from taxi drivers. We will aim to streamline those procedures when we review taxi vehicle regulations. There will probably be a resultant cost, but the solution to the problem is for taxi licence plates to be issued at the point of testing.

258. Previously, a disc was used to identify a licensed taxi. However, the disc was indiscernible to the travelling public. That was one of the reasons for the introduction of the taxi-plating system. I appreciate that the delay between the time of the test and the issuing of plates is a problem.

259. Mr McKay: When will the review of taxi vehicle regulations take place?

260. Mr Laverty: The Taxis Bill will give the Department enabling powers to make new taxi vehicle regulations. The current PSV requirements will be reviewed and enhanced. I would like to believe that the review will take place sooner rather than later, possibly within 18 months of the new Bill’s being enacted.

261. The Chairperson: On a final note, could the Committee have sight of the early draft of the regulations flowing from the Bill?

262. Mrs Watters: The Department does not have any early drafts of regulations.

263. The Chairperson: Could they be made available to the Committee when the Department has them?

264. Mrs Watters: Of course, but it will be some time before early drafts of regulations are available. The Department’s main focus is on the primary legislation, but, as the policy is being developed in those regulatory areas, we are happy to work with the Committee. The Department does not envisage that the Committee will first hear about those regulations when it sees the secondary legislation.

265. The Chairperson: I thank the departmental representatives for their time; does any other Committee member want to add anything?

266. Mr Boylan: After these discussions, taking a taxi has a whole new meaning for me. [Laughter.]

267. The Chairperson: Thank you for your time today.

20 September 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Billy Armstrong
Mr Trevor Clarke
Mr David Ford
Mr Samuel Gardiner
Mr Ian McCrea

Witnesses:

Mr Andrew McCartney Mr Eamonn O’Donnell	North West Taxi Proprietors
Mr Eddie Lynch Ms Claire Toner	Consumer Council

268. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): I welcome Mr Eamonn O’Donnell and Mr Andrew McCartney from North West Taxi Proprietors (NWTP). It is good to see you. The Committee’s standard format is quite informal: you will have about 10 minutes to make your presentation or to add to the submission that you provided to the Committee, and then Members will ask a few questions for clarification. Your written submission is concise, and you have put a lot of work into it. Your submission is highly focused on the Bill: if you wish to supplement it, you have 10 minutes.

269. Mr Eamonn O’Donnell (North West Taxi Proprietors): Before I begin our presentation, I wish to thank the Committee for giving us the opportunity to discuss the Taxis Bill. Our presentation will outline some background, examine the proposals and specify some of our concerns.

270. NWTP has been involved in the taxi review from the beginning and at every stage of its progress. We lobbied for the taxi review, responded to the key-stakeholder consultation, responded to the consultation on the regulation of taxis and private-hire vehicles, and we responded to the draft Order in Council. We wrote a briefing paper for MLAs before the debate in June 2007, and we responded to the Environment Committee’s recent request for submissions.

271. We were very pleased when the Assembly decided to introduce the Taxis Bill early in its mandate. We are impressed with local politicians for taking that decision, and we thank them.

272. We met the Department of the Environment (DOE), various taxi groups, the Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee (Imtac), the Consumer Council and many others in our quest to create a fair and regulated taxi industry for everyone. It is fair to say that we have been involved in the process from the beginning and at every level.

273. On 3 May 2002, I sat before the previous Environment Committee to lobby for a taxi review and to call for the Department to give proper priority to the taxi industry. It is worth revisiting the reasons behind our call for a review of taxi administration and the introduction of the Taxis Bill.

274. In 1992, the Sterling Report was completed and given to the Department. That report highlighted the inadequacies of the Department and the fragmentation of the taxi industry, but it was inexplicably shelved. NWTP discovered through research that poor working practices and attitudes existed in the local taxi industry. That was later confirmed by the Department’s own research. It was widely accepted that the taxi industry’s system of administration had failed and was inadequate for dealing with the problems of the industry.

275. In Derry, where I live, regulated taxi services were outnumbered by the unregulated providers by at least 2:1. The situation was dire. At the start of the legislative process, the taxi industry was heading for total collapse. The current legislative process has pulled that situation back. However, it is vital that you, our local representatives, complete that process and deliver meaningful change that impacts on community safety and proper working conditions for those in the taxi industry.

276. NWTP welcomes the proposals in the Taxis Bill. We are happy to finally see the taxi review being translated into legislation. In principle, we agree with almost all the content of the proposed Taxis Bill. The changes are necessary to bring the taxi industry into the twenty-first century.

277. I turn to the specific proposals in the Bill. Clause 1 deals with operator licensing for taxi businesses. That will make office owners more accountable and will put the taxi industry firmly into the mainstream economy. NWTP welcomes the introduction of operator licensing, because it is long overdue and should go some way to addressing many of the bad practices of some office owners. The industry needs operator licensing, but, as in the past, if that measure is not enforced properly, all the good work will amount to nothing.

278. We agree that all taxi operators should be licensed. We see that as a central plank in the fight against the unregulated sector. Under the current system, sex offenders cannot be taxi drivers, but they can own and run taxi offices. That must change, and we would welcome such a change.

279. All taxi proprietors should be licensed. Owing to the loophole in the current regulations, standards in the taxi industry have fallen significantly. There is no accountability for taxi offices, and the Bill will introduce accountability and responsibility. That measure will be very effective in tackling the problem of unfair competition.

280. Clause 20 allows for taxis to pick up passengers on the street without them having booked. The structure of the taxi industry will change to a one-tier system. The Department intends to designate areas where only accessible vehicles will be able to pick up. We believe that a one-tier system is the best option for the local taxi industry. Regulation should maintain a safe standard for the industry, but market forces should dictate who services the different aspects of the diverse market. Regulation for the taxi industry in the North is undertaken by the Driver and Vehicle Agency (DVA) and is confined to the probity and health of drivers and vehicle suitability, roadworthiness and safety, including insurance cover. If the current position were enforced, it would regulate a safe standard for the industry.

281. Market forces should be allowed to develop and supply services, where there is a demand, and entrepreneurs in different localities could develop sustainable services that are tailored to that locality, covering the mix of urban and rural services. The taxi industry outside Belfast currently operates as a one-tier system, although on paper it is supposed to be a two-tier system. A two-tier system is not practical or enforceable. The law should not cover something that is not enforceable.

282. We want the taxi industry to be regulated to a safe standard. We want the marketplace deregulated and opened to allow the development of twenty-first-century services. If a taxi driver’s medical and repute checks are in order and his vehicle is up to standard, he has earned the right to work in the taxi industry marketplace. There should be no monopolies.

283. The new proposals will make it safer for the general public by providing more taxis at key times to pick up on the streets. We do not accept the Transport and General Workers Union analysis that such a measure will cost 400 jobs in Belfast public-hire taxis. Rank designation will protect them. The claim made by the union was sensationalist. It was an attempt to grab headlines on the day of the debate to protect what is an unfair monopoly in the city centre of Belfast. The union’s claim should not deflect the Committee from establishing equity and endorsing the proposal.

284. Clause 16 of the Taxis Bill proposes that maximum fare rates are set for all taxis. The Department has agreed that it will commission a taxi cost index to establish what a fair fare is. The maximum fare will come from that report. At present, the economics of the taxi industry are wrong. It is imperative that the Department also sets a minimum fare. North West Taxi Proprietors believe that the taxi cost index will establish what a fair fare is; it should be initiated immediately, and maximum and minimum fares should be set. A multi-tariff system should be put in place to cover day, evening and night-time shifts. Holiday rates should also be built into the system. Once the taxi cost index is completed, the cost of taxiing will be officially established here for the first time ever. If the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) wants fair competition on fares, it is important that parameters be set at both the maximum and minimum ends. The minimum wage is currently set. If the taxi cost index sets out the cost of running a taxi, it will not be rocket science to set a minimum fare, equating to a minimum wage for taxi drivers, alongside the maximum fare.

285. Clause 18 requires all taxis to have taximeters. NWTP agree that all taxis should have taximeters. A taximeter is a measuring instrument for time and distance to set the cost. Taximeters are good for the taxi industry. They give the general public clarity, and, as they are standard in most European taxis, they are good for tourism. Taximeters are fundamental to the success, sustainability and growth of the industry. Implementation of the policy will increase fees for taxi drivers, so it is important that the Department moves at an early stage on two key issues for taxi drivers: improved enforcement and the early introduction of taximeters.

286. It is important to deal with unregulated taxis and offices that use them before we introduce taximeters. We believe that that will mean that operator licensing, at least in part, will be initiated within the next year. It is also important that the Department shows some understanding of taxi-driver issues and deals with costs by the early introduction of taximeters.

287. Clause 23(3) proposes that all new taxi drivers must pass a taxi-driving test. Existing taxi drivers will be required to complete one training day a year. The taxi driver’s licence must be re-established as a vocational licence, and that will require the reinstatement of the taxi-driving test. Only new applicants should be required to sit the test and existing taxi drivers should have their grandfather rights respected as they have already invested significant sums of money in becoming taxi drivers.

288. Clauses 50 and 23(2)(a)(iii) require taxi drivers to complete vocational training at the same time as other vocational lorry and bus licence holders. We expect training in disability awareness, customer care, health and safety and other relevant areas. Cost is an issue for drivers. NWTP admits that the taxi industry has room for improvement in areas such as disability awareness, customer service, health and safety and new innovation. We agree with the proposal, but cost will be an issue for the industry.

289. The shared-fares scheme — in which taxi drivers are permitted to charge individual passengers separate, but less expensive, fares — is covered by clauses 5 and 6. Shared-fares schemes are to be introduced, where possible, and will provide for some diversity in the development of services. The scheme will also cover the current “black hack” services. Shared-fares schemes are aimed at peak periods when taxis are scarce, or they operate between entertainment centres or busy areas in a town or city centre. The schemes result in a person getting a taxi more quickly, saving money on the standard meter fare, and they may meet interesting fellow travellers. Such schemes help to reduce congestion and pollution and will enable the development of new urban and rural services.

290. As regards clause 2(5) and the issue of requiring operators to provide more taxis designed to meet the needs of older people and people with disabilities, Disability Discrimination Act requirements insist that each taxi operator provides more accessible vehicles. We expect this to be mandatory for a percentage of each fleet. We believe that the needs of people with disabilities should be addressed. However, it is important that the solution is balanced with the scale of the problem. Cost will be an issue, and it will be important for the Department to take a balanced approach when setting percentages for businesses and when designating areas.

291. With respect to allowing only accessible vehicles to use taxi ranks, it appears that in certain transport hubs and other designated areas only accessible vehicles will be allowed to ply for hire, and that, after a certain period, only accessible vehicles will be allowed on taxi ranks. Accessible vehicles are expensive to buy and more expensive to run than ordinary taxis. The Department is creating non-financial incentives for those who buy and operate accessible vehicles.

292. There are other issues covered in the Taxis Bill such as advertising, signage, enforcement, increased penalties, requirements for taxi drivers and operators, vehicle licenses. The main issues will be dealt with within the first three years. Other issues may take longer.

293. We have specific concerns relating to clause 55. We ask for clarification regarding article 66A of the of the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981, which deals with car sharing arrangements and provides an exemption for people in the rural transport schemes run by DRD to transport people in a similar way to taxis. Has that exemption been written into the Taxis Bill? If so, that will enable people to abuse the scheme, as has happened on a wide scale in the past.

294. Taxi drivers have to undergo repute and medical checks; their vehicles undergo rigorous tests; they have to carry identification plates, and they will be required to undergo training under the new legislation. Why put us through all of that while providing an exemption that could become a loophole and be abused? Why not run voucher schemes in rural communities and other areas that require special services, and use local taxis to bolster the local industry? If that exemption is to be retained, enforcement will be important.

295. As regards clause 15(2), the Department has stated that a taxi driver could be fined £1,000 for failing to have proper identification on his taxi. Past inefficiency in the Department concerns us. We have an unwritten agreement with the Department that taxi drivers can work, once they acquire the vehicle inspection notice in the test centre, for a period of up to ten days, and they should then contact the Department to find out why their taxi plates have been delayed. If the Department is serious about fining taxi drivers for failure to display, we need a system that provides drivers with certificates or plates at the test centre.

296. Our preference is that the plates are replaced with roof signs containing the information. We agree with the principle of plating but would rather have the information displayed at eye level on roof signs. There is also an environmental impact to be considered in destroying more than 20,000 plastic plates annually. A disc, or certificate, could be issued at the test centre.

297. Changing vehicles is a vital issue for taxi drivers. The current process can keep a taxi driver off the road and losing earnings for two weeks to six weeks, except when the Department grants an amnesty through goodwill. We acknowledge that the merger between DVTA and DVLNI should improve the situation, together with the new legislation that will remove the criminal records office check from the vehicle. We would like to see the Department put a fast-track process in place for taxi drivers who are currently on the Department’s records. The process needs to be speeded up, and provision needs to be written into the Bill.

298. The cost of change is going to be a massive issue for taxi drivers. That can be illustrated by examining clause 30. Under the legislation, taxi drivers will be charged additional fees. We accept that fees must increase so that the new system can be introduced, but we would like some understanding from the Department about taxi drivers’ costs. We would like the Department of the Environment to spell out the time frame of change in an action plan. With regard to clause 8, we do not want all the costs to be introduced to taxi drivers without the introduction of meters in all taxis.

299. We would like clauses 18 and 30 to be linked at the implementation stage. We are pleased that the Department and the Committee are bringing the administration of the taxi industry into the twenty first century. However, we are concerned that the taxi enforcement team consists of only five people for the whole industry. Although a bigger pool of 21 can be tapped into on occasions, that is not good enough. All the good work of the Department and the Assembly will come to nothing if the legislation is not properly enforced. We would like a new enforcement strategy that instils confidence and has a local element of enforcement or compliance. Given that the taxi review is five years old, what is the action plan for implementation? What resources will the Department put into that?

300. In the consultation, the Department was vague on designated areas. We need a common-sense approach and more detail before implementation. Our fear is that whole areas of city centres and towns will be designated out of bounds to non-accessible taxis.

301. In conclusion, NWTP welcomes the Taxis Bill. We are happy that the Department is taking steps to update policy and the administration of taxis. The taxi review and the Taxis Bill are long overdue. We agree, in principle, with almost all the proposed Taxis Bill. However, we have concerns because we do not have the detail. The legislation is enabling, but our main concern is that it is so open. Although we understand that more consultation will follow, it points up the inherent difficulty that we have in giving a complete welcome to the Bill.

302. The Committee for the Environment should endorse the Taxis Bill and do all that it can to ensure that it receives Royal Assent, so that the development of the taxi industry can move ahead as soon as possible and the Department can get on with planning the programme of change that will bring the taxi industry into the twenty first century. I thank the Committee for taking time to listen to us and for giving us the opportunity to express our opinion.

303. The Chairperson: Thank you for that well-constructed, cogently argued submission.

304. Mr I McCrea: I reiterate what the Chairperson said. It was a well put-together response that dealt with almost every clause, which helps the Committee to understand any potential problems with the Bill.

305. There is concern that a one-tier system may put sole operators out of business if large companies can come in and take business off the street. You also touched on the benefits that you have reaped from tourism. Will there be room for everyone if a one-tier system is introduced?

306. Secondly, you mentioned setting meters at the maximum fare rate. There would be no obligation for anyone to discount if the meter was set at the maximum rate. I do not know how that discount would work, given that taxi drivers, quite rightly, want to make as much money as possible, as does any business. Obviously, it would be down to the individuals or the companies.

307. Mr O’Donnell: There is room for everyone in the one-tier system. Operator licensing is imperative because there is nothing in place to make operators accountable. Many of the industry’s problems, including the growth of the unregulated sector, have arisen from the lack of operator licensing.

308. As with others, if the Department takes a common-sense approach to the sole-operator issue and if there is good consultation with the taxi industry, there is an opportunity. We hear, mainly from rural operators, that sole operators in each location could, together, cope with operator licensing under a percentage system. If not, in other words, a sole operator should be forced to provide the service. As long as a sole operator can contact someone in a village with access to a vehicle to provide the service needed, that is enough to cover that clause. Without sole-operator licensing, a loophole will be created that could be abused, and there has been massive abuse in the past.

309. The second issue is the maximum fare. Maximum fares and discounts are not the preference of the taxi proprietors. Our preference is a maximum and a minimum fare: the taxi cost index would set a fare for the region, and we would all work from that. However, a report by the Office of Fair Trading recommends competition, and the argument is that someone could go on a taxi journey, find at the end of it that the fare is the maximum, and argue the price. It was put to the Office of Fair Trading that someone filling a trolley with groceries in a supermarket would not negotiate the prices when their shopping came to be rung through at the checkout. Taxi proprietors also find that unacceptable, and our counter argument is that, if there is to be one rate, all meters must be set at that. They cannot be set at the lowest rate, because there would not be one.

310. Mr Boylan: Thank you for your presentation. You have outlined many issues, and I hope that they have all been noted. Could you expand on fast tracking and on designated areas?

311. Mr Andrew McCartney (North West Taxi Proprietors): Fast tracking is a big concern in the taxi industry. If a taxi driver writes off his or her car, or it is burnt, or, for whatever reason, the vehicle can no longer be used as a taxi, that situation is out of his or her control. The driver has to buy a new car, and re-apply for a PSV licence, and the process can take up to six weeks. Even if the driver knows someone in the Department who can put it through more quickly, it can take two weeks. Therefore, a taxi driver is off the road from between two to six weeks, and there is absolutely no mechanism written into the Bill to fast track the process.

312. Every week, taxi drivers face the possibility of being off the road. If a driver forgets to apply for a PSV licence, that is his or her fault; however, if, for reasons that are out of the driver’s control, the vehicle no longer works, provision should be written into the Bill to fast track that process. There would have to be very strict criteria, but there should be some mechanism whereby the vehicle could be presented at a test centre, tested, and the paperwork done in reverse. If there is a problem, the licence can then be revoked, as opposed to the current situation in which the Department takes the safe option of going through the bureaucratic process and issuing the licence six weeks later. No driver can afford to be off the road for six weeks, earning no money. That has not even been considered, but it must be. It is perhaps not too high on the scale, but, from a practical point of view, it is a possibility that taxi drivers face every week.

313. Mr O‘Donnell: NWTP fears that the Bill is vague on designated areas. They work on a ranking space where accessible taxis are allowed to queue up, but saloon cars will be allowed to pick up at a designated distance. We are afraid that four or five places in a town or city centre will be chosen as designated areas and that the whole city centre will, therefore, be designated as out of bounds. I suggest that the departmental officials use their common sense and talk to representatives from the local taxi industry to work out what the designated areas should be.

314. Mr T Clarke: Mr O’Donnell referred to the test for new drivers, but he seems to be against the one-day training course for existing drivers. Perhaps I misunderstood him, but would that examination not surely be a good way of maintaining an excellent service in the taxi industry?

315. Mr O’Donnell: You picked me up wrongly. We are in favour of the training because we accept that there is room for improvement in the industry.

316. Mr T Clarke: Are you happy for existing drivers to do the one-day training course?

317. Mr A McCartney: We are opposed to the introduction of a driving test for existing licence holders; we are not against the one-day training course.

318. Mr T Clarke: In the past, some drivers — although others might call them cowboys — have been given taxi licences even though they have not received adequate training. In fact, it has been said that the licences were given out like Guinness labels. If that is the case, the obligation on those drivers to do the complete test would iron out lots of problems in the system.

319. Mr A McCartney: The difficulty that I have with that might sound like a contradiction. Many people who have invested in taxiing as a job and a livelihood might not pass the test and would be out of work. We are trying to be all inclusive. Many people in the industry — even the operators — have played their part in destroying it over the past number of years. You called them cowboys, but I call them pirates. If they license themselves, they should be part of the process: they should not be excluded. The Department decided to do away with the driving test and give out licences. Existing drivers should not have to do the test, but drivers who join the industry hereafter should. However, every driver — existing and new — should be trained in disability and customer awareness.

320. Mr T Clarke: Mr McCartney’s comments about drivers who have invested heavily in the industry but who might not pass the test make me fearful. For the sake of the industry, the Bill should enforce the test. I know that people have made heavy investments, but if those individuals are not of the standard required to transport the public, they should not be in the industry. I am almost afraid to say that, but that is why I agree with that part of the legislation. The Department was wrong to do away with the test.

321. Mr A McCartney: That is what I meant when I said that my comments might sound like a contradiction. However, it is about defending people’s rights, and the Department has to make a decision on that. If it goes back on its decision, many people — not just one person — will be affected. The taxi industry has always been honest enough to say that there are gaps in its service — even with regard to disability awareness — but the Department has created those. Therefore, the Department must be careful when drafting the legislation, because some people might be put out of work. We may have to deal with a few contradictions to protect those who are working. There are worse things happening than taxis being driven by people who are not properly trained to drive; for example, people who do not even have licences are taxiing. We have to draw a line in the sand and get a fully regulated, professional service.

322. Mr O’Donnell: For instance, some people are capable of driving taxis, but they might be slow learners or have literacy problems, so they must be protected.

323. Mr Gardiner: I compliment the witnesses on their professional presentation; thank you for that. You have suggested areas that the Department can consider and hopefully amend.

324. The Chairperson: We could not finish on a finer point. Thank you for travelling from Derry to make your valuable presentation.

325. I welcome Claire Toner and Eddie Lynch from the Consumer Council. The Committee has limited time and a lot of business to do; nonetheless, the Consumer Council’s contribution is extremely valuable in bringing the voice of the consumers to the Committee. The Committee hears similar and conflicting messages from the taxi industry.

326. Mr Eddie Lynch (Consumer Council): Thank you for the opportunity to come before the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to present the views of passengers on this subject, and I will try to keep my presentation brief. I will focus on the views of the Consumer Council and on why the Taxis Bill is important to consumers here. I will also focus on areas of the Bill where the council feels that there should be some amendment. Members should have copies of our presentation. I will outline the role of the Consumer Council in the process, the impact that the Taxis Bill could have on consumers and taxi users, the process so far and the need for changes.

327. The Consumer Council is a statutory body and represents passengers travelling to, from and within Northern Ireland. It has been involved with the Department and others in the review since 2002. Early in the review, the Consumer Council conducted consumer research and produced a report, ‘Talking about Taxis’, which fed into the review of taxis and outlined the key issues and concerns faced by consumers who use the industry. Throughout the process, the Consumer Council felt that the consultation was very well handled by the Department and officials. It has always had an opportunity to speak to the Department during the various stages and put its views across. Indeed, several areas that caused concern have been addressed, and I will refer to them later.

328. What does the taxi industry need? The Consumer Council strongly supports the key objectives of the Taxis Bill because it believes that the current standards are not high enough for consumers and must be raised across the industry. More legal taxi operators must be introduced, and we need to tackle and remove illegal operators. We need improved consumer protection, awareness to enable passengers to make informed decisions and choices and a framework for competitive and reasonable fares for all, both for the industry and for the passenger.

329. Why is change needed? Over one million passenger journeys are made annually. Research carried out by the Consumer Council a few years ago showed that 5% of consumers use taxis as their main mode of travel, which is significant when compared to the 4% who use buses and the 1% who use trains. Taxis have a key role in transporting people about their business.

330. The research also highlighted real concerns about charging. Around 51% of consumers believed that public-hire taxis may have overcharged them at least once, and 37% of consumers believed that they had been overcharged by private-hire taxis. That highlighted not necessarily that taxis were overcharging, but real consumer confusion over what is a fair price. The Bill is needed to ensure a proper and fair system of charging and to ensure that consumers know what they have to pay and how to take action if they believe that they have been overcharged.

331. There is a lack of consumer knowledge about rights and protection. More than half of the consumers who made a complaint were unhappy about how that complaint was received. Many felt that there was no avenue to progress it.

332. Some key issues emerged from the consultation process. Initially, it was proposed that roof signs should be removed from taxis. We strongly opposed that, believing that they are vital for passenger information and safety. We are pleased that the Department of the Environment has changed its mind on that issue, and we welcome the new suggestions. Roof signs could be used more effectively and could include licence plates, making them more visible. We are keen to work with the Department on that proposal.

333. Accessibility is another key issue. We argued that Northern Ireland consumers require a mixture of fleets and vehicles to meet various needs and disabilities. A single solution would not meet all of those requirements. Accessible taxis, or “wheelchair taxis”, would not meet the needs of all consumers. We agree with the Department’s approach that a proportion of taxi operators’ fleets should be wheelchair-accessible, leaving other taxis to meet other needs.

334. We have some concerns about operator licensing, particularly in regard to sole operators in rural areas. I will touch on that issue later.

335. In general, any concerns that we raised with the Department have resulted in safeguards being put in place throughout the Bill. Although the Taxis Bill provides a framework for change, the devil will be in the detail. Many issues still need to be teased out to get it right.

336. In summary, the status quo is not an option. There must be a more passenger-focused system that meets the three principles of accessibility, or the three As: accessible vehicles that meet the needs of all passengers; vehicle availability when passengers wish to travel; and affordability. In the future, we want consideration to be given to how concessionary fares could be extended to the taxi industry.

337. Taxis must be available at the point of need. We must work to ensure that, for every passenger, a vehicle that meets requirements is available when it is wanted and at a fair price.

338. I have some specific points about the Bill itself. In the area of operator licensing, consideration must be given to the needs of sole operators — particularly in rural areas. That matter is addressed in the Bill; however, we want reassurances that the Department will ensure that those operators are not overburdened by huge costs, which would have a negative impact on consumers in such areas.

339. Although passenger complaints are mentioned in regard to the operator licence, a robust complaint system must be put in place. In addition to operators having to have a complaints procedure, it is essential that there be a further avenue to pursue if passengers are unhappy with the taxi company’s initial response. In other areas, that is a role for the Consumer Council. It is vital to ensure that passengers are adequately protected.

340. We welcome clause 10(4), which states that:

“The Department shall take into consideration … any recommendations made by the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland.”

341. That is an important initiative. However, recourse to the Consumer Council should be embedded in other parts of the legislation, and its role enshrined. In particular, the Bill should state that the Consumer Council should be consulted in relation to fare-setting and maximum fares; passenger information; accessibility standards; and the handling of passenger complaints. Currently, that happens in many of those areas. We have close links and discussions with the Department of the Environment; however, if the Bill is to be passenger-focused, the passenger representative must be enshrined in it.

342. Ms Claire Toner (Consumer Council): We are aware that there has been a separate consultation on taxi-driver training, and we have responded to that.

343. The Consumer Council welcomes the additional training proposed for drivers and believes that it will help to raise standards in the industry, as well as meet the needs of passengers. Disability-awareness training is a particular issue for those passengers and will help to address their needs. The Consumer Council has recently received feedback from passengers with disabilities, regarding driver attitudes, so disability-awareness training is vital. However, the Consumer Council recognises that a balance needs to be struck, so that the costs of that training are managed and the benefits of the system to passengers are not outweighed by increases in fares.

344. Mr Lynch: To finish, there are two points. First, enforcement — which has been mentioned already — is central to the success of the Taxis Bill. The Department needs sufficient resources to ensure that there is compliance and that standards are met across the industry. Raising standards is very important for the industry, but we recognise that it is a challenge. Therefore, as they move to improve service for passengers, those working in the industry need protection from damage by illegal operators. The Consumer Council urges that the Department be given the necessary resources to ensure that the Bill is implemented fully.

345. Secondly, to date, the Consumer Council has welcomed the implementation and monitoring of the process by the Assembly, and it welcomes the Committee’s role in overseeing progress on the issue. As the current system does not meet the needs of passengers, the Consumer Council urges the Committee to take an active role in setting timescales and in the monitoring process, so that passengers can benefit from the changes as soon as possible.

346. Consumers must have feedback; they have played a part in the whole review and given their views, so communication with them is vital. We would like to see the “what”, the “when” and the “why” addressed; consumers must be told what key changes they can expect, when they can expect them, and why they are happening and what their impact will be. The Consumer Council looks forward to working with the Department and other stakeholders, to ensure that the Taxis Bill meets its objectives.

347. We thank members for their attention and are happy to answer any questions that they may have.

348. Mr Deputy Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. Does anyone have any questions?

349. Mr Ford: The Committee has heard a lot about accessibility in the earlier presentation, and the Consumer Council talked about regulating the one-person operator. If there is a situation such as that, and we accept the idea that only a proportion of taxis should be fully accessible, how do you decide what the necessary proportion is? Furthermore, could that proportion vary between the single operator — or possibly two or three operators sharing in a type of partnership — in a rural area, and the big Belfast firms? How can a reasonable balance be produced in a situation where not every operator has to be fully accessible?

350. Mr Lynch: That is a very good question, and one with which we have struggled. Initially, we thought of exemptions for sole operators, in relation to providing fully accessible taxis. After speaking to the Department, we had concerns that that route could open up a loophole for the industry to register a number of drivers as sole operators. We felt that it would have a negative impact on efforts to increase accessibility standards across the industry. Further discussion is needed on that issue, and we are happy to work with the Department on it.

351. The question of proportions has to be looked at on an area-by-area basis, to see what is needed. Again, referring to our principles about accessibility, what is important is that a taxi that meets the needs of the passenger is available when he or she wants to travel. That is where the level of proportion is vital. The situation in Belfast must be viewed differently to that in rural areas. We must examine the system again to see how it will operate.

352. There is no easy answer. There must be incentives that encourage the industry to provide accessible taxis. We welcome the proposals to develop taxi ranks and to establish interchanges at such strategic points as public transport stations, which only accessible taxis will be able to enter. The industry must be offered business benefits and incentives to encourage it to go down that route, so that it considers the provision of accessible taxis worthwhile.

353. Mr Ford: That leads us to regulation. Last week, we heard significant complaints from Belfast public-hire drivers that taxi ranks do not work, because there is no enforcement and because ordinary private-hire saloon cars hover around — if not use — the ranks. Without a proper regulatory regime, how can one achieve a balance and offer incentives? It appears that the Department is failing — at least, according to the Belfast public-hire drivers.

354. Mr Lynch: The current system is failing and in no way meets the general needs of passengers, including those who require wheelchair access to taxis. We are trying to develop a public transport network that is accessible to everyone. We are introducing fully accessible trains and buses, and our focus is on connectivity. We want people with disabilities and older people with reduced mobility to be able to get from A to B. Many journeys involve more than one bus or train service; people are required to use more than one mode of transport. We recognise that unless all links in the chain are accessible, some journeys cannot be completed.

355. I agree that the current situation does not meet the needs of passengers, particularly those with disabilities.

356. The Deputy Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. It is important that the Consumer Council has a major input in the discussion.

27 September 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Billy Armstrong
Mr Trevor Clarke
Mr David Ford
Mr Alex Maskey
Mr Ian McCrea
Mr Daithí McKay
Mr Peter Weir

Witnesses:

Ms Barbara Fleming Mr Michael Lorimer	Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee
Mr Richard Daniels Mr Andrew Overton	London Taxis International
Mr Sean Smyth	T&G Section of Unite
Mr James Beckett Mr James Matier	Transport and General Workers’ Union
Mr Anthony McCloskey	George Best Belfast City Airport Taxi Rank

357. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): Ms Fleming and Mr Lorimer, you are very welcome. The Committee tries to keep these evidence sessions as informal as possible, and they focus on legislation. Witnesses are invited to take between 10 and 15 minutes to make their submissions. The Committee has your written submissions; if there are aspects of those that you want to emphasise particularly, or other issues that you want to raise, please feel free to do so.

358. Mr Michael Lorimer (Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee): Thank you, Mr Chairperson. I will set out the position of the Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee (IMTAC) on the Taxis Bill, and Barbara Fleming will then speak on the experiences of disabled people who use taxis.

359. IMTAC is the main source of advice to Government — and others — on transport issues for disabled and older people. It is sponsored by the Department for Regional Development to perform that function. IMTAC works towards an inclusive transport system on the basis that disabled people should have access to the same goods and services as everyone else, which is current Government policy. There should be a move to change the transport system from one of segregation to one of inclusivity.

360. Taxis are a key service for disabled people. Before I go into detail, I wish to record that, for many years, taxis have provided a vital service for disabled people; taxi drivers provide a door-to-door service, and many drivers go the extra distance to help disabled people — for example, by carrying shopping into passengers’ homes. Taxis are often available when other transport is not. Historically, because of the inaccessibility of public transport, taxis have often been the only available source of transport for some disabled people.

361. Despite that, disabled people have had extreme problems using taxis. I will highlight some of those as a background to IMTAC’s position on the Taxis Bill. The number of taxis suitable for disabled people is low, including wheelchair-accessible taxis. There is a particular problem outside Belfast; however, the problem of access to those taxis in Belfast is huge.

362. There is a lack of availability of taxis at the times when disabled people want to travel. Many vehicles that are wheelchair accessible — again, particularly outside Belfast — are hired by Departments for home-to-school transport. Therefore, disabled people are restricted in the times that they can travel.

363. To illustrate this point, we had a meeting with one of the direct rule Ministers at Stormont Castle around a year and a half ago, and we had to be there at 4.00 pm. One of our members is disabled, and, because of school transport, the only time that a taxi could take him was around 12.00 noon. Therefore, he was at Stormont three hours before the meeting and had to hang around for an hour afterwards, and he had to pay £70 for the privilege. His journey was from Bangor to Stormont. Those are the type of issues that disabled people face.

364. We also have real concerns about vehicle standards. Again, London-style taxis are being used in Belfast, and standards are set for those vehicles, and they are safe. However, we have grave concerns about the safety of some of the vehicles outside Belfast that purport to be accessible vehicles. Many of them are van conversions, and we have grave concerns about whether the people being transported in them are safe.

365. Staff attitudes are a big issue for disabled people. That can permeate in a number of ways. A common problem is that disabled people are refused taxis. Once they say that they are wheelchair users or are disabled, the answer from the taxi firm is that it does not carry disabled people. There are also issues around language. Basically, disabled people are often treated with lack of dignity by taxi drivers.

366. Last week, I had a case in Dungannon in which a young girl being transported to school by taxi was verbally abused by the taxi driver. The disappointing aspect of that case was that when the parents complained to the Department of Education, they were told that unless the daughter could prove it, the Department would do nothing about the matter. Attitudes are a big issue for disabled people.

367. The final issue is the cost of services. There is a premium to be paid, particularly if you are a wheelchair user and need an accessible taxi, on many services in Belfast, and there is clear evidence of extreme discrimination as regards charging.

368. A man from Derry spoke to me yesterday about his mother, who was dying of cancer. In the last weeks of her life, she had to use a wheelchair and needed to travel a quarter of a mile. She had to use an accessible taxi and was charged £70 for the privilege of doing so. There is a lot of anger among disabled people about charges for wheelchair-accessible vehicles.

369. IMTAC broadly supports the Taxis Bill. The Department has sought to consult with the taxi trade, taxi users and stakeholders. In particular, it has sought to be proactive in gauging the views of disabled people and older people. IMTAC facilitated several public meetings in Derry and Belfast, and there were focus group meetings comprising disabled people in places such as Dungannon. The Department got real first-hand accounts from disabled people about the issues that they faced when using taxis. There were people attending who were blind, had learning disabilities, were deaf, were wheelchair users and those who had other impairments.

370. The Department has clearly listened to the views of users as well as those in the trade and has come up with a balanced approach on the requirements of taxi users and operators. I would like to stress that the solution is for all of Northern Ireland. It is not a solution for the centre of Belfast, where much of the focus on these issues tends to be.

371. There is much debate about the tiered systems. There is a good deal of merit in having a one-tier system, the reason being that the only place where the current two-tier system makes a difference is in Belfast, where there are public- and private-hire vehicles.

372. The public-hire system does not work for disabled people. It may be that there are 450 accessible taxis available from ranks, but the message that we hear from disabled people is that they cannot access those services. The public-hire sector has not done enough to engage and promote its services to disabled people. Why is there no contact or dispatch service so that disabled people can phone to access those vehicles? We also have anecdotal evidence of disabled people trying to access taxis at ranks, only to be told that those vehicles do not accommodate wheelchairs.

373. There are difficult issues around the availability of the public-hire fleet in Belfast. I know of very few disabled people who use public-hire taxis in Belfast. Those who do use taxis do so on a private-hire basis. Predominantly, the wheelchair users to whom I have spoken use the main private-hire operators in Belfast: Value Cabs, fonaCAB, and so on.

374. There are difficulties with the current two-tier system for disabled people in Belfast. Outside Belfast, the one-tier system is the only one that addresses accessibility issues. In a two-tier system, public-hire taxis will migrate into the private-hire sector, and accessibility issues would not be addressed. The one-tier system is crucial to increasing the number of taxis that are accessible to disabled people. There is no point in having 450 accessible taxis if they are not available to disabled people.

375. We support operator licensing, and we particularly support the link between operator licensing and accessible vehicles. Accessibility of vehicles should be tied to operator licensing. We support the link between accessibility and the provision of taxis at ranks. We stress that that should apply to all ranks.

376. One big issue that was identified early in the review process is taxi provision at Belfast International Airport, the main point of entry for visitors to this country. There are very few accessible vehicles there, and that sends out a message to visitors that we do not take seriously the requirements of disabled visitors. We understand that that is not part of the contract, but contracts can stipulate levels of accessibility, and they should. Obviously, other taxi ranks should also connect to the transport system.

377. We support the measures relating to fares, particularly the provision for a maximum fare. That will not end discriminatory charging, but it will end the extreme discrimination encountered by some disabled people. Some have been charged as much as £70 for a quarter-of-a-mile journey. A maximum fare will end that type of discrimination. We support the use of taximeters; a clear display of fares will give all passengers greater confidence in the use of taxis.

378. We support proposals to give the Department powers to prescribe driver training. That is important. Unless we challenge the attitudes of some drivers, disabled people will not be able to access taxis. Better training of drivers and driver development will bring benefits to the taxi system in general, and that should be available to drivers with disabilities. We do not want to discriminate against drivers with, for example, learning disabilities.

379. We want vehicle standards to be addressed; people need vehicles that are safe. The Department should establish vehicle accessibility standards throughout Northern Ireland. We are assured that the Bill includes the powers for the Department to do that. As it stands, the Taxis Bill will improve standards for all consumers, particularly for consumers with disabilities.

380. Other transport services, both large and small, have had to become accessible because of legislation and Government policy, as have service providers such as hairdressers and café proprietors. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 has affected all such businesses. We have seen massive changes to public transport. Taxis have been left behind somewhat, and that must be addressed. It is essential that the powers in the Taxis Bill that change how taxis are regulated are not watered down any further.

381. I will hand over to Barbara Fleming, who has been an IMTAC member for eight years and has been a taxi user for a long time. She is connected to nearly every disability group in Belfast, so she has talked to many people about their experiences of using taxis.

382. Ms Barbara Fleming (Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee): I will switch myself off the loop because I cannot stand my own voice. [Laughter.] As Michael said, I am not speaking just on behalf of myself; I have talked to many disabled people across the board. For example, I am heavily involved in 18 organisations; I am the principal chairperson of the board of Open Arts, which serves more than 300 disabled people; and I am the secretary of the Northern Ireland Neurological Charities Alliance (NINCA), which is an alliance of all the charities that support people with neurological conditions. Despite being a qualified interpreter, I am hard of hearing, so I serve on a rota basis as chairperson of the regional division of the British Deaf Association.

383. I am representing disabled people with every conceivable impairment, including the deaf sign-language-using community. Everyone to whom I have spoken has had the same experiences as I have had, so when I speak for myself, I am speaking for them as well; not just wheelchair users but people with mental-health issues, visual impairments or people like me who have multiple impairments. I cannot tell you how excited we are about the Taxis Bill, because it is a giant leap forward in resolving many of the issues that Michael has addressed. It is especially exciting for disabled people in rural areas, where it is next to impossible to get a taxi. The lack of taxis means that we have to go with what is available, which has led to exploitation and attitudinal difficulties that disabled people have experienced.

384. For example, I represented a friend whose husband was the first deaf chairperson of the bowling club on the Malone Road. I know how much taxis cost; it amounts to a fare and a half, and there is also a minimum charge. I had worked out that the taxi from my home would cost me about £15 either way. I was charged £35 one way, and so had no money to get home. I could not tell my friend, because I was there to support her and did not want to upset her. I cannot explain to you what that did to me physically as well, because of my heart condition. I had to get through that night without knowing how I was going to get home.

385. I have had taxi drivers shout at me and swear at me. I have had to sit cramped; I have been shoved into a taxi that I was told was accessible and have had to sit doubled-over because I am too tall. My chair reclines backwards and has to be put into that position, forcing me to bend over in agony. I have been charged extortionate rates for those privileges.

386. Why do I not complain about that treatment or report it? The answer is simply because the firm would refuse to take me; therefore, I am not in a position to complain. A colleague and I were asked to talk about this on the radio, but we could not — if we did, we would no longer have a taxi service to use. There is only one main taxi service in Belfast that I can use. There have been only two journeys in the past 11 years during which I have not been exploited. As a wheelchair user, one really depends on the taxi drivers. When the taxi driver that I mentioned earlier charged me £35, I told him that that was not was the meter said, and he simply cleared the meter. He was a big man, and, as a woman, what could I have done? I did not want to make a big scene and alert people to the situation, because I was there as a support and I did not want to worry or stress anyone.

387. On Monday evening, a friend of mine booked a taxi to travel to an Open Arts event. She explained to the driver that she was travelling with another wheelchair user with whom she lived. However, she could not get into the taxi because it was too high. She was a wheelchair user, but she could transfer from the wheelchair into the car, so the taxi driver just thought she was being awkward. When she transferred to the backseat, the driver shouted at her. He folded up her chair and just set it down without securing it, meaning that the chair fell on top of her and injured her knee.

388. On a few occasions, I have tried to get a taxi at a rank. I have been ignored, but, thankfully, on two occasions, I was recognised by a taxi driver from a firm that had transported me a couple of times, and he said that he would take me. I had to wait until his taxi came down the queue at the rank, and then I knew that I was going to get home.

389. Like Michael, other people have told me that they have been refused by a taxi driver. The drivers have said that they are sorry, but they do not transport disabled people. Sometimes drivers have said that their taxis are not accessible when it is very obvious that they are accessible. In some ways, taxi drivers are a bit fearful, or perhaps they do not know how to work the ramps. Again, the Bill is a giant step forward because it means that training will be provided that will tackle that fear. Equality training is not like disability-awareness training: it does exactly what it says. It enables people to see disabled people as they are: members of the public and a very important part of society. We are contributors. If we do nothing else, we supply a vast amount of employment; if disabled people are taken out of society, it will collapse, and a lot of people would be unemployed.

390. As members of the public, we have the right to travel as other people do. Not only that, our money is worth the same as anyone else’s. If a driver makes a taxi wheelchair accessible, wheelchairs users will get in it and will pay. Setting a maximum rate will not mean that taxi drivers will be poverty-stricken. They will have more clients, especially when the one-tier system comes into effect and there are more accessible taxis. There are many disabled people in rural areas who cannot access any form of transport whatsoever; they are just waiting to use this service. Therefore, it will pay in the long run. If the system is established correctly, the cost of setting it up will be recouped in fares that drivers receive from the increased number of clients using the service. It will go a long way.

391. For disabled people who are totally dependent on others, getting out and about will have a knock-on effect in many areas. The Bill will cut down on abuse and the exploitation of them as people. It will open up opportunities for friendships, employment, and so much more than I have time to talk about today. You have no idea about the knock-on effect that the proposed legislation will have on the disabled community and the deaf community in Northern Ireland.

392. I have deaf friends who have been charged a ridiculous amount of money for taxi journeys. They do not have a mobility impairment, but because they are deaf, speak with a monotone voice and are difficult to make out, they are classed as having a learning difficulty. Consequently, they are charged an extortionate amount for their taxi journeys. Unfortunately, they are afraid to complain.

393. People with learning difficulties and mental-health difficulties have been exploited. I feel that the Bill will resolve many of those problems. It will supply more taxis, so it will even out the ground a bit more by providing more competition. The training will enable taxi drivers to interact with disabled people and other members of the public, including older people. Overall, I think it is a very positive step.

394. The Chairperson: Thank you for that, Barbara. I am sure that, like other Committee members, I am shocked to hear, at first hand, people’s experience of that type of exploitation, unacceptable practice and behaviour. It provides a human focus on why we should be here today and dealing with the Taxis Bill. Thank you for your evidence.

395. Mr Weir: First, thank you for your presentation. If we hear no other evidence, the evidence that you have given today shows, at least, the need for some degree of reform of the current system to ensure that disabled people are put on a level playing field with everyone else. You highlighted, principally from your own experiences, a number of problems that wheelchair users, in particular, have with the current system and the level of exploitation that they suffer. You touched on the deaf community as well. Do you have any other information, from your own experience, of the levels or types of discrimination or exploitation that any other disabled groups are suffering?

396. As you have said, wheelchair users are vulnerable to exploitation. Similarly, a deaf person’s voice may make them vulnerable to exploitation. Could you give us any information on the impact on any of the other disabled groups?

397. Ms Fleming: Certainly. I have a few colleagues and friends who have a visual impairment and who have guide dogs. There have been occasions when a taxi driver has said that he could not carry a guide dog in his taxi. Although the new policy has helped in some ways, there was an incident, a couple of weeks ago, when a taxi driver said that he could not carry a guide dog in his taxi because he was allergic to dogs.

398. A married couple, who each have a dog, because the man works and the woman is a housewife, had to give up one of their dogs. The taxi could have carried two dogs but the driver, nevertheless, refused to carry both. That left one person at a disadvantage. In that case, the woman gave up her dog because her husband needed to travel by taxi. That left the woman at a disadvantage because she did not know how she was going to get into the building at the end of the journey. Thankfully, it was arranged by mobile phone that someone would wait for her at the other end.

399. Mr Lorimer: Blind people who do not use guide dogs have also expressed concerns about drivers who treat blind people as stupid and take them on the scenic route, thereby building up a healthy fare. That is a fairly common experience for blind people. People with mobility impairments who are not wheelchair users have problems accessing saloon taxis.

400. Earlier, we talked about vehicle accessibility: the focus tends to be on wheelchair users but we must look at the standards of vehicle accessibility for a broad range of people, including those with walking difficulties. For instance, fitting a swivel seat in a saloon vehicle can make it much more accessible to people with a walking difficulty. There are taxi accessibility issues for disabled people apart from wheelchair users.

401. Mr A Maskey: Thank you for your illuminating presentations. In your written presentation, you said that you had held meetings with taxi drivers’ representatives and others in the trade at which you addressed areas of common concern, such as enforcement and accessible vehicle standards. Was there clear dissent between you and the taxi operators on any issue? Was there anything that you did not agree on that may or may not be covered by the Taxis Bill?

402. Mr Lorimer: The vehicle standards favoured by taxi operators and those favoured by disabled people differ. Ideally, we want a standard of vehicle that everyone can access. However, that aspiration may not be achievable, as we must be realistic about the nature of the industry and the costs of developing such a vehicle.

403. There are issues about Belfast public-hire taxis, and there has been a great deal of publicity about the Bill affecting taxi accessibility for disabled people. We said in strong terms that that will not be the case, because, at present, disabled people cannot access many Belfast public-hire vehicles. It is a bone of contention for us that some representatives of the public-hire sector say that they are the defenders of disabled people.

404. We also want a higher percentage of fleets to be of a disabled-access standard, whereas the taxi industry probably wants a lower percentage; but that is life. We will have to compromise on that as much as the taxi trade in the outcome of the Bill.

405. There are differences, but there is common ground as well. We share Belfast public-hire representatives’ concerns about enforcement and vehicle standards, and we would like to see those issues addressed.

406. Mr Ford: Thank you both for your presentations. Your written submission highlights several issues that will come up only in secondary legislation, such as the percentage of fleets that should be disabled-accessible. You both talked about the attitude of taxi drivers and training. Should training be compulsory for all drivers or solely for new drivers?

407. Mr Lorimer: We would prefer that all drivers go through some kind of disability equality training, but some already have. In the past, as the disabled persons’ Transport Advisory Committee, we were connected with Disability Action and we trained taxi drivers, so there are 300 to 400 drivers who have done that training. There must be flexibility in recognising that some drivers have already undertaken training, but, ideally, we would like all drivers to go through periodic refresher training, because issues change.

408. Mr Boylan: Thank you both for your presentations. Over the past weeks, the Committee has heard from taxi drivers, so it is good to hear the customers’ perspective, and that is all part of social inclusion.

409. You mentioned a one-tier system in rural areas. Is accessibility even more difficult there?

410. Ms Fleming: Very much so.

411. Mr Boylan: Can you clarify the issues?

412. Mr Lorimer: There are fewer accessible vehicles outside Belfast. Saloon taxis are predominantly used in rural areas. Since there are no standards for those vehicles, many vehicles in rural areas are van conversions that have been done by local firms, and that presents serious safety concerns. Taxi firms in rural areas tend to do a lot of work for Government agencies, such as ferrying patients to medical appointments and providing home-to-school transport, so their vehicles are not readily available to disabled people in any case.

413. Therefore, they are not available to disabled people anyway. Furthermore, because there are so few of them, companies can charge whatever the heck they want for the use of those vehicles by disabled people. The low number of accessible vehicles is a huge problem in rural areas. Imtac has received a lot of feedback about the absence of any other form of transport in rural areas from older people and disabled people who rely on taxis.

414. Mr Boylan: It is hoped that the Bill will deal with that problem.

415. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for giving your time to attend the meeting. It is an important matter, and you have made compelling arguments. I am sure that you have gathered that from the members’ comments.

416. Mr Sean Smyth (T&G Section of Unite): I am Sean Smyth of the T&G section of Unite. There appears to be an administrative error on the agenda. Representatives from London Taxis International (LTI Vehicles), which manufactures London-type taxis, are present. LTI and I would like to address the Committee as one group. Afterwards, Mr Beckett and Mr Matier, as the T&G, will address the Committee.

417. The Chairperson: That is permissible if you can compact your presentation into ten or fifteen minutes. Provision has been made for several people to speak. Others must be included in the schedule.

418. Mr Smyth: We are on the agenda twice.

419. The Chairperson: I have not seen the notification to which you refer.

420. Mr Smyth: I refer to today’s agenda, on which we appear twice. We are referred to first as Unite and then as the Transport and General Workers’ Union (TGWU). If Mr Chairman agrees, I will speak first on behalf of LTI. Afterwards, my colleagues will address the Committee.

421. The Chairperson: Mr Smyth, can you clarify that you are with the union, Unite, and your colleagues are with the TGWU?

422. Mr Smyth: TGWU and Unite are now one union. TGWU merged with Amicus, which is now the T&G section of Unite.

423. The Chairperson: I see — sorry about that.

424. The Committee Clerk: The confusion has arisen because the Committee received two submissions, rather than just one.

425. Mr Smyth: That is quite possible. I am aware that the Committee is under time constraints. Therefore, rather than drag out the matter, LTI Vehicles and I shall address the Committee for fifteen minutes.

426. The Chairperson: Can you clarify for the Committee who LTI Vehicles is?

427. Mr Smyth: LTI Vehicles manufactures the London-type taxis that are well known throughout the world. Its representatives are present to voice the concerns of its customers.

428. The Chairperson: The Committee has not received a submission from LTI Vehicles.

429. Mr Smyth: We have put forward a joint submission.

430. The Chairperson: The Committee has not received a submission from LTI Vehicles for today’s meeting. Today’s agenda includes Unite and the TGWU.

431. Mr Smyth: As part of my presentation, may I call LTI Vehicles to give a detailed response on —

432. The Chairperson: The Committee’s agenda is to discuss the submission that it has received and all members have read. The Committee has received a submission from TGWU, which is also on the agenda. Clearly, any submission that may have been made by LTI Vehicles is not on the agenda. That may be for another occasion.

433. Mr Boylan: Is the submission from LTI Vehicles incorporated in Unite’s submission?

434. The Chairperson: No.

435. Mr James Beckett (Transport and General Workers’ Union): Mr Chairman, perhaps I could clear up the matter.

436. The Chairperson:

437. Perhaps you could indicate who you are.

438. Mr Beckett: I am James Beckett of T&G. I was told by — (inaudible) — Mr Overton, who is very busy.

439. Mr Overton asked me to make his presentation for him.

440. The Chairperson: Just for clarification, because there may be people here who have travelled a considerable distance, and we have little time, are you saying that the other company should make part of its submission in your allotted 15 minutes?

441. Mr Smyth: Yes. I imagine that we will take no more than five to seven minutes each. Then we will take questions.

442. The Chairperson: I will limit you to 15 minutes. Bear in mind that the Committee has your submissions, so if you want to curtail your presentation, that is up to you. We have the submissions in front of us, although you might want to emphasise aspects of them to the Committee. If the representatives of LTI Vehicles wish to speak, they will have five minutes each. I understand that they have come all the way from London.

443. Mr Smyth: I thank the Committee for the opportunity to speak on this emotive subject. As we heard during the previous submissions, there is a great deal wrong with the taxi industry. I am a regional industrial organiser with Unite, with responsibilities for transport that include representing 2,000 bus drivers in Translink. For the past 12 months or more, I have been trying to organise public-hire taxi drivers in Belfast.

444. Unite believes in striving for a fully inclusive public-transport service for the whole of Northern Ireland, not just Belfast. After consulting its members in the taxi industry — Unite represents some 30% of the public-hire taxi drivers in Belfast — it put forward nine proposals for a root-and-branch reform of the industry. The industry must be pruned hard and re-grown to develop the affordable, safe, accessible taxi service that everyone wants for the whole of Northern Ireland.

445. Unite entirely supports the Department’s endeavours to rectify the taxi industry. I am a taxi user, and I too have been ripped off. We want to stop people being charged £40 to travel to Bangor at a certain time of night, for example. However, it will not be easy to change that without changing the very foundations of the industry, as I intend to show the Committee.

446. It is difficult to argue against the balanced and reasonable expectations of taxi users who want a higher-quality taxi service that has the flexibility to adopt new ways of thinking and working in order to provide that service. However, those ideas must be balanced against economic realities and must allow those who work in the industry to make a reasonable return on their considerable investment.

447. Although Unite agrees with most of the points raised, it has serious concerns about certain issues. There are approximately 450 public-hire taxi drivers in Belfast who enjoy a two-tier system. As the Committee will have learned, another two-tier system operates outside Belfast between town and country taxi services. In the country, there are private operators, and the Committee will know about Belfast’s two-tier system.

448. Most of our disabled-accessible vehicles are of the London Taxi type. The newer models can cost more than £30,000, which is a large investment for the taxi driver. If the system were changed, as proposed, it would be to the detriment of public-hire taxi drivers. I will explain that as I go on. It would lower the number of accessible taxis in Belfast. Rather than reduce, we want to expand the number of accessible taxis outside Belfast and throughout Northern Ireland. Unite believes that its proposals will do that.

449. We oppose the delimitation of public taxis. My union also represents 4,000 cabbies in London, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Southampton; it has vast experience of organising public-hire taxis in those areas. We must keep the specialised conditions under which public-hire taxis operate. That is the only way of making the industry viable. We propose that the number of public-hire taxis operating, not only in Belfast but in the whole of Northern Ireland, should come under the constraints and control of the Department of the Environment. The Department should allocate plates for public-hire taxis according to need. The number of taxis would be increased so that the availability of taxis would grow in accordance with the expansion of a town or city.

450. There are major problems with accessibility. If I were to buy a new taxi tomorrow morning, I would have to wait two to four weeks to get it tested. I would then have to wait a further four to six weeks to get the plate issued: the vehicle cannot operate without a plate. We propose that the driver be given a plate on the day that he receives his licence and that that plate would go on any vehicle that the driver bought. On the day that the driver retired from the service, his plate would not be sold but returned to the Department. Therefore, if I were to upgrade my vehicle after three years, I could transfer my plate immediately after the vehicle had passed its test. At present, a driver can spend £30,000 on a vehicle and then be unable to work for four weeks. That is expensive for a driver and cannot be maintained. Changes in the plating system would alleviate the lack of vehicles on the roads.

451. We support the proposals requiring all taxis to have taximeters. However, rather than setting a maximum fare for all taxis, it would be better to have a uniform, single rate that would vary at different times of day. Getting people home from nightclubs at the peak times between midnight and 4.00 am on Friday and Saturday nights is a major problem. We suggest that fares be adjusted to cope with that.

452. If the two-tier system is kept in Belfast, the city should have a limit. If a driver was required to operate outside that limit, a penalty fare would be incurred, of which the passengers would be aware. All fares would be set in conjunction with the Department of the Environment, the Consumer Council and non-governmental organisations, such as ourselves. That way, the customer would know exactly what had been charged and why they had been charged. People would know that the fare from Belfast city centre to Bangor town centre, for example, was £20. They would not be charged £40 because the fare would be in black and white. That would reduce the activities of rip-off merchants and eventually stop them. More easily identifiable plates would enable the culprits to be more easily identified. I will return to the issue of plates later, but I will press on as I know that the Committee is pushed for time.

453. The Unite proposal would ensure that Belfast and Northern Ireland would have a first-class public-hire taxi service that would be fully integrated with all other forms of public transport. From arrival to departure, people would have access to reasonably priced, accessible public transport. Achieving that would be a first for any city in the European Union; we would be setting standards instead of playing catch-up. Restrictions on the number of licence plates would enable drivers to work an average working week, instead of having to work excessive hours.

454. Drivers in Belfast work in circuits on a radio system.

455. Drivers pay between £100 and £110 a week to rent their radio systems. If they go on holiday or are on sick leave, they must continue to pay the operator or they will lose their radios. Unfortunately, some people coming into the taxi industry do not have the finances to buy a cab, so some operators rent cabs to them. Therefore, those drivers must pay for cab rental, radio rental and diesel, and they must make more than £350 a week before they can earn a shilling.

456. Many drivers work more than 90 hours a week to earn a living, and the Bill does not address that. It is dangerous to work such hours, and drivers have caused crashes by falling asleep at the wheel, but those crashes have been put down to accidents. The Bill does not address that. In fact, we are concerned that the introduction of the Bill will worsen the situation.

457. All public-hire taxis must have disability access, and all drivers must be trained to deal with disabled people. I have not met any drivers who are trained to assist blind people. Fortunately, when I was a bus driver, I was trained to work with disabled people through the minibus driver awareness scheme (MiDAS). I strongly recommend that training, because it gives participants a whole new focus on how to work and live with disadvantaged people, from those with slight disabilities to those who are more severely disabled. The MiDAS system must be introduced for all taxi drivers in Northern Ireland who want to operate a public-hire taxi service. All fares should be set via negotiations involving the Department of the Environment and the Consumer Council, so that there is third-party involvement, and the PSNI should have full enforcement rights on taxi legislation.

458. We have heard stories today about getting access to a taxi. If people are shopping in the centre of Belfast, in CastleCourt, they cannot get access to a public-hire taxi unless they walk for half a mile in either direction. We do not have access to shopping areas, ports, airports or train stations. It is difficult for a disabled person to get a public-hire taxi. We also do not have access to hospitals. If a disabled person phones for a taxi to collect them from a hospital appointment, a saloon car arrives, they are pushed from the rear into the back seat of the car, and their wheelchair is put in the boot. I have witnessed that. Public-hire taxis must have disability access. Give us the tools to do that job, and I will guarantee that our taxi charter will deliver for Northern Ireland.

459. Mr Andrew Overton (London Taxis International): London Taxis International (LTI Vehicles) supplies the majority of purpose-built taxis in Northern Ireland. I have been in the business all my life and have been coming to Belfast for 20-odd years, and we are passionate about the taxi trade that operates in this city. We support the intentions of the Taxis Bill and the fact that it addresses matters such as professionalising the taxi trade. Many good intentions are represented in the Bill. We support training for taxi drivers, and we will help to provide that, as we manufacture accessible taxis. There is a need for better standards for taxis, and the standard of conversions that was mentioned by Michael Lorimer is an issue that must be addressed. New accessible taxis should be introduced outside Belfast.

460. My comments relate to Belfast city. Officials from the Department of the Environment have said that their public consultations have shown that a one-tier system is the way forward. We have considered that conclusion and the Department of the Environment’s documents, and we find that there serious concerns in Newry, Cookstown, Enniskillen and Armagh about the impact of the Bill. Certainly, the taxi trade in Belfast is concerned about the impact of the Bill. There is an impression that there will be no financial impact on the taxi trade. However, there are 450 purpose-built vehicles operating as public-hire taxis and 2,000 private-hire taxis, and, if those 2,000 private-hire taxis can suddenly pick up in the street, that will have a dramatic impact on the drivers’ incomes. I am sure that drivers have informed the Committee of that. It is similar to one shop opening up in a street and, suddenly, four other shops open up in the same street selling exactly the same thing. That will have an effect.

461. Our concern is that the number of accessible cabs will decrease. I accept as valid the point that IMTAC made earlier that people need to be able to contact accessible taxis. The public-hire taxi drivers to whom we have been talking accept that they may have to use a radio. However, were their income to drop substantially, they would return to driving saloon cars, so the overall number of accessible cabs would fall. That is contrary to what is happening in the rest of the UK. My role in LTI Vehicles is to liaise with local authorities across the country on implementing accessible taxi policies. Public-hire taxi companies everywhere else in the UK are increasing their number of accessible taxis, not reducing it.

462. The Bill may be a charter for the private-hire industry. That industry will view the Bill as being wonderful, because those who drive saloon cars must sign up to a radio circuit. One private-hire operator told me that private-hire drivers want to make life as difficult as possible for black-cab drivers, and, for that reason, he supports the Bill.

463. The legislation will have a serious effect on the trade’s livelihood and on the number of accessible cabs in Belfast, which will go down, not up. I am not saying that private-hire operators will not rub their hands and put on more taxis, but that is not the issue. The issue is that people are trying to earn a living. LTI Vehicles pleads with the Committee to take that point seriously.

464. My colleague Richard Daniels will propose a couple of amendments to the Bill. Those amendments would enable the Department to preserve the current system, because we do not believe that the rank-only pick-up point will work. There are only 31 permanent rank spaces in Belfast city, and taxi drivers will be unable to earn a living solely from working on those ranks. It will also be very difficult to police the exclusion zone that the Bill provides for, and we do not think that that proposed system will work properly. My request is that the Committee take that point seriously.

465. Mr Richard Daniels (London Taxis International): We are essentially looking at the regulatory framework that will be adopted. Andrew’s point is that we must ensure that regulation is proportionate. To that end, I wish to propose two amendments, both of which apply to clause 20.

466. My first amendment would secure the provision of disabled-accessible vehicles that can be held on the street. If accepted, clause 20 would include:

“The Department may make regulations to apply to taxis of a specific class or to taxis of a particular class of use to operate within a designated geographic area in standing or plying for hire or reward or to carry passengers for hire or reward.”

467. The second amendment would secure the provision of non-accessible taxis that can operate a pre-booking service. As a result, those vehicles would remain accessible. The proposed amendment reads:

“The Department may make regulations to taxis of a specific class or to taxis of a particular class of use to operate within a designated geographic area as vehicles which are used (a) solely in connection with a hiring for the purpose of carrying one or more passengers; or (b) are immediately available to an operator to carry out pre-booked work.”

468. Those definitions are taken from the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998. Those amendments would secure the provision of an accessible taxi service, which should be a right in a city such as Belfast, as it is in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Manchester, London or Liverpool. It is important to state that. The comments that the IMTAC representatives made earlier are also valid.

469. Mr Weir: I appreciate that the Committee will have a record of the proposed amendments, because members will want to absorb their content and return to them at a later date.

470. You have concerns about Belfast’s moving from a two-tier system to a one-tier system. Why do you think that Belfast should be different to anywhere else in Northern Ireland?

471. Mr Smyth: Belfast is the only place in Northern Ireland in which public-hire taxis as we know them operate.

472. Mr Weir: That is a circular argument.

473. Mr Smyth: We are proposing that the whole of Northern Ireland has access to accessible taxis, but, unfortunately, we are dealing with Belfast now.

474. Mr Overton: The issue is pertinent to Belfast; it is not an issue outside Belfast. All taxis outside Belfast are, for the most part, public-hire taxis. There is a two-tier system in Belfast, so there is an economic balance between the taxis that ply for hire at taxi ranks and on the street and those that are not allowed to do so. If the rules for Belfast are changed, and five times as many vehicles are permitted to pick up fares along the street, the taxi operators’ business model will be undermined completely.

475. Mr Weir: Regardless of the system, should there not be a level playing field across Northern Ireland? Mr Overton used a good analogy: someone sells a product in a shop and other shops open on the same street and sell the same product. I understand that markets change suddenly, but that is how business operates. Are you suggesting that shops on a street should be banned from selling fruit and vegetables merely because another shop is already doing so?

476. Mr Smyth: I am a self-employed taxi driver and I operate a public-hire taxi. I want to be self-employed. However, under the new legislation, I will be forced into a circuit, and I do not want to work for one. I do not want to have to give backhanders to radio operators to ensure that I will get my fair share of work; nor do I want to have to pay depot rent when I am sick or on holidays. I want to be self-employed. Why am I being forced to join a circuit?

477. Mr Weir: I understand why someone who is working in public-hire taxis, particularly in Belfast, will have concerns about the legislation and, perhaps, be opposed to it. However, I am still not convinced that Belfast should be treated differently to the rest of Northern Ireland.

478. Mr Smyth: Competition is good, but this legislation will mean that our drivers will not be permitted to pick up fares at locations such as the George Best Belfast City Airport or Belfast International Airport. However, taxi drivers operating at the airports will be able to come to Belfast and work the ranks.

479. Mr Weir: There should be equality for all taxi drivers, but we will hear from the airport taxi drivers later, and the issue will be dealt with then.

480. Mr Daniels: In urban areas, disabled people have the right to hail a taxi and get a taxi from a rank. After a while, because these proposals will unbalance the economic model, they will have to phone for taxis. In rural areas, there is no justification for having all vehicles as disabled-accessible vehicles. However, in urban areas it is justified, because disabled people should have the right to hail taxis on the street or at a rank. That is what happens in many other cities.

481. Mr Weir: Belfast is much smaller than many of the cities that you have used in your examples. Glasgow and Edinburgh would be closer in size to Belfast whereas London would be larger.

482. Mr Daniels: London is bigger, and I would not draw on that analogy too strongly.

483. The Chairperson: We have spent enough time on that question.

484. Mr T Clarke: It was feared that people would go for the cheaper taxi if the one-tier system were introduced. You are from London: why not make your taxis cheaper so that everyone can buy them — that is, if you are really concerned about disabled people in Northern Ireland?

485. Mr Overton: Let me give you a simple answer. If we were selling saloon cars that were non-accessible, we could make them cheaper. Today we have heard about the standard of accessible taxis, and IMTAC has said that it wants good-quality, safe vehicles for use by disabled people. Michael Lorimer praised London-style taxis, and we have spent much time and effort developing a purpose-built taxi that is safe for the passenger and the driver and that is accessible for wheelchair users and non-wheelchair users. It costs more to build such a vehicle.

486. Mr T Clarke: Perhaps we let Mr Lorimer off with his comments about some taxis being converted vans. Vehicles in Northern Ireland go through a more rigorous test than those on the mainland, and converted vans have been inspected by DOE vehicle-testing centres and approved for the purpose for which they were built. We let Mr Lorimer off with his comments about van conversions, because those vans have to be brought up to a standard.

487. Mr Overton: Even the DOE officials have said that they want to address accessibility and safety standards for vehicles. They have said that the Bill will enable them to address those issues. The argument was about whether we have saloons or whether we have accessible cabs at all.

488. Mr T Clarke: Some vehicles may need to be improved. If the Government have set a standard for van conversions, and if those vans pass the test, it is unfair to say that they are not up to standard. However, if the Government now believe that their standard could be tightened to make the test more rigorous, that would be welcome. It is unfair on the owners of such vehicles for the Government to assume that they are not up to standard.

489. Mr Daniels: To be fair, there are different standards. There is European Community whole-vehicle-type approval, which we and companies such as Peugeot 07 and Allied Vehicle Contracts have, and there are lower standards within the EU framework, so there is a separation. Some of the vehicles mentioned come under low-volume small-series-type approval, which is a lesser standard.

490. Mr Overton: I do not want to lose the focus. If a saloon car can pick up a fare off the street, why would a taxi driver have a purpose-built vehicle? He would not. If he can pick up off the street — and there are only 31 rank spaces — the 400 accessible cabs would diminish. As the vehicles get older, drivers will replace them with saloon cars. I am not debating the quality of accessible taxis: they will not be accessible at all; drivers will go back to saloons. Therefore, the overall fleet of accessible cabs will decrease.

491. Mr Boylan: I will not get into the debate about rural and city taxis. It seems strange that you want to reduce the numbers. You also referred to additions, tests and training levels. Are they referred to in the Bill? Can you elaborate on that?

492. Mr Overton: We would support taxi-driver training, as taxi drivers benefit from training in handling and dealing with disabled passengers. As the manufacturer of accessible taxis, we are happy to help authorities to set up training courses for drivers to learn how to use the facilities that we provide in our vehicles. We are aware that drivers do not always load wheelchair passengers into our vehicles in the best way, so we would be happy for taxi drivers to have training in that. I have spent years dealing with disabled people who complain about some of the issues that we have heard today, and we must move that issue forward.

493. Mr Smyth: Who would provide the training? Belfast Metropolitan College advertised for tutors, but it was unable to fill the position. The problem is that the training needed, which is part of the certificate of professional competence (CPC) training, has been extended to taxi drivers, and they must obtain seven hours’ training a year. Bus drivers have to obtain 35 hours’ training and, when that is complete, their licence will be renewed. Taxi drivers will have to train for 21 hours.

494. Will I, as a taxi driver, invest in my training this year, not knowing whether I will be in the taxi trade in three years’ time, or will I wait — as I suspect most people will do — until year three when there will be a mad rush to get the training in order to get my licence renewed? The T&G Section of Unite has 12 registered tutors, fully competent in delivering the training programme, with the North West Regional College. The West Belfast Taxi Association is developing a training course for its drivers. However, that will add additional charges, and in the circuits they will pass those on to drivers, incurring more hours to pay more depot rent.

495. Mr Armstrong: My statement may be a bit unfair, but taxis are not very visible. On the subject of safety, ordinary saloon cars are more visible, better lit up and can be easily seen at dusk. However, the lighting system on black taxis is poor and does not come on automatically when it becomes dull during the day.

496. Mr Overton: I was referring to the safety of the people inside the vehicles —

497. Mr Armstrong: I know what you were referring to —

498. Mr Overton: I take your point. There is nothing to stop drivers from deciding to have a colour code. For instance, in Derby —

499. Mr Armstrong: I am not talking about colour codes; I am talking about lighting systems.

500. Mr Daniels: It is not something that we have come across with any regulatory authority that we have spoken to.

501. Mr Armstrong: I know that.

502. Mr Overton: I will be happy to consider any proposals that you have. It is not an issue that has been raised before, but I take your point.

503. Mr Smyth: On that point of safety, a number of years ago Dublin Bus instructed all its drivers to drive with their headlights on at all times — day, night, summer and winter. That reduced accidents by 50%. All public-hire vehicles should drive with their headlights on at all times. Personally, when I am driving my car — day or night — I always have the headlights on.

504. Mr Armstrong: I have noticed that black taxis do not have lights on when every other car does.

505. The Chairperson: I thank the witnesses for attending. We explored many issues, and I was quite generous with the time allocation. Needless to say, your comments will be considered by the Committee.

506. Mr Smyth: In closing: we want to work in partnership with the non-governmental organisations, the Government and elected representatives for the future of public transport in Northern Ireland.

507. The Chairperson: We have a submission from Mr James Beckett in his capacity as vice-chairman of the Transport and General Workers’ Union (TGWU).

508. Mr James Matier (Transport and General Workers’ Union): I am a committee member of the TGWU also.

509. The Chairperson: Are you giving the presentation?

510. Mr Matier: Yes.

511. The Chairperson: The submission that has been given to the Committee is very detailed. Your presentation should last no longer than 10 to 15 minutes. Members will then ask questions.

512. Mr Beckett: Chairman, we believe that the Taxis Bill is a personal baby for Adele Watters.

513. The Chairperson: Hold on a minute, James. Irrespective of the personalities involved in this, Adele Watters is a civil servant who is acting on behalf of the Department of the Environment. We are here to discuss the Department’s Taxis Bill. Please focus on the context and the content of that Taxis Bill. Thank you.

514. Mr Beckett: No disrespect to Adele, sir.

515. The Chairperson: Sorry, sir. I do not want to emphasise the point again, and I will not say it again. We are here to focus on the Taxis Bill.

516. Mr Beckett: Right, OK. I will focus on that. Our main concern is public safety, the cost to the public and accessibility to the public. Mr Boylan asked a question about the views of rural areas on the Taxis Bill. There was a public meeting in Newry, and the people there were critical of the Bill and rejected it —

517. The Chairperson: You have referred to an issue that Cathal raised earlier. We are here to discuss the Taxis Bill; we are not referring back to what was said earlier. After your presentation, Mr Boylan will have the opportunity to question you on aspects of that submission.

518. Mr Beckett: That was part of my presentation. Can I not present my evidence?

519. The Chairperson: Just to be clear, if you are referring to the issue of rural isolation, that is fair enough. Please address the issue of rural isolation and the difficulties with rural taxis. Mr Boylan asked a question; however, it does not refer to your submission. Please stick to the subject of your submission.

520. Mr Beckett: My submission deals with his question. I submitted the 10 findings that emerged from the public consultation meetings. There was opposition in nine of those meetings to the Taxis Bill. That is why I provided those statements.

521. We met the Minister of the Environment on 12 September, and she gave us assurances. We received an immediate response from the Department. On Tuesday night, I spoke to an official in the Department who told James Matier and me that the provisions in the Bill could not — and would not — be policed. That official told us that there was no way that the Department would police the provisions.

522. I wish to mention a past Member of the Assembly, the late David Ervine. He was greatly respected in the political world. He worked with us on the Taxis Bill for three years, and I have a copy of his response to it. He met us regularly, used our contributions and fought our corner. The closing words of his response are:

“The Department had the opportunity to make this taxi industry work for the benefit of the public and the driver. We believe they have failed miserably. This is mainly a money-making exercise.”

523. Mr Weir: With respect, I appreciate those sentiments; however, to take evidence from someone who has died is a difficult road for us to go down.

524. The Chairperson: I listened carefully to determine the relevance of that evidence to the Taxis Bill. Mr Beckett, I hear your point, but please confine yourself to the opinions of your organisation.

525. Mr Matier: I wish to explain the reason that the one-tier system will not work in Belfast and the reason that my income will drop by 75% if that mechanism is introduced and private-hire taxis are allowed to pick up on the street. There are not enough taxi ranks to enable us to earn back that 75%.

526. I know of four proposed taxi ranks, which we believe are to be approved in Stormont today. Of those, the proposed taxi rank in Donegall Street, near the John Hewitt bar, is out of the way and unsuitable for disabled people. Taxi ranks must be at shopping centres such as CastleCourt and the new Victoria Square development. We asked for 12 taxi ranks, but only four have been proposed. That will not enable us to regain that 75% drop in our incomes.

527. I wish to submit a proposal to the Committee that would benefit disabled people and the public in Belfast. I have submitted a map that highlights the existing taxi ranks as well as our proposed additional ranks, which we believe will bring the taxi industry into the twenty-first century.

528. On 12 September, Adele Watters admitted that we were 20 years behind —

529. The Chairperson: Please stick with your own submission.

530. Mr Matier: The taxi industry is behind, and it has always been classed as a terrorist threat. Drivers have asked for ranks within the city limits in places such as CastleCourt, but we have been told repeatedly that we are a terrorist threat. More than 10 years after the ceasefires, we should be growing with the city, but we have been unable to do so. It took more than two years to get those four taxi ranks.

531. They are a waste of time. There is a proposal for a taxi rank on the Lisburn Road at Hunter’s bar. Do disabled people drink there? No. There is one proposed for Chichester Street, near the new shopping centre. The other two are proposed for the Dublin Road and Donegall Street — disabled people do not go there. Accessible taxis should have unlimited access in the city, and there should be taxi ranks throughout the whole city.

532. The two-tier system should be retained because if a one-tier system were implemented, I would lose 75% of my income, which will mean changing my vehicle to an ordinary saloon car. My taxi cost £32,000, whereas I can buy a saloon car for £10,000. Over a three-year period of payments, I would save £21,000 by changing my vehicle to a saloon car.

533. If the Taxis Bill passes, it will ruin accessible-taxi provision in Belfast. I have raised my misgivings about the taxi ranks, and I have an Equality Commission report on working with the taxi industry. To my knowledge, the Taxis Bill was never discussed with anyone in the black-taxi industry — yet they are the people who are concerned about it. Adele Watters and Disability Action should come and talk to us. The taxi branch of the Transport and General Workers Union (TGWU) opened 12 months ago. We tried to talk to people about the Taxis Bill before it got to this stage, but the doors were closed in our faces. The Taxis Bill might increase the number of accessible taxis in rural areas, but it will not in Belfast — it will decrease them, and put me in financial difficulty.

534. Mr Weir: I appreciate your point about the lack of taxi ranks. That is something that the Department should be addressing through regulations rather than in the Bill; presumably, the Bill will not list where the new taxi ranks will be.

535. Mr Matier: Under the Bill, private-hire taxis will not be allowed to pick up a fare within a certain distance of taxi ranks. Pick-ups cannot be enforced now — how will that be enforced in future? Currently, the taxi rank at Belfast City Hall has 35 spaces; how are 400 of us supposed to fit into that? If disabled people say that there is a lack of accessible taxis, it is down to a lack of taxi ranks.

536. Mr Weir: Again, I will ask a question that has been posed to many bodies. Much of the debate will centre on whether there should be a one-tier or two-tier system. I appreciate that a one-tier system would have a detrimental impact financially on public-hire taxi drivers. The flip side of that is that the private-hire taxis would pick-up a lot more trade. Objectively, although I understand the impact on public-hire taxis, it would be a case of swings and roundabouts. Why do you think that Belfast — particularly the city centre — should be treated differently from anywhere else in respect of the regulation of taxis?

537. Mr Matier: That is because there is already a sizeable number of accessible taxis in Belfast. If the Taxis Bill is implemented, it will decrease the number of accessible taxis in Belfast. There needs to be an increase in accessible taxis in rural areas. If the Taxis Bill is implemented, with a one-tier system, my income will drop.

538. Mr Weir: Do you not think that the whole of Northern Ireland should be on a level playing field?

539. Mr Matier: No, because there is already a sizeable number of accessible taxis in Belfast.

540. Mr Beckett: The Department created the two-tier system, not us. When applying for a vehicle licence, a driver has a choice between public hire or private hire. It is the driver’s choice whether he wants to work the streets or work from a depot. There is choice and competition.

541. Mr Matier: I understand what Barbara was saying; some of the things that I heard made me feel sick. I understand the training issue — I started the taxi branch of TGWU because I understand that training is necessary. I do not have disability training — I learnt how to put a wheelchair in a taxi myself. I understand that all fares should be shown on the meter.

542. If Belfast public-hire taxis have to leave the city limits, there should be a surcharge for returning; however, taxi ranks and other matters are 20 years behind. I totally agree on the training. I disagree with people’s being ripped off. That is why our proposals for the taxi industry go into the twenty-first century. If DOE and DRD give us taxi ranks, we will be able to provide a service for all disabled persons, no matter whether they are blind, wheelchair-users or whatever. We all know that, because of the Troubles, the industry, in every part of the city, is 20 years behind. The industry needs to grow; it needs to have the chance to grow. The two-tier system should stay in Belfast to give us, as the Belfast public-hire taxis branch of TGWU, a chance to grow with the city.

543. Mr Boylan: My question has been answered; however, I am concerned about the issue with Belfast and the surrounding area. Many rural taxis that service regular runs and weekly work are saloon cars. Those will all, therefore, have to become accessible taxis. For those drivers to argue that they have saloon cars, and a regular run during the week, with a bit of extra work at the weekend, is the same as your arguing the case to secure your business in your area. It should be fair.

544. The Committee has listened to submissions over past two weeks and, apart from the Consumer Council, we have heard mostly from taxi associations. We listened to a customer this morning, and when I heard —

545. Mr Matier: May I point out —

546. Mr Chairman: Had you finished?

547. Mr Boylan: No. From the point of view of that passenger, I understand that people are trying to secure a one-tier fares system that applies to everyone, or, if not that, then a two-tier system.

548. My other concern was taxi ranks. Stakeholders have the opportunity to discuss the problems and to challenge some of the clauses in the Bill, and you say that there are not enough taxi ranks.

549. Mr Matier: There are not enough taxi ranks. There are 31 to 35 spaces in Belfast to hold 400 Belfast public-hire taxis. Every day, the NCP give out tickets for double parking. The eyesore opposite Belfast City Hall is not our fault; we are trying to ply for work. There are eight spaces there, and six at the side of the City Hall. Some days, probably 20 to 30 taxis sit there, trying to get into those spaces. The NCP warden comes around, leaves a ticket and goes. It is the same at the side of the City Hall: that space is for public transport, and we are not allowed in there. On occasions, the traffic wardens and the police are at the City Hall. They make us drive up Howard Street, past Jury’s Hotel and back down again. We are Belfast public-hire taxis, but we are not looked upon as a public service.

550. If a disabled person in a wheelchair gets into my vehicle, I am not allowed to charge any more than the meter price, whereas other taxi companies in Belfast charge a minimum of £8 or £10. I get out, put the wheelchair into the car, strap it up, get back into my vehicle and put on the meter. We do not rip people off. We charge whatever amount is on the meter.

551. Mr Ford: You made it clear in your written submission that a major concern is regulation, and Jimmy quoted a department official as saying, “We cannot police this Bill”. I am well aware of your concerns at the moment, as well as the proposals. How do you see regulations alleviating those concerns? Clearly, elements of the Bill require regulations to ensure that taxi ranks are used appropriately, and so on. What is the appropriate body to do that? If it should be the Department, and if there are issues concerning resources, are you prepared to see an increase in the cost of licences to pay for that?

552. Mr Beckett: The Department did away with taxi-driving tests. I did a test, but many of the new drivers have not done a test. Six years ago, my licence fee was £26. It is now £75: it has increased by 200%. The cost of an MOT test for a taxi has increased twice in six months and is now £126∙50. However, the MOT test for a car — which is, more or less, the same test as for a taxi — costs only £30. We do not know what the Department proposes to charge for the test but it has inserted a clause into the Bill enabling the fee to be paid in instalments, which suggests to me that it will be substantial.

553. Another major concern is the use of taximeters. A fare at 9.00 am might cost £8, and the same fare at 11.00 am might cost £3 because there is no traffic or waiting around at that time. When, at my depot, one company introduced taximeters, a fare of £3 rose to £4∙50, and at peak periods became £5 or £6. As a result, the public took its custom elsewhere. The depot owner had to remove the taximeters and return to the set fare structure.

554. Taxis are regulated by the Department, and the Bill states that all taximeters will be required to be sealed by the Department. The Department has also said that it does not have the manpower to seal all the taximeters. If that is so, then how does it expect to be able to police the new proposals?

555. There is another major issue. When I was invited to attend today’s meeting, I received the Committee’s rule booklet explaining what I should do. However, taxi drivers have no rules to guide them: there is no code of conduct. For the past year, I have been asking for a book of rules and regulations for taxi drivers. The Department’s response has been that it has no book. However, day after day, taxi drivers are pulled in and accused of breaking this rule or that regulation. I have asked that taxi drivers be shown the rules or regulations, but that is not done. The Department produces no guidance.

556. For example, I was prosecuted for puing: that is, picking up someone from the street without a booking. I had a white plate on my vehicle, which authorised me for public hire outside Belfast. I was fined £56 and a further £28 in costs. The two sections of the Department work side by side. The licensing section sent me a letter asking me to attend a meeting or my licence would be revoked because I did not tell them about my conviction. However, they were the very people who prosecuted me; they had sat in the courtroom during my hearing. That is what we are up against daily.

557. As I said, on 12 September, the Minister spoke to DOE officials and said to them that if these are the facts, she is not surprised that taxi drivers are angry. That was on 12 September. On 14 September, we got action from the Department because Arlene Foster had intervened directly.

558. Mr I McCrea: You mentioned taximeters. What opinions do you have on a maximum fare?

559. Mr Matier: A maximum fare will create chaos, especially in the area served by the Belfast public-hire taxis. The driver at the front of the rank might charge the maximum fare; if I am second or third in the rank, I could charge less than that. The passenger will go down the taxi rank asking drivers how much they will charge. The way we work the rank, the first taxi there is the first one away. The maximum fare will create chaos; the minimum fare should stay. It is understandable that a maximum fare could be imposed in certain circumstances, but, in general, it will create chaos in our industry.

560. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your time; your contribution has been very useful.

561. Mr Beckett: Mr Chairperson, may I say that all the evidence that I have given is publicly available.

562. The Chairperson: Thank you.

563. Mr Matier: May I submit these supporting documents? There is also a map of the proposed taxi ranks.

564. The Chairperson: Thank you. Will the representatives from the George Best Belfast City Airport taxi rank please come forward? Mr McCloskey, thank you for coming today. You have probably sat through the whole session, so we will try to make this as relaxed as possible — although within certain guidelines.

565. Mr Anthony McCloskey (George Best Belfast City Airport Taxi Rank): I have only a few questions to ask and a short submission to make. I made most of my proposals in writing, and I am here only to highlight a few of them.

566. I have been a Belfast public-hire taxi driver for more than 34 years and have had very little help or protection from the Department of the Environment in that time. The franchise for George Best Belfast City Airport runs a fleet of 50 taxis, all of which are wheelchair accessible. We do not charge anyone extra.

567. All our taxis are in pristine condition, and we would advocate to the Committee that all ports, airports, bus and train stations, and city centres, should have wheelchair-accessible taxis; in fact, I would suggest extending that to every town and city in Northern Ireland.

568. We agree with a one-tier system, as long as it includes wheelchair-accessible taxis. All our taxis at Belfast City Airport are metered, and we set a fair rate in conjunction with the airport. We would like all taxis in Northern Ireland to be metered, those meters having been calibrated and sealed by the Department of the Environment or its appointed agent.

569. We want a maximum fare to be set at the highest rate possible in order to accommodate people such as us who pay a high premium to stand and ply for hire at Belfast City Airport. At the moment, our minimum fare is £5, which is scarcely enough.

570. Rather than running backwards and forwards looking for rises every year or every second year, if the maximum fare was set at a high rate, drivers could get a price rise and it would not take up a lot of time — it would be within the maximum fare, if you understand what I mean. In the past, we have found getting a fare rise to be a very laborious task, and by the time the rise was passed and implemented, it was time to look for another one. It took about a year to get the rise, and we were kicked from Department to Department and then to the Consumer Council. I was a wee bit bemused as to how we ended up at the Consumer Council. I wish that the process for getting a fare rise was more accessible, and that it was easier, rather than harder, to get one.

571. Our taxi licences are too cheap — licences should be expensive. Getting a licence should involve going on a four- or five-day course that includes a driving test, an aptitude test, a knowledge test and Inclusive Mobility and Transport Advisory Committee (Imtac) training. The majority of our drivers carry have such training; they have paid for it themselves. Such training and testing should be part of the licence-application process. In layman’s terms, the drivers should be told the rules, regulations and penalties, so that when they are sent out to ferry the public around, they know exactly what they can and cannot do, and they go out to do a professional job.

572. We have different types of vehicles, all passed by the Department. Some of them do not carry the Belfast public-hire specification, which includes a partition. That should be an optional extra for the driver — if he wants it for his own safety, depending on where he works. Manufacturers are now producing wheelchair-accessible vehicles, which are readily obtained. We have a variety of such vehicles at George Best Belfast City Airport.

573. Finally, I suggest only one amendment to the Taxis Bill. I would like to see a zone in Belfast in which the only type of taxi that is allowed to ply for hire is an accessible vehicle. That could be amended slightly to allow outside taxis to come in to the city at the weekend, say from midnight Friday to dawn on Saturday and from midnight Saturday to dawn on Sunday. Those are the only times when there is a scarcity of taxis in Belfast. Other than that, a zone should be in operation in which only wheelchair-accessible taxis are allowed to pick up or ply for hire.

574. The Chairperson: Thank you for outlining your case with such clarity.

575. Mr Weir: Thank you for your evidence. Other witnesses have mentioned the situation at the airport. How do things operate at George Best Belfast City Airport? Is there some sort of franchise system? Do drivers pay a particular premium? I was going to use the word “accessible”, but that might be the wrong word in this case. How open is the system, and who can avail of it?

576. Mr McCloskey: The committee advertises when it needs drivers. We interview them to see whether they meet the criteria, and we explain to them the way in which we operate.

577. I omitted to mention enforcement. We work at George Best Belfast City Airport, which, as you know, is part of Belfast harbour industrial estate and has its own by-laws. I would like enforcement powers to be extended to the Belfast harbour police.

578. In answer to Mr Weir’s question, we carry out interviews and we run the scheme on a committee basis. We do not make a profit.

579. Mr Weir: I am trying to clarify the way in which the scheme operates. Is it almost like a form of licensing that permits taxi drivers to operate at the George Best Belfast City Airport? If so, do those taxi drivers have to pay a fee?

580. Mr McCloskey: We pay the George Best Belfast City Airport a substantial fee for the franchise to operate at the airport.

581. Mr Weir: If a taxi driver has not gone through your process, would he be able to drive into the George Best Belfast City Airport and pick up a fare?

582. Mr McCloskey: No.

583. Mr Weir: Some people feel that there is not a level playing field inasmuch as the range of taxi drivers that can operate at George Best Belfast City Airport is restricted. Presumably, taxi drivers who work at the airport are free to pick up fares outside the airport.

584. Mr McCloskey: No. Airport taxi drivers have a restricted public-hire plate for use outside Belfast. We do not operate in the city centre. We operate only at the airport.

585. Mr Weir: Is that because you are restricted by regulations?

586. Mr McCloskey: Yes.

587. Mr Weir: Finally, as regards the proposed legislation, do you see any particular implications for taxiing at George Best Belfast City Airport, over and above anything that applies elsewhere?

588. Mr McCloskey: No. Our boss — for want of a better description — is the director of the airport. If he tells us to reverse around the airport, we would do that because he is the king of the castle.

589. Mr Weir: It would be interesting to see you reversing around the airport.

590. Mr McCloskey: I read about a court case in Birmingham in which the judge said that the director of the airport was akin to the king of the castle who ruled over all he surveyed. The Belfast harbour estate has its own by-laws. However, the harbour police do not have any by-laws that control taxis. In addition to the airport, there is the harbour, and many types of transport, including cruise ships are coming into Belfast. Therefore, the harbour police should be involved in enforcement.

591. Mr Ford: Are all your vehicles, rather than just a proportion of them, wheelchair-friendly? I know that some of the vehicles are of an MPV-style.

592. Mr McCloskey: We have purpose-built taxis. We have Volkswagens, Mercedes’ and Peugeots that are in pristine condition. They have to be below a certain age.

593. Mr Ford: Are you operating a 100% accessible fleet of taxis?

594. Mr McCloskey: Yes.

595. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your time, Mr McCloskey. Your attendance at today’s meeting has been very useful.

596. Mc McCloskey: I must tell Mr Armstrong that, after 35 years, I found the lighting at Stormont to be not too bad. I managed to get around all right.

4 October 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr David Ford
Mr Tommy Gallagher
Mr Samuel Gardiner
Mr Ian McCrea
Mr Peter Weir

Witnesses:

Mr Raymond Dempster Mr Eamon Grogan	Accessible Taxi Association NI
Mr Terence Maguire
Mr William Black
Mr James McVeigh Mr Brian Press	International Airport Taxi Co Ltd

597. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): Today we shall receive oral evidence from Mr William Black; the Accessible Taxi Association NI; Mr Terence Maguire; and the International Airport Taxi Co Ltd. Members will find all the submissions in their members’ pack.

598. One further evidence session is scheduled for next Thursday. The witness will be Monica Wilson of Disability Action, and, unless we receive any late requests, that will be the final oral evidence session. Departmental officials should be in attendance for that.

599. We will now begin to take formal evidence. Is Mr William Black here? He is not. We will move on. Are Mr Eamon Grogan and Mr Raymond Dempster here? They are.

600. You are both very welcome. We try to keep evidence sessions as informal and relaxed as possible. We have received your submission. We will allow 10 to 15 minutes for you to present to the Committee. Please try to keep within that time frame. You do not have to repeat everything that you have already said in your written submission, but if there are particular points that you wish to emphasise, please feel free to do so. After that, Committee members will indicate whether they have further questions to ask or points that they would like you to clarify. Please stay focused on the Taxis Bill. The floor is now yours, so I thank you very much for giving up your time to be with us today.

601. Mr Eamon Grogan (Accessible Taxi Association NI): I wish to thank the Committee for the Environment for its invitation and the Committee Clerk for the work that she has done on our behalf.

602. I want to talk about the Department’s proposal for an operator’s licence and how that will affect me as a driver.

603. Mr Raymond Dempster (Accessible Taxi Association NI): I will be helping Eamon. We have put together our notes, and obviously Eamon will need some help with what he is saying. Basically, that will be my role.

604. As Eamon has said, the association’s first problem with the Taxis Bill is operator licensing. The association feels strongly that that licence is not suitable for Belfast public-hire taxis. It is widely known that that type of licence is used to regulate the private-hire taxi industry. The operator’s licence requires drivers to take and maintain records. Eamon wants to explain exactly what that would mean for him.

605. Mr Grogan: The Department stated that Belfast public-hire taxis would always be exempt from having to hold operator’s licences. However, the Taxis Bill will require all taxi drivers to hold an operator’s licence. Therefore, someone such as myself, who cannot read or write, will be unable to keep the records required by the licence. As the driver of an accessible taxi, I will no longer be able to meet the required standards. Therefore, I feel that there is no legislation to help people such as myself.

606. On the health and safety issue, public-hire taxis are of the highest standard —M1 type approval standard vehicles — and they are wheelchair accessible. Public-hire taxis have always been exempt from holding an operator’s licence.

607. Mr Dempster: Association drivers are sole traders — self-employed people who do not work for companies. As sole traders, we feel that an extra burden will be placed on us. For example, we will have to pay for the operator’s licence — whatever the cost — and that cost will be set by the Department. However, taxi drivers who work for companies will have that cost paid by the company owner, who may then pass the cost on to the taxi driver. The association feels that drivers’ having to pay for the licence themselves is an extra burden, and that that has not been fully recognised by the Department.

608. As Eamon also said, before the Taxis Bill was drawn up, an early consultation included an exemption from holding an operator’s licence for our type of taxi. However, when the later consultation document on the Taxis Bill was issued, that exemption had been removed. We spoke to the Department about that, but were given no firm answers to our questions. We would like the Committee to amend the Taxis Bill to allow that exemption to remain in place. The Committee should remember that an operator’s licence has never before been used in respect of a public-hire taxi service.

609. Mr Grogan: The Department proposes to put in place a one-tier system that will allow all taxis, when hailed, to pick up passengers on the streets of Belfast. The public have always been able to recognise easily that public-hire taxis can be hailed in the street. However, the new legislation will make it easier for any taxi to pick up people on the streets — the public will not be able to recognise that they could be getting into anyone’s car and that that is not a safe situation. Therefore, the association wants the two-tier system to remain in place.

610. Mr Dempster: As an association, we are aware that there is a need for more taxis at peak times and, has already been discussed with the Committee, those times are between 1.00 am and 3.00 am at weekends.

611. There is no need for extra taxis in Belfast outside those hours. Taxi industries in every town and city have the same problems at the same times; the situation is not unique to Belfast or anywhere else in Northern Ireland. It is at that time of night that taxis are used most.

612. Drivers of Belfast public-hire taxis have serious concerns about the amount of work that will be taken away from them if the Assembly passes the Taxis Bill. The booking of private-hire taxis has grown beyond anyone’s expectations. In Belfast, the system works very well, and private-hire taxis provide a good service when the public want to phone and book a taxi.

613. However, the proposal to allow private-hire taxis to pick up people in the street without a prior booking goes against what has always been normal practice in Belfast and will put public-hire taxis at a distinct disadvantage. The rest of the industry can work in the public- and private-hire arenas whereas, by definition, our type of taxi can work only from taxi ranks. The Bill will, therefore, push our association into doing something that it does not want to do. Our taxi drivers do not want to work for private-hire companies through phone booking. They want to continue to work from taxi ranks and be hailed in the street. I am aware of the fact that to limit ourselves to that type of work could be detrimental to us, but we believe that there is no level playing field and that proposals in the Taxis Bill, at the risk of repetition, will allow saloon cars to work in the public- and private-hire arenas. The Taxis Bill will create a huge movement towards private-hire companies.

614. Another problem posed by the Bill and the one-tier system is the provision of designated areas, which are to be regulated by the Department of the Environment. That greatly concerns us because our association has never been told what distances those areas will cover or how they will be enforced. The Department will regulate that private-hire cars cannot pick up passengers in designated areas around a taxi rank, but passengers being picked up by private-hire taxis without a prior booking has been one of the main problems in Belfast to date.

615. The proposal in the Bill is for private-hire taxis to pick up people in designated areas. The association does not feel that that measure can be enforced effectively. The authorities have never been able to enforce it in Belfast city centre in the past, and we feel that they would be unable to do so in the future. We cannot expect to have complete enforcement in every designated area. As representatives of our industry, we believe that the more designated areas there are, the better; but a bigger problem is going to be created.

616. The association’s other concern is based on the requirements for accessible taxis under the one-tier system. Eamon will take up that point.

617. Mr Grogan: Drivers of accessible taxis have always been told that permission to pick up passengers on the street relies on our vehicles being wheelchair accessible. The Department is now saying that it will allow private-hire vehicles to pick up people on the street and is easing the current requirements about permission. Taxi drivers in the association have had to go to the expense of buying wheelchair-accessible public-hire taxis, and now the standard is being lowered; that is wrong.

618. Mr Dempster: As Eamon said, the association’s taxis have to meet the highest standards to gain M1 type approval. We want the specific standard of M1 type approval to remain as the classification for an accessible taxi, simply for the safety of passengers. It is the highest standard, and to go below it might be detrimental to the industry and, later, probably to the Department too. We ask the Committee to be mindful that the best taxi industries in the world use our type of taxi and that regulation for accessible taxis in Belfast is in its infancy. There should be a sustained period of stability and enforcement, so that the public can gain confidence in the public-hire, wheelchair-accessible taxi service.

619. Eamon will now explain what the training that all drivers must undergo means to him.

620. Mr Grogan: The training means that drivers of accessible taxis will have to meet certain requirements. The Department will train drivers on issues specific to taxis. I feel that if I do not meet the requirements, I will be out of a job.

621. Mr Dempster: When the association had a meeting with GoSkills, the company that will develop the training schedule, I raised a concern about the training. It is proposed that drivers be trained to BTEC level, but how can someone in Eamon’s position, or someone like him, comply with that? How will he be trained? That problem must be recognised now, and he must be given the same rights as other drivers to receive training, attain qualifications and better himself as a professional driver.

622. The association knows what those rights mean to Eamon. We asked the Department about the scenario of keeping records relating to operator’s licences and were told that Eamon may be able to use a Dictaphone. That simply does not seem right: to say the least, it is a poor suggestion. Eamon, do you want to say anything else about training?

623. Mr Grogan: No.

624. Mr Dempster: I remind the Committee that Eamon has been forced to go public, as at today’s meeting, on having trouble with reading and writing. That has never happened before and is happening now only because the Department has offered nothing to help drivers in Eamon’s position.

625. A dedicated taxi-enforcement team was created as a result of a previous presentation to the Committee by the association’s chairman and other members of the association. We warmly welcome the establishment of that dedicated team and praise its work. The level of compliance by taxi drivers in our industry in Belfast has never been higher. They are now starting to do their job as they are required to do, and that is positive.

626. Our concern is with the level of priority or commitment that the dedicated taxi-enforcement team has been given. Since the new plating system was introduced several years ago, the enforcement team has not grown at all. Provisions must be made to expand the team.

627. The association wants consideration to be given to the possibility of more localised enforcement throughout the Province. It believes that that would be of great benefit to the entire taxi industry. The team could respond much quicker if enforcement were more localised. The association agrees with the proposal that the DVA could use its own test-centre facilities. The Committee is aware that, at present, the dedicated enforcement team has only five officers. More officers are needed. Recently, the association was informed that one of the officers must leave the dedicated team tomorrow to work in enforcement elsewhere. That is absolutely wrong. I want to take the opportunity to mention that because the team should be getting bigger rather than smaller. That is what the taxi industry needs.

628. Mr Grogan: There are over 19,000 licensed taxis in Northern Ireland. There are 11,000 plated taxis. The five members of the dedicated enforcement team must enforce regulations for the entire plated-taxis industry. As Raymond has mentioned, the licence fee went from £61•50 to £120 when the new plating system was introduced in November 2004. The association was told that £20 from the cost of each licence would be used to take on more enforcement officers. However, there has not been an increase in the number of officers. How are only four enforcement officers expected to enforce the Bill, which regulates on operators, licences, training, ensuring that meters are on, and so on, for 11,000 taxis across Northern Ireland? That is impossible.

629. The Chairperson: Thank you for your evidence, particularly the information on enforcement, which brings the Committee right up to speed. It is a burning issue, on which, I am sure, members will pick up.

630. Mr Weir: I thank you for your evidence. How many drivers and taxis does the Accessible Taxi Association NI represent in Northern Ireland?

631. Mr Grogan: Around 150 drivers are represented by the association.

632. Mr Weir: The Committee receives different evidence from different parties. Therefore, it must ensure that the weight of evidence from each party is at the right level. Does the association believe that all taxi drivers should be regulated in the same way?

633. Mr Grogan: No, not unless they drive vehicles that are of the standard to provide passengers with a hail-and-ride service. The association does not believe that it is acceptable to let private-hire vehicles pick up passengers on the street.

634. Mr Weir: The association has said that drivers of the type that it represents are the principal providers of the service to disabled passengers in Belfast. The Committee has heard evidence from representatives from IMTAC, who said that disabled people are often ripped off by taxi drivers. Is that not a strong argument for proper regulation of all taxi drivers, which would ensure, for example, that all passengers get receipts and that all journeys are metered, and so forth?

635. Mr Dempster: I do not believe that drivers of the type that the association represents are involved in ripping off passengers. Drivers of that type of taxi cannot overcharge: the driver must use the taximeter when he or she picks up a disabled passenger, whether the taxi has been booked privately or hailed for immediate hire on the street. Drivers cannot charge any extra; they can charge only the metered fare for that passenger’s journey. Private-hire companies are charging extra fares.

636. Mr Weir: I do not suggest that disabled passengers are overcharged only by the type of drivers that the association represents. However, they are the drivers of the type of taxis that are most used by disabled people. The evidence from IMTAC has been that those people have suffered from having been ripped off by taxi drivers.

637. Mr Dempster: They have suffered at the hands of private-hire companies. When disabled people phone to book a taxi, they are told that because of —

638. Mr Weir: With respect, that was not necessarily the evidence that was given. The evidence that we heard mentioned taxi drivers in general. That clearly means that although such incidents may have involved drivers of private-hire taxis at times, they also involved drivers of public-hire taxis.

639. I want to raise a few issues about the one-tier system. Why should Belfast be different from Banbridge, Bangor or Enniskillen? Why should there be a special rule that allows a two-tier system in Belfast but not anywhere else in Northern Ireland?

640. Mr Dempster: Belfast should have enjoyed proper regulation for public-hire taxis, given that those taxis are the only ones in Northern Ireland with a regulated fare structure. This service should be given the utmost chance to succeed because it is the best taxi service. If you consider other major cities in which taxis of this type operate, you will agree that it is a very good service. People sometimes do not want to book a taxi; they want one straight away. That is the service that we provide.

641. Mr Weir: Why should Belfast be different from anywhere else in Northern Ireland?

642. Mr Dempster: Belfast should be seen as a capital city. If Belfast had been given the proper regulation that it deserved, it would be in a very different situation today.

643. Mr Weir: You said that a number of drivers in your association operate only out of taxi ranks, and that if private firms are allowed to pick fares up on the street, it would, in one sense, mean that there would not be a level playing field. I appreciate that point. However, everyone would have the opportunity to make some form of arrangement to receive phone bookings — public-hire taxis and private-hire taxis alike — and under no circumstances would private-hire taxis be allowed to operate out of a taxi rank. Do you therefore agree that a level playing field would not exist for self-imposed reasons? There would be the same opportunities for everyone.

644. Mr Dempster: My understanding of the Taxis Bill is that if drivers want to accept private-hire bookings — in other words, get work via telephone calls — they will need an operator’s licence. The association’s taxi drivers should be given a choice; if they want to accept such bookings, they must get an operator’s licence, and, if they do not, they will not need that licence. That is the way that it is everywhere else.

645. Mr Weir: My point is that, to the extent that there would be a non-level playing field, it might be described as a self-imposed non-level playing field, in that your drivers would have the option to avail of those arrangements under the Bill, but some of them would simply choose not to do so.

646. Mr Dempster: Yes, some of them would choose not to do so. The association’s taxis make up probably less than 5% of the total taxi population. When the Taxis Bill is passed, you can imagine that the other 95% will point their cars towards Belfast, because they will be allowed to lift passengers from the street there. That is where the Bill will be detrimental to us.

647. Mr I McCrea: I thank the witnesses for coming here today.

648. In every evidence session to date, witnesses have raised the issue of how enforcement will be administered. It was mentioned that, from tomorrow, there will be only four enforcement officers. Obviously, the Committee cannot answer for the Department, but I am sure that the Department could find someone else to replace the officer who is leaving — I cannot see why not, because it said that there should be five officers. You talked about the need for more enforcement officers, and I agree with you.

649. Mr Dempster: I think that everybody would agree with that.

650. Mr I McCrea: How would that work? Given that there is talk about the need for a number of extra ranks, how many officers do you realistically feel would be needed — and how many are needed even now?

651. Mr Dempster: Belfast certainly needs many more enforcement officers. I would like the Committee to consider the possibility of localised enforcement across the Province. As I said, DVA test centres could be used as bases for a localised enforcement team. That would mean that the enforcement teams would be much smaller and could respond more quickly. I am not in a position to state actual numbers, but I am certain that more than five officers are needed to look after Belfast. I have listened to the problems that others have experienced across the country, and it is clear that more officers are needed elsewhere, too.

652. In the event of localised enforcement, taxi drivers might choose not to go outside Belfast. For instance, if taxi-enforcement teams were active in Belfast, taxi drivers might choose to hunt for a job outside Belfast where they would be able to work more freely. However, if localised enforcement were introduced, those taxi drivers who go out of Belfast illegally might run into a taxi-enforcement team in a different town. That is another reason why I feel strongly about enforcement. I do not know how many officers would be required, but they should be spread across the Province.

653. Mr I McCrea: Do you accept that training is necessary?

654. Mr Dempster: Yes.

655. Mr I McCrea: I understand the circumstances that you are describing, and the Department must do something in respect of the drivers who are unable to read or write. How can we ensure that all drivers are trained to the same standard?

656. Mr Dempster: That is correct. Eamon deserves the same rights as me as regards training and the ability to receive a qualification in passenger transport.

657. Mr Ford: Thank you both for attending the Committee, and I especially thank Eamon for talking about his personal circumstances. With regard to the operator’s licence, Raymond, you said that there should be exemption for your type of taxi. Is that on the basis of vehicle type or because you are a sole operator?

658. Mr Dempster: We are entitled to exemption on both counts. It is unfair that sole operators will have to foot the bill for the operator’s licence whereas drivers working for private-hire companies will not. Furthermore, the licence is not suitable for our type of taxi. Some of our immediate hires are picked up late at night when the passengers are rowdy — you can imagine the scenario. Black taxis accommodate up to seven people, so I can only imagine what would happen when the passengers are rowdy and the driver starts taking their names, addresses and destinations. That exercise has not previously been tried in black taxis.

659. The operator’s licence is, by design, more suited to private-hire taxi operators. Belfast always had such a scheme, until its removal in the past few years. It was never enforced for private-hire operators and now, suddenly, it is being reintroduced under the guise of an operator’s licence. Belfast has always had a licence for private-hire operators, but it was never regulated or enforced properly.

660. Mr Ford: I have two views on record keeping. First, everyone should be required to maintain proper records so that customers are not ripped off. Eamon, you are working satisfactorily even though you have problems with reading and writing, and I have sympathy with your position. Are you suggesting that a method of record keeping should be introduced that would not depend on a driver’s ability to read and write, or are you suggesting that there should be an exemption for existing drivers who cannot meet those standards? How do you want the situation to be handled?

661. Mr Grogan: Amendments should be made to the operator’s licence requirements. We have always been exempt from holding an operator’s licence, and the Department said that we would continue to be exempt.

662. Mr Ford: Do you mean that the entire group of current public-hire drivers should be exempt?

663. Mr Grogan: Yes.

664. Mr Dempster: Especially sole operators, because that is where the disadvantages will happen.

665. Mr Ford: If I have sympathy with Eamon because he has difficulties with reading and writing and no sympathy with Raymond’s position, and do not buy the argument for complete exemption, can anything be done to make life easier for drivers who have particular disabilities?

666. Mr Grogan: I hope that the Department will put something in place for people in my circumstances.

667. Mr Ford: Do you have any specific proposals?

668. Mr Grogan: No.

669. Mr Ford: You are, therefore, looking for appropriate measures to be put in place.

670. Mr Grogan: Yes.

671. The Chairperson: No one else has indicated a wish to speak, so I thank Mr Grogan and Mr Dempster for giving of their time today.

672. I welcome Mr Terence Maguire to the meeting, which will be quite informal. The Committee has received submissions, which have been placed in front of members. Please feel free to add to those submissions. You will have 10 to 15 minutes in which to make a presentation. Members will ask questions for the purpose of clarity and will, perhaps, invite you to expand on the points that you have raised.

673. Mr Terence Maguire: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I represent around 15 public-hire taxi drivers. Belfast public-hire taxi drivers ply for hire within a five-mile radius of Castle Junction. Public-hire taxis are the only taxis that are allowed to be hailed or to sit in ranks.

674. Currently, a hard core of illegal taxis work within that five-mile radius, and that presents a big problem. The Department of the Environment is not addressing that matter. It is not that the Department cannot do anything about it — the taxi drivers are known to the Department — but it seems incapable of enforcing current legislation. I would like the Department to make a better effort to enforce the legislation.

675. The Department’s team of five enforcement officers has been reduced to four. It is impossible for a team of that size to enforce regulations in Belfast, never mind Northern Ireland, and I am worried about how it will enforce the proposed legislation. I suggest that the five-mile zone in which we operate be reduced to a two-mile zone if an adequate number of taxi ranks could be made available in Belfast city centre.

676. I suggest that there are plenty of public- and private-hire taxis in the whole of Northern Ireland except, perhaps, during the early hours of Sunday morning between the hours of 1.00 am and 3.00 am. At all other times, lots of public- and private-hire taxis are available. Mr Ford was driven around Belfast one night by a couple of public-hire taxi drivers, and he saw the number of taxis that were parked and waiting for work.

677. Permitting people to hail private-hire taxis in the street will create a problem for taxi depots. While private-hire cars are on the streets, lifting people willy-nilly, their depots will be receiving phone calls from other people who are trying to book taxis — and those taxis will not be available. By allowing that situation to happen, the number of taxis on the street will not be increased — there will still be the same number of taxis on the street. However, a different problem may be created whereby the depots will not have enough cars, at times, to cover work because their drivers will be out on the streets trying to pick up fares.

678. The one-tier system, which is under discussion today, is unfair to public-hire taxi drivers who work in Belfast. Private-hire taxi drivers will be working from the depots when the depots are busy, and they will be working on the streets when the streets are busy. By contrast, my colleagues and I will be sitting at taxi ranks whether they are busy or not. We do not take phone calls. Therefore, private-hire taxi drivers will have more opportunity to get work.

679. A taxi-rank system should be put in place around Belfast. At present, there are virtually no taxi ranks in Belfast. Last week, Barbara Fleming from IMTAC talked about access to public-hire taxis. There is virtually no access to public-hire taxis in Belfast for disabled people. Currently, there is taxi rank at the City Hall, and another outside Great Northern Mall, beside the Europa Hotel. The only way that a disabled person can get a public-hire taxi is if they go to one of those ranks. Otherwise they have to phone the private–hire depots, which is when the rip-off begins. When the major private-hire companies in Belfast carry disabled people in their cars, the minimum fare is £8 — that is before the engine is turned on. By comparison, the minimum fare for a public-hire taxi is £2•70. Private-hire companies are discriminating against disabled people.

680. Many private-hire depots do not want work from disabled people. We can talk until we are blue in the face about how many private-hire taxis should be wheelchair-accessible, but if disabled people ring depots for taxis, nine times out of 10 they will be told that there are none available — or that all the taxis with wheelchair access are fully booked or are off the road. Most of the depots do not want fares from disabled people. However, all public-hire taxis in Belfast are wheelchair-accessible, and if there were sufficient taxi ranks around the town, disabled people would have no problem getting wheelchair-accessible taxis.

681. That brings me on to another point: all taxis in Northern Ireland should be wheelchair-accessible. That could be achieved in a three-year period and would mean that disabled people could order taxis without mentioning their disabilities. Disabled people are being discriminated against, because if they phone for a taxi, they have to specify that they are disabled, which would not be the case if every taxi were wheelchair-accessible.

682. Finally, control and enforcement of the taxi industry should be transferred from the Department to local councils. Local councils would be able to take a more hands-on approach and enforce penalties for any misdemeanours, which would make taxi depots and taxi drivers more accountable. That transfer could be financed by revenue from the fees that all taxi drivers pay for PSV tests, and the fees for the proposed licence for operators. The councils could also charge private-hire depots for an operator’s licence. That would enable councils to be more hands-on in their approach. The Department has been in charge of the taxi industry for 30 years, which is why we are in the current mess. The Department does not seem to be capable of looking after the taxi industry.

683. The Chairperson: Thank you very much, Mr Maguire; you have raised major issues about enforcement. The Committee needs to hear from the Department about why there has been a downgrade in the number of enforcement officers available. The Committee needs to seek clarity from the Department on that immediate problem, irrespective of what may happen as regards the legisation.

684. Mr Gardiner: Thank you for your presentation, Mr Maguire. You stated that private-hire depots are discriminating against disabled people by telling them that no wheelchair-accessible taxis are available, or that they are booked or out of order. I wonder if, as a Committee, we could have that allegation investigated. If a taxi company is discriminating against disabled people, the Committee wants to know about it. Its licence should be withdrawn. People with disabilities should be treated equally. I would like that matter investigated, Chairman.

685. Mr Maguire: That is why I brought up the idea of all taxis being wheelchair-accessible, because that type of situation would not occur.

686. The Chairperson: Mr Gardiner, the Committee can return to that issue when it has heard all the other questions.

687. Mr Boylan: Thank you for the presentation. I was also concerned about the allegation of discrimination. You have said that all taxis should be wheelchair-accessible. In rural areas, many taxi drivers make a living by driving saloon cars. You say that private-hire depots are ignoring disabled people.

688. Mr Maguire: I am suggesting that disabled people who phone for taxis are being ignored. I know that that is the case from past experience of working in depots.

689. Mr Boylan: You are calling for more taxi ranks. However, if there were more ranks, and more taxi drivers moved in, would it not be fair to say that they would still be doing the same thing?

690. Mr Maguire: No.

691. Mr Boylan: It may not be a solution; I am only making a suggestion.

692. Mr Maguire: If we had more taxi ranks in Belfast, a disabled person could come along to one of those ranks. There are only two taxi ranks in Belfast at the moment.

693. Mr Boylan: Surely a disabled person should go to whatever rank is available.

694. Mr Maguire: Yes, if there were more of them. In that event, there would be greater choice.

695. Mr Boylan: Are they not entitled to go to the ranks that are already there?

696. Mr Maguire: Yes. However, if a disabled person is at the Wellington Park Hotel, the nearest taxi rank is at the Europa Hotel.

697. Mr Boylan: That is something that can be looked at later. However, I feel strongly that disabled people should be able to access taxi ranks.

698. You referred to taxi drivers being out doing other work and not being available from the depots. Would you clarify that please?

699. Mr Maguire: Private-hire taxi drivers who are permitted to lift fares in the street could get hailed once the city centre starts to get busy on a Saturday night. That would mean that their depot would be short of cars. The depot would not be able to take phone bookings because no drivers would be available; they would all be out on the street trying to get flagged down.

700. Mr Boylan: Having one regulation for an operator’s licence would curb that behaviour.

701. Mr Maguire: In what way?

702. Mr Boylan: There has talk of one-tier and two-tier systems? What is your view on that? Should there be a law that allows Belfast drivers to lift fares in the street but requires people in rural areas to phone for accessible taxis?

703. Mr Maguire: There are public-hire taxis and taxi ranks outside Belfast. Drivers do not have to be in Belfast to sit in a taxi rank.

704. Mr Boylan: Yes, but you are talking specifically about taxi ranks.

705. Mr Maguire: I am speaking as a public-hire taxi driver, and I am suggesting that we need more taxi ranks. However, you are asking me about drivers who work in depots.

706. Mr Boylan: You are saying that you want the taxi ranks; but people still want to use taxis outside taxi ranks. Is that correct?

707. Mr Maguire: We need taxi ranks, and we need —

708. Mr Boylan: I am only asking you the question. The reason that I am asking is so that the Committee can bring forward your suggestions at the overview. You specifically said that there may not be enough taxi drivers at the ranks —

709. Mr Maguire: In the depots.

710. Mr Boylan: Sorry; in the depots.

711. Mr Maguire: If I am working in a depot and my depot is quiet, and if Belfast city centre is busy, I will go into the city centre and try to earn some money. If people then phone my depot, I will not be there, and the depot will find it hard to get its work covered. This legislation will not put more taxis on the street; it will shift the problem from one area to another.

712. Mr Boylan: So with that in mind, are you saying that the number of taxi drivers should be restricted? What happens if new people come in?

713. Mr Maguire: I did not say that.

714. Mr Boylan: I am only asking the question.

715. Mr Maguire: That is not for me to say.

716. Mr Boylan: That would be a lead-on question.

717. Mr Maguire: I think that there are plenty of taxis. Personally, I would like to see a cap put on the number of taxis. As I said earlier, there are plenty of taxis for everybody except for about two hours on a Saturday night, and that is when private-hire taxis will flood the city centre, leaving their depots exposed.

718. Mr Weir: With regard to leaving depots exposed at peak times — especially on Saturday nights — when private-hire taxi drivers head in the direction of the city centre, and I appreciate that there is likely to be a lot of cars going in that direction, surely what is more likely to happen is that a depot would hire in more drivers for those peak periods.

719. Mr Maguire: The depots could not do that. They could not hire people to work for only two hours on a Saturday night.

720. Mr Weir: Why not? Surely they would earn money; they are providing a service.

721. Mr Maguire: If you were a taxi driver, would you work for two hours a week?

722. Mr Weir: Presumably, any business that experiences a massive increase in trade at a particular time will bring in more people to cover that period.

723. Mr Maguire: What would taxi companies do with those people for the rest of the time — tell them to go home without any wages?

724. Mr Weir: Presumably, not every driver works 40 hours a week. Some drivers must work flexibly or part-time.

725. Mr Maguire: There is no work for those people for the rest of the week.

726. Mr Weir: Surely, as in any profession, some people work part-time and do something else for the rest of the time.

727. Mr Maguire: With respect, Mr Weir, you are stretching the point by suggesting that people would work for just two hours at peak time on a Saturday night. Let us be realistic.

728. Mr Weir: I appreciate that, but the reality is —

729. The Chairperson: We are veering from the legislation into the management of private companies.

730. Mr Weir: To be fair, the witness raised that point to illustrate a repercussion of the proposed legislation. I am suggesting that the problem will not be as bad as he fears.

731. I have two further questions. On the subject of increased accessibility for disabled people, you mentioned concerns about the potential for disabled people to be ripped off by private-hire taxis. The Committee has heard evidence on that issue that suggests that disabled people have been ripped off by a minority of drivers in the system as a whole, not only by one section of it.

732. Mr Maguire: I agree. It is not just one section. The disabled girl, Barbara Fleming, who gave evidence to this Committee last week, said that the taxi driver from the depot that she normally uses charged her £35 for a journey from the city centre to upper Malone, which left her with no money to get home. She should be asked to name the company responsible for that. Her friend was charged £70 for a journey of a quarter of a mile. Those are people who —

733. Mr Weir: The problems appear to be across the board. May I ask you —

734. Mr Maguire: Can something not be done about that?

735. The Chairperson: Again, we are veering into investigations.

736. Mr Weir: You said that the taxi-rank system works fairly well in areas outside Belfast. Why do you believe that a two-mile radius —

737. Mr Maguire: If we had more ranks.

738. Mr Weir: OK, assuming that there were more ranks, why do you believe that a special system, which does not apply anywhere else in Northern Ireland, should operate within a two-mile radius of Belfast city centre? Why should it have a different system?

739. Mr Maguire: Do you mean that public-hire taxis in Belfast would be the only taxis allowed to —

740. Mr Weir: Why do you believe that there should be a two-tier system in the centre of Belfast, when such a system does not apply anywhere else in the Province?

741. Mr Maguire: In comparison with, say, Banbridge, on a Thursday night, Belfast is much busier than any of the outlying areas. In Belfast, there is a need to have 450 taxis waiting for people to jump into to go home. In Banbridge or Coleraine, there is not.

742. Mr Weir: If there is that volume of business in Belfast, and I agree that, on any Thursday night, there is —

743. Mr Maguire: That is the difference between Belfast and other areas.

744. Mr Weir: Hold on. Given that volume of business, would it not still be there if there were a one-tier system and anyone could pick up from the streets?

745. Mr Maguire: There would still be the same number of people; however, as has been said, the number of taxis would not increase. Currently, people are being picked up illegally, by illegal taxi drivers. The DOE is doing nothing about that. In order to turn its back and wash its hands of the problem, the DOE intends to legalise the illegal drivers. That is the Department’s solution.

746. The Chairperson: Thank you, Mr Maguire, for bringing your practical experience to the Committee, and for your time.

747. I welcome Mr William Black and thank you for giving the Committee your time. The Committee already has your written submission and, as you have probably gathered, the meeting is pretty informal and relaxed, so please be at ease. If you wish to highlight particular points of your submission to the Committee, please do so, and the members will ask for clarification or further details, as required.

748. Mr William Black: Thank you, Mr Chairman. My name is William Black, and I have been in the taxi industry for just over 25 years, during which time there have been many changes. Fifteen minutes is not long, and I do not want to waste time, so I will start with the matter of the operator’s licence.

749. The operator’s licence was introduced on the mainland so that there would be some sort of accountability for private-hire vehicles, which they call minicabs. As far as I am aware, hackney cabs did not need an operator’s licence.

750. The Department of the Environment was informed about a case on the mainland in which a council had decided that hackney cabs working for a private-hire company should require an operator’s licence. The case went to the High Court, which ruled that a hackney cab did not need an operator’s licence. Brentwood Borough Council took the case to the Court of Appeal, but the previous ruling was upheld.

751. I have been in touch with the Department, which has sent me some material stating that that case falls under a particular category. The bottom line is that the High Court and the Court of Appeal stated that a hackney cab does not need an operator’s licence — that sector is already regulated.

752. The Department intended to allow certain exclusions from the operator’s licence clause, which would include Belfast public-hire cabs. However, the proposed legislation was changed, because when all stakeholders and other interested parties were asked about the operator’s licence, the response was that all taxis should be covered by an operator’s licence. That goes back to consultations in 2005 and 2006.

753. There are 512 public-hire hackney cabs working in Belfast, according to information supplied by the DOE licensing office on 18 September 2007. There are 7,841 public-hire vehicles, 2,782 private-hire vehicles and 272 taxi buses outside Belfast. If we compare the 512 drivers in the Belfast public-hire sector with the 10,895 other drivers in various categories, who are, at present, unregulated, it is safe to assume that the Belfast public-hire cabs will not have any real opportunity to be exempted from the operator’s licence, because the other sectors that never had to pay before will now have to do so.

754. Hackney cabs are still regulated by the Department, but they will fall foul of the regulations through sheer numbers. The Belfast public-hire cab must conform to certain standards and can cost anything up to £35,000. That is a massive price difference in comparison with the average price of £10,000 to £14,000 for a private-hire vehicle.

755. The Department was a bit clever in changing the proposed legislation in July 2006 to state that the Belfast hackney cab and all other taxis, private or otherwise, would be classed as a taxi. I have that document with me. The minutes of evidence that were presented to the Committee on 31 May 2007 state:

“Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK where what we call a ‘private-hire taxi’ is allowed to be known as a taxi. Everywhere else in the UK, they are called private-hire vehicles”.

756. The evidence from DOE officials goes on to state:

“Under many licensing authorities in the rest of the UK, private-hire vehicles are prohibited from carrying roof signs because that makes them look like public-hire taxis.”

757. The Department decided to call every type of vehicle a taxi. That is a somewhat confusing decision. If that is the Department’s idea of progress, I find it totally amusing.

758. My next point concerns the proposal to allow taxis that are not accessible to wheelchairs to pick up passengers in Belfast. That proposal, in my opinion and those of many others, will destroy Belfast public-hire cabs. Some 512 hackney cabs operate in Belfast, but not all of them work at peak times, as the Department of the Environment told the Committee on 31 May 2007. However, I am disappointed that the minutes of evidence do not record the fact that the two largest companies working in Belfast have more than 500 drivers who are available for work, but they also do not have a full complement of taxis working during peak periods.

759. The Department went on to state that vehicles licensed for private hire, or public hire outside Belfast, pick up much of that demand illegally. That is true, but one of the main reasons for so much illegal “p-uing”, as we call it, is that drivers would rather work off the street so that they can choose whatever work they want. If they work for a depot, they have to take the job that is allocated to them, but if people phone a taxi depot during peak periods and are told that there is a two-hour waiting time, they will go out and try to hail a taxi illegally on the street. If those taxis worked for depots, it would cut down on the number of people trying to hail a taxi illegally on the street. That is a fact.

760. On Friday and Saturday nights between 1.00 am and 3.00 am, taxi demand reaches saturation point, not only in Belfast but all over the UK. That is six hours out of 160 hours a week — 3•57% — during which accessible taxis are still working. That seems to be an unjustified reason for the drastic changes that the Department has proposed. In evidence to the Committee, the Department said that people do not know or care about differences in taxi plating — they just want to get home. It appears that departmental officials are saying that if enough people are prepared to break the law, the law will be changed to suit them.

761. The Department carried out an impact assessment, which states that allowing other taxis to pick up on the street would have no detrimental effect, financially or otherwise, on any part of the industry. For those members who know central Belfast, take the scenario of someone walking out of Fountain Street onto Wellington Place, he or she can obtain a taxi by phoning for one, walking to the nearest taxi rank or hailing a hackney cab. If there is permission for private-hire taxis to pick up on the street, people will not need to walk to the taxi rank, and those taxis will sit in the ranks for longer.

762. We have been told that the Belfast public-hire cab is an integral part of the public transport system, but taking away part of my business and telling me that it will not affect me is ludicrous. Of course it will affect me, because this will happen all over Belfast. Public-hire taxis in Belfast need protection to maintain the current system and the facilities that they provide.

763. The Department says that it wants more accessible taxis operating throughout Northern Ireland. If Belfast does not keep the two-tier system, there will be fewer accessible taxis available for immediate hire. I have spoken to many drivers in my sector of the business, and they have stated that if they were to lose a percentage of their business in such a way, they would be better going into private hire, taking into consideration the cost of the cab, the extra charge of £25 for having a PSV-accessible vehicle just for the test, as well as the loss of business. The business would be unsustainable and drivers could not cope with it. There are not many taxi ranks around Belfast, but they are all full, considering that they are 24-hour ranks operating successfully during daylight hours. What with National Car Parks (NCP), the PSNI and the enforcement officers, drivers cannot get into the ranks. Are drivers supposed to drive round the city in the hope that they will eventually get in?

764. The enforcement team working in the taxi industry does a remarkable job, considering that there are only five officers who cover the whole of Northern Ireland. I understand that we are about to lose one of our enforcement officers. I say “our” enforcement officers, because I believe that they have done a great job.

765. Recently, I discovered which enforcement officer was being moved. I suggest that the Committee for the Environment approach the enforcement office and stop that transfer, if it has the power to do so. Losing enforcement personnel who know their job in order to bring in new personnel is a waste of money and manpower. We need those personnel.

766. The Committee has been informed that there are 21 officers who may be called on to carry out sting operations, if requested. Can the Department tell the Committee how many times since the taxi plates were introduced in 2004 more than five enforcement officers have been used in an operation? In November 2004, changes were made to legislation that were aimed at substantially reducing the number of illegal taxis in order to minimise the risk to the travelling public. Legislation is only as good as its enforcement.

767. When the plates were introduced, the fee was increased to up to £120 a cab; currently, the fee is £126•50. At the time of the increase, we were informed that the Department would take £20 from each application to use for enforcement. There were 9,000 taxis in 2004, and that number has increased to 11,470. A levy of £20 per person adds up to a lot of money, so why has there not been an increase in enforcement? That is more than £750,000. Where is that money going?

768. The money that has gone into enforcement seems like a large amount, although, after it is spread out, perhaps it is not. In either case, five officers is not enough. I would like the Department to explain where the money has gone, and whether the other 16 officers have been called on to become involved in sting operations at any time in the past three years. If they have, I do not think that that would have cost £750,000.

769. At present, a two-tier system protects the Belfast public-hire cab sector. To change to a one-tier system would devastate that part of the industry. I refer to the Committee’s minutes of evidence of 31 May 2007, when departmental officials stated:

“When we asked directly whether respondents would prefer a one-tier system or a two-tier system, the two-tier system was narrowly preferred if the alternative was that all taxis — public hire and private hire — must be accessible.”

770. The costs of making those taxis accessible would be astronomical. The vast majority did not want to make their vehicles accessible, and the simple reason was cost. I refer members to the same minutes of evidence:

“When the Department examined the outcome of the policy consultation, it set out to revise its key proposals. Respondents were asked: ‘Do you agree with the proposal to keep a revised two-tier system as described?’

771. Respondents came down narrowly on the side of a two-tier licensing system. However, they also stated that they wanted all taxis to be able to pick up fares, have roof signs, work to regulated fares and have taximeters.”

772. That sounded like a one-tier system to the Department, which decided to push for a one-tier system.

773. Any licensed taxi that has a meter must have it sealed by the Department, regardless of whether the taxi is private hire, public hire outside Belfast or Belfast public hire. Currently, the only vehicles that have had their meters tested and sealed are Belfast public-hire taxis. Private-hire and public-hire vehicles outside Belfast have never been tested or sealed. The Department’s explanation is that it does not have the manpower. That is not my problem.

774. The question is: a one-tier or a two-tier system? In my opinion, by virtue of the numbers involved, the Belfast public-hire cab is becoming a scapegoat. If the Belfast public-hire cab, as we know it, is to survive, the two-tier system within a five-mile radius of Belfast must be retained. That is paramount to its survival. If the Belfast public-hire cab is to be part of an integrated public transport system, the Department must keep the two-tier system for Belfast.

775. In any review, all parties involved should gain something, but if certain amendments are not made to these proposals, public-hire cabs in Belfast will lose substantially. There will be loss of revenue, because no one is going to pay an extra £25 for a cab simply because it is wheelchair accessible. In addition to that, the cultural identity of the hackney, or black, cab, will be lost. There will also be charges: approximately £242 for receipt printers; £400 to install meters in taxis that do not already have them; a separate fee for calibrating those meters; the cost of courses up to, possibly, NVQ level; the cost of an operator’s licence, which has not even been discussed; the paperwork that must be kept to comply with “due diligence”; and the cost of renewal of the licence. A separate fee for processing applications for licences is currently £75, and that includes a repute check. Under the new proposals, an extra £30 will be added for the repute check, which will bring the licence fee up to £105. For new applicants, a licence will cost £110, plus a £30 repute check.

776. There will also be a reduction in the number of years that a licence covers. A five-year licence now costs £75, and over a period of 15 years, taxi drivers would buy three licences, which would cost £225. However, if the period of the licence is going to be reduced to three years, the cost, over a period of 15 years, would be £375 — an increase of £150.

777. The PSV test costs £126•50, and a retest costs £19•50. There has been talk about splitting the categories of PSV testing; therefore, there could be a charge of £40 for documentation, £30 for the meter test and £40 for the mechanical test, and so forth. Currently, if a taxi fails in any, or all, of those categories, the cost of the retest is £19•50, but that would not be the case if the categories were split — it may be £30 for the meter test and £25 for the mechanical test. That is another increase that taxi drivers would have to pay. When a PSV test is booked, a date and a time are given, but if I am told that my test can only be undertaken on a Friday evening at 7.00 pm, I have to pay extra.

778. At present, when a taxi is being sold, the new owner receives a V36 on the vehicle, which means that the seller takes the taxi to the PSV centre for a quick check for which there is no charge. However, that practice will stop, because the Department is seeking powers to charge for processing the change of ownership, registration and the type of hire and plates.

779. The Chairperson: I am conscious of the time.

780. Mr Black: I have just one more matter to mention.

781. A one-tier system will result, in all probability, in a substantial reduction in the number of accessible taxis available for people with different types of disabilities. I was distressed to hear a number of respondents saying that people with disabilities have enough transport supplied for them and that there is no need for more accessible taxis. It is disgraceful that anyone in public or private hire would say that. People with disabilities have the same right to have transportation as any other person, and there is already legislation, which states that overcharging someone with a disability will result in the loss of a licence. I would like to see that legislation enforced.

782. The Chairperson: Thank you very much. You put your evidence very comprehensively.

783. Mr Weir: Thank you for your evidence, Mr Black. I apologise to the Chairperson — I will have to leave in a few minutes to attend a briefing.

784. I agree with the witness. What was said about enforcement is valid, and that point has been made by a number of witnesses. There is a need for greater levels of enforcement and for more resources. It is nonsense to suggest that the measures will not have any grave detrimental impact on the public-hire sector in Belfast. They will clearly have some effect in that some business will be shifted away from the public-hire sector into the private-hire sector.

785. I will play devil’s advocate. Mr Black, you mentioned that, already, many taxis are breaking the regulations and picking people up from the street when they should not. You also said that the public does not care who picks them up, as long as they get home. How do you respond to the suggestion that what the legislation proposes simply reflects the economic reality on the ground? That is how things are operating in practice, and the Department is trying to regulate what is happening.

786. Mr Black: Taxis are operating illegally in Belfast. Private-hire taxis are doing that outside Belfast too, so it is not just in Belfast that that happens.

787. The regulations exist. When people apply for a plate, they can choose what type of plate they want and in what type of business they want to work. The number of taxis that are picking up illegally is clear to anyone who travels around Belfast at peak periods. Those taxis should be working from their depots. However, when a customer telephones a depot, he or she may be told that there is a two-hour wait. If that were not so, taxi drivers would not have to go out and do something illegal. Drivers would prefer to be able to pick up on the streets and turn away business that does not suit them. When a customer wants to go to Bangor late at night, the driver might then charge him or her £40.

788. Mr Weir: I would have thought that taxi drivers would have considered such an opportunity a gold mine.

789. Mr Black: That is the point. When drivers choose a licence, they should abide by its rules. If drivers do not like it, they should get out of that business. I want to work in one type of business, and I buy a type of vehicle that complies with that. However, someone else with the same licence might decide that: the depot is not that busy; a customer will give him a job that will earn him £3; or he has to travel from the Holywood Road to Ballysillan to pick up his next fare. Those things happen regularly. Those are the reasons that taxi drivers in private-hire companies — and the public-hire sector — come in, pick up people from the street and refuse whatever work they do not want.

790. Mr Boylan: Thank you for your presentation. With respect to the point about taxis working from the depot, did you have an opportunity to submit anything during the consultation period?

791. Mr Black: I did.

792. Mr Boylan: I would like to hear your thoughts on enforcement.

793. Mr Black: Our enforcement team — I am sorry — I refer to it as “our enforcement team” because I believe that enforcement is necessary for the industry and for my benefit. That team has operated since 2004, when the plates were introduced, but, with five officers, it is not nearly adequate. However, they do an excellent job.

794. I was disgusted to hear this morning that we were losing an officer. When I found out which officer we were losing, I was even more upset. The person concerned is not merely good at the job, the person is excellent at it. In my opinion, that is why that person has been removed. If I can get enough people to phone up and complain about someone, it will not matter whether that person is innocent or guilty — rather than take the heat, that person will be swept under the carpet. It is as simple as that. That is what is happening. The enforcement officer has been moved —

795. The Chairperson: I am sorry. The Committee cannot get into that issue.

796. Mr Black: The Committee should get into it.

797. The Chairperson: I am sorry. That is a matter for the Department. We will raise the general question of enforcement with the Department. Specific issues about staffing are not the Committee’s responsibility. The Committee is here to examine the legislation.

798. Mr Black: Enforcement is not good enough. At £20 a driver going towards the costs of enforcement, over the past three years, where has the money been spent? I cannot get an answer to that question.

799. Mr Ford: In your written submission, you referred to the need to increase the number of accessible vehicles.

800. What would you see as an appropriate proportion of fully accessible vehicles for any operator to have, if we are moving in the direction that the legislation proposes?

801. Mr Black: The proposed legislation is for each depot to have a percentage of accessible vehicles.

802. Mr Ford: What would your percentage be in that context?

803. Mr Black: My percentage, for private-hire vehicles, would be around 10%. That begs the question of who has the right to give you a job or make you buy an accessible taxi. If the law were to be that 10% of taxis had to be accessible, for example, and another gentleman and I were to buy two Mercedes and both of us wanted to work for the same company, we could not both be employed if that left the company with less than 10% of its fleet being accessible taxis. Who gives an owner, or anyone else, the right to give someone a job on the condition that they have a wheelchair-accessible vehicle? The Department would call that a grey area.

804. The Chairperson: Thank you for your time, Mr Black; we covered a lot of ground today.

805. Mr Black: Thank you.

806. The Chairperson: Are all of the representatives from the International Airport Taxi Co here?

807. Mr James McVeigh (International Airport Taxi Co Ltd): I apologise for Mr Kennedy, who has been unable to make the meeting.

808. The Chairperson: So there are just the two of you? Thank you for being with us. As you can see, the format is informal, but within certain guidelines. Our focus is on the Taxis Bill that is in front of us, and we already have a submission from you. It is not necessary to go over the whole submission again, but if there are particular aspects of it that you wish to add to, please do so. Committee members will then seek clarity or ask for further detail.

809. Mr McVeigh: First of all, Chairman, I want to thank the Committee for the opportunity to come here. I have listened with great interest this morning. This has been much talked about in the taxi industry.

810. Can I say, as someone who moved to Randalstown 10 years ago, that there is life outside Belfast? I would like to point out that there is a three-tier system in operation, not a two-tier system. There are two tiers in Belfast, and we have no problem with that. Neither has any driver who works in a country town or village. The third tier is public and private. It provides people who live in a small village, whether in County Fermanagh, County Down, County Armagh, or even somewhere such as Bangor, with the opportunity to expand their business. They can work off a taxi rank, through a depot, or by mobile phone, as most people do. We work outside Belfast at the international airport, and we feel that there is a need to retain that third tier, which no one seems to have mentioned. It is private hire with limited public access, which is represented by white plates.

811. I will not go too deeply into my second point, as it has already been covered and I am conscious of the time — the overheads that will arise from the legislation. As the gentlemen before me said, no one has any idea how much the operator’s licence will cost. There is talk about different structures for sole traders, but any taxi drivers that I know in Belfast, Randalstown, Antrim or wherever are sole traders. They may, at certain times, work through a depot, they may work off a taxi rank; but they are sole traders.

812. If they work from a depot, they pay a fee. However, they are responsible for their own vehicle, their insurance, the running costs of the vehicle, and, if they are out of work — tough. The introduction of an operator’s licence will mean that all drivers will have to pay for it; depot owners will not necessarily pay for it because they can simply offload the costs.

813. An increase in test fees for the cars will be introduced. The fee is currently £126•50. I recently changed my vehicle, and I was fortunate that the bank did not own the one that I had been driving. I could not get a test date for my new car, which resulted in it having to sit in the car showroom for four weeks. When I eventually did get a test date, I had to torture the people in Corporation Street to get the plates ready.

814. Officially, I could not drive my new vehicle. Had I had an accident while driving my old car, or if the engine had blown, it would not have been worth while getting it fixed. Therefore, technically, I would have been out of work for approximately six to eight weeks. I would have had no earning power, which would have been bad for me as I have a mortgage, and so on. Why should I pay £126•50, when the cost for a coach that is capable of carrying 75 passengers is virtually half of that? I do not think that that is fair.

815. The fee for a taxi licence is increasing again. At present, after a five-year period, taxi drivers have to reapply for a licence. The Department, because of business and management problems, advises people to apply six weeks prior to the end of that five-year period. I, like most of the drivers, apply at least three months ahead. Those of us who are over the age of 45 have to complete a medical, and that too has to be paid for. Furthermore, we have to pay for a taxi test, on top of which will now be added the cost of the operator’s licence. We feel that that is unfair, because we get nothing in return.

816. There is also talk that all taxis that work off a rank system will have to be wheelchair accessible. As a small private company, we feel that that will put us at a distinct disadvantage. Working at Belfast International Airport, we offer an across-the-board taxi service. Foreign dignitaries or businessmen can book an executive car in advance of their arrival. If they arrive and have not booked one — maybe their secretary has made a mistake — we can still supply one.

817. We also supply wheelchair-accessible vehicles, and we do not charge any extra for those facilities. If people book those vehicles in advance, they pay the standard rate. I agree with the chaps who represented Belfast public-hire taxis that that should not be an issue.

818. We also run a general taxi service, which enables anyone to get a taxi at their convenience. All of our customers are supplied with written receipts, which are printed with our company logo, and our company is registered with Companies Registry. The driver’s number is at the top of the receipt, and the office address is included in case anyone wishes to make a complaint. We have set fares. We feel that we meet quite a lot of the Department’s criteria, and some of the legislation.

819. For two hours on a Friday night, and two hours on a Saturday night, Belfast taxi drivers are under pressure. We may be wrong, but we feel that it is unfair for taxi drivers who work in small country towns, such as Magherafelt, Banbridge, Bangor, Holywood — where my colleague comes from — and Randalstown, to be classed the same as those who work in Belfast. Given that there is a system that works in the country areas, why fix what is not broken?

820. Making all taxi drivers drive wheelchair-accessible vehicles would affect small country areas — the villages and towns. The information note that accompanied The Draft Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 stated:

“Accessible taxis will, in due course, become the only taxis that will be allowed to stand for hire in taxi ranks”.

821. It goes on to clarify the locations at which they can do so:

“(airports, ferry terminals and railway stations and the like) but also areas such as shopping centres and entertainment complexes.”

822. Does that mean, for example, that if taxi drivers want to sit outside the Buttercrane shopping centre in Newry, they will need wheelchair-accessible vehicles? Does every person who comes out of the Buttercrane centre want a wheelchair-accessible vehicle? The answer is no.

823. In the past four years, we have had four — or possibly five — requests for wheelchair-accessible vehicles at the airport. I will give one example. One Saturday night when we were under severe pressure, a passenger on a diverted British Midland flight from London wanted a wheelchair-accessible vehicle, and one of our drivers was instructed to do the job. The flight was delayed, and the driver had to wait for 30 minutes for the lady to come out. He got the ramps out and pushed the wheelchair into the back of the vehicle, and the lady then got out of the wheelchair and walked to the front seat of the car. Those things happen.

824. I am not saying that disabled people are not entitled to a service: they are. However, as Dr McCrea said to Stephen Peover when they met in Clarence Court, the legislation must be examined on a broader scale, and we must examine what all our customers need. We agreed that that should happen. A blanket decision cannot be taken based on what is happening in Belfast. The problems in Belfast do not necessarily equate to those in country areas. I think that the country is a brilliant place to live; it is a bit more laid-back and, people are more easy-going Belfast is very fast and is becoming more like Dublin, suffering similar traffic problems. My daughter said that she has banged on the windows of taxis outside the Bot on more than one Friday night and asked to be taken up the road, but the drivers do not want to know.

825. Those are my views on the plating system. People in country areas should still have the choice of using the white plates.

826. Mr Brian Press (International Airport Taxi Co Ltd): To verify what Jim McVeigh said, we try to work to passenger needs at Belfast International Airport. We find that, as Mr Gardiner said, there is a demand for wheelchair-friendly vehicles. However, we have found that that percentage is not very high, as Jim said. As a company, we try our best to keep around 20% of our vehicles that are on the rank wheelchair-friendly to ensure that disabled people will be catered for. We have found that to work quite well, and we have not had any problems. Our franchise arrangement at the airport states that we cannot keep a wheelchair-bound person waiting for more than 20 minutes. We have never exceeded that time; in fact, we have never come close.

827. I sometimes wonder whether the people who use the industry —passengers — have been consulted about their needs. Has the Committee met with the Consumer Council or similar agencies? We find that a lot of business people use the back of the taxi as an office. They prefer to travel in saloon cars, and we also use those cars for tourists who have large amounts of luggage. We have Mercedes cars for executives and celebrities, and around 20% of our vehicles are wheelchair-friendly. Our company tries to cater for all needs.

828. From a business perspective, we are concerned that if people come out of the airport and cannot get the vehicle of their choice, they will phone the local private-hire companies. Consequently, our company and our drivers will suffer a loss of income. At that point, the question would be: are we needed? That scenario is occurring quite often at the George Best Belfast City Airport, which is now completely wheelchair-friendly. You will see private-hire taxis waiting outside in large numbers, but people will phone for a saloon car rather than travel in a wheelchair-friendly vehicle. Our business could be adversely affected while, at the same time, passenger interests are not being considered.

829. Ours is a country depot, and, therefore, the Belfast taxi drivers’ argument does not really affect us as such. However, we understand their concerns. The enforcement issue needs to be looked into. There should be a more robust complaints procedure as regards overcharging. We know that overcharging happens and, undoubtedly, there are still cowboys in the industry. We have a very strict disciplinary code. Any driver who overcharges a customer is dismissed — and there is no going back on that. Our disciplinary code works well and perhaps could be considered by the industry. By adopting a better complaints procedure and stricter disciplinary codes, the industry could be cleaned up.

830. Our main concern is that the one-tier system — which some companies are arguing for — would unfeasible in a country location such as Aldergrove. Why change something that has worked well over the years?

831. Mr McVeigh: Recently, our company went to the expense of developing a website. It will be activated in the next two or three months. Aer Lingus has now come to the airport, which has created a lot of problems down below.

832. The Chairperson: You will be the beneficiaries of that.

833. Mr McVeigh: We had similar problems here when British Airways and British Midland pulled out. We will be advertising an across-the-board service on our website, and undoubtedly, we will be expecting a lot of tourists to visit next year. We are a small company, and we are all shareholders. No one makes any money out of it. We are not like the big guys.

834. The Chairperson: Those of us from rural areas would regard Belfast International Airport as a cosmopolitan area — I have to point that out to you. However, on a serious note; while we may be more able to present our views, nonetheless the rights and entitlements that we expect as public representatives should be exactly the same as those of our cousins in urban areas such as Belfast. That is a point well worth making. In your submission you referred to exemptions for the airport area — is that a public area?

835. Mr McVeigh: I am not an expert on the legal aspects. The airport is on private ground, but there is public access, and there are certain criteria to be followed. For example, I cannot access the taxi park unless I have a gizmo in the car. We also have to be security-cleared by the Department and checked out by the airport police. Therefore, not just anyone can access the taxi park. Each taxi driver must display the airport badge and must have a transponder in his vehicle before he can access the taxi parking area.

836. Mr Ford: Following the eulogy for Randalstown and Aldergrove, I must declare an interest as MLA for South Antrim. Mr McVeigh raised interesting comments about the status of the international airport, given that it is privately owned, but semi-public — but the Chairperson has followed up on those comments. Have you had discussions with the Department about its attitude to the taxi rank at the airport?

837. Mr McVeigh: I met the MP for South Antrim, the Rev William McCrea, who was interested in that issue. He and I had a meeting with Mr Peover — the permanent secretary in the Department of the Environment — and I subsequently received a letter from Bill Laverty. That letter stated: “As was advised in the course of the meeting, the Taxis Bill, subject to the approval of the Northern Ireland Assembly, would give the Department enabling powers to introduce regulations which may require certain classes of taxi to meet accessibility standards. These regulations would be subject to public consultation and also the approval of the Assembly. It is expected that such regulations will take some time to draft and in doing so the Department would take fully into account the representations made by your Company about the way taxis are currently operated under the airport contract.

838. I can therefore assure you that the passing of the Taxi Bill into law of itself will not automatically mean that all airport taxis will have to become accessible nor will the way that taxis are presently operated be immediately affected.”

839. Mr Ford: This is another instance in which we will have to wait for regulations, rather than expect measures in the Bill.

840. Mr Boylan: Thank you for your presentation. I was glad to hear mention of the customers in rural areas. You mentioned the variety of services that you offer. Do you follow a code of practice that is governed by the airport?

841. Mr McVeigh: Taxi drivers who work at the airport are security vetted by the airport authorities. We have to supply a certain standard of vehicle, and it must not be more than six years old. Every driver is subject to checks by the police — if the authorities wish — and our insurance and PSV certificates must be 100% up to date. A complaints procedure is also in place. If a complaint is made against one of our drivers, it is immediately acted on. We have a training and employment agency in Ballymena to look after those affairs, and that keeps us completely right. If a complaint is made against an airport driver — through the international airport — a representative from the training agency gets in touch with one of the management team on the taxi rank, who will strictly monitor the service.

842. Mr Boylan: Customer care is very important in your line of work.

843. Mr Press: Complaints — when they are made — come through to us via the airport authorities. We know how important it is for our type of franchise to have a proper disciplinary procedure in place. However, that is something that is sadly lacking in other private companies and, perhaps, even in the public sector. Some organisations do not have effective complaints procedures, and proper disciplinary procedures might not be taken against those who fall foul of the legislation. People care so much about their jobs that they do not step out of line. In the past two years, only two drivers have left because they have overcharged passengers.

844. Mr Boylan: You deal with many different nationalities.

845. Mr Press: We look upon ourselves as ambassadors for our country, because there are lots of tourists. Last year, seven million visitors came through the airport, and we are the first people that they meet. There has been talk about training, but we are already there. We direct, advise and give people estimates of the cost of their journeys, for instance. I am not being big-headed, but we lead by example. We are further ahead than some private companies.

846. The Chairperson: Thank you both very much for coming here today. You are quite right; you are the ambassadors meeting people who have just arrived in the country.

847. Mr Gardiner: They work at the airport, but they seem to run a tight ship.

11 October 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Trevor Clarke
Mr David Ford
Mr Tommy Gallagher
Mr Ian McCrea
Mr Peter Weir

Witnesses:

Kevin Doherty	Disability Action
Ms Adele Watters Mr John McMullan Mr Stephen Spratt Mr John Martin	Department of the Environment

848. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): There was no written submission from Disability Action, but members may recall that at our meeting on 27 September, we agreed that it was important that the Committee hear an oral brief from a Disability Action representative. I also advise members that unless the Committee receives and accepts any late requests, today is our last day for oral evidence.

849. Mr Doherty, you are very welcome. Our proceedings are informal; you will have 10 or 15 minutes to explain your case and any views you may have on the Taxis Bill. Members will then ask questions seeking further detail or clarity.

850. Mr Kevin Doherty (Disability Action): Thank you. Our chief executive, Monica Wilson, sends her apologies. I am here to present evidence on behalf of Disability Action, which is a pan-disability organisation that works to create an inclusive Northern Ireland with, and for, people with disabilities. There are currently more than 330,000 people in Northern Ireland with a declared disability. The most recent census survey in Northern Ireland has identified certain barriers to social and economic inclusion for people with disabilities, and transport is one of those barriers. Disability Action urges the Committee to examine the results of that survey as part of any inclusive strategy for transport in Northern Ireland.

851. Disabled people’s experiences of using taxis are very mixed. The vast majority of taxis are private, and can be used by some with mobility impairments, but are often difficult for wheelchair users in particular.

852. Disability Action represents 180 different disability organisations throughout Northern Ireland, and the evidence I am giving today is of specific examples that have been given to us. The issues faced by disabled people using taxis that are private include: extra charges for carrying luggage; extra charges for waiting the few extra minutes that a disabled person may need to get into the taxi; taxi drivers complaining that walking aids have scraped paintwork on cars; refusal of some drivers to move seats to give extra leg room; difficulty with storage of mobility enhancements, such as crutches; and extra charges for guide dogs for the blind, or, as is more often the case in Northern Ireland, refusal to transport them.

853. For wheelchair users who can transfer into a private car issues include: refusal to allow the wheelchair user to put their chair as close as possible to the car to facilitate ease of transfer in case of damage; extra charges for waiting; extra charges for storing the wheelchair — I will give examples of that later; rough handling, and subsequent damage to wheelchairs, which is an ongoing issue that has been highlighted to us; refusal to allow the wheelchair user to travel by themselves by some companies who insist that they have an escort; and the driver’s attitude, language and lack of experience in transporting disabled people can make the journey uncomfortable.

854. Comfort and safety are key issues with self-styled accessible transport, although there are a small number of examples of good practice in transporting wheelchair users with knowledge, sensitivity and confidence, but they involve a select number of drivers who specialise in services for disabled people. Disability Action urges that those services should be used as the benchmark for good practice.

855. Examples that are reported to Disability Action include; lack of knowledge on the use of ramps; wheelchair users not being restrained; being forced to travel facing sideways, or sometimes, the wrong way; lack of driver training and knowledge of effects of impairment, including poor balance; and inability to stay in the chair due to the driver’s poor braking or turning.

856. There are key concerns over the consistency of service, safety and comfort for the disabled person. However, the key significant issue that is often reported to Disability Action is the exorbitant fares imposed on disabled people. I will give two specific examples: a return journey from Lisburn Road in Belfast to Carrickfergus, where there was a ten-minute wait, resulted in a fare of £86, and a return journey of one mile in County Derry with a 20 minute wait was £70. Many disabled people find it difficult, and are afraid to challenge, such discriminatory practice, and pay the fare for a quiet life. In addition, deaf and blind people experience the barriers of lack of accessibility and information, and poor attitude of dispatch and driving staff.

857. In effect, disabled people often rely on taxis as their only means of mobility, but attitudes, safety, charging, inaccessibility of information, and lack of communication make journeys dangerous, uncomfortable and overly expensive.

858. The Taxis Bill must secure significant changes for the 20% of Northern Ireland’s population who are disabled.

859. I recommend that several clauses of the Taxis Bill be amended. Clause 2(5) should include a reference to the number, or percentage, of taxis in each taxi fleet that should reach an agreed level of accessibility. Clause 3(2) should contain the provision that licensed operators be required to have a designated SMS number, text phone or other device that enables deaf people to access the booking system. I also suggest that clause 3(9) recommends accessible methods through which disabled users may make complaints to the licensed operators, for instance, a person with a learning disability may wish to make an oral complaint and a deaf person may wish to communicate his or her complaint by text. Clause 13(3)(a)(ii) should include accessibility as a condition for the taxi to be granted a taxi licence, and we ask that the exorbitant fares imposed on disabled people be challenged by clause 16(1)(b). With regard to clause 16(3), the highest penalties should be imposed for overcharging. Disability Action urges the comprehensive enforcement of clause 20(2)(c). If strong enforcement measures are not in place, the situation will become even more difficult for people with a disability.

860. With regard to clauses 20(2)(h) and 20(2)(j), we seek assurances that accessibility will be the key elements of a future DOE regulation. Even though clause 50 is another enabling clause, the Department recommends that disability and equality training is made mandatory. That would eliminate the lack of disability knowledge that some taxi drivers have — as I mentioned earlier. A further clause should be added regarding the carriage of assisting animals to bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of Great Britain.

861. We welcome the introduction of the Taxis Bill, however the overall needs and basic rights of disabled people must be taken into account at the Bill’s Committee Stage. This is an opportunity for the Department of the Environment and the Committee to set the benchmark that future Bills will have to reach if society is to be made more inclusive for people with disabilities.

862. Mr I McCrea: Thank you for your evidence, Kevin. It is always important to hear from someone who is speaking on behalf of people with disabilities and who wants to ensure that the needs of disabled people are catered for. It is also important that the legislation caters for disabled people. At the beginning of your evidence, you talked about the extra charges faced by disabled people — regardless of their disability. Have you evidence to show the differences in charges imposed by public-hire and private-hire taxis?

863. Mr K Doherty: Taxi firms in small rural villages, for example, are unlikely to have accessible vehicles. Therefore disabled users have to get taxis from firms in bigger places, such as Belfast, Derry and Newry, which have accessible transport, and pay exorbitant fares for taxis to travel to the individuals. However, the problem would be eliminated if all licensed operators were to have some accessible vehicles — as recommended in my proposed amendment to clause 2(5).

864. Mr Ford: Thank you for your evidence. I hope that you will send the Committee a written list of your suggested amendments to the clauses because I did not have time to note them all.

865. Mr K Doherty: I will.

866. Mr Ford: Can drivers’ attitudes and ignorance be improved through regular training? Should such issues be part of the licensing procedure? How should they be dealt with?

867. Mr K Doherty: It is a training issue. Working with and being with people who have disabilities often requires a lot of understanding of the disability.

868. Training should be mandatory across public transport in general, not simply for taxi drivers. There should be mandatory disability and equality awareness training so that those in the transport industry are aware of issues that may face those with a disability, because often such needs are inadvertently not recognised.

869. Mr Ford: Last week, a driver who has the disability of reading and writing with difficulty gave evidence. Have you discussed the significant requirements for record-keeping with any of the drivers who may be similarly affected?

870. Mr K Doherty: The taxi drivers themselves?

871. Mr Ford: Yes, or are you solely concerned with issues relating to passengers?

872. Mr K Doherty: Currently, in regard to the Bill we are solely concerned with issues related to passengers.

873. Mr Ford: In a sense, a number of points that you highlighted about the legislation may be regarded as beefing up the existing Bill, which is, as you have said, overwhelmingly an enabling Bill. Have you had any discussions with departmental officials about that? It appears that you are proposing a fundamental change to the concept of the Bill. You are seeking to have issues that would normally be regulated included in the Bill.

874. Mr K Doherty: We are open to discussion on the issues.

875. Mr Ford: Have discussed them yet?

876. Mr K Doherty: Not at this stage.

877. Mr Weir: The Department has provided the Committee with a list of potential regulatory amendments. Certain witnesses, including Mr Doherty, have given us a list of specific amendments. It would be useful if a full list of amendments were drawn up relatively soon. Also, it would be useful to have the Department’s opinion on the workability of those amendments. Some issues raised by Mr Doherty could be dealt with through amendments, some through regulations, and others through obtaining assurances. The Committee could break that information down for the Department and seek confirmation that there would be amendments or satisfactory regulations put in place. It may be helpful to Mr Doherty’s organisation to get written responses from the Department to confirm, for example, that certain clauses will be enforceable in certain situations. The issue of amendments is separate, but it would be helpful to get written assurances and clarification from the Department on the regulations. That is a role that the Committee could play.

878. The Committee Clerk: A lot of work is going into producing a single document that will break down the legislation, by clause, to outline the key issues. That work will be ongoing until next week. The document will include suggested amendments to clauses and subsections in the Bill. The Department is working hard to put its comments in a third column, so that the information that members need will be contained within a single document.

879. Mr Weir: The potential impact and merit of suggested amendments will vary. On the one hand, everyone will agree that some suggestions make common sense while, on the other hand, a proposal by an individual taxi driver, for example, could amount to a pet theory that no one else agrees with. It will be important for the Committee to make distinctions between suggested amendments; and, therefore, unless the Department comments on workability, it will be difficult for the Committee to make value judgements on what may be sensible improvements to the Bill and what may constitute pet theories that will not work in practice.

880. It was not really a question; I was just seeking clarification.

881. The Committee Clerk: The Bill Clerk, Kevin Shiels, is here today. He will explain the process of clause-by-clause scrutiny to members. I hope that the document that we are going to use will answer all of the questions that members may have. The Committee will examine the clauses, the issues that were raised during oral and written evidence, and the Department’s responses. There will also be an opportunity to discuss the responses with the departmental officials. The document is very large; we have tried to provide members with all the evidence as best we can.

882. Mr Ford: I have one further question. Mr Doherty highlighted clause 2(5) and the issue of the percentage of taxis that should be disabled-friendly. Does Disability Action have a figure in mind?

883. Mr K Doherty: It is difficult to say; in some rural communities there may only be two taxis. I could not say, for example, that 50% of the Value Cabs fleet in Belfast should comprise disabled-friendly vehicles. The question is whether opportunities exist for disabled people to avail of accessible taxis.

884. Mr Ford: I suspect that when we come to the regulations we may have to set a figure.

885. The Chairperson: Mr Doherty, thank you for coming along and giving of your time.

886. We shall now move on to the proposed amendments. We are going to be briefed by Adele Watters and John McMullan from the Department of the Environment. I have been advised that the proposed amendments are minor and do not involve any policy changes. Adele and John will probably clarify that for us.

887. Members have been provided with a copy of the proposed amendments.

888. Mr John McMullan (Department of the Environment): Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee on the Department’s proposed amendments to the Taxis Bill. Although it may appear slightly odd that the Department wishes to propose amendments so soon, the tight drafting deadlines that were imposed, initially for Westminster and then for the Assembly, allowed our lawyers only the summer recess to reflect on the legislation. It is probably inevitable that when lawyers look at draft legislation they will always find something that they want to change.

889. We have described the proposed amendments as minor drafting improvements. No policy changes are being suggested in any of the amendments, save one or two, and even then the overall integrity of the Bill will not be greatly affected. The amendments iron out certain ambiguities and uncertainties in the legislation. Although the changes may look small or even insignificant, they are the sorts of issues that can come back to haunt us in years to come, and the Department invariably ends up in Court trying to defend such legislation.

890. At the beginning of the oral evidence session, Mr Chairperson, you stated that the Committee was determined to get the legislation right. We share that objective, and the amendments will assist us in that regard.

891. To understand the proposed amendments fully, it will be important to read the clauses; identify the offending wording; examine the replacement wording, and try to read the whole thing afresh as an amended version. The process is rather tedious, but I hope that I can get through the proposals without being too legalistic. If the Committee requires more detail, I am happy too discuss individual amendments. The Chairperson mentioned the list of proposed amendments, which has been provided to members, and I propose to go through those individually.

892. The first amendment is to clause 6, which deals with compliance with a departmental taxi-sharing scheme. The clause contains a catch-all provision for the Department — under subsection (1)(c) — when making legislation, to create taxi-sharing schemes.

893. Clause 6(1)(c) states that the Department shall:

“include such provision, or provision of such description, as may be specified in the scheme for the purposes of this paragraph.”

894. That is a rather clumsy way of saying that the Department shall include such other provisions as it thinks fit. The amendment will make that clear: it will tighten up the initial draft.

895. Clause 6(3) states that:

“The Department may vary any scheme made by it under this section.”

896. That is the same as saying that the Department can change subordinate legislation, which goes without saying as the Interpretation Act (Northern Ireland) 1954 enables all Departments to change subordinate legislation. Sometimes, stating something in legislation that is unnecessary can lead to legal arguments that it must mean something different. In this case, it does not mean anything different from what is in the Interpretation Act (Northern Ireland) 1954, therefore, the safest approach is to omit clause 6(3) altogether. That is what is being proposed.

897. The next amendment is to clause 10, which refers to functions in relation to operator’s licence authorising separate fares. This refers to taxi-operators who wish to provide a bus-type service. At present, they must obtain a Roads Service licence, which is basically a bus licence. They must also satisfy fairly rigorous criteria set out in the Transport Act (Northern Ireland) 1967.

898. The Taxis Bill means that it will be no longer necessary for them to obtain such a licence; they will get all their licensing under the Taxis Bill. We have imported the same criteria from the Transport Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 into the Bill. Our intention is that someone who holds a Roads Service licence will not need to meet all the criteria again — there is no point in making someone jump through the same hoops twice.

899. Inadvertently, we exempted them from only one criterion, which was the suitability of routes. This amendment will restore the policy intention that those drivers who want to operate a bus-type service are exempt from all of the various conditions in clause 10. We have also included additional power to enable the Department to make further exemptions in regulations if it is thought to be necessary.

900. The next amendment is to clause 27(3), which outlines the time during which a licence will be suspended or curtailed. The amendment simply removes the reference to “curtailment”. The reason for that is that clause 26(4) already covers curtailment. Therefore, the amendment is not only removing duplication, there was actually a contradiction between the two clauses. Clause 27(3), therefore, will be left as the clause that deals solely with suspension.

901. The next amendment is to clause 37, which refers to powers of entry. The legislation states that:

“an authorised officer or a constable may … inspect those premises and other item”.

902. However, clause 37(8) states that the powers of seizure extend to:

“any equipment or other items”.

903. Equipment had not been mentioned when the powers of inspection were referred to. Therefore, the amendment will ensure consistency in that it will make it possible to also inspect equipment.

904. Clause 42 refers to dealing with taxi touts. It provides an exemption to the offence of touting if it is permitted in regulations made under clause 20(2)(c). Clause 20(2)(c) refers to regulations dealing with taxi marshals. Taxi marshals, by their nature, will be touting; they will be trying to get people into taxis in order to clear the streets. Therefore, it is right that they should be exempt.

905. We also felt that there may be other situations and regulations where someone could be exempt. For example, we provide regulation powers for advertising. Therefore, in clause 42(3) we want to leave out “20(2)(c)” and insert “20.” If something is legally permitted, it should not be an offence under taxi touting.

906. Mr T Clarke: Could I get an explanation of that amendment? Can it be explained from the start again?

907. Mr McMullan: The Bill makes it an offence for someone to be touting for a taxi.

908. Mr T Clarke: What do you mean when you refer to “touting”?

909. Mr McMullan: I mean someone shouting for business on the street — letting people know that a taxi is available. That is not permissible at the moment, and it is not permissible in the Taxis Bill. We are including an exemption in the clause for taxi marshals. In future years, if they are brought in, they will be regulated by the Department, and their role will be to get people into taxis.

910. Mr Weir: At present, are there any taxi marshals, or is that a role that will be introduced in the future if the legislation is adopted?

911. Mr McMullan: There are currently no taxi marshals. The proposal is to introduce them in the future.

912. Mr Weir: Does the law on touting also include taxi drivers? Presumably, they are not allowed to roll down their window and shout that their taxi is available. If they did, would they be guilty of an offence?

913. Mr McMullan: Yes, that is correct.

914. Mr T Clarke: There is a problem with the wording of the Bill. Surely, it should make it clear that marshals are allowed to solicit taxis. The Bill appears to state that taxi drivers can solicit business. Who is to deem whether a taxi driver is doing that correctly or incorrectly? The wording is a bit loose.

915. Mr McMullan: If a taxi driver were to do that, he would be committing an offence.

916. Mr T Clarke: That is not what the Bill says.

917. Mr McMullan: Clause 42(1) of the Taxis Bill states that:

“a person who solicits any person to be carried for hire or reward in a taxi is guilty of an offence.”

918. Mr T Clarke: Yes, but we are talking about clause 42?

919. Ms Watters: Yes. Clause 42, subsection 1.

920. Mr McMullan: The word “person” covers taxi drivers.

921. Ms Watters: The Bill intends to recognise the fact that certain situations in which someone solicits persons to be carried for hire or reward would be permissible. Mr McMullan’s point is that, in focusing on ensuring that that the Bill does not criminalise taxi marshals, we lost sight of our policy aim, which was to ensure that advertising on a taxi or an advertising hoarding were permitted. Potentially, advertising could be regarded as soliciting also.

922. The Chairperson: Clause 20(2)(c) states:

“enforcing order at and regulating the use of places referred to in paragraph (a)”.

923. What does it mean by “places”?

924. Ms Watters: The word “places” means taxi ranks.

925. The Chairperson: The Committee has heard that there are not enough taxi ranks. When the Bill refers to “enforcing order”, it does not refer specifically to taxi marshals. Potentially, anyone could solicit a taxi and claim that they were enforcing order.

926. Mr McMullan: They could only claim that if the Department makes regulations to allow them to do so. The regulations will stipulate who will be legally entitled to enforce order.

927. The Chairperson: Those enforcers of order will regulate and tout legally. How will it be ensured that they are not touting on behalf of a company or a person?

928. Mr McMullan: The Department will regulate for that. It may be that departmental marshals are appointed and that that they will be only people allowed to enforce order.

929. Ms Watters: Alternatively, representatives from a local council might carry out that role. Their training, type of uniform and activities would be tightly regulated. Regulating the enforcement of order at ranks means that that activity can be controlled. Currently, people may try to enforce order by claiming to be a taxi marshals, although were they to do that, they would be at risk of breaking the law on touting.

930. The Chairperson: Will you explain what taxi marshals would do? I am intrigued by the notion of how their role would work in practice, particularly if the number of taxi ranks is limited. Would taxi marshals be designated to work from specific taxi ranks?

931. Ms Watters: In many British cities, queues generally develop at taxi ranks around closing time, when the city is busy and people are leaving — it is a night-time phenomenon. Many of those people have taken alcohol, which can result in allegations of queue-jumping. Taxi marshals, who are appointed by the taxi-licensing authority, the local council, or a combination of both, are on the scene, wearing high-visibility gear. Part of their role will be to ensure that the queue is orderly and that people get taxis as quickly as they become available. That makes it possible to tackle issues such as a driver refusing to take someone to Bangor unless he is paid £40. The aim will be to match people with available taxis as efficiently as possible.

932. The Chairperson: If you wish to build some elbow room into the legislation in order to introduce marshals in the future, what provisions would give them the necessary authority, and what powers would you conceive of them having? In addition, for the issues you raised, such as overcharging, would it be necessary to introduce a two-tier approach requiring enforcement officials — albeit reduced by 20% — as well as marshals, and would that result in the replication of, or an overlap in, work?

933. Ms Watters: We envisage distinct roles for both jobs. The marshal’s role would be to keep order at the rank, match passengers to taxis and help to clear the town at night. Enforcement officers would enforce the regulations. To have enforcement officers marshalling at taxi ranks would not be a good use of that resource.

934. The Chairperson: I am intrigued. Perhaps you did not anticipate this question; however, if you build-in provisions for marshals and, in the future, they are dealing with issues such as keeping order or overcharging, which someone else is empowered to do, would there not be an overlap in duties, and what potential legal role — other than simply herding people into taxis in order to keep them moving — do you envisage for those marshals? Why should the concept of such a role be introduced at this stage if they would not be empowered to do anything?

935. A further element is that if marshals are employed by councils, as you said, some people might consider that to be an attempt by the Department to offload some of its responsibilities onto the local authorities — particularly in light of the oncoming review of public administration.

936. Ms Watters: I do not envisage the marshals having any enforcement role. For potential issues, such as overcharging, the presence of marshals would be a deterrent. If a driver arrives at the rank and the next customer is waiting, the inference is that they will take that customer. The issue of refusing to take them unless they pay £40 will not arise. The idea is that the most a driver could charge would be the maximum fare. The marshal’s role would be to act as a deterrent, rather than one of enforcement.

937. The Chairperson: But, if he cannot do anything about it —

938. Mr T Clarke: As soon as the industry gets to know that that marshal cannot do anything, he will be as useless as a sleeping policeman.

939. The Chairperson: They will just laugh at him.

940. Ms Watters: The marshal may not be able to do anything at the time. However, information could be passed to the Department if specific companies refuse to carry customers because they are not prepared to pay more than the maximum fare or if a particular pattern of behaviour being is displayed at taxi ranks. There are ways to tackle such issues without giving enforcement powers to marshals.

941. Mr McMullan: We do not envisage marshals being enforcement officers. They would be used more in taxi-sharing schemes — to match people to taxis that are going to particular areas. They would not have a specific enforcement role. They would keep order at the ranks. They would not enforce licensing or taxi regulations.

942. Mr T Clarke: However, you are portraying the marshals as having an enforcement role by saying that they would be at taxi ranks to deter certain acts from taking place. If that is the case, then there must be a perception that they have power to act. Once the industry knows that marshals have no power to act, they will be useless. Either they are at taxi ranks to get people into taxis and clear the streets, or they are there with an enforcement role. It has to be clear. If they have such a role, it must be clearly defined.

943. Ms Watters: Their role will be clearly defined in regulations.

944. Mr T Clarke: We started by talking about touting and what the marshals can and cannot do. I do not think that the proposed amendment makes that clear.

945. In other Committees, we are trying to make things easier for organisations. I must admit that I am at pains to understand this provision, and taxi drivers will have difficulty in understanding it too. There will be problems if this is left the way it is.

946. The case is clear-cut: either taxi drivers are permitted to tout for business or they are not. If they are allowed, that should be clearly defined. Perhaps marshals should be allowed to tout for business at a taxi rank, but not drivers.

947. The Chairperson: Clause 42(1) states that:

“a person who solicits any person to be carried for hire or reward in as taxi is guilty of an offence.”

948. The issue is: if that person is guilty of an offence and he is observed by a marshal, the marshal should be able to so something about it. That is the problem.

949. Mr T Clarke: However, the effect of the amendment is to make it clear that a person may be exempt from a taxi touting offence if it is permitted in regulations made under clause 20.

950. The Chairperson: That is under clause 20(2)(c): “enforcing order at and regulating the use of places referred to in paragraph (a)”.

951. That is where the concept of the marshals comes from.

952. Peter, you have been trying to get in for a while.

953. Mr Weir: I will perhaps add to the confusion.

954. I agree with Trevor and with the Chairman. More confusion is being caused than clarity given. I do not know why this amendment has come from legislative counsel, saying that clause 42 should include all regulations made under the whole of clause 20 rather than those made under paragraph 20(2)(c).

955. A wide range of potential regulations could be made under subsection 20(2) as a whole or under clause 20 as a whole. Why does the Department want to address the issue of marshals in any provision other than paragraph 20(2)(c)? It strikes me that that paragraph is directly relevant; the others are not. I cannot envisage any set of circumstances in which the Department would want to make regulations for marshals in any other part of the Bill.

956. Mr McMullan: I agree. Marshals are covered under paragraph 20(2)(c). The other one we thought of was —

957. Mr Weir: If marshals are covered under paragraph 20(2)(c), then none of the other paragraphs in subsection 20(2) are relevant to marshals. Why change from a specific reference to paragraph 20(2)(c) to clause 20 as a whole?

958. Mr McMullan: The other one we thought might be caught was clause 20(2)(l), which relates to advertising. There could be an argument that someone advertising is actually soliciting for business.

959. Ms Watters: Mr McMullan is suggesting that a more appropriate amendment, rather than reference to regulations in the whole of clause 20, should be to paragraphs 20(2)(c) and 20(2)(l).

960. Mr Weir: If it were paragraphs (c) and (l) there might be a little more logic to it. This might be pedantic of me, but I am not sure that regulations for advertising would be confused with touting for business. I do not think anyone would confuse the two: they are different. There remains, however, the separate point raised by the Chairman and Mr T Clarke, which is that people might find the wording that we now have confusing. It might create a situation where we have marshals who are virtually powerless.

961. Members must give a great deal of thought to that in order to ensure that we get it right. I did not see the point of opening the provision out from paragraph 20(2)(c) because that does not add anything.

962. Mr McMullan: It may be useful for members to ask questions as I go along, rather than leaving them all to the end.

963. Clause 53 is a technical savings provision for the existing taxi by-laws. The Taxis Bill will disapply the power under which a plethora of taxi by-laws were made. Therefore, the taxi by-laws must be underpinned by legislation to ensure that they will continue to be in force until such times as regulations replace them. Our amendment simply states that taxi by-laws will be treated as though they had been made under provisions in the Bill.

964. Mr Weir: May I have a point of clarification on taxi by-laws, because I do not know a great deal about them? Do those by-laws cover all of Northern Ireland or to specific areas?

965. Mr McMullan: Generally, they relate to taxi ranks, and they differ from one local council area to another.

966. Mr Weir: Therefore, the by-law for taxis in Fermanagh may differ, in part, from the one that applies in Magherafelt?

967. Mr McMullan: Yes.

968. Clause 55 is the interpretation clause to which we propose to add a definition of the word “notice” to clarify that we mean notice in writing. If a driver’s licence is to be revoked, suspended or curtailed, the Department must give “notice”. As the driver’s rights flow from that notice, it is an important legal document — from date of receipt, a driver has 21 days to appeal before the decision takes effect.

969. There is a small amendment to clause 57, which the commencement clause. It is normal drafting practice for commencement and interpretation provisions to come into effect immediately, or shortly after, a Bill receives Royal Assent. We missed that point when the Order was converted into a Bill for the Assembly. Therefore, as things stand, the clause is potentially embarrassing to the Department because without the power to make commencement orders, even if we get the legislation right, we may not be able to act. It is one of those critical amendments I mentioned earlier, and we definitely want it to be included.

970. Mr Weir: The proposed amendment will exempt four sections. Does the wording of the amendment have a bearing on when those four sections will come into effect?

971. Mr McMullan: Yes, the amendment means that those four sections will come into effect when the Bill is granted Royal Assent — and every other section will come into effect on such day, or days, as the Department may by order appoint.

972. Mr Weir: Presumably it is standard practice that if no provision is made for a section to come into effect on a named day, it comes into effect immediately?

973. Mr McMullan: Yes.

974. Schedule 2 to the Bill details minor and consequential amendments. Paragraph 2 refers to Article 66A(1) of the Road Traffic (NI) Order 1981, which relates to car-sharing arrangements. This amendment clarifies that the definition of the word “taxi” will be as defined in the Taxis Bill. When cross-referencing legislation, it is important to ensure that a wrong definition is not referenced: for example that the definition of taxi is not taken from the 1981 Order.

975. We are adding one more repeal in schedule 3 of the Bill. This is a provision from the Road Traffic (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Order 1991, which deals with taxi licences. That provision is no longer needed, because the taxi licence will be covered in the Taxis Bill. It is a repeal that was not spotted first time round.

976. There is then a run of amendments relating to all references to offences in the body of the Bill. We have referred to the mode of trial and the penalty for each offence in the body of the Bill. However, the drafting convention for road traffic legislation is that the penalties are set out in schedule and should be put into a road traffic offenders Order. It is handy for practitioners to know that all the road traffic offences and penalties are listed in that Order. We have done both in the draft: we have set it out in schedule 1, and we have also set it out in the body of the Bill.

977. On several occasions, the Bill refers to a person who is:

“guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3”,

978. or whatever. However, it is unnecessary to state that wording in the body of the Bill when it is also at schedule 1. While the duplication is not wrong, the amendment will make the Bill consistent with all other road traffic legislation.

979. The final amendment is a consequential amendment to section 37A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and relates to the carrying of assistance dogs in private-hire vehicles. The concept of private-hire vehicles is no longer in the Taxis Bill and, therefore, the terminology has to be changed to cover the new legislation that will be introduced.

980. The previous witness mentioned assistance dogs. The Department has already drafted regulations under section 37, and the SL1 will be coming to the Committee in the next couple of weeks, which will basically say that no one can charge to take an assistance dog in a private-hire taxi.

981. Mr T Clarke: Can drivers refuse to do that?

982. Mr McMullan: No.

983. Mr T Clarke: Do the regulations deal with refusing to carry an assistance dog as opposed to charging?

984. Mr McMullan: Yes. Drivers cannot refuse and they cannot charge extra. That is all part of the regulations.

985. That completes the proposed amendments. Most of them are fairly small, but they iron out some ambiguities and will help us in future.

986. The Chairperson: Thank you, Adele and John. If members do not want to add anything or seek clarity on any issue, we will move on to the enforcement issue that arose last week.

987. I thank Mr Stephen Spratt and Mr John Martin for attending. I understand that you work in the enforcement section of the Department — so that section will be 50% down today. I invite you both to say something about enforcement and how you are fixed at the moment. I presume that you have been briefed before coming today. Time and again, when the Committee has been taking oral evidence, enforcement has cropped up as a major recurring theme. Last week a witness said that the enforcement section was down another member — and it was a small team to begin with, which is another issue. The Committee would like to hear about your role, and members will raise concerns about current and future enforcement. Much of the Taxis Bill rides on having proper and adequate enforcement and dedicated resources. Do you have any sequence for speaking?

988. Mr John Martin (Department of the Environment): We will give the Committee a 10- to 15-minute talk on the background of enforcement and what we are doing. We will then take the Committee through the Bill and how we see enforcement being taken forward. We will present four key topics and then answer any questions that members might have. The issue of having four members of staff will be covered in the presentation.

989. The Chairperson: OK. Please go ahead.

990. Mr Martin: First, I would like to thank the Chairperson and the Committee for giving us the opportunity to give an insight into enforcement and to show what we have being doing to date and what we will be doing after the Taxi Bill becomes law.

991. The first key subject is the utilisation of additional resources made available to DVTA enforcement in 2003. Members who were in the Assembly then may recall that the taxi-licensing fee increased by £20 to provide additional funding.

992. Prior to 2003, taxi enforcement was undertaken by the DVTA on an ad hoc basis, and it was given a relatively low priority in comparison to goods vehicle or bus enforcement. Concerns about the lack of enforcement were elevated to a political level by the industry, which set out that DVLA did not have effective strategies to deal with the unlicensed sector, estimated to be around 40% in 2003.

993. The industry also felt that enforcement was too focused on volumetric targets, which involved the systematic checking of licensed taxis, while illegal taxis drove past because they had no signs on them. To improve the situation at that time, additional funding was made available to DVTA through an increase of £20 on the cost of the taxi-licensing fee and an overall increase in the budget was provided by the core Department. As a result of the additional revenue, DVTA established a dedicated taxi enforcement team in 2003. One of its main focuses was to deal with the unlicensed sector of the industry.

994. The team, which consisted of four full-time dedicated officers, was based in Belfast. However, it had another 21 enforcement officers to call upon. Those 21 officers dealt mainly with goods vehicle and bus enforcement. However, the team was able to call upon them to undertake larger-scale operations around the Province.

995. I will provide details of the number of taxis that have been licensed over the last four years and the income generated from that, because some concerns were raised about the amount of revenue being generated from the extra £20 and the use to which it was being put.

996. I will give a couple of examples: in 2003-04, 7,167 taxis were tested. The actual income from that equated to £143,000, while the Department spent £267,000 on taxi enforcement. In the financial year 2006-07, 10,334 taxis were tested and the income from that — which included the £20 extra on the licensing fee — was £206,680, and the Department spent £294,000 on taxi enforcement.

997. Over the past four years, 35,475 taxis have been tested, generating a total income of £709,000, and the total expenditure on taxi enforcement has been more than £1 million. More has been spent on taxi enforcement than has been received in revenue from the extra £20 taxi-licensing fee.

998. The Chairperson: Will you be expanding on those figures, because a substantial amount of money has been spent on enforcement? The Committee would be anxious to hear how that money is being spent. If four members of staff are engaged in enforcement, is the rest of the money being spent on administrative costs or elsewhere?

999. Mr Martin: Spending involves a combination of the salaries for the full-time enforcement officers; the cost of administrative support; the cost of processing prosecutions, and the costs of travel, subsistence, overtime, equipment, vehicles and some management charges that are built in.

1000. The Chairperson: How many members of staff is that for in total?

1001. Mr Martin: In 2003, there were four permanent members of staff who dealt with enforcement for the taxi industry.

1002. The Chairperson: That amounts to £250,000 apiece.

1003. Mr Martin: When one considers the four members of staff and all of the ancillary activities; such as processing prosecution cases, administrative support and accommodation costs —

1004. The Chairperson: Do other staff process prosecutions?

1005. Mr Martin: An enforcement officer’s role is to investigate levels of non-compliance and complaints. He will make detections at the roadside and gather sufficient evidence. If there is sufficient evidence to warrant prosecution, the officer will generate the initial file. The file must go through an administrative process and is then passed to the Public Prosecution Service (PPS). When the enforcement officer completes the initial file, it goes through an administrative process and a management process in order to ensure that when it reaches the PPS —

1006. The Chairperson: Is that a departmental process, rather than that of the specific section? In other words, is all the money that is spent classed as central departmental expenditure, which is not specific to the branch that deals with enforcement of taxi regulations?

1007. Mr Martin: The money has always been spent by the enforcement branch of the Department, which completes the entire process.

1008. The Chairperson: How many staff would be involved from the initiation of the process; for example, from when an enforcement officer stops a driver because there is a problem? How many enforcement branch staff would be involved in the process to deal with the matter before it is passed on elsewhere? How many staff would be employed by the branch?

1009. Mr Martin: The total staff complement for enforcement is 32.

1010. The Chairperson: Does that include administrative staff and officers on the ground?

1011. Mr Martin: That includes administrative staff, officers on the ground, the management structure, policy staff, and so on, to cover the enforcement section’s full remit. The section is not solely staffed by the officers who stop vehicles at the roadside. There is a support structure of administrative staff, management staff, staff who develop policies for stopping vehicles and for dealing with investigations. A large amount of money is associated with non-productive activities.

1012. There are four full-time members of staff. However, staff are regularly brought in from other teams to supplement the four full-time staff during, for example, large-scale operations in Belfast, Derry or Newry, or perhaps during covert operations that require more than four staff. Therefore, there might be eight staff during such operations, four of whom were from the taxi team and the other four from the goods teams. That is the cost for all staff, taking into consideration all of their salaries, when they have been involved with taxi enforcement. It is not just the salaries of the four full-time staff, but also includes costs for the time spent by additional staff on taxi enforcement.

1013. In 2003, the DVTA realised that the previous approach to enforcement did not deal with what was required. Officers were carrying out high visibility checks while wearing yellow coats. The legal taxi industry — those drivers who had signs, licences, and so on — had nothing to fear. However, they got caught up in the checks, while the illegal drivers, who did not have signs, were harder to identify and simply drove past.

1014. Therefore, in order to utilise the new taxi enforcement team effectively, it was necessary to move the focus from working in a high-profile capacity to working in a more covert, investigative unit. That proved to be an effective approach towards securing reliable, first-hand prosecution evidence. Previously, passengers were reluctant to provide statements of evidence or to attend court as witnesses.

1015. The team also adopted a more proactive and reactive management approach in response to complaints and intelligence, using the national intelligence model to grade and prioritise high-level work priorities. An example of high-priority work in 2003 was to target illegal taxi drivers, disqualified drivers, and drivers who operated poorly-maintained vehicles.

1016. The enforcement office received a number of complaints that enabled us to target particular taxi depots that were reportedly operating illegal taxis. Since April 2003, the DVTA, working in partnership with the PSNI, has carried out 641 taxi operations and checked around 13,000 taxis. That has resulted in 291 commercial taxi radio sets being seized by the police, under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, on behalf of enforcement officers. Upwards of £150,000 in fines has been generated; 1,650 penalty points have been awarded to taxi drivers; and 80 drivers have received a driving ban in that period. In total, there were 824 prosecutions for taxi drivers who had no public-service licence, 513 prosecutions for those who had no driving licence, eight prosecutions for those driving while totally disqualified and 742 prosecutions for those who had no insurance. That gives the Committee an indication as to what the enforcement office’s activities have been since 2003.

1017. In addition, we see education and communication as key in addressing the problems that exist. Best practice has traditionally been developed through experience coupled with a combination of internal and external training. The DVTA has made a significant investment in training taxi-enforcement officers; all officers are required to obtain the Advanced Professional Certificate in Investigative Practice, which is equal to NVQ level 5. That is a high standard, which all our taxi-enforcement officers have attained.

1018. Introducing effective systems of educating drivers and operators was also made a high priority, which resulted in the introduction of advice being routinely given during roadside spot checks. Frequent meetings have been hosted with the industry at all levels so that people are aware of their legal requirements. The DVTA also committed resources to promotional events, which aimed to raise awareness of taxi compliance in the greater public arena. Examples of those include the 2005 Motorplus show and the 2006 DVA Roadworthiness Open Day, in which the taxi industry participated.

1019. It must be remembered that the police can enforce all taxi regulations as part of their normal activities. The enforcement office has also undertaken a number of training sessions with the PSNI to train existing officers and new recruits on taxi regulations.

1020. We are also focusing on forging a strong alliance with the taxi industry; to that end our enforcement officers have established a professional relationship at all levels with industry representatives.

1021. I am aware that taxi-industry representatives have submitted oral evidence to the Committee, which included the claim that the DVA intend to reduce the number of dedicated enforcement officers from five to four — something that the Chairperson mentioned earlier. The DVA recently completed an evaluation of its high-level business priorities in the enforcement section. That exercise identified strong business grounds for a temporary restructuring of the section. That was done by reducing the number of enforcement teams dedicated to goods-vehicle enforcement from two small teams to one large team based in Craigavon. The evaluation also supported increasing the number of enforcement officers presently attached to the taxi-enforcement team; so as opposed to its members going down to four it has now gone up to over five.

1022. The Chairperson: How much over five?

1023. Mr Martin: Five plus an allocation of 0•3; one person, who manages the team, has a third of his time dedicated to being an enforcement officer.

1024. The Chairperson: But he is a manager, not an enforcement officer. Is he doing that for one third of his time?

1025. Mr Martin: That is correct. So the complement has not gone down to four; it has gone up slightly.

1026. The Chairperson: The complement is the same as it was before.

1027. Mr Martin: Not exactly; the team used to have four members.

1028. The Chairperson: It had four members, but before that the team had five members. That is what the Committee is discussing.

1029. Mr Martin: In 2003 there were four members. Between 2003 and 2007 the number of members rose to five, which is the level it is staying at. We are also allocating an additional resource of management.

1030. The Chairperson: To be fair, the Committee is discussing the situation in the last year, not about what it was four or five years ago.

1031. Mr Martin: It is currently sitting at five plus, with a management resource of one third.

1032. Mr Clarke: Can we get into this matter before we hear the rest of the presentation? I am grey, and I am going to be completely bald before this is over? I am totally frustrated. The Committee has had various presentations from the taxi industry that have reported consistently that there are not enough enforcement officers. With no disrespect to the two gentlemen here, because they are only the messengers, they are going to be shot today, because they are telling us what a wonderful job they are doing, and yet we have had the whole taxi industry saying what a poor job is being done by the enforcement section. Can we look at that matter, Mr Chairman?

1033. The Chairperson: Yes. Please complete the presentation, Mr Martin, and we will come back to that point.

1034. Mr Clarke: Do you have any tablets, Mr Chairman?

1035. Mr Martin: One of the key weaknesses within the existing taxi legislative framework is that anyone wishing to operate a taxi depot can do so provided they obtain adequate planning permission and a commercial taxi radio licence so that they cannot operate out of just any depot. Officers have encountered illegal taxis operating and controlled from an array of premises that range from Portakabins to private dwellings in residential housing developments. Those businesses operate free from regulatory control and often from premises that do not meet suitable accessibility standards.

1036. The big weakness with the existing system is that there is no regulatory provision to make taxi depots accountable for the types of taxis that carry passengers on their behalf, or keep records of customer bookings, etc.

1037. Enforcement officers are currently powerless to stop repeat offenders. We stop taxi drivers on a regular basis who have flouted the regulations on two or three occasions, and continue to do so. We cannot physically put them off the road. All we can do is gather sufficient evidence and process the cases through to prosecution stage. That is another serious weakness.

1038. We do not have any jurisdiction over taxis that are sitting in the Harbour Estate, for instance, where they service a lot of the cruise liners, or at the Odyssey complex, which is part of the Belfast Harbour Commissioner’s land. We have no authority to deal with taxis operating illegally at those venues. There are also not enough taxis to deal with public demand on Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights between the hours of 8.00 pm to 4.00 am, and that entices people to operate illegally.

1039. Enforcement officers also do not have the authority to issue fixed-penalty notices. Currently, if we detect an offence at the roadside we have to go through the court process, which is long, costly, laborious and time-consuming. We are in the process of looking at introducing a fixed-penalty system.

1040. The enforcement office’s strategy in combating future illegal activities includes proposals to recruit additional staff to enable us to deal with the issues in the taxi industry. We have had only between four and five members of staff over the last few years, and that is not sufficient to deal with the problems. Our staff have been successful, but there are nowhere near enough of them, and that is recognised and appreciated. We intend to establish a more regionalised approach to deal with the problems, with teams in Belfast, the north-west and the west of the Province.

1041. As I have already said, we hope to adopt a fixed-penalty and deposit-scheme approach, which will allow us to deal with offences more efficiently and effectively, as opposed to all our cases going through the courts, which takes a lot of time and money.

1042. We also intend to introduce live access to data at the roadside through the use of laptop computers, and will be investing in new equipment and technology. We have purchased two high-visibility liveried vehicles, which have proven to be quite effective at the roadside, in highlighting to the industry that enforcement officers are trying to deal with the problems. We have also recently purchased two automatic number-plate recognition cameras that will enable us to target the unlicensed sector of the industry.

1043. As I have said, we are hoping to recruit 15 to 18 members of staff.

1044. We are currently working with the Department to determine how those staff will be funded to enable us to deal more effectively with the issues in the industry. One of the main reasons for having the Taxis Bill in the first place is to strengthen the regulatory framework for taxis and enforcement. If regulations and powers were in place to enable us to deal with the problems in the industry, and if we had the necessary staff, we would not need the Taxis Bill. That is one of the main reasons why we are here.

1045. The Chairperson: I would like some clarity on recruitment. You said at one point that you were hoping to recruit, and then, on another occasion, you said that you were proposing to recruit. At what stage is the recruitment process, and what type of staff would be recruited?

1046. Mr Martin: The current position is that we have assessed the provisions in the Bill. We are fully aware of the difficulties in the industry with unlicensed and defective vehicles. We have worked up figures in relation to the number of staff that we perceive that we need to deal with those issues and to enforce the new licensing regime effectively. We have identified the number of staff that we need and that that they will work on a regionalised basis, and we are in the process of considering how the salaries for those staff will be funded.

1047. The Chairperson: At this stage, no recruitment process has been started, then.

1048. Mr Martin: No recruitment process has started because the Bill has not come into effect yet. We are simply carrying out the initial development work.

1049. The Chairperson: So your recruitment is based solely on the Bill?

1050. Mr Martin: Yes.

1051. The Chairperson: So, at the moment, you do not identify any weaknesses or shortcomings in enforcement?

1052. Mr Martin: No, that is not what I am saying. My point is that the current regulatory framework is deficient. We recognise that to bring this matter forward, we need additional powers. That is one of the main reasons for the Taxis Bill. We need additional staff to ensure that when the enhanced licensing regime is introduced, it can be effectively regulated. At the moment, we do not have sufficient funds to recruit additional staff. We will make representations to the Department that we need x amount of money to effectively regulate the provisions of the Bill.

1053. The Chairperson: Let me just get this clear; at this stage, you are working up a case, but you have not yet made that case to the Department?

1054. Mr Martin: It is at an advanced stage. I cannot say what stage it is at exactly, but it is a very advanced stage. We are hoping for a positive response from the Department on funding.

1055. The Chairperson: With the greatest of respect, you cannot get a positive response from the Department if you have not submitted a proposal.

1056. Mr Martin: It has been submitted.

1057. The Chairperson: It has? Sorry, but I thought you said that the case was at an advanced stage.

1058. Mr Martin: Yes, but it is not finalised.

1059. The Chairperson: Sorry, but what part is not finalised?

1060. Mr Martin: The actual approval.

1061. The Chairperson: Do you mean the approval from the Department?

1062. Mr Martin: Yes.

1063. The Chairperson: So, you have submitted a bid to the Department for extra funding, and the Department has not responded yet.

1064. Mr Martin: Final approval has not been given.

1065. The Chairperson: OK, that is a bit clearer.

1066. Mr Boylan: I was just trying to make some sense of the whole issue, to be honest.

1067. Mr Martin, you gave figures over a four-year period, and you mentioned the cost of enforcement and the money generated by enforcement. You also said that 500 people were caught taxiing without a licence. Could you go through those figures again, please? Can you tell me how much, on average, has been generated through enforcement, and whether that money has been put back into enforcement?

1068. Mr Martin: We have carried out 641 taxi operations since April 2003. We have also checked 12,926 taxis. During that period, 291 commercial radio sets — the radio sets that they use to communicate — have been seized from taxi operators. Some 997 drivers have been reported for prosecution.

1069. During that time, fines totalling £147,000.97 were imposed. Payment of fines does not go into enforcement but into the consolidated fund. The courts awarded 1,654 penalty points for various offences. Immediate driving bans were given to 80 drivers, either as a result of an offence or because they already had sufficient penalty points on their licence to lead to a licence suspension.

1070. Of the 997 drivers who were prosecuted, the range of offences was as follows: 824 did not have a public service vehicle licence, which is the licence for the taxi; 513 did not have a taxi driver’s licence; eight did not have a driving licence as they had been disqualified from driving, and were prosecuted again for not having a licence, and 742 had no insurance.

1071. Mr S Spratt: The figure of 742 uninsured drivers is a good benchmark, as they did not have a PSV licence either. Therefore, 742 drivers were working as taxi drivers in private saloon cars and carrying out a stealth activity in the black economy, which the normal eye could not detect.

1072. That re-emphasises the amount of resources that it took to enable officers to collect satisfactory evidence for the higher reward test. We are highly visible when we stop a vehicle; normally, the driver will say that the passengers are his friends, and the passengers will say that the driver is giving them a lift. In cases where passengers have disclosed that the vehicle is a taxi, and have asked us to get them another taxi, they were not prepared to take the case to the next stage and go to court. In order to thwart that, our staff must operate in a stealth capacity so that they can gather evidence first-hand. Using legislation such as the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and putting undercover operatives on the ground is expensive and convoluted, and has resulted in this process.

1073. Pre-2003, we made detections that resulted mainly in apparent offences. We had enough evidence to strongly suggest that the offenders were operating illegally, but such cases did not go to court because they did not pass the evidential test. We are seeking to impress upon the Committee that the 742 drivers who have been picked up operating without insurance also did not have a PSV licence, and that the vast majority of them did not have a taxi driver’s licence. However, because that licence is so easy to obtain they could get it in any case. Some of them do not want a licence because that may compromise them by alerting the authorities to the fact that they work elsewhere. There are various reasons why some have driving licences and some do not.

1074. The Chairperson: How many of those 742 drivers were exclusively picked up by the police, with no involvement from your organisation?

1075. Mr S Spratt: None: those figures represent our staffing resources.

1076. The Chairperson: Therefore, there is a bigger problem potentially, and other offenders could have been picked up by the police.

1077. Mr S Spratt: The figures do not reflect detections by the police. From the perspective of our operational protocol the role of the police is to provide operational support. When we put operatives on the ground to travel in taxis, the police are there to uphold the law and to provide operational support. In certain areas, detecting bandit operators involves going through a plethora of proper planning and preparation before the operation take place.

1078. As John has highlighted, we also have to draw in resources from other sections and utilise 21 other members of staff: in certain operations there may be four staff on the ground and an additional eight in the background who carry out pre-surveillance work, provide surveillance, and give support by speaking to passengers after the event. There is a lot of work involved to support the four staff on the ground. The back-end is much bigger than the just the four staff who are upfront.

1079. Mr Martin: To give the Committee an insight into some operational tactics; prior to 2003 staff used high-visibility jackets. They stood on the roadside and, essentially, only checked vehicles that looked like taxis.

1080. It is a more resource–intensive activity now. We are in plain clothes; we are phoning depots and posing as passengers, and taking rides in taxis because that is the only way that we can obtain evidence that people are operating illegal taxis.

1081. Whereas, if we are wearing high-visibility jackets and speak to a driver, he might say that the vehicle is not a taxi. We might speak to the passengers, who will say that the driver is just a mate. However, because there are about 15 complaints in the system, we know that the driver is providing a taxi service but we cannot get the evidence to take a case to court. It is a resource-intensive activity.

1082. Mr Boylan: I wondered where the money to finance that operation was coming from. You mentioned a strategy. Are you thinking about including the taxi marshals in the enforcement system? Taxi marshals were mentioned earlier, but who is going to stop a person touting for one firm or another? Would it not be better to give the marshals enforcement powers, rather than having to employ enforcement officers to go and stand up to those people. At the minute, you cannot operate from the Harbour Estate and at the Odyssey.

1083. Mr Martin: Hopefully, the Taxi Bill will change all that.

1084. Mr S Spratt: I would like to comment on the role of the marshal, having given serious consideration to the work that our staff do. For example, if one person is sent out to marshal a taxi rank and carry out enforcement activities in the city centre at 11.00 pm, midnight or 1.00 am — when there might be many intoxicated people and serious potential for public order offences to be committed — health and safety considerations will limit what he or she can do.

1085. I see the marshal’s role as being partly to interface with the customer; he will exist predominately to bring order to the taxi ranks. He can also provide an interface between drivers and the Department. We can build into our strategy a reactive strand whereby, following consultation with marshals and drivers on local issues that build up at ranks, we can enforce those issues.

1086. If the marshals were to take up enforcement responsibilities — given the splits and different views and factions in the industry at the moment — it would quickly become difficult for them to carry out that role on health and safety grounds alone. They would probably require permanent police support eventually.

1087. Mr Weir: Before I move onto the crux of the matter, which is the potential recruitment of new staff, I want to clarify a point that confused me slightly during the evidence. In answer to a previous question, you mentioned that you had more success when you switched from a high-visibility approach to a more subtle approach. When enforcement officers wore the high-visibility jackets they had limited success, whereas officers in plain clothes were more successful. It strikes me that, when tackling crime, you can go down one of two routes. For example, if there is antisocial behaviour in an area, sometimes the high visibility of police can act as a deterrent or shift people on. However, it strikes me that the most productive route in your case is that of plain-clothes, undercover enforcement.

1088. What surprised me was that you mentioned that you intended to get two high-visibility vehicles. I would have thought that, rather than leading to more prosecutions, that would be counterproductive. If I were an uninsured or unlicensed taxi driver, and I were to spot a high-visibility vehicle and enforcement officers, I would get offside very quickly.

1089. Mr Clarke: You would probably tell others too.

1090. Mr Weir: Yes. What was the thinking behind that intention?

1091. Mr Martin: We can use an array of possible tactics when we are planning operations. For example, if we are going into Belfast to detect unlicensed taxis, we might deploy a covert approach and phone an operator or try to pick up a taxi on the street. The benefit of using the high-visibility vehicles is that, just as you and your colleague said, we can go into an area two or three times a week, and unlicensed or uninsured drivers, or those with defective vehicles, will see the vehicle, and they might go home. If they see the vehicle regularly, it may deter them from operating illegally. We would use a combination of the two approaches.

1092. Mr Weir: When the police have been highly visible in a specific area to try to — for want of a better term — scare off crowds of young people, it can work for that specific area. However, the crowd congregates elsewhere. The danger is that those high visibility vehicles will simply shift the problem elsewhere. For example, if there is a problem outside Antrim railway station, would that problem not simply be shifted elsewhere?

1093. Mr Martin: We are not saying that the high visibility vehicles are a sole approach; they are used in conjunction with other approaches.

1094. Mr Weir: Problems have been raised about enforcement. To be fair, several witnesses made complimentary remarks regarding the work that the enforcement officers were doing. However, owing to a lack of resources, they are unable to stem the flow.

1095. What is the scale of the bid for the 15 to 18 members of staff? Is it simply going to involve the relocation of existing resources in the Department, or is a bid going to the Department of Finance and Personnel? Having been involved with another organisation, my experience has been that when one Department eventually gives a green light for a bid, a business case then also has to be approved by the Department of Finance and Personnel.

1096. How many of the 15 to 18 members of staff would actually be enforcement officers out on the ground? You have been getting favourable responses from the Department, but, as yet, you have not got approval. If you get approval, what would be the likely timescale for the new members of staff to become operational?

1097. Mr Martin: Those staff will be on the front line dealing with the issues at the roadside. We are not ashamed to say that we have done a reasonably good job. However, it has to be taken into consideration that we have had extremely limited resources, and have been working with legislation that was inadequate. However, a number of staff will be working on the front line.

1098. We are hoping to appoint staff and to have them ready for duties prior to the implementation of the Bill. In other words, when the Bill becomes law, the staff will be trained and ready to roll.

1099. Mr Weir: When do you think that that will happen?

1100. Mr Martin: That depends on the progress of the Bill. We think that it may be late 2008 or early 2009. We are hoping appoint the staff in middle or latter half of 2008.

1101. Mr Weir: What is the overall value of the bid? What is the amount in the business case that you have submitted?

1102. Mr Martin: The business case not only reflects additional resources for taxi enforcement; it also reflects additional resources for other enforcement vehicles that we have to increase our activities on. It is in the region of 15 to 18 members of staff.

1103. Mr Weir: Will you tell the Committee what the monetary resource is?

1104. The Chairperson: It may be useful if the witnesses provided the figures to the Committee in writing.

1105. Mr Weir: I do not want to get approximate figures. Will you provide those figures in writing? The figure of £1•5 million was mentioned. I presume that that will be being requested from the Department of Finance and Personnel.

1106. Mr T Clarke: Can I get clarification; are you both enforcement officers?

1107. Mr Martin: Yes, we are enforcement officers and managers. We have come through the enforcement field as operatives, and we are now managers in the enforcement regime.

1108. Mr T Clarke: Therefore, are you no longer enforcement officers?

1109. Mr Martin: We still undertake enforcement activities.

1110. Mr T Clarke: I am getting confused again. Are you still one of the four enforcement officers?

1111. Mr Martin: Stevie is the one third — he is the senior manager in charge of the enforcement section.

1112. The Chairperson: Were you in the enforcement section before?

1113. Mr S Spratt: Yes, I was an enforcement operative a few years ago.

1114. The Chairperson: Have you been there all along?

1115. Mr S Spratt: I still invest my time going out with the staff on occasions.

1116. The Chairperson: Have you consistently been in enforcement?

1117. Mr S Spratt: Yes.

1118. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for giving us your time. We look forward to getting further detail from you.

18 October 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Trevor Clarke
Mr David Ford
Mr Tommy Gallagher
Mr Samuel Gardiner
Mr Ian McCrea

Witnesses:

Mr Bill Laverty Mr John McMullan Mrs Adele Watters

Department of the Environment

1119. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): I welcome Mr Bill Laverty, Mr John McMullan and Mrs Adele Watters from the Department of the Environment. I believe that you are going to give the Committee a short introduction and that John will then provide a short summary of each clause.

1120. Mr Ford: On a technical point; when they were with us last week, the officials were referring to the printed copy of the Bill, which contains line numbers. Committee members have before them what appears to be a printout from the website, which does not have line numbers. That makes it difficult to follow what the officials are talking about in detail. Could we all have the same version of the Bill when we are doing clause-by-clause scrutiny?

1121. The Committee Clerk: The master file and copies of the Bill should be here.

1122. The Chairperson: Do members have a photocopy of the original Bill?

1123. Mr Ford: The problem is that each version we have been given has not been a copy of the original Bill.

1124. The Committee Clerk: We will get that version for members.

1125. Mrs Adele Watters (Department of the Environment): I will make a few brief introductory comments on two matters. The first is a preamble to today’s proceedings, and the second will pick up on some of the matters that Mr Shiels mentioned concerning the enabling nature of the Bill. The Bill team is happy to be here today, and we will try to assist the Committee in any way.

1126. First, we have been working with the Committee Clerk and her staff to provide the Department’s comments on the key issues identified in the written submissions and in the oral evidence. Although the Department has not attempted to respond to every comment, we are happy to answer questions on anything raised in the written submissions and oral evidence or on any other points pertaining to the Bill. We will try to answer members’ questions as fully as possible, but, if there are questions we cannot answer, we will try to respond before next week’s meeting.

1127. Secondly, the Bill is enabling legislation: its purpose is to put into place a new framework for taxi regulation. When the proposed legislation was being brought forward as an Order in Council, the Department issued an information note with it at consultation stage — that note has been circulated to members. It set out the Department’s vision and described the key elements of the new system when fully in place. The Department is pleased with that approach because it was open and transparent and helped us to engage stakeholders, particularly the taxi industry, in the issues. It has also meant that the Committee has received a number of responses, some directly on the Bill and many others on the implications of the future reform programme.

1128. As Mr Shiels said, there will be a lot of detail in the implementation of the Bill, and we will be returning to the Committee with consultation papers, regulatory impact assessments and, of course, regulations. We will be able to engage with the Committee on detail at that time. We look forward to engaging with the Committee over the coming years in that programme and are happy to start today by assisting with the clause-by-clause scrutiny.

1129. Mr John McMullan (Department of the Environment): Part 1, Chapter 1 of the Bill deals with the regulation of taxi operators. Clause 1, which deals with the requirement for operator’s licences, is one of the Bill’s fundamental clauses. At the moment, there is no regulation for taxi operators in Northern Ireland. Clause 1 will make it a requirement for a person to have an operator’s licence before he or she can operate a taxi service. Operating a taxi service without such as licence will be an offence with a maximum fine of £5,000. The exception to that requirement will be for the “affiliated driver”, who is a person who works for an operator and therefore comes under the umbrella of that operator’s licence.

1130. The term “operate a taxi service” is defined in the Bill and encompasses the present modes of taxi business, which are: accepting a taxi booking and standing or plying for hire. It is worth mentioning that, at the top of page 2 of the Bill, the definition of the term “operate a taxi service” is “subject to such exceptions as may be prescribed.” That phrase will allow the Department to make exemptions to the requirements of an operator’s licence. Basically, that is the set-up.

1131. The Chairperson: Will you clarify where that provision may be found in the Bill?

1132. Mr McMullan: It is the last few words of clause 1. The wording reads:

“subject to such exceptions as may be prescribed.”

1133. The Chairperson: Did you say exceptions or exemptions?

1134. Mr McMullan: The word is “exceptions”. It allows us to except — or exempt, I suppose — certain activity that does not equate to operating a taxi service.

1135. Mrs Watters: Does the Committee want officials to address the key issues raised?

1136. The Chairperson: I apologise. Do you mean as regards to how the Committee wishes to deal with the issues at today’s meeting?

1137. Mrs Watters: Yes.

1138. The Chairperson: We would like you to present a brief overview of each clause, then, if members wish to raise an issue based on some of the written or oral evidence that the Committee has received, they can do so. Questions can also be based on the departmental comments that have been included in the synopsis. Members have the key issues before them, which they can peruse as you present details of the clauses. John, have you dealt with clause 1, completely?

1139. Mr McMullan: Yes.

1140. The Chairperson: Do members have any issues that they would like to raise from the evidence that has been received? I asked about “exceptions” or “exemptions” because of an issue that was raised by undertakers. They suggested that vehicles used for mourners should be granted an exemption from the licence. What is the Department’s view on that?

1141. Mrs Watters: Traditionally in Northern Ireland, funeral cars have been regarded as public service vehicles and have been licensed as taxis. They are granted many exemptions from certain requirements, such as those for signage, taximeters, and so forth. The Department has always taken the view that if a vehicle is being provided for hire and reward then, in the interests of those who pay for those services, it is important that such a vehicle is regulated.

1142. The situation in GB is different, and that is partly why the National Association of Funeral Directors suggested the exemption. We do not know much more about the funeral directors’ position other than what is in their written submission. We invited them to meet us, as did the Committee, to explore their position in more detail. Without pre-empting the outcome of that meeting, the Department’s starting position is that it would prefer them to remain covered by the legislation rather than exempted on the face of the Bill. If a strong case were to be made, there is provision in the Bill for an exemption.

1143. The Chairperson: Are there any other queries?

1144. Mr Boylan: Are affiliated drivers who work for a firm but also work privately required to obtain an operator’s licence?

1145. Mrs Watters: I am not sure whether that issue comes under clause 1. Is the member content for us to return to the matter when it is dealt with under a later clause?

1146. Mr Boylan: I just wondered, because affiliated drivers are mentioned in clause1.

1147. Mrs Watters: There may be occasions when the detailed comments have been correctly linked with a clause and other occasions when they relate to other clauses.

1148. Mr T Clarke: To be seen as a totally reasonable person, given our last debate, I would say that clause 1 is fine. My only query relates to the smaller operator. Could the cost of an operator’s licence be banded according to the size of a business? That would help small businesses and act as an incentive for them to ensure that they operate within the law.

1149. Mrs Watters: Yes, there is that flexibility. In the information note to which I referred, we were conscious that the industry would be concerned about the size and structure of the fees. Feedback from the industry should that it would be happiest for the fee to reflect, roughly, the size of the business. Therefore, small operators would pay a greatly reduced fee.

1150. The Chairperson: Are members content? Before moving on to clause 1(2) —

1151. Mr McMullan: We have covered all subsections in clause 1. Perhaps we should move on to clause 2.

1152. The Chairperson: Sorry, I did not realise that. In that case, is the Committee broadly happy with clause 1?

1153. Mr T Clarke: During the oral submissions it was suggested that an operator’s licence should be required at places such as Belfast City Airport. Would that form part of the legislation?

1154. Mrs Watters: The legislation will cover every taxi business, irrespective of its size or where it operates.

1155. Mr T Clarke: Therefore, a business operating there should have an operator’s licence.

1156. Mrs Watters: Yes, absolutely.

1157. The Chairperson: Are members broadly content with clause 1?

1158. Members indicated assent.

1159. Mr McMullan: Clause 2(1) provides that:

“Any person may apply to the Department for an operator’s licence.”

1160. Clause 2(2) states that the applicant must state the name and address of an operating centre in Northern Ireland. Clause 2(4) states that the Department will grant an operator’s licence if it is satisfied that the person is a fit and proper person and meets any other requirements that may be prescribed. The Department may impose conditions on a licence, and the important point to note in clause 2(5) is that it may specify a percentage of vehicles that must be of a particular class. The Department wants to be able to set a percentage for operators as regards accessible vehicles.

1161. Clause 2(7) states that the licence will be granted for five years, and any refusal of a licence will be subject to appeal to the magistrates’ court.

1162. The Chairperson: Members will recall Mr Grogan, the driver with literacy problems, who provided evidence to the Committee. He is probably a brilliant driver, but he queried the obstacles that may be placed in the way of his being able to fulfil that role and how he — and people like him — could be accommodated. I am not sure where that is covered in the Bill, but it is an important issue.

1163. Mrs Watters: I agree. Those points are reflected under clause 1. Mr Grogan said that drivers who cannot read or write should be exempt from holding an operator’s licence — and I think that he said that in response to a question from Mr Ford. I believe Mr Grogan had two main concerns: first, he was concerned about whether he would be able to meet the training requirement; and, secondly, whether he would be able to maintain the required records. The Department’s feeling is that the duties for an operator should be proportionate and take account of circumstances. A sole operator’s recording requirements will be different from those required by a driver from a larger depot, for example. In discussion with Mr Grogan, we suggested that there would be different ways of recording the information that he was required to keep. The meters used in taxis are sophisticated small computers, and they may be able to keep a lot of the information that the driver is required to keep. The Department wants to explore various workarounds for operators’ record keeping.

1164. As regards training requirements, the Department has been working closely with GoSkills — part of the Sector Skills Council for Road Passenger Transport — and the Department for Employment and Learning. They will soon commence a specific programme to develop essential skills training for taxi drivers, who will be trained in reading, writing and ICT. It is intended that a number of drivers will undertake the training in the next couple of years. The Department, therefore, is taking a number of positive steps to accommodate such people as Mr Grogan.

1165. Mr T Clarke: One of the issues arising was that a sex offender should not be able to obtain a taxi operator’s licence. The Department’s view is that:

“it would not be appropriate to amend the Taxis Bill to automatically bar any category of offender from obtaining a licence. Such a provision would potentially conflict with the Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults Order (Northern Ireland) 2003”.

1166. Surely the opposite applies. Barring any category of offender would protect children, would it not?

1167. Mrs Watters: That is correct. However, the Department is saying that the rules and arrangements for vetting and barring are set out in legislation relating to the protection of children and vulnerable adults, which came out of the Bichard inquiry into the Soham murders.

1168. The Chairperson: Therefore, you are saying that there is other legislation to oversee those issues?

1169. Mrs Watters: Yes. The Taxis Bill may state that a person must be fit and proper in order to get an operator’s licence, but the Department can only go so far in stating what constitutes a “fit and proper person” before someone steps in and says that the arrangements for all occupations and professions are set out in other legislation.

1170. The Chairperson: Therefore, other legislation would provide that definition for all Departments.

1171. Mr T Clarke: However, the wording of the Department’s response is not good.

1172. Mrs Watters: I apologise if it looks as if there is some conflict.

1173. Mr T Clarke: The response states that such a provision would potentially conflict with the protection of children, but the contrary is true.

1174. Mr Ford: It says that it would conflict with the Order.

1175. Mr T Clarke: That is not what it says.

1176. Mr Ford: It is what it is says.

1177. The Chairperson: We know now what the position is, so we have clarity.

1178. There is a suggestion that provision should be made for an internal or independent review of DOE decisions before appeal to the courts. Is the Department going to provide for that?

1179. Mr McMullan: The Department sees merit in this. A similar provision is included in clause 11, which I hope we will get to today. As occurs in other legislation, the first tier of appeal is to the Department. If a person is still dissatisfied, the appeal then moves to the magistrates’ court. There are several benefits, in that cases that go to the courts unnecessarily can be filtered out and dealt with more quickly. Depending on the Committee’s feelings, the Department would not object to a two-tier appeals system; the first being to the Department, and the second to the magistrates’ court.

1180. The Chairperson: Are members content with that?

1181. Mr Ford: I want to refer back to the point made by Eamon Grogan. Does the Department see its provision as applying to existing taxi drivers only, or would it be a continuing provision?

1182. Mrs Watters: It would be a continuing provision.

1183. Mr Ford: I welcome the fact that the Department is saying that it sees merit in the informal appeal mechanism, but there needs to be a little bit more than merit. It is slightly anomalous that clause 11 has a specific provision for one area only. I would have thought that there needed to be a bit more spelling-out as to how such an appeal mechanism might operate, although I accept that most of it will be covered by subordinate legislation. One of the things that the drivers are looking for is an assurance that they will get some sort of hearing without having to end up in court.

1184. The Chairperson: Is it appropriate for the Committee to ask for that to happen as a recommendation or an amendment?

1185. Mrs Watters: The matter has been raised in written and oral evidence. As has been pointed out, there is an anomaly. The Bill was read across and was drafted from one piece of legislation in such a way that that provision only applied in one instance. Now that it has been brought to our attention, there is merit is applying it more broadly.

1186. Mr Ford: Given the complexity across a range of different areas, I hope that the Department will return with a comprehensive set of amendments, rather than leaving us to do it. And, for the purposes of Hansard, I see the officials nodding in agreement. [Laughter.]

1187. The Chairperson: Is the Committee content that this is a proposed amendment that could be agreed?

1188. Members indicated assent.

1189. Mr McMullan: Clause 3 places certain duties on licensed operators. First, an operator must use only licensed drivers and vehicles. Failure to do will result in a maximum fine of up to £5,000. An operator must also:

“keep such records as may be prescribed”;

1190. and those records are set out at clause 3(3)(b). An operator must be able to produce those records for departmental inspection. Records of complaints must also be kept, and complaints must be dealt with in such a manner as may be prescribed. Contravention of that provision could also lead to a fine of up to £1,000.

1191. The point made by Mr Boylan is covered by clause 3(7), which deals with affiliated drivers.

“Subject to such exceptions as may be prescribed, a person shall not be an affiliated driver of more than one licensed operator at any one time.”

1192. Exceptions can be worked in under that provision.

1193. The Chairperson: Are there any questions?

1194. Mr Ford: How will that provision apply to a sole-operator who may, at times, want to work in a wider grouping and be affiliated to another operator while remaining a sole-operator? That point was raised in one of the submissions.

1195. Mrs Watters: The Department is saying that the general rule should be that someone can work for only one operator at a time, and that if they are a sole-operator, they are working for themselves. In general, they would not be able to work for themselves and work for a depot as well. In a sense, they would have to make that election.

1196. Through consultations with the industry, we are aware that there may be situations in which a person whose main work during the week comes from school contracts wants to work at the weekend for his brother who has a taxi company. Alternatively, he may want to be available for wedding services. Provided the case is made for such an arrangement, and that it does not undermine the overall intention of operator licensing and is not difficult for operators to control, such activity will be allowed.

1197. However, it should be borne in mind that if someone is working for one operator, and is also working for himself or another operator, the difficulty could be that it may be unclear who that person is actually working for at any given time.

1198. We have provided for exceptions in the Bill to cover situations such as that. The Department cannot foresee any definite exceptions, but has left it open for a case to be made.

1199. The Chairperson: I see merit in the suggestion that the Department should take into consideration the recommendations of the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland (GCCNI). I know that the Department is meeting with the GCCNI next week. If the GCCNI is to have a role, what shape or form would that take?

1200. Mrs Watters: It could take the form of an amendment, which would be written into the Bill and would give the GCCNI a statutory role that would require the Department to consult with it on the arrangements for passenger complaints.

1201. Alternatively, it could be the case that the first line of complaint would be to the operator; the second line of complaint would be to the GCCNI, copied to the Department. We want to meet with the GCCNI to find out what they would like to happen in practice, and we will then ascertain how that may be translated into an amendment.

1202. The Chairperson: Do members agree that that should be proposed as an amendment?

1203. Mrs Watters: Would the Committee like us to return with details for an amendment that would be agreeable to all parties?

1204. Members indicated assent.

1205. Mr McMullan: Clause 4 can be described fairly simply. It provides that a licensed operator may only sub-contract a booking to another licensed operator. To do otherwise will be an offence that can result in a £1000 fine being imposed.

1206. The Chairperson: Are members happy with clause 4?

1207. Mr Ford: Mr Samuel Egerton asked whether it was legal for someone to ask an affiliated driver to cover a job. Presumably, officials are saying that it is legal only if drivers tell their depot they are doing so.

1208. Mrs Watters: Yes.

1209. The Chairperson: In practice, how will that work? Would they inform their depot via mobile phone, or maybe text messages?

1210. Mrs Watters: Yes, with a mobile phone or a text message it would be very easy to tell the operator that one is doing a job.

1211. The Chairperson: Yes, as long as you have the number at hand.

1212. Mr T Clarke: The job could be done by the time a text message is sent.

1213. The Chairperson: Are we agreed on the general thrust of clause 4?

1214. Members indicated assent

1215. Mr McMullan: At clause 5, we move into chapter 2 of the Bill, which deals with the hiring of taxis at separate fares. Clause 5 is a general clause, as members can see from the title. It is declaratory, and it states that the bidding of taxis at separate fares is permissible is three ways. The first is under clause 6 by way of a taxi-sharing scheme. The second is under clause 7, which covers the circumstance in which all the passengers book their journeys in advance and consent to sharing a taxi. The third is where the Department authorises an operator to provide a service for the carriage of passengers at separate fares. That sets out what happens in clauses 6, 7 and 8.

1216. Mr Ford: The nature of the schemes that the Department may approve appears to be rather unclear. Analogous examples came up in the evidence from the North-West Taxi Proprietors and that from Mr Samuel Egerton, who pointed out that on a weekend night in the centre of Belfast, a taxi driver who finds a passenger who wants to go to Glengormley and two for Ballyclare cannot put them all in his taxi together. Surely to be able to do so would be entirely sensible and worthwhile, and would be in keeping with the Committee’s desire to see large groups of people moved as fast as possible at night. Am I correct that as those clauses are currently drafted, the circumstances that I have outlined are not legal, unless the passengers pretend that they are friends?

1217. Mr McMullan: That situation is permissible if they book the taxi in advance, because they all consent to sharing the fare. Again, the mobile phone may be useful.

1218. Mr Ford: If our aim is to get taxi ranks and taxi marshals to operate as efficiently as possible in Belfast, surely people would be asked to share taxis in the interests of efficiency? It appears that the circumstances that I have outlined do not fit the bill, with the clauses as currently drafted.

1219. Mrs Watters: They do not fit the bill, in the sense that that all sounds reasonable. However, that situation can become unreasonable, and abuse can occur when the person who is dropped off first is charged approximately the same fare as if they had had exclusive use of the taxi, and the customers who are dropped off second are charged in the same way. In that case, the taxi driver wins, but the passengers have not won.

1220. Mr Ford: They have not lost either.

1221. Mr T Clarke: How do you police that situation?

1222. Mrs Watters: Many complaints have been received about such situations. It is all very well when passengers consent, and they are happy, but the problem arises in the situation when there is enforced sharing. If a taxi is going in a certain direction, it is assumed that all the passengers must share the fare, but the basis on which the fare will be divvied up is not clear to the passengers, and that is a situation where abuse can take place.

1223. Mr T Clarke: If two people pick up a taxi in Belfast and are not friends but constitute separate fares, surely the taxi driver has nevertheless done a good job by taking two people or parties off the street rather than leaving one for another taxi, which may not turn up, especially late at night. Were two people, one going to Glengormley and the other to Antrim, to get in a taxi, they would know that if they were going on their own, they would pay from Belfast to Glengormley, or to Antrim. Why make it so complicated?

1224. Mr Laverty: Traditionally, taxis are hired as a whole, although in Northern Ireland the legislation is silent on that. We are trying to legitimise taxi sharing. One of the main stems is the setting up of taxi-sharing schemes. The scheme would be ordered by the Department from particular locations, for example from busy spots in towns and particular ranks. The regulations governing the scheme would state the destinations to which the taxis would go.

1225. Mr T Clarke: You are complicating the issue. Let us get back to the situation on Saturday night in Belfast. We have heard from the taxi industry that not enough taxis are in operation at that time. Say, for example, four people, two couples, are waiting to get a taxi home. One pair wants to travel to Glengormley and the other wants to travel to Antrim. Under this legislation, what practice are you trying to promote?

1226. Mrs Watters: Under this legislation, we propose the setting up of a taxi-sharing scheme that would clearly state that the fare to Glengormley would be x and the fare on to Antrim would be y. Both those fares would be cheaper for the passengers than a single separate fare to either destination.

1227. Mr T Clarke: So if I was travelling to Antrim, the person who is being dropped off in Glengormley would subsidise my fare to Antrim. That is what you are saying, and that is unfair to the taxi industry.

1228. Mr Laverty: No.

1229. Mr T Clarke: I will go back to my example of the two couples and the two fares. If those two couples had taken separate taxis, the couple travelling to Antrim would not have had their fare subsidised. Why are we penalising the taxi drivers for clearing the streets more quickly? That is, in effect, what the scheme would do.

1230. Mrs Watters: Passengers have complained to the Department about their experience of enforced taxi-sharing, where the taxi driver gets all the benefit. He basically gets all the fares —

1231. Mr T Clarke: He is providing the service.

1232. Mrs Watters: Yes, the driver is providing the service, but on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. Either the passenger shares the taxi with someone else and pays the full fare, or they do not get a taxi at all. We would like a scheme whereby passengers can have exclusive use of a taxi if they wish, but, if they avail of a shared service, they would be able to get a price discount.

1233. Mr T Clarke: The Department is putting a provision in the Bill that it cannot police.

1234. The Chairperson: I was about to make that point.

1235. Mr T Clarke: Through this provision, the Department is trying to criminalise taxi drivers and make life difficult for them, yet it cannot even police the proposal.

1236. The Chairperson: Let us say that the fare to Glengormley is 20 quid and the fare to Antrim is 40 quid. The Department believes that there should be a required stipulation for a shared fee, whatever it might be. However, how can the Department ensure that those fees are charged?

1237. Mrs Watters: Situations may arise whereby the passengers and the taxi-drivers are agreed on a fare, and it is in the interests of all parties to come to that arrangement. In those instances, you are right, we cannot enforce any stipulation. However, we want to make provision for sharing schemes.

1238. The Chairperson: We are back to the situation that was described in evidence that we heard from disabled people. I read last night about a person who had to attend a meeting in the Stormont estate with the NIO. That individual obviously had to be here at a set time. That person had to pay a fare of, I think, 70 quid and had to footer around Stormont for about three hours. No matter how much we legislate here, in practice, excessive fares will still be charged.

1239. Mrs Watters: Yes. However, we want to at least make provision in the Bill for shared schemes that are properly controlled, and that are of benefit to both the taxi driver and the passenger.

1240. The Chairperson: That brings me back to the issue of control and enforcement. Those words pop up throughout the Bill.

1241. Mr I McCrea: You talked about how the scheme would operate from specific ranks. However, passengers may not be near those ranks when they want to go home. Again, it is a matter of taking people off the streets at night. Surely the same rules should apply when someone hails a taxi on the street. I find it difficult to understand how the scheme will be policed. Taxi-sharing will continue to happen in Belfast, whether we like it or not, and whether or not we provide for it in the legislation.

1242. If the scheme were to apply to taxis picking fares up on the street, how would the metering system be factored in? The meter runs from point of pick up to destination. The idea seems to be to help passengers by giving them a fare concession, but no concession can be given if a meter is in operation.

1243. Mr Laverty: Not every taxi would be allowed to participate in the taxi-sharing scheme. The Bill states that the Department may by Order make a taxi-sharing scheme.

1244. That would be a scheme with a starting point. Taxis at peak times, for example on Friday and Saturday night, that are prepared to travel long distances and accommodate a number of passengers, could drop passengers off on the Antrim Road perhaps, on the way to Glengormley. The fares for the taxi-sharing scheme would be set in the regulations by the Department. There are examples of those schemes operating in London. The main one is at Paddington Station, where a number of taxis provide a zonal service that people can use, providing they are prepared to share a taxi. The fares are set by Transport for London.

1245. Mr T Clarke: Sorry, I cannot wait any longer to say this: London is bigger than Northern Ireland, so it would be ridiculous for us to try to copy something that is happening in London.

1246. The Chairperson: There is another aspect to this aside from enforceability. What incentive is there for a taxi driver, other than some currently unenforceable legislative imperative, to do that?

1247. Secondly, I can see how a zoned area works. If you hail a taxi and you know that it is part of a shared scheme, it is your choice, and may be an easy way to get home. The big problem that we have, particularly in Belfast, is will the Department define zones within which such schemes will operate, and only taxis authorised to provide shared services will be available?

1248. Mr I McCrea: Accessible zones.

1249. The Chairperson: Yes.

1250. Mr T Clarke: You are going to put taxi drivers against each other if you go down that route. That is provided that the taxi drivers operate the sharing scheme correctly, because if Patsy and I were taxi drivers, and I was picking up, and Patsy was sitting at the rank waiting for the next fare, if I take two to get the price of one fare that would leave Patsy with nothing. Taxi drivers would not want to take the fares. Why would Patsy want to take a double fare — a Glengormley and an Antrim lift — if he is only being paid for one.

1251. Mr Boylan: To be honest, if I was paying a certain amount to travel from Armagh to Belfast, and someone got into the taxi at Portadown and paid the same as me, I certainly would not object to that. The main problem that I can see is enforcement. I would like to hear how that could be done. I understand the concept of the proposal. A taxi driver can pick up two people, and get paid £40 for a trip to Bangor and £20 for the half distance as well. What we want is a system that is fair and gives value for money to the passenger as well. I am concerned about enforcement.

1252. The Chairperson: To come back to that point — the issue of zoning has obviously at least been raised, but have you given any further thought as to how that would work out?

1253. Mrs Watters: Not a great deal. Remember, the taxi-sharing schemes are something that the Department may put in place, so there is discretion. Where taxi-sharing schemes have been implemented in GB, initially they were on a pilot basis to see how they would work in that particular environment, to assess the demand and to see how they would work out for passengers and drivers. Before the use of those provisions could be ruled out, there could perhaps be one or two pilot schemes, and we would then work out the details and any difficulties over zoning.

1254. Mr T Clarke: We are launching the space shuttle before we have it built.

1255. The Chairperson: We need to reach some conclusion. There have been some reservations and caveats inserted around clause 5.

1256. Mrs Watters: To summarise to ensure that we are agreed: there is an issue about the enforceability of taxi sharing at separate fares. Also, is it that members can envisage situations that although everyone has consented to sharing, advanced bookings would be a problem? Are members saying that that should be provided for in the legislation?

1257. Mr T Clarke: I am more concerned about the taxi industry. Cathal referred to an Armagh to Portadown trip. If a taxi drives through Portadown, and it is teeming out of the heavens, a customer should not get into that taxi if they do not want to pay the fare. I am thinking of the taxi driver here. Much of the legislation is designed for everyone, but, at the end of the day, the taxi driver is running a business and if he wants to drive past a fare, he should drive past it rather than picking up the fare to share it with someone else.

1258. The Chairperson: What incentives for taxi drivers are contained in the legislation?

1259. Mrs Watters: A taxi driver could take one passenger from Belfast to Glengormley and it could cost, for example, £8•00. However, under a taxi-sharing scheme, they could take five passengers, each paying £5•00, and the taxi driver could get £25•00, so everyone wins.

1260. Mr T Clarke: That scheme does not exist.

1261. Mrs Watters: Yes, I know, but that level of detail to allow for such a scheme could be provided in the legislation. The idea is that both parties would win in the taxi-sharing scheme. At the moment, when there is taxi sharing, the taxi driver wins and the passengers do not — apart from the fact that they get home.

1262. Mr T Clarke: That is a fair system, as they are the guys who buy the expensive cars and sit out late at night when we are asleep in bed. Having listened to some of them, they have problems even paying for that investment. Three people sharing a taxi is the norm on Friday or Saturday nights anyway, so the chances of taxis having any space are slim. We are talking about something that does not even happen very often. Anyone who is in business likes to get the icing on the cake. For the taxi driver, the icing on the cake is when they get a double run in the one journey. They should be allowed that icing; therefore, I am against that clause.

1263. Mr Laverty: Under the taxi-sharing scheme, the taxi driver would get more and the passenger would pay less.

1264. Mr T Clarke: We do not have a taxi-sharing scheme.

1265. Mr Laverty: Clause 5 makes provision for that. Not all taxis will participate in the scheme. There is provision in this clause for taxis operating under such a scheme to be discretely identified as taxi-sharing taxis operating from a particular location.

1266. The Chairperson: Do you have locations in mind, or is that subject to further regulation down the line? Perhaps there would be pilot exercises, subject to zonings, to specific locations and to the identification of such taxis.

1267. Mrs Watters: Exactly, that is correct. There could be a taxi-sharing scheme at a bus station or train station, for example, particularly where a flood of people arrive at one time. It helps to match passengers to taxis.

1268. The Chairperson: Will you summarise your view of our opinion?

1269. Mrs Watters: The Committee feels that enforceability would be a problem, and you would like the Department’s views on how a taxi-sharing scheme could be properly enforced. In essence, that is really the issue.

1270. Mr T Clarke: What about the taxi driver?

1271. Mrs Watters: That is where piloting comes in. If the Department were to agree that a taxi-sharing scheme could be set up at Central Station, but the industry were not interested in getting involved, the scheme would not run. It would only run if members of the industry wanted to get involved and, in practice, they often do.

1272. Mr T Clarke: That is fine, but what about the taxi drivers who would work from other ranks? We need to be sure that we are not tying down that taxi driver in other areas of Belfast or wherever it may be. It is all very well to talk of a special scheme operating at Central Station or wherever, but we have already put something in the legislation that will prevent that from happening.

1273. Mr Gallagher: Since the Department has an enabling power, it can try out a pilot scheme and develop the taxi-sharing schemes, if there is anything worth developing as a result of the pilot. We are agreeing only that the Department has the power to do that. The taxi industry may then avail of the opportunity; but it is for the industry to reflect on whether it is viable.

1274. Mr T Clarke: Are we not also saying that they cannot do all the different scenarios that we have said that they are doing? Are we not are preventing them from doing that by agreeing to allow taxi-sharing schemes?

1275. The Chairperson: We are providing the legislation, but that does not mean that the schemes will happen.

1276. Mr Boylan: If the operators and customers consent to it they will try it out. That is their choice. We are making it available. If it does not work, it does not work.

1277. Mr T Clarke: It says here, under Departmental comments, that this is:

“to protect taxi users from being overcharged”.

1278. Do we accept that? Central Station is the pilot scheme; so take that out of the equation. If a taxi driver lifts three customers at Belfast City Hall to go to Glengormley or Antrim, and charges three different fares for three different passengers —

1279. The Chairperson: Can we arrive at an agreement? Is the Committee happy with the summary that Adele has presented?

1280. Mr T Clarke: No.

1281. Mr Gallagher: Yes.

1282. The Chairperson: Please read it out one final time.

1283. Mrs Watters: Some members are concerned that the provisions that the Department would like to put in place in relation to taxi-sharing schemes may be unenforceable. One member considers it unfair on taxi drivers to be subjected to any restrictions on when they can charge separate fares, because that is, as he says, the icing on the cake.

1284. Mr T Clarke: I am happy with that.

1285. The Chairperson: We will review this aspect again. [Laughter.]

1286. Mr Gardiner: The issue is how the schemes would be policed; that is the bottom line.

1287. Mrs Watters: Yes.

1288. The Chairperson: We have covered clauses 5 and 6. We will move quickly to clause 7. I want to speed up progress.

1289. Mr McMullan: We touched on clause 7 as well. That relates to customers booking a journey in advance and then consenting to share that taxi. Mr Clarke’s point that we should not get hung up on the booking. People can hail a taxi and consent to the fare. That is something we will have to consider.

1290. The Chairperson: Can we move to clause 8?

1291. Mrs Watters: I should say that there are some points relating to clause 6 that the Committee has not addressed. It is suggested that taxibus operators who already hold a roads service licence should automatically be permitted to operate taxi-sharing schemes. The Department’s view is that that would discourage competition. It was suggested that, if the Department decided to run a taxi-sharing scheme, there should be open competition for taxi drivers who want to be involved.

1292. The Chairperson: We are agreed on that bit. Let us move on then to clause 8.

1293. Mr McMullan: We can link clauses 8, 9 and 10, which all do the same thing. This is the situation where the Department can authorise an operator to provide a service at separate fares. This is really the bus-type service which the West Belfast taxis presently operate.

1294. Clause 8 sets out the framework. It enables the Department to authorise an operator’s licence to provide such a service and can restrict it to a particular class of taxi, which the Department sees as accessible taxis, and such other conditions that may be prescribed.

1295. The information that the Department will want from an applicant is set out in clause 9:

“such information as may reasonably be required”

1296. It also includes information about the timetabling of the service. When the Department is deciding on whether to authorise such a licence, it should consider various criteria. Those criteria are based on the interests of people that are likely to use the service, the people that are providing such a service, the suitability of routes, the need for the service and the effect on other holders of the same type of licence or a road service licence.

1297. Clause 10(3) contains an exemption. It states that “Subsection (2)(a) shall not apply”. Subsection 2(a) refers to the suitability of routes. As we said last week, the Department intends that someone who, as the holder of a road service licence, has already gone through all those criteria, should not have to go through the process again. Rather than linking to one criterion, they should be exempt from the whole provision if they hold a road service licence.

1298. Mr T Clarke: How does a taxibus work?

1299. The Chairperson: Not mechanically, I hope.

1300. Mr T Clarke: No, how does it collect its fares?

1301. Mr Laverty: Taxibuses operate in seven routes in west Belfast and in north Belfast. For PSV purposes, they are licensed as taxis and they go through the PSV test annually. However, the service that they provide is not a typical taxi service. They do not respond to pre-booked calls, and they do not stand for hire as the black taxis in Belfast do. A number of years ago, in addition to licensing taxibuses as taxis, the Department decided to grant them a road service licence, which is a bus operator’s licence, to operate the seven authorised routes.

1302. Mr T Clarke: Taxibuses have various stops and they can lift more than one passenger at each of those stops. The person who gets on first pays the same price as the next person. That leads to the same point that I have just made about taxi drivers. It is unfair that there are any restrictions on when taxi drivers can charge separate fares. Taxibuses are exempt from those restrictions. A taxibus driver can go on a route and the first and last passengers may be charged £5 for a journey to the centre of Belfast; the passengers are charged separately. However taxi drivers cannot do that. That is a two-tier system, and I can understand the frustration in the industry towards taxibuses. That is why I asked you to outline exactly how they work.

1303. Mrs Watters: The system is similar to any bus service. Currently, the standard fee on a Translink bus is £1•30, or 65p for a concession. It does not matter at what stage you get on the bus; everyone knows what the deal is.

1304. Mr T Clarke: It is unfair that someone pays £1•30 and someone behind him also pays £1•30, no matter where they are going. It is considered unfair for taxis to charge separately but not unfair for buses to do it. It is considered unfair for someone to pay the taxi fare from Belfast to Glengormley, and for another passenger to pay the extra part of the fare to Antrim.

1305. The Chairperson: The average punter does not see a distinction between taxis, whether they are black, blue or red.

1306. Mrs Watters;

1307. The idea is that the deal should be transparent when someone gets a taxi. A taxibus is a type of bus, where the person pays, for example, £1•30 no matter at what point on the route they get on. If someone gets a taxi, they have exclusive use of it and they will pay what is charged by the meter at the end of the journey. Under a proper scheme, passengers would know that they would definitely get a discount if they shared a taxi. It would not be an icing-on-the-cake situation, where the passenger would pay the same if he or she had got the taxi themselves.

1308. Mr T Clarke: That is unfair. If a person is travelling from Belfast to Antrim and knows that, because they are travelling alone, the fare will be £16. Why should the fare be different because the person is sharing that car with someone else? The person would have to share when travelling in a taxibus.

1309. Mrs Watters: It is quite different. The general rule is that when someone opts to travel by taxi, the members of their party are going to be the only passengers. If someone opts to travel by bus, the deal is that they are sharing with other people and would pay a much cheaper fare.

1310. Mr T Clarke: Are you saying that if someone gets into a taxi and there are two passengers in the back, they will not know that they are sharing it?

1311. Mrs Watters: If there were no control over the sharing of fares, then one would have no way of knowing whether they are going to get ripped off.

1312. Mr T Clarke: If it were made clear to the general public, then they would know. I draw a strong parallel between this clause and the one that the Committee discussed earlier. I have nothing against what is being said about taxibuses. However, I am trying to draw a comparison between taxibuses and taxi sharing, where people could be charged different fares.

1313. The Chairperson: Will no taxibuses be participating in taxi sharing?

1314. Mrs Watters: Operators may be licensed to provide taxibus services, and they may also want to work in a taxi-sharing scheme. This discussion is likely to get very complicated if we try to think of scenarios in which operators are doing both. However, it should be remembered that if a taxi is operating in a particular mode — for example as a taxibus — then there would be signage display requirements, which would state where the vehicle is going; for example from west Belfast to the city centre. Similarly, if the vehicle were part of a taxi-sharing scheme, it would be clear what scheme it is part of; for example, from Central Station to wherever. Therefore, taxibuses could potentially participate in taxi sharing.

1315. The Chairperson: What are the Committee’s views?

1316. Mr T Clarke: It was suggested to the Committee that taxibuses should not be allowed to be used as normal taxis, yet the Department’s response is:

“Such a rule would be unfairly restrictive particularly in areas where there are relatively few taxis.”

1317. The inference is that it is acceptable to be restrictive on taxibuses but unfair to be restrictive on taxis.

1318. The Chairperson: Where are the areas with relatively few taxis? Taxibuses are a predominantly urban feature, are they not?

1319. Mrs Watters: Taxibuses have been an urban phenomenon in Northern Ireland. However, in the Scottish highlands, for example, they are used in rural areas because although the local population may want a bus service, it may not be economically viable to use a large bus. For example, for journeys between an outlying village and a town, a taxibus might bridge the gap between having a weekly service using a large bus and a daily service using a smaller vehicle. The point being made in the submission was that a vehicle providing a taxibus service should never be used for any other service. That seems to be an overly restrictive measure to put in the Bill. A vehicle being used for taxibus services during the day — with proper signage — should be permitted to be driven at night by someone else for another purpose.

1320. The Chairperson: That is fine. Is the Committee content?

1321. Members indicated assent.

1322. Mrs Watters: I do not think that there are any points that the Committee wants us to return with as regards taxibuses.

1323. Mr Boylan: I think that they are fine. [Laughter.] Whatever way one looks at it, they are value for money. I know that Trevor is making a point —

1324. Mr T Clarke: I am only using taxibuses to make a point about taxis.

1325. Mr Boylan: I know that and totally agree.

1326. Mr Gardiner: I am inclined to support Trevor, particularly when it comes to taxibuses. If a taxibus sets off from Lurgan to Belfast and a passenger gets in at Moira, which is eight miles down the road, for the sake of fairness, a meter should be fitted to help the driver calculate the lesser fare and allow the passenger to see how that has been done.

1327. Mr T Clarke: In that case, you are not in agreement with me. In the example I used earlier, when the taxi leaves Belfast —

1328. The Chairperson: The point that Mr Gardiner was making concurs with what Adele said, which would allow that elbow room and build in flexibility to allow taxis to travel outside zoned or urban areas.

1329. Mr Gardiner: I am from Upper Bann, and was thinking about travelling from my area into Belfast, rather than coming from Belfast.

1330. The Chairperson: As you should. Much of our focus has been on Belfast.

1331. Mr Gardiner: There are six counties in Northern Ireland.

1332. The Chairperson: Is the Committee content with the discussion on clauses 8, 9 and 10?

1333. Members indicated assent.

1334. The Chairperson: We will move to clause 11. No issues have been raised.

1335. Mr McMullan: That is correct.

1336. The Chairperson: Presumably, by this stage, the Committee does not have any further issues. Are members content?

1337. Members indicated assent.

1338. Mr McMullan: We are now moving into Part 2 of the Bill, which covers the regulation of taxis. Clause 12 states that a taxi licence is required in order to use a vehicle as a taxi. Contravention of that requirement will result in a fine of £5,000.

1339. The Chairperson: Is the Committee content?

1340. Members indicated assent.

1341. Mr McMullan: Clause 13 states that:

“The owner of any taxi may apply to the Department for a taxi licence”.

1342. Clause 13(2) is important because it allows the Department to grant a licence in respect of

“(a) taxis of such different classes of use as may be prescribed; and

(b) such different classes of use”.

1343. There has been a lot of talk about one-tier and two-tier systems of use, and I apologise if members have been searching through the Bill for those systems because neither of them is mentioned. Clause 13(2) will allow the Department to license different classes of vehicle. In theory, we could license vehicles as they are now — for public and private hire. However, we will be licensing vehicles as accessible or non-accessible within a single, clear system. Therefore, this is where the one-tier system resides in the Bill.

1344. Clause 13(3) covers another important point. The Department will be able to set out in regulations the suitable type, size and design of taxis. That will give us the power to specify what is meant by an accessible taxi.

1345. A taxi licence will be granted for one year, and, as mentioned earlier in relation to other appeals procedures, appeals will be to the magistrates’ court.

1346. The Chairperson: Are there any issues?

1347. Mr T Clarke: Will the Department clarify the last point? Moving to a one-tier system will undoubtedly affect Belfast public-hire taxis, which will still be allowed to use the ranks, but will they also be allowed to tout for other business?

1348. Mrs Watters: Anyone who is allowed to use a rank will be allowed to pick up fares from the street.

1349. Mr T Clarke: Thank you.

1350. Mr I McCrea: If memory serves me correctly, there were concerns about reducing the term of the licence to one year.

1351. Mrs Watters: The Bill proposes that drivers will be required to renew their licences every three years. Currently, that must be done every five years. We will come to that when we review clause 23, which will be for next week. [Laughter.]

1352. Mr I McCrea: I am glad you pointed that out.

1353. The Chairperson: Do you think so Adele? Of course, we would not assume that you are not ready for that. [Laughter.] We move now to clause 23. [Laughter.]

1354. As regards clause 13, we received a suggestion on capping the number of public taxi hire plates and only increasing them in line with business needs. Is there any merit in that or, ultimately, is it down to the market finding its own way through?

1355. Mrs Watters: It is down to the market finding its own level. It is very easy to get into the taxi industry, and there may well be an oversupply of taxis, although it may not feel like that at peak times. If the number of taxis were capped — and that is becoming less common across the UK — it would put a lot of power into the hands of the taxi industry. The moment it would be decided to raise the cap, taxi drivers would say that that affects the value of their licences. Licences would become tradable and transferable. In the South, licences were worth €130,000 before the industry was deregulated.

1356. Mr T Clarke: How could a cap be imposed? How would someone bid to become included?

1357. Mrs Watters: A limit of 11,000 taxis could be set.

1358. Mr T Clarke: So those who are in, are in?

1359. Mrs Watters: One would be pulling the ladder up, which is why the industry liked the idea.

1360. The Chairperson: It is a bit like a pub licence.

1361. Mrs Watters: Yes.

1362. The Chairperson: The Committee received evidence that disabled people are being discriminated against. If they phone for a taxi they have to specify that they are disabled. That point was made during some very well articulated evidence from Mr Maguire. How can that situation be dealt with?

1363. Mrs Watters: Mr Maguire went on to make the point that if all taxis were disabled-accessible nobody would have to say that they needed a taxi that meets their needs. If an operator has a mix of accessible and non-accessible taxis and it does not matter which taxi comes, that is fine. However, if someone needs a wheelchair-accessible taxi, they would have to request that from the operator. It is not a discrimination; it is an indication of the type of service that that person requires, and that an appropriate vehicle needs to be sent.

1364. The Chairperson: Is there broad agreement on the issues regarding clause 13?

1365. Members indicated assent.

1366. Mr McMullan: Clause 14 places certain duties on the owners of licensed taxis. An owner will be required to present a taxi for inspection and testing through the Department. The taxi will not be required to be presented on more than three occasions in any one period of 12 months. Owners must report any accidents to their vehicles, particularly if it affects the safety or performance of their vehicle, and they must also report change of ownership and return the licence and the plates. Again, contravention of that will be an offence and incur a fine of £1,000.

1367. The Chairperson: That brings things more or less into line with what the rest of us do with our own private vehicles.

1368. Mrs Watters: Statutory off-road notification (SORN) applies to normal vehicles, and it would apply anyway if the vehicle were destroyed or sold on.

1369. Mr I McCrea: I know that this question is going into details, but are you talking about any damage to a vehicle? Is it specific to any area, or damage, that could risk someone’s health? Would it apply to any bump?

1370. Mr Laverty: PSV regulations specify the extent of damage and define the word “bump”. Strictly speaking, any accident should be reported and the vehicle should be taken off the road while it is repaired. It is a matter of standards of service to the public; it is a public-service vehicle.

1371. The Chairperson: Are members content?

1372. Members indicated assent.

1373. Mr McMullan: Clause 15 deals with the identification of licensed vehicles. The Department will issue whatever identification plates, signs or distinguishing marks it decides to use. Driving a taxi without such identification will be an offence that carries a fine of £1,000. The plates must be exhibited in, “such manner as may be prescribed”. That wording is important because it may be inappropriate to have taxi plates on wedding or funeral cars, for example, and it gives the Department some flexibility in dealing with such circumstances.

1374. The Chairperson: There is nothing contentious there. Are members agreed?

1375. Members indicated assent.

1376. Mr McMullan: Clause 16 is one of the fundamental clauses in the Bill, and it deals with the regulation of fares. It allows the Department to set the maximum rates and fares to be charged for the hire of a taxi, and it will be an offence for a taxi to charge more than the maximum fare.

1377. The Chairperson: The Committee Clerk has just pointed out to me that the General Consumer Council has raised some issues about the clause. Presumably, the Department will bring the General Consumer Council’s recommendations back to the Committee.

1378. Mrs Watters: Yes.

1379. Mr T Clarke: I recall that there was talk about a maximum fare. I never use taxis, but does that refer to taxis that have a set fare for a journey before it begins?

1380. Mrs Watters: That would be what people refer to as the minimum fare or the flag-fall fare.

1381. Mr Clarke: OK. What is the maximum fare that was referred to?

1382. Mrs Watters: There might be a tariff that could be tailored for different times of the day. For example, the maximum initial charge for a particular journey could be £2∙50, with a further charge of £1 per mile thereafter.

1383. The Chairperson: Sorry, do you mean that £2∙50 would be the least that they could charge?

1384. Mrs Watters: No, £2∙50 would be —

1385. Mr T Clarke: Is that the minimum charge?

1386. Mrs Watters: It would be the maximum initial charge.

1387. The Chairperson: The maximum —

1388. Mrs Watters: It is the maximum minimum charge.

1389. The Chairperson: Do you mean the maximum basic charge?

1390. Mrs Watters: Yes. When a person gets into the taxi and the driver turns on the meter, that fare would be displayed.

1391. The Chairperson: Therefore, that fare cannot go any higher before the taxi sets of?

1392. Mrs Watters: Yes.

1393. Mr T Clarke: Are we talking about the maximum fare?

1394. Mrs Watters: What we are saying is that when the Department sets fares, it —

1395. The Chairperson: It is the maximum minimum charge.

1396. Mrs Watters: Yes. It is the maximum minimum charge.

1397. Mr T Clarke: Is that where the word “maximum” is coming from?

1398. Mrs Watters: The Department would set out fares and charges, which would show the most that a taxi could charge. We would not penalise anybody for wishing to charge less, for example by giving students or pensioners a discount.

1399. Mr T Clarke: I cannot grasp that; the wording does not seem right. It is a minimum fare. Could we not give it a different name?

1400. Mrs Watters: “Initial charge” might be a more useful term. There are people in the taxi industry who say that there should be a minimum charge. I am not sure whether they mean that there should be an initial fare or that, whatever the initial fare is, nobody should be able to undercut it.

1401. Mr T Clarke: Could we say that there would be a standard charge to a maximum of such and such, or that a standard charge should not exceed a certain sum?

1402. The Chairperson: Or, perhaps we could say that the initial fare shall be no greater than an agreed amount?

1403. Mr T Clarke: Yes.

1404. Mrs Watters: There is a concern in some parts of Northern Ireland — for example, in Derry/Londonderry — where some drivers say that operators are charging uneconomic fares. Ultimately, the drivers suffer because fares are their income, and they want to be guaranteed at least £3 for every journey.

1405. Mr T Clarke: Some of them have referred to a maximum fare.

1406. Mr I McCrea: Will meters be set to the highest possible minimum fare? Some drivers have asked that the highest possible charge for the minimum fare is set.

1407. Mrs Watters: There are technical details with regard to the calibration of meters.

1408. The Chairperson: The Committee is confused about the wording, and there appears to be a need to tighten the precision of the wording in order to ensure that it is not subject to other interpretations.

1409. Mr Laverty: The Republic of Ireland’s Taxi Regulation Act 2003 provides for maximum fares. The Committee may be aware that, in September 2006, the Republic introduced a national taxi fare across the industry on the basis of the maximum fare described in the Act.

1410. The Chairperson: That is precisely the issue under discussion. Perhaps there is an appropriate form of words from which we can learn in the Act.

1411. Mr Gardiner: I believe that it is the “maximum minimum” bit that is confusing. I understand where you are coming from but —

1412. Mrs Watters: The words “maximum minimum” do not appear in the legislation. There is no reference in the legislation to an initial charge.

1413. Mr Gardiner: Joe Public will not understand that. If members are confused, how are the public supposed to understand it? Words must be selected that will convey the message.

1414. Mr T Clarke: I understand the term. It was the industry that did not understand it. When drivers gave evidence to the Committee, they referred to minimums and maximums.

1415. Being from a rural area, I know that there is no minimum charge when someone gets into a taxi. I am concerned that there should be a mandatory maximum initial charge.

1416. Mrs Watters: The Bill’s provisions would not make that mandatory, although some people in the industry would like it to be.

1417. Mr T Clarke: We need to agree a form of words that would mean that the minimum fare could not exceed a certain sum of money. People in the countryside, particularly the elderly, depend on taxis to take them on short journeys. Where I live, there is a charge of £2∙50 from outside the town. However, if a senior citizen is charged £2∙50 before they are even taken down the street, the eventual fare will be too expensive.

1418. Mrs Watters: Often the initial charge will cover the entire journey because the meter does not start the minute that the taxi moves off. Sometimes, the initial charge will include a certain distance.

1419. Mr Laverty: When the meter is engaged, the minimum fare shows up automatically.

1420. Mrs Watters: That is not a requirement of the Bill.

1421. The Chairperson: In order to reflect the Committee’s views, can the wording be tightened up in order to make it more precise and clear?

1422. Mr I McCrea: Is it the Department or the individual driver who sets the tariff on meters?

1423. Mr Laverty: Normally, each taximeter is calibrated.

1424. The Chairperson: That matter will come up when we discuss taximeters during our consideration of clause 18. The Committee is seeking further clarification on clause 17. Are Members content?

1425. Members indicated assent.

1426. Mr McMullan: As you rightly pointed out, Mr Chairman, clause 18 is linked to fares. It will be a requirement for all taxis to have a taximeter and a receipt printer, and it will be an offence if a taxi is not fitted with those devices. The Department has the power to regulate the testing, sealing and operation of taximeters, the display of tariffs and the details that must be included on receipts.

1427. The Chairperson: Are there any questions?

1428. Mr I McCrea: It should be compulsory to issue receipts on request. In evidence to the Committee, it was clear that people were being overcharged. Therefore there should be a mechanism whereby passengers who ask for a receipt should get one. That would be evidence of whether they had been charged an amount between the recommended minimum and maximum fares.

1429. Mrs Watters: Should receipts be provided only on request, rather than there always being an expectation that they will be issued, or are you saying that the onus should be on the driver to provide receipts rather than on the passenger having to ask?

1430. Mr I McCrea: I do not mind not getting a receipt. However, if I wanted one, I would like to be able to get it.

1431. Mr McMullan: The legislation covers that.

1432. Mr I McCrea: I am happy to take it to mean that everyone will get receipts.

1433. Mrs Watters: If every driver is required to have a receipt printer, the provision of receipts becomes less of an issue. The main thing is that drivers have the mechanism to create receipts.

1434. Mr I McCrea: There would be a concern about the cost of the receipt printers to the taxi drivers.

1435. The Chairperson: Are members content?

1436. Members indicated assent.

1437. Mr McMullan: Clause 19 states that each taxi may carry a prescribed number of passengers, and that is worked out in the regulations. To carry a greater number of passengers means a £1000 fine.

1438. The Chairperson: Are members content?

1439. Members indicated assent.

1440. Mr McMullan: Clause 20 sets out the Department’s regulatory powers. There has been much talk about the Taxis Bill being an enabling Bill, and this is the classic enabling clause. Clause 20(1) states that the Department can make general regulations relating to taxis. Clause 20(2) allows the Department to regulate on a wide range of issues. Some provisions look to the future, such as regulating the colour of taxis — and I do not expect to see yellow taxis on the streets in Northern Ireland any time soon. The clause simply details issues on which the Department may regulate.

1441. The Chairperson: Are there any issues?

1442. Mr T Clarke: I want to be clear about how clause 20 will work when the Bill is passed. I am not being facetious but should the Department decide to paint all the taxis yellow, how would it implement that decision? That is simply an example. The same applies to other issues, but you will kill my curiosity by answering that question.

1443. Mr McMullan: The general procedure is the same as for making any regulation. We would consult with the industry, the Committee and other stakeholders before deciding whether the regulation is sensible.

1444. Mr T Clarke: Would any new regulations become amendments to the Bill?

1445. Mr McMullan: No. They would be made as separate sets of regulations that will be sent to this Committee to agree.

1446. Mr T Clarke: Do not take this the wrong way, but does clause 20 give you a clean brush to do what you want?

1447. Mrs Watters: No. Any changes require regulations. We would have to consult and carry out a regulatory impact assessment that we would share with the Committee.

1448. Mr Gallagher: That is important to know.

1449. The Chairperson: Adele, at the last meeting, an issue with respect to clause 20(2)(c) cropped up.

1450. Mrs Watters: Yes. The taxi-marshal proposals.

1451. The Chairperson: It was put to you then that a little more thought needs to be put into that concept to reflect the views of the Committee that someone could be standing at the kerb with absolutely no powers to do anything. The other aspect of that was that there was an overlap between any potential enforcement powers that may, or may not, be there, and lack of clarity on what the role of a marshal might be in certain circumstances, as opposed to the enforcement officers. To be honest, I am not a wild pile wiser after last week.

1452. Can you come back to the Committee with some detail on how you envisage the taxi-marshal proposals being taken forward?

1453. Mrs Watters: OK.

1454. The Chairperson: Thanks for that. With that built in, can we agree, with that caveat, clause 20?

1455. Mr Boylan: I want to raise the issue of seat belts. Some taxis have flip-down seats that do not have seat belts. I was thinking about that from the point of view of children using them.

1456. Mrs Watters: The provision for seat belts in taxis is included in the legislation for seat belts in other vehicles, so that is not a Taxi-Bill issue directly, because it is already provided for. Recognition is taken of the fact that because of the nature of the journeys, not all taxis can be expected to have child seats or restraints available. Certainly, where restraints or seats are available, they must be used.

1457. The Chairperson: Can we move to clause 21?

1458. Mr McMullan: There is currently an anomaly between the Department for Regional Development (DRD) and DOE with regard to taxi ranks. DRD makes the policy for taxi ranks, but the legislative function rests with DOE. Clause 21 places the legislative function with DRD. An opportunity will arise, when total responsibility for taxi ranks moves over to DRD, to use the traffic attendants in an enforcement manner. We recommend that the traffic attendants should enforce the taxi regulation Order, which means that they will provide enforcement for incorrect parking at ranks and prescribe parking distances from ranks, etc. DOE can work out that transfer; it will require a small consequential amendment to a piece of DRD legislation.

1459. The Chairperson: It says in the paper that you supplied on the proposed amendments to the Taxis Bill that:

“In the Department’s view, it would not be appropriate to extend the powers of traffic attendants to include the full range of enforcement powers.”

1460. If they will not have the full range, what range will they have?

1461. Mr McMullan: There is a distinction there in that the traffic attendants would not have any enforcement powers over the licensing of taxis. Their power would be confined to parking infringements at ranks. Their enforcement powers could be used, but only in relation to the parking of vehicles.

1462. Mr T Clarke: Could that be clarified, because it is a bit of a grey area? I understand why they cannot have full enforcement powers — well I do and I do not, because we need a large degree of help with enforcement.

1463. The Chairperson: I am not entirely sure that the first point squares with the second. Unless I am reading it wrong, it says:

“In future, DRD will make by means of ‘Taxi Regulation Order’….”

and then:

“DOE and DRD agree that it would be appropriate for traffic attendants to be able to enforce such regulation orders” .

1464. Mrs Watters: The second sentence needs to come out. That is wrong.

1465. “transfers the legislative function by making taxi stands from DOE to DRD by means of ‘Taxi Regulation Orders’.”

1466. The Chairperson: Can we park clause 21 and get clarification on that. We can revisit it later. We will probably begin at clause 21/22 at our next session.

1467. We are agreed that clause 21 needs further clarification? We have exhausted most of the matters that we wanted to address on the Taxis Bill today — unless anyone wants to ask another question.

1468. Mr T Clarke: No, thank you.

1469. The Chairperson: I thank members, and I thank Bill, Adele and John for giving us their time today. We will see you next week.

23 October 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Patsy McGlone (Chairperson)
Mr Cathal Boylan (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Billy Armstrong
Mr Trevor Clarke
Mr David Ford
Mr Tommy Gallagher
Mr Samuel Gardiner
Mr Alex Maskey
Mr Ian McCrea
Mr Daithí McKay
Mr Peter Weir

Witnesses:

Mr John McMullan Mrs Adele Watters

Department of the Environment

1470. The Chairperson (Mr McGlone): Are the witnesses happy to continue with the process that we used last week?

1471. Mrs Adele Watters (Department of the Environment): Yes. We have made available a short paper that addresses the issues that were raised on the earlier clauses. We can come back to that. I am happy to start with clause 22.

1472. The Chairperson: Any member who has any interest to declare should do so now.

1473. Mr John McMullan (Department of the Environment): Last week, we considered part 1, which refers to operator licensing, and part 2, which refers to the regulation of taxis. Today, we will move on to part 3, which refers to the regulation of drivers of taxis.

1474. Clause 22 sets out a requirement that only the holder of a taxi-driver’s licence may drive a taxi. Contravention of that requirement will be an offence, carrying a maximum fine of £5,000. It will also be an offence, carrying a fine of up to £1,000, for a driver to drive a taxi if he or she does not hold a licence for that class of taxi. For example, someone may be entitled to drive a non-accessible vehicle, but not a stretch-limousine. Basically, that is the general requirement as set out in clause 22.

1475. Mrs Watters: Do you want to highlight the key issues, and I will respond?

1476. The Chairperson: It worked well last week when members raised any issues that they had with the clauses. Therefore, members can do that again. Does any member have anything that he wants clarified in clause 22, or are members happy to move to the next clause?

1477. Members indicated assent

1478. Mr McMullan: Clause 23 is the main substantive clause in this part of the Bill. It provides that the Department shall grant a licence if satisfied that the applicant has been authorised to drive a car for three years prior to the application; is a fit and proper person; has undergone training; and has passed a test of competence to drive a taxi.

1479. An important point to note on the taxi-driving test is that it will not apply to those who already hold a taxi-drivers’ licence immediately prior to the provision’s coming into effect. Therefore, it will apply only to drivers who are new to the industry.

1480. The licence will be granted for up to three years; at present, it expires after five years. The licence will be granted for a specific class of taxi; for example, it may enable the holder to drive limousines only. The right of appeal, as it stands at the moment, is to a magistrate’s court.

1481. The Chairperson: Does any member have any queries regarding clause 23?

1482. Mr Weir: Is the switch from licences expiring after five years to after three years in order bring that area into line with Department for Transport best practice?

1483. Mrs Watters: Yes, both the Department for Transport and DOE are moving in the same direction on that issue. We were conscious that as drivers’ licences lasted for five years, they were not in line with the period allocated for criminal record checks. We thought that it was important to bring those into line. At approximately the same time that we were deliberating on that matter, the Department for Transport issued its guidance to the 350-plus taxi-licensing authorities in England and Wales. That also influenced our decision.

1484. Mr Gallagher: Why do UK criminal record checks not extend to the Republic of Ireland?

1485. The Chairperson: That is relevant to where you live, Tommy.

1486. Mrs Watters: I honestly do not have an answer for that at the moment. I will need to go back to check what occurs now, and whether any changes are proposed in relation to that.

1487. The Chairperson: That is an important query; so you can come back to us on that.

1488. Mr Boylan: One of the main issues regarding the switch from the five-year licences to the three-year licences is costs. That is one problem that was raised during the witness sessions.

1489. Mrs Watters: Two issues were raised regarding costs. The first one was that drivers will have to pay a taxi-driver licence fee every three years. The second one was that people were afraid that they would have to pay for a medical examination every three years, instead of every five years.

1490. Taxi drivers were concerned about those two costs. The Department’s current position is that there are no proposals to change the requirement for taxi drivers to undergo a medical examination from every five years to every three years. Therefore, their fears about the level of increased cost are, perhaps, unfounded. The only change will be that taxi drivers will now have to pay a licence fee every three years rather than every five years.

1491. The Chairperson: You make the important point that for people with a lower level of educational skills, the Bill need not be amended to implement training. However, the Department must have given some thought to the fixed provision that will be made for training. Although it is not a critical element of the Bill, the Committee will need clarification in order to be satisfied with that provision’s detail.

1492. Mrs Watters: We touched on that subject last week when we discussed the project that GoSkills and the Department for Employment and Learning (DEL) is to undertake. They are working with the Department of the Environment to tailor training to taxi drivers’ needs. Everyone who presents for taxi-driver training will be assessed, so GoSkills and DEL want to ensure that they are assessing drivers’ essential skills and determining their current level of learning. The first stage of the project will be to raise drivers’ essential skills to a level at which they could then undertake taxi-driver training. That is, by and large, the training provision that the Department sees itself creating. If prospective taxi drivers have a skills gap, we will work with them to address that skills gap and raise their skills level.

1493. The Chairperson: If members have nothing further to add on clause 23, we can move on, subject to the requested detail being provided to the Committee.

1494. Mrs Watters: OK.

1495. Mr McMullan: Clause 24 deals with the issuing of drivers’ badges. It states that the Department will issue badges and other evidence of identification to each person who has been granted a taxi-driver’s licence. The badge must be worn and identification displayed at all times for drivers to be acting in accordance with their licence, unless they are specifically exempt. Drivers of funeral cars or wedding cars, among others, may be considered for exemption. Failure to comply with the wearing of the badge will result in a penalty of up to £1,000.

1496. The Chairperson: No issues were raised, or comments made, about clauses 24 and 25. Are members happy to move on?

1497. Members indicated assent.

1498. Mr McMullan: Clause 26 is important. It gives the Department the power to suspend or revoke any licence under the Bill or to curtail an operator’s licence for any reasonable cause. Moreover, an operator’s licence can be suspended or revoked if the Department is no longer satisfied that the licence holder is a fit and proper person or if another condition or obligation imposed on the licence holder has not been complied with.

1499. Should an operator’s licence be curtailed, the Department can remove one or more vehicles from the licence, or it can reduce the maximum number of taxis or the class of taxis that the operator can use.

1500. The Chairperson: If members have no points to raise, we shall move on.

1501. Members indicated assent.

1502. The Chairperson: No issues were raised, or comments made, about clauses 27, 28 and 29. However, will you run through those clauses briefly, John? If any member wishes to raise anything, that is fair enough.

1503. Mr McMullan: Clause 27 complements clause 26. It outlines the procedure that the Department will follow for suspending or revoking a licence. If the Department decides to suspend, revoke or curtail a licence, it must give notification and grounds for its decision. Suspension, revocation or curtailment will take effect 21 days after notice is served. Why 21 days? That is also the length of the appeal period, during which a licence holder or operator can appeal against a revocation or suspension.

1504. Clause 28 allows an operator to apply to have his licence varied to add a new operating centre or to remove an existing centre, and to vary the number of taxis that he may operate. Owners or drivers may also apply to have their licences varied, and all have a right of appeal to the magistrates’ court.

1505. Under clause 29, the Department may also suspend or vary an operator’s licence where it is satisfied that an operating centre no longer meets the necessary requirements. The Department must give the operator notice of such a decision, which would take effect 21 days thereafter; unless, in the interests of public safety, it should take effect immediately.

1506. The Chairperson: Do members wish to seek clarity on those clauses? Is the Committee agreed on the content of clauses 27, 28 and 29?

1507. Members indicated assent.

1508. Mr McMullan: Clause 30 sets out all the various activities and services where the Department feels that it may have to prescribe fees. The fee regulations will eventually come before the Committee.

1509. The Chairperson: Are members happy with clause 30?

1510. Members indicated assent.

1511. The Chairperson: We move on to clauses 31 and 32. No key issues were raised around these clauses. However, John will give us an overview.

1512. Mr McMullan: Clause 31 is a typical clause found in Bills, and it relates to the production of documents. In this case, the documents include licences and certificates of insurance. Any other documents must be produced to an enforcement officer or to the police for inspection, and failure to do so would be an offence and incur a £1,000 fine.

1513. Clause 32 deals with the return of licences. If the Department decides to suspend, revoke or curtail a licence, the licence plate or badge or other evidence of identification must be returned to the Department.

1514. The Chairperson: Do members want any further information? Are we agreed on clauses 31 and 32?

1515. Members indicated assent.

1516. Mr McMullan: Clause 33 deals with the register of licences. It places a duty on the Department to maintain a register containing the details of each licence issued under the Bill. The Department must make that register available for inspection to members of the public free of charge.

1517. The Chairperson: OK.

1518. Mr Boylan: The major issue was the cost of the changes. Will that cost ultimately go to customers? Will there be any incentives?

1519. Mrs Watters: There will be additional costs on operators and drivers, and some of them will be through licence fees and others through compliance costs. For example, if a driver does not have a taximeter and is buying one, it is expected that, ultimately, he will seek to pass any of those additional costs on to customers. If services and standards are being improved then, in a sense, the customer is getting more. However, we do not want operators to be in a position where they can put their fares up without limit, and that is where the regulated fares come in to play. The Department will set the maximum fares that the operator will be able to charge. We agreed that the Consumer Council will be involved in the setting of fares, and, therefore, consumers’ interests will be looked after. We are trying to get a balance. It will cost more to provide better services, and we will have to take account of people’s ability to pay.

1520. Mr Weir: I suppose this is the flip side of the coin. We have talked about the various penalties that could be put in place for non-compliance, particularly where people would be acting fraudulently in various ways, and new revenue will come in as a result of that. What happens to the fines that will arise? Do they simply go back into the courts?

1521. Mr McMullan: Yes, they go back to the courts.

1522. Mr Weir: Therefore, there is nothing from the Department of the Environment?

1523. Mrs Watters: No.

1524. Mr Weir: To take Mr Boylan’s point, in the case where there are costs, is it correct that additional fines could not be used to offset those costs?

1525. Mr McMullan: That is correct, the fines go back to the courts but the fees are what we use to run the system.

1526. The Chairman: Are Members in agreement on clause 33?

1527. Members indicate assent

1528. The Chairperson: We move to clauses 34 and 35 for which there were no key issues, or comments made. John, please give the Committee a brief overview.

1529. Mr McMullan: Clause 34 covers appeals to the magistrate’s court, and sets out that an appeal to the court must be made within 21 days of receiving notice of the decision, and that the Department must inform the subject of their appeal rights and of the time limit when it gives that notice.

1530. Clause 35 states that the decision of the Department will not take effect until the appeal has been heard, disposed of, or withdrawn. Therefore, the decision is in abeyance until the court hears the appeal. The clause is useful, as we have had certain drivers who cannot work during the time it takes for a case to go to court, which may be six months.

1531. The Chairperson: Are Members in agreement over clauses 34 and 35?

1532. Members indicate assent

1533. The Chairperson: We will move to the clauses that deal with enforcement in part 5 of the Bill, starting with clause 36.

1534. Mrs Watters: The first table is not in relation to clause 36. There were many general comments relating to enforcement that did not relate to any particular clause, and those have been grouped together. Therefore, the table is not clause-specific but deals with how effective the Department is at enforcement.

1535. The Chairperson: Should we go through those page by page?

1536. The Committee Clerk: That may be a more useful exercise to do after we look at the document as a whole.

1537. The Chairperson: As members wish; I am seeing the information for the first time.

1538. Mr Weir: It has been a long time since members have seen detailed legislation going through the Assembly. With our final position, in addition to having the power to make recommendations for amendments, may we make general comments?

1539. The Committee Clerk: Yes, you may make recommendations and general comments on enforcement.

1540. Mr Weir: I do not wish to be pre-emptive but I assume that the Committee is reasonably concerned about the lack of enforcement, or the lack of resources for enforcement.

1541. The Committee Clerk: Last week, certain general, rather than clause-specific, enforcement issues were discussed. The officials will address those when we come to the end of part 5. They have provided a document that addresses some of those issues.

1542. The Chairperson: As the document will address some of those issues, we may leave the discussion of part 5 of the Bill for now.

1543. Mrs Watters: It may be best to deal with the table later.

1544. The Chairperson: The Committee will now examine clause 36.

1545. Mr McMullan: Clause 36 covers enforcement notices and applies where a licensed operator has failed to comply with certain record-keeping duties covered by the Bill. The idea of the enforcement notice is that the person will be granted up to 21 days to put his books in order, rather than going directly to court. If the person still does not comply, the case will go to court. A person may also appeal to the magistrate’s court against an enforcement notice.

1546. The Chairperson: There were no problems with that clause during consultation, and if no one has further comments to make, we will move on.

1547. The Chairperson: Are members agreed on clause 36?

1548. Members indicated assent.

1549. The Chairperson: Clause 37 provides powers of entry to licensed premises. Did that power not exist before?

1550. Mr McMullan: The problem is that, previously, there was no operator licensing. Therefore, there was no provision for legal entry.

1551. The Chairperson: I see.

1552. Mr McMullan: Clause 37 provides that enforcement officers and the police might enter any licensed operating centre to ensure that the provisions of the Bill are complied with. Private dwellings can only be entered under the authority of a warrant.

1553. Enforcement officers and the police can also enter unlicensed premises — again, under a warrant — where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person is operating a taxi service. On exercising the power of entry, the officers may seize and remove any items or equipment that may be required as evidence in court.

1554. The Chairman: Does anyone have anything further to add?

1555. Mr T Clarke: Someone suggested that an operator’s licence should not be given to someone who is operating the business from his or her home. Is the place deemed as licensed premises if the operator’s licence is for a private address?

1556. Mr McMullan: Yes.

1557. Mr T Clarke: Therefore, that place will be considered to be licensed premises?

1558. Mr McMullan: Yes, and because it is a private dwelling, a warrant will be needed before anyone can enter.

1559. Mr T Clarke: That is why I ask. What way are such properties dealt with as private dwellings or licensed premises? That seems to be a grey area. The point that I am trying to make is that to the taxi driver on the main street, clause 37 means that the Department has power to enter without a warrant. In the case of someone who deems himself to be operating a taxi business from a house, who has a taxi operator’s licence, the Department should not need a warrant. If a person is setting up a business up as licensed premises, there should be no need for a warrant. Running a business from a private house makes it more difficult to enter the premises.

1560. Mr McMullan: Our legal advice is that if the location in question is private premises, a warrant should always be obtained before entering. I take your point.

1561. Mr T Clarke: There is also the difficulty of issuing an operator’s licence to a private address.

1562. Mrs Watters: The Department recognises that a number of operators, particularly in rural areas, run their businesses from their homes. If we were to rule that it is inappropriate to have an operating centre in domestic premises, they would either go out of business or they would have to set up some sort of office outside their homes. It would have implications for a lot of small operators.

1563. The Chairperson: Are members agreed on clause 37?

1564. Members indicated assent.

1565. The Chairperson: At this stage, perhaps we can park our proceedings, so that the Committee can welcome back Mr Billy Armstrong. It is great to see you back in good fighting form. You went through a traumatic event.

1566. Mr Armstrong: I do not know about fighting form, but I am back anyway.

1567. The Chairperson: That is good. I am glad to see you in good health again.

1568. Mr Armstrong: Thank you very much.

1569. The Chairperson: There was nothing on clause 38; we had no issues with it. Please give us a run through it in any case, John.

1570. Mr McMullan: Clause 38 provides that enforcement officers and the police may stop and examine any licensed taxi. If they find that the condition of the vehicle is a danger to passengers, the officers may require passengers to leave the vehicle and the driver to make suitable arrangements for the passengers to be taken to their destination.

1571. The Chairperson: Are members happy enough with that?

1572. Members indicated assent.

1573. Mr McMullan: Clauses 39, 40 and 41 are linked; they all have the same purpose. Under clause 39, officers may stop vehicles suspected of illegal taxiing, and may require drivers and passengers to provide information and documents as specified. Once an officer has stopped a vehicle in those circumstances, and he still feels that there are reasonable grounds to suspect illegal taxiing, he has the power to seize and remove the vehicle, as well as any other equipment or items found in it. As members will appreciate, seizure of a vehicle is a severe sanction. It must be tightly controlled, and that control is provided for in clause 41, which sets out conditions for removal of the vehicle, detention of it, release and disposal of it, notifying the owner, payment for release of the vehicle, and, where the vehicle is being disposed of, who gets the proceeds of the sale.

1574. Those three clauses are similar, in that they all combat illegal taxiing.

1575. The Chairperson: Are members content with clauses 39 to 41?

1576. Members indicated assent.

1577. Mr McMullan: Clause 42 deals with taxi touting. The Committee discussed that matter a couple of weeks ago. Clause 42(1) provides that:

“a person who solicits any person to be carried for hire or reward in a taxi is guilty of an offence.”

1578. That is a fairly broad statement, and when creating an offence of that nature, it must be decided whether anyone should be exempted. The Department considers that clause 42(1) should not apply to taxi marshals because the nature of their job involves almost touting for business. We are moving into a discussion about taxi marshals, and I am aware that we have provided a separate paper on that matter, which relates more to clause 20(2)(c) and the enforcement of order at taxi ranks.

1579. Clause 42 makes touting for taxi business an offence, although there is to be an exception.

1580. The Chairperson: The public consultation did not throw up any issues relating to clause 42 or clauses 43 to 47, which deal with offences, obstruction and associated legalities. Will you give us a brief overview of those, John?

1581. Mr McMullan: Those clauses are typical to many Bills. False statements and forgery are regarded as serious matters and will result in a £5,000 fine. Equally, clauses dealing with obstructing an officer or a police officer typically appear in Bills.

1582. Clause 45 is peculiar to the Taxis Bill and serves a useful role. There is a strong interrelationship between owners, operators and drivers. Sometimes, an offence may be committed, which may be the fault of the operator rather than the driver. Clause 45 states that someone else may be liable if an offence is:

“due to the act or default of another person”.

1583. Clause 46 links back to the Interpretation Act (Northern Ireland) 1954 and makes it clear that individuals and companies can also be liable for offences under the Bill. Clause 47 is simply a directional clause.

1584. The Chairperson: Are members content with clauses 40 to 47?

1585. Mr T Clarke: Is the Committee accepting clause 42 at this stage?

1586. The Chairperson: Are we not accepting it?

S.H. Egerton

Mr William Black

James Neeson

Dear Sir/Madam,with reference to new Taxi Bill that is proposed I would like to submit the following

Taxis should be licenced to pick up any where they are hailed at any time. Taxis which are purpose built are sufficient to fulfill the needs of the disabled community. The argument that purpose built taxis are more expensive to operate is null and void as the taxis which are saloon cars are as expensive if they are to the standard which should be required. It is imperative that every taxi is fitted with a meter, calibrated to Licencing standards and approved makes only.

To bring in legislation that does not compel meters makes a nonsense of any attempts to regularise the industry. Enforcement should be strictly enforced but done fairly. It is to the advantage of drivers that meters are fitted, this will ensure that passengers get a fair deal and drivers will get a good wage.

I do not need to remind the Assembly committee of the extortionate late night fares particularly in the city of Belfast, it is criminal. Enforcement should not only apply to those drivers who break the law but to the depot owners who subcontract them. Persistent abuse by drivers of a particular depot should reflecton the ability of a depot owner to hold a licence. Depots should be made to comply with planning and health and safety laws.

The taxi/bus community taxis should only be able to operate on the routes specified in their licence and not allowed to be hailed on other routes. There is an anomaly in that taxi/bus operators, particularly on Shankill/Shore roads work their routes and also run part-time as public hire taxis, this is forbidden by the rules of the West Belfast Taxi Association.

My reason for objecting to this particular problem is that the communities they serve are losing out. Outside of purpose built taxis,saloon cars should be no older than five years. This is an unwritten law in the larger taxi depots as can be seen by the standard of vehicles employed by them.

I have spent the last thirty years arguing for change in the industry, the Sterling Report was never really taken seriously by the Government and this was a mistake. Albeit the new leglislation will require a rise in fares to compensate, but the better service,cleaner cars,correct metered fares will give better value for money to the public.

Training should be a priority to make this industrya success,many years ago the Industry Training Board revolutionised the rest of the Transport Industry and this should be a priority in the future.

Whoever or whichever dept heads decided to abolish the Driving Test for PSV drivers had little or no comprehension of the Taxi Industry.

The legislation proposed is a major step forward but more needs done,

Regards James Neeson

S.H. Egerton

T.J. Monaghan

J Beckett

From: jimmy [mailto:jimmy.beckett@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 18 July 2007 11:41
To: +Comm. Environment Public Email
Subject: Taxi Bill

Dear Committee

As Vice Chairman of the TGWU I would ask you to consider the findings of the ten public meetings carried out by the DOE & DRD on their option on the TAXI BILL you will find 97% against this Bill.

As any other Minister or Committee decides on a Bill they visit the people involved I would ask you to appoint a member of your committee to accompany me on a weeknigh before midnight and you will see the taxis lined up as there is no work for them and a Saturday night between the hours of 12 30 and 3 am and you will see the conditations the Cab drivers have to work under.

There is also illegal taxi operators on every corner and outside every ber which the DOE turn a blind eye to.

I would ask you to see for yourself then decide on this Bill. If this Bill is passed it will put many drivers of the road as the town will be flooded# One major concern is how does the DOE intend to enforce these proposals as they do not enforce what they have at present.

Thank you for your time and please take on board my request to view yourselves the conditions that the cab drivers work under due to no enforcement in Belfast

J Beckett

Public Consultation on Proposal for a Draft Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006

Public Meeting – Belfast
Venue: Wellington Park Hotel
Date: Thursday 28 September 2006 – 12 Noon

Between 80 and 100 people were in attendance. They included operators and drivers from all licensed sectors from the Greater Belfast area, Lisburn, Antrim and Londonderry.

A very wide range of views were expressed during the meeting including:

Regulatory Impact of Proposals

• Concerns if measures enabled by the Taxis Order are implemented that costs and other regulatory requirements for legitimate operators and drivers will put them out of business.
• Absence of any commitment to provide government financial assistance for accessible vehicles and training was criticised.

Regulatory Framework

• Fears that allowing all taxis to ply for hire will prompt confrontation near to ranks.
• Industry needs to be advised about the extent of ‘exclusion zones’ around taxi ranks. Major concerns about where ‘non-accessible’ taxis are going to wait. Would waiting on in a ‘pay and display’ parking place be allowed?
• Clarification sought as to whether the new legislative provisions can apply in places such as airports which are subject to the Airports (NI) Order 1991.
• Suggested that number of licences should be capped given the considerable over-provision of taxis in Belfast and that plates should have a value as an investment for drivers.
• There should be distinction made between full-time and part-time drivers with a view to capping the number of taxi driver licences issued.
• There should be a Public Carriage Office in Belfast.
• Department needs to be more transparent about fee levels and increases.
• Alleged that DOE proposals are based on assumptions instead of carrying out surveys e.g. unmet demand.

Accessible Taxis

• Fleet percentage requirements will cripple operators if they have to purchase vehicles themselves.

Taxi Fares

• Department’s performance in relation to fare regulation has been abysmal.
• Provision for fuel hikes need to be taken into account when setting fares rates.
• Immediate action needs to be taken on setting new fare structure which should include minimum rates.
• In the new fare structure there should be allowance for ‘dead miles’.
• There should be procedures for fare reviews.

Taximeters

• Concerns that if a taximeter stops working, driver will be penalised. Provision needs to be made to avoid drivers having to stop working if taximeter breaks down at a busy time.

Training

• PATS training already acquired by some drivers should be recognised for the purpose of meeting any new disability training requirements.

Enforcement

• Enforcement of plating requirements is not obvious given evidence of illegal trade and also expired plates.
• Enforcement must be evident and there is need for support and commitment from PSNI particularly when drivers need assistance.
• Claimed that in the Antrim area, some drivers cancel insurance cover once vehicle passes test.
• The DOE as regulator should be regulated by an independent body.

Other Issues

• A Taxi Consultative Forum with statutory powers should be set up as soon as possible with proper representation from the taxi industry.
• Given the increase in the immigrant population in NI, DOE should ensure that there are adequate measures in place to check repute of foreign nationals and their ability to speak English.
• Procedures for licensing of taxis need streamlined to reduce delays in having vehicles tested and plated and to accommodate change of vehicles.
• Suggested that use of domestic premises as an ‘operating centre’ will mean independent operators will have to pay commercial rates.

Note prepared by:
Road Transport Regulation Review Branch

Public Meeting – Armagh
Venue: City Hotel
Date: Wednesday 20 September 2006 – 12 Noon

Approximately 20 people attended including taxi drivers (who were in the majority), taxi operators, an insurance broker and a vehicle adapter. They came from Armagh, Craigavon, Keady and Newry.

Views expressed included:

• Concerns from one operator that, if implemented, the impact of the proposals provided for in the draft Order would put some taxi firms out of business.
• Serious concerns about lack of enforcement; targeting of the legitimate trade while ignoring illegals (particularly by PSNI); unfamiliarity by PSNI officers with taxi legislation; and the lack of support to the industry shown by PSNI in protecting drivers from attacks and non-payment by passengers.
• Criticism of DOE in that there is no perception that it is fulfilling its promises to increase enforcement using money generated by recent taxi PSV fee increases. Contention that if even the current legal requirements cannot be enforced, then introduction of new legislative requirements will be unworkable. Lack of enforcement is seriously demoralising the taxi industry and, as a result, the Department can expect little support for the new proposals.
• Alleged that there are serious insurance deceptions which elude DVTA because of shortcomings in the current road traffic legislative requirements. Claimed that unscrupulous operator can obtain insurance from GB brokers by declaring that their vehicles are funeral cars and that certificates are being issued without addresses and are not vehicle specific. Since the draft Order is silent on insurance requirements other than production, the legislation should be more specific in this respect.
• Taxi sharing could result in passengers taking a taxi for a very short distance as a means of just getting a taxi at peak times.

Questions were raised and clarification given (where appropriate) on specific issues relating to operation of taxis:

• The proposed accessibility requirements for vehicles.
• The accessibility requirements in the case of fleets below 10 vehicles will probably mean that one vehicle at least will have to be accessible and that a single vehicle operator will only be allowed to operate an accessible vehicle. It was agreed that if this were not the case operators might seek to subdivide themselves into smaller units to avoid having to operate accessible vehicles.
• New provisions will only allow driver and vehicle to be affiliated to a single operator – i.e. a driver cannot be an operator in his own right and also affiliated to another operator. If a driver were to accept a booking by mobile phone, he would be required to inform his operator. If not he would be operating without an operator’s licence.
• Multiple operators using one operating centre.
• Drivers’ inability to deal with number of passengers who insist on using taxi which results in vehicle being overloaded and driver being prosecuted. Taxi drivers can experience intimidation – and indeed violence or damage to vehicles – if they refuse to comply with the wishes of unruly passengers. Passengers. One operator the Newry/S. Armagh area had recently had £3k damage caused to his taxi when he refused to carry more passengers than permitted by his licence. It was suggested that legislation should either exempt drivers or provide them with a defence to prosecutions for overloading. There were also concerns that PSNI regard violent or abusive passenger behaviour as what taxi drivers should expect.
• Smoking and eating in taxis.

Note prepared by:
Road Transport Regulation Review Branch

Public Meeting – Ballymena
Venue: Adair Arms Hotel
Date: Thursday 21 September 2006 – 12 Noon

Approximately 50 people attended – mainly taxi operators, some number of drivers and a vehicle adapter. They came from a wide area covering Ballymena, Ballymoney, Coleraine, Antrim, Portrush, Portglenone, Toomebridge, Larne and Glens of Antrim.

Views expressed included:

• Operator from Glens of Antrim regarded the proposals as ‘Belfast-orientated’ and not appropriate for application in rural areas.
• Lack of enforcement stressed as a major shortcoming. The industry felt let down given that there appeared to be no ‘enforcement dividend’ as promised following the increase in taxi licence fees when taxi plating was introduced in 2004. ‘One enforcement operation in two years’ was not enough. Illegal taxiing was seriously undermining the legitimate trade and there was criticism of PSNI and their alleged lack of understanding regarding taxi regulation requirements and tendency to target the licensed trade whilst ignoring the illegals. Not convinced that stronger powers and penalties in the Order would combat the illegals. Calls for passengers in illegal taxis to be culpable as well as the driver/operator. Government should be resourcing the combating of illegals – not the industry from increased licence fees.
• Claims that there were inconsistencies in the way DVTA tested taxis – one year things were accepted, the next turned down – and from test centre to test centre (e.g. location of fire extinguisher). Also, lack of information forthcoming about changes to PSV regulations resulting in failed PSV tests and additional fees for re-tests.
• Calls for more rank spaces/ new ranks/ranks in smaller towns (some of which currently have no provision at all for taxis), including temporary ranks for use at peak times.
• Concern from a Belfast operator that legislation would allow taxis operating bus-type services also to do ‘normal’ taxi work and, in doing so, potentially could exploit permitted use of bus lanes.
• Concerns that fare proposals do not include provision for setting of minimum fares by Department. Flexibility in allowing operators to set their own fares within a NI maximum is not welcomed. Fares should be standard. Also concerns that higher fares cannot be charged for carriage of disabled people in accessible vehicles which cost more to buy and operate.
• Regulatory impact of proposals, particularly those regarding accessibility, could have serious consequences for both independent operators and fleet operators. Operators anticipating the new requirements for provision of accessible vehicles, are not convinced there is demand or justification for the accessibility proposals to the extent envisaged by the Department. One Ballymoney operator allows his vehicles to stand on ranks while waiting for pre-booked hirings. The proposed requirements would not justify all his vehicles becoming accessible and therefore will create problems for drivers with non-accessible vehicles of (a) where they will wait and (b) their inability to accept immediate hirings at ranks.
• Concerns that the additional costs for accessible vehicles and training will have to be met by industry without any financial assistance from government.

Note prepared by:
Road Transport Regulation Review Branch

Public Meeting – Cookstown
Venue: Burnavon Arts And Cultural Centre
Date: Tuesday 19 September 2006 – 10.30am

Approx 30 people comprising mainly taxi drivers. Audience also a number of taxi operators. One of the operators was known to be a wedding car proprietor.

Views expressed included:

• Serious concerns that if proposed reform programme enabled by the draft Order are implemented it will lead to more rather than less illegal taxiing. The measures would not stop illegal taxis from operating and higher costs would force many current legitimate taxis to go illegal.
• No confidence that either DVTA or PSNI will significantly increase enforcement. Serious criticisms of PSNI were expressed especially in relation to the blatant operation of illegal taxis and minibuses. PSNI ‘ignore illegal taxiing’ whilst ‘hounding the legal trade’. Despite the identification by the trade of illegals and PSNI knowledge of those who operate illegal taxis, police appear reluctant to take appropriate action. Also there is a perception that where offences take place on private property (e.g. car parks) neither PSNI nor DVTA can take effective action because of lack of powers and evidence to prosecute. In relation to DVTA there was very strong criticism that despite recent steep PSV fee increases and assurances that the extra income would be used to mount increased enforcement, illegals are still operating freely. The perception is that DVTA will still not have the resources to provide adequate enforcement cover particularly in rural areas.
• Claims that two unlicensed minibuses regularly pick-up at the weekend at a local GAA club and operate on a regular basis at entertainment venues in Cookstown and in Dungannon ‘under the noses’ of PSNI.
• Concerns that differentiating between licensing of owners and drivers could create loopholes. Who is prosecuted for e.g. roadworthiness offences, in the case of a taxi not being owned by driver ?
• Doubts that DOE or PSNI would have powers or the will to prosecute breaches of the new legislation on private property.
• A Belfast Public Hire driver queried how the new legislation could be applied to non-accessible taxis which ranked up just outside a taxi rank ‘exclusion zone’.
• Claims that limiting the taxi drivers licence to three years would mean more profit from fee income for the Department and concerns that drivers over 45 years of age would have undergo medical checks every three years instead of five were refuted.
• One taxi operator suggested that ‘grandfather rights’ – similar to those which applied in the past to freight and bus operators -- should apply to existing operators when taxi operator licensing is introduced.
• It was suggested that there should be provision for a five year review or evaluation of the new measures.
• Concerns expressed that the proposal to establish a taxi consultative forum appeared to have been shelved.
• A number of concerns were expressed about the taximeter and taxi fare proposals. These included a claim that taximeters by recording all mileage travelled by the vehicle including personal mileage, could create problems in relation to income tax returns. There were also concerns that having fares calculated on both time and distance would mean that elderly people could have to pay more if the vehicle is delayed in traffic.
• One operator complained strongly that the local taxi trade is unfairly disadvantaged by DOE-DRD supported rural transport and car sharing schemes. Also that the 10B permit scheme is not always properly operated and is, on occasion, being exploited.
• Clarification was sought regarding the legal requirements for forward facing seats in vehicles not exceeding eight passenger seats.

Note prepared by:
Road Transport Regulation Review Branch

Public Meeting – Lisburn
Venue: Island Centre
Date: Thursday 26 October 2006 – 12 Noon

The public meeting was attended by a local taxi operator (20 vehicles), a driver and a vehicle converter – 3 people in total.

Proposals for introduction of taxi operator licensing and driver training were welcomed as were the proposals in the main which were regarded as largely overdue. The proposals should be implemented sooner than later.

Taximeters and Fares

Concern that currently installed taximeters may not be compatible with receipt printers. Given that there is undercutting of fares by some operators and illegals, it was suggested that there should be an initial minimum fare.

Enforcement

It was claimed that illegals coming into Lisburn from outside the City at weekends are a problem. Concern at the lack of enforcement was expressed particularly in light of the assurances given that part of the increased taxi licence fee would fund additional enforcement. This has been perceived not to have materialised.

There were claims that some taxis in the City are operating with false plates.

Bus Lanes

It was suggested that taxis carrying urgent blood supplies and medical staff on urgent call should be allowed to use bus lanes.

Note prepared by:
Road Transport Regulation Review Branch

S.Beckett

From: Sean [sean.mb@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 06 August 2007 23:20
To: +Comm. Environment Public Email
Subject: Taxi Driver

To whom it may concern,

As to the new taxi proposals, I agree with most of the proposals but what i dont agree with is making Belfast a one teir taxi system as it has always been a two teir taxi system and this would be unfair to the disabled people as they would be left standing on the edge of the road until a taxi was prepared to lift them or if they ring a private sector and have to pay the surcharge of £8 that the private sector charges and the public sector does not. Furthermore the public sector does not have a surcharge for disabled people and I also see from your minutes that Mrs Watters failed to mention that the private sector has most of the public sectors work sewn up in most of Belfast. I also do not think that it is necessary for taxi drivers to sit a test every time their licence is due renewed. I do think this should be implemented to all new taxi drivers just to take a test and I do not think it is necessary for all taxis to be allowed to pick up in the city centre as the D.O.E cannot implement their duty’s that they have at present and furthermore as the rush only last for 6 hours every weekend this would bring a large number of so called pirate drivers back on the streets of Belfast I think the D.O.E need to enforce their regulations now that they have in place as we do not see enough of them on the street to reinforce the regulations that are in place at present. I think it would be necessary if the control of the taxis in Northern Ireland was give back to the council to take change off and I think the public sector should have a dress code.

Your Thankfully

S.Beckett

Taxi Driver

Mr Nick Berryman Melville Funerals & Co Head Office 195 York Road Belfast BT15 3HB Tel: 028 9077 9252 Email: melvillefunerals@btconnect.com

Mr William Millar Ivan Murdock & Sons 31 Bushmills Road Coleraine BT52 2BP Tel: 028 7034 3350 Email: william@ivanmurdockandsons.co.uk

 

Accessible Taxi Association N.I.

Consumer Council

Our Ref No. 3/4/4.14 7 September 2007

Patricia Casey
Committee Clerk
Room 245, Parliament Buildings
Stormont, Belfast BT4 3XX

Re: Taxi Bill

Dear Ms Casey

I am writing to express the Consumer Council’s support for the Taxi Bill currently being considered by the Environment Committee of the Northern Ireland Assembly. We have worked closely with the Department of the Environment throughout the review of taxi regulation and look forward to continuing to work with the department and the committee as the details of the proposals are further developed and implemented.

Taxis play a significant role in transporting consumers in Northern Ireland, with four per cent of consumers listing it as their main way of getting around, [1] which is highly significant when you consider that only 5% of consumers are dependent on buses. Therefore, it is important that steps are taken to raise the standards in the local taxi industry to protect consumers and increase accessibility. The quality of this mode of transport in particular impacts on consumers on low-incomes, older consumers, and those without access to a car who more are dependent on taxis to transport them to key locations such as doctor surgeries and shopping centres.

The Consumer Council supports the overarching aims of the taxi review and the principles and supporting work that will attempt to:

• Increase standards and remove illegal operators
• Encourage more ‘legal’ entrants to the taxi industry
• Improve consumer protection
• Ensure competitive and reasonable fares for all

The Consumer Council would welcome the opportunity to give our view on any aspect of the Taxis Bill over the coming months if the committee believed this would be useful. If you require any further information on the views of the Consumer Council on this matter please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

Eddie Lynch, Head o f Consumer Affairs

Consumer Council

[1] General Consumer Council 'Talking About Taxis' 2004

Consumer Council

From: Lynch, Eddie [mailto:elynch@consumercouncil.org.uk]
Sent: 20 September 2007 15:46
To: Casey, Patricia
Cc: adele.watters@doeni.gov.uk
Subject: Taxi Bill

Hi Patricia

Thanks again for letting us have the opportunity to present to the committee this morning. I have outlined below the changes that we believe need to be made in relation to the bill for your information.

Operator Licensing (Part 1) Chapter 1 - Requirement for operator’s licence (point 2)

• Need to ensure the bill allows for consideration to the needs of sole operators, particularly in rural areas
• There needs to be a robust system for handling passenger complaints. As well as the requirement on operators to handle complaints and keep a record of them there needs to be an adequately resourced body established under legislation to take up complaints for passengers if they are unhappy with the response from the company. This would ensure the consumer is protected and incentivise the company to handle the complaint properly. The Consumer Council currently has this role in relation to all other forms of passenger transport and we would be happy to discuss this further with yourself, the committee and the department if this was useful.

CC role in the legislation

• The bill needs to state that the Dept will consult with the Consumer Council, the statutory passenger representative, on the details of key issues affecting passengers and in particular:
• fares setting/maximum fares (Part 2 - clause 16)
• passenger information (Part 2 - clause 17)
• accessibility standards
• Passenger Complaints
• This will ensure that the bill contains a passenger focused approach throughout.

I hope this is helpful and thanks for your help in preparing for this. If you need anything further from us in relation to this bill please do not hesitate to contact me.

Kind regards

Eddie

Eddie Lynch
Head of Consumer Affairs
The Consumer Council
Elizabeth House
116 Holywood Road
Belfast BT4 1NY

Tel: 028 9067 2488
Fax: 028 9065 7701
e-mail: elynch@consumercouncil.org.uk
Web: www.consumercouncil.org.uk - www.consumerline.org

Adele Watters	Department of the Environment
Bill Laverty	Department of the Environment
John McMullan	Department of the Environment
Stephen Spratt	Department of the Environment
John Martin	Department of the Environment
Samuel Egerton	Public Hire Taxi Driver
Stephen Long	West Belfast Taxi Association
Stephen O’Reilly
Robert McAllister	Public Hire Taxi Driver
Andrew McCartney	North West Taxi Proprietors Ltd
Eamonn O’Donnell
Barbara Fleming	Inclusive Mobility Transport Advisory Committee (IMTAC)
Michael Lorimer
Sean Smyth	UNITE the Union
Richard Daniels	London Taxis International (LTI)
Andrew Overton
Jimmy Beckett	Transport and General Workers Union
James Matier
Anthony McCloskey	George Best Belfast City Airport Taxi Rank
Raymond Dempster	Accessible Taxi Association NI
Eamon Grogan
Terence Maguire	Public Hire Taxi Driver
William Black	Public Hire Taxi Driver
James McVeigh	International Airport Taxi Co Ltd
Brian Press
Kevin Doherty	Disability Action

The 2006 key proposals were generally welcomed by the great majority of respondents, for example:

Newry and Mourne District Council (2006) “…would be supportive of this new regulatory system, which will help to ensure a more efficient, accessible and high quality service from the taxi sector to the general public”, while the PSNI (2006) state that “Comments have been positive concerning the improvements this legislation will make to the accountability of operators and the reduction in the number of illegal taxis. Other enhancements to enforcement powers are also welcome”. The Homefirst Community Trust (2006) stated that the proposals could make “…a very significant contribution to raising levels of professionalism in this service area.”

However, a number of respondents did highlight minor areas of unease and several raised major concerns, particularly the Belfast Public Hire Taxi Association (2006) which stated that:

• Standards for accessible taxis should not be diluted
• Operators of Belfast Public Hire taxis should not require an operator’s licence
• Only Belfast Public Hire Taxis should be able to pick up passengers from the street within five miles of the city centre
• Taxi drivers should not be required to wear seatbelts
• Drivers should receive financial support for any training they need to undertake
• A uniform Northern Ireland wide taxi fare system should be introduced

The concern regarding the maintenance of accessibility standards was also shared by the West Belfast Taxi Association (2006), which had particular concerns about the safety of vehicles which were not purposefully designed to be accessible but adapted for that use. As the major provider of shared taxi services (taxi buses) the West Belfast Taxi Association was content with the proposals for the revised regulation of shared taxi services.

The Equalities Commission (2006) and Disability Action (2006), while acknowledging that the DoE will attempt to tackle the issue through Regulation, both asked that fares be regulated in such a way as to ensure that disabled people cannot be charged more for using a taxi service than anyone else.

Many other concerns raised relate to a lack of detail on the face of the Bill and statements made in the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum or in policy statements by the DoE, e.g. provision of accessible taxis by owner/operators, maintenance of records, regulation of fares, taxi driver testing or the definition of a ‘fit and proper person’. The Bill allows for these issues to be set out in secondary legislation, which the Assembly will have an opportunity to scrutinise at a later date if the Bill is passed.

Sources

Belfast Public Hire Taxi Association. (2006) Response from the Belfast Public Hire Taxi Association. Belfast: Belfast Public Hire Taxi Association. Available at: http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=256

Department of the Environment. (2005) Reform of Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles. Belfast: Department of the Environment. Available at: http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=199

Department of the Environment. (2006) Proposals for a Draft Order in Council: The Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006. Belfast: Department of the Environment. Available at:
http://www.roadsafetyni.gov.uk/index/consultations/consultations-maindetails.htm?id=con79&doctitle=Formal%20Responses

Disability Action. (2006) The DOE’s Consultation on a Draft Order in Council: The Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006: Disability Action’s Response. Belfast: Disability Action. Available at: http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=265

Equalities Commission for Northern Ireland. (2006) Proposal for a Draft Order in Council: The Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006. Belfast: Equalities Commission for Northern Ireland. Available at: http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=266

Homefirst Community Trust. (2006) Consultation on a Proposal for a Draft Order in Council: The Taxis (Northern Ireland) Order 2006. Ballymena: Homefirst Community Trust. Available at: http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=264

Newry and Mourne District Council. (2006) Consultation on the Proposal for a Draft Order in Council: The Taxi (Northern Ireland) Order 2006. Newry: Newry and Mourne District Council. Available at: http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=250

Northern Ireland Assembly. (2007) Taxis Bill [As Introduced]. Belfast: Northern Ireland Assembly. Available at: http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/legislation/primary/2007/niabill4_07.htm

Northern Ireland Assembly. (2007) Taxis Bill: Explanatory and Financial Memorandum. Belfast: Northern Ireland Assembly. Available at:
http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/legislation/primary/2007/niabill4_07efm.htm

Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. (2004) Taxi Operator Survey 2004. Belfast: Department of the Environment. Available at: http://application.doeni.gov.uk/doe_foi/document.asp?doc=8427

PSNI. (2006) Consultation on the Proposal for a Draft Order in Council: The Taxi (Northern Ireland) Order 2006. Belfast: PSNI. Available at:
http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=261

The Road Transport Regulation Review Branch of the Department of the Environment. (2007) How Taxis Operate Under Existing Legislation. Belfast: Department of the Environment.

West Belfast Taxi Association. (2006) Comments in relation to Primary Legislation. Belfast: West Belfast Taxi Association. Available at:
http://roadsafety.drdni.gov.uk/Applications/Roadsafety_consultation/file.asp?id=257

DOE Reponse on Taxi Incomes and Costs

Central Management Branch
10-18 Clarence Court
BELFAST
BT2 8GB

Department of the Environment Proposed Amendments to Taxis Bill

Amendments	Effect
1. Clause 6, page 5, line 20, leave out paragraph (c) and insert - ‘(c) include such other provision as the Department thinks fit.’	Re-drafted to make it clear that the Department may make other provisions in respect of taxi sharing schemes as it thinks fit.
2. Clause 6, page 5, line 37, leave out subsection (3).	The Interpretation Act enables Departments to amend subordinate legislation, therefore, this subsection is not needed
3. Clause 10, page 6, line 27, at beginning insert ‘Subject to subsection (4A),’ Clause 10, page 6, line 38, leave out ‘subject to subsection (3),’ Clause 10, page 7, line 6, leave out subsection (3). Clause 10, page 7, line 13, after ‘and (2),’ insert ‘subject to subsection (4A)’ Clause 10, page 7, line 22, at end insert - ‘(4A) Subsections (1), (2) and (4) shall not apply, for or until such time or for such a period as may be prescribed, in relation to a person who is applying to be authorised under an operator’s licence to operate a taxi service for or in respect of the carriage of passengers at separate fares and who - (a) immediately before the coming into operation of this section, was the holder of a road service licence to provide a service on same routes granted under the Transport Act (Northern Ireland) 1967; or (b) meets any other requirements that may be prescribed.’	Re-drafted to make it clear that if a person holds a Road Service Licence authorising the provision of bus type services, immediately before the new legislation comes into effect, then they will be exempt from having to satisfy similar provisions now in the Bill. It also allows the Department to make further exemptions in regulations.
4. Clause 27, page 19, line 9, leave out subsection (3) and insert - ‘(3) A licence suspended under this Act shall remain suspended until such time as the Department by notice directs that the licence is again in force.’	This removes reference to “curtailment” of a licence in Clause 27(3) as it is already covered in Clause 26(4).
5. Clause 37, page 24, line 26, after ‘those premises’ insert ‘and any equipment’. Clause 37, page 24, line 36, after ‘those premises’ insert ‘and any equipment’	To make it clear that an authorised officer or constable on entering premises may inspect “any equipment” which brings it into line with the powers of seizure under Clause 37(8).
6. Clause 42, page 28, line 10, leave out ‘20(2)(c)’ and insert ‘20’.	To make it clear that a person may be exempt from a ‘taxi touting’ offence if it is permitted in any regulations made under Clause 20 (rather than under one specific regulatory power as presently drafted).
7. Clause 53, page 31, line 26, leave out subsection (4) and insert - ‘(4) Subsection (5) applies to bye-laws made or having effect as if made under Article 65 of the 1981 Order which - (a) relate to taxis; and (b) are in force immediately before the coming into operation of section 52(1). (5) Notwithstanding anything in section 52(1)- (a) provisions of those bye-laws which could have been included in an order under Article 27A of the Road Traffic Regulation (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 shall have effect as if contained in such an order; and (b) any other provisions of those bye-laws shall have effect as if contained in regulations made under section 20.’	This is a savings provision for existing Taxi Bye-Laws and is re-drafted to show specifically the legislation under which the existing Bye-Laws will continue to have effect.
8. Clause 55, page 32, line 22, at end insert - ‘ “notice” means notice in writing;’	This is a short amendment to define what is meant by “notice” when referred to in the Bill
9. Leave out clause 57 and insert - ‘Commencement 57. This Act (except section 53 to 55, this section and section 58) shall come into operation on such day or days as the Department may by order appoint.’	This is to ensure that there is power for the Department to make regulations and orders (including Commencement Orders) and for the Interpretation clause (Clause 55) to come into effect immediately upon the Bill receiving Royal Assent. The remaining provisions will come into effect on such day or days as the Department may appoint.
10. . Schedule 2, page 38, line 23, after ‘taxi’ insert ‘(within the meaning of the Taxis Act (Northern Ireland) 2007)’	To make it clear that “taxi” means taxi under the new Taxis Act when it is referred to in Article 66A(1) of the Road Traffic (NI) Order 1981.
11. Schedule 3, page 40, line 8, at end insert - ‘The Road Traffic (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Order 1991 (NI 3) – Article 6 In Schedule 3, Part II”	This repeals a provision in the Road Traffic (Amendment) (NI) Order 1991 which relates to taxi drivers’ licences and is no longer needed as it is superseded by provisions in the Bill.
12. Clause 1, page 1, line 14, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 15. Clause 3, page 3, line 30, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 31. Clause 3, page 4, line 5, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 6. Clause 3, page 4, line 8, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 9. Clause 4, page 4, line 20, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 21. Clause 5, page 5, line 6, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 7. Clause 12, page 8, line 20, leave out subsection (5). Clause 14, page 9, line 34, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 35. Clause 15, page 10, line 10, leave out subsection (6). Clause 16, page 10, line 28, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 29. Clause 17, page 11, line 2, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 3. Clause 18, page 11, line 35, leave out subsection (9) Clause 19, page 12, line 2, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 3. Clause 20, page 13, line 5, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 6. Clause 22, page 15, line 34, leave out subsections (8) and (9). Clause 24, page 17, line 26, leave out from ‘and’ to end of line 28. Clause 31, page 21, line 31, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 32. Clause 32, page 22, line 23, leave out subsection (7). Clause 36, page 24, line 2, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 3. Clause 38, page 26, line 3, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 4. Clause 42, page 28, line 11, leave out subsection (4). Clause 43, page 28, line 36, leave out subsection (4). Clause 44, page 29, line 17, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 18. Clause 44, page 29, line 26, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 27. Clause 44, page 29, line 30, leave out from ‘and liable’ to end of line 31.	This is a run of amendments to remove reference to the mode of trial and penalty for an offence from the body of the Bill as it is already covered in Schedule 1 and it makes the Bill consistent with the other Road Traffic Orders which adopt this drafting style.
13. Schedule 2, page 38,line 39, at end insert - ‘4A. In section 37A (carrying of assistance dogs in private hire vehicles) - (a) for ‘private hire vehicle’, each place it occurs, substitute ‘taxi’; (b) in subsection (9) - (i) for the definition of “driver” substitute - ‘ “driver” means a person who holds a taxi driver’s licence granted under - (a) Article 79A of the Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981; or (b) section 23 of the Taxis Act (Northern Ireland) 2007;’; (ii) after the definition of “assistance dog” insert - ‘ “ booking” means a taxi booking within the meaning given by section 55(1) of the Taxis Act (Northern Ireland) 2007;’; (iii) for the definition of “operator” substitute - ‘ “ operator” means a person who holds an operator’s licence granted under section 2 of the Taxis Act (Northern Ireland) 2007;’ Schedule 3, page 40, line 9, leave out ‘paragraph 16(2)’ and insert ‘paragraphs 16(2) and 21A(2)’	The opportunity is taken to amend section 37A of the Disability Act 1995 relating to the carriage of guide dogs in taxis to insert legislative references in line with the terminology now used in the Bill.

Petition from Robert McAllister

LTI Submission
(submitted at oral evidence session)

Jimmy Beckett Speaking Notes

Equality Commission Paper

• The “default position” when hiring a taxi is that it is for your exclusive use. That is fundamental to how taxi travel works.
• There are times and/or locations when we know the demand for taxis is often much greater than the supply – for example late-nights in town and city centres. It makes sense to make provision for taxi sharing in these situations and to regulate the fares that can be charged to ensure that both the driver and the passengers benefit from the sharing arrangement.
• The Department would resist any suggestion that provision be made for taxi-sharing “at the taxi door”. Consent is a key element of the advance booking sharing arrangement (Clause 7). If passengers don’t want to share they can either insist on having a taxi for themselves or try another operator. If shared fares arrangements extended to immediate hirings many drivers would increasingly only want to do that type of work and would be reluctant to go anywhere without a full load of passengers. The result would be that sharing, rather than exclusive use, would become the default.
• Controlled taxi-sharing is useful because it can help to disperse crowds quickly in town and city centres at peak times. But it should not be permitted to the extent that, in practice, it becomes the only option for consumers.

Clause 6 – Taxi Marshals

As well as the taxi sharing issue in Clause 6 the Committee should note that as presently drafted there is a power to regulate for taxi marshals in Clause 6(2)(e) in the same terms as Clause 20(2)(c) which the Committee expressed concerns about. The issue is dealt with under Clause 20(2)(c) below and if the Committee accept the proposed amendment therein for consistency the same amendment should be to Clause 6. [Point 5 of the attached Amendments]

Clause 11 – Appeals

The new two tier appeal system is now provided legislatively throughout the Bill as set out at points 6 to 15 of the attached draft amendments. Quite often when making amendments of this nature to a Bill they can have a ‘knock-on’ effect on other clauses. In this case some minor tidying-up at Clause 11 is required. [Point 7 of the attached Amendments]. Counsel has also removed the term notice “in writing” as it is unnecessary to state this when it is defined in Clause 55 (point 8 of Department’s Amendments)

Clauses 16 and 17 – Maximum Fares

The Committee expressed some concerns about the wording of Clause 16 in relation to the setting of maximum fares. Those concerns were raised with Legislative Counsel to ascertain if any further drafting would improve the provision and clarify the issue. It is Counsel’s opinion that as drafted Clause 16 will allow the Department to set a range of maximum fares including the initial rate, rates based on time and distance, evening work and public holidays and no further drafting is necessary. Accordingly, no amendment to Clauses 16 and 17 is proposed.

Clause 20(2)(c) - Taxi Marshals

The Committee’s view that the role of taxi marshals is more one of management than enforcement has also been raised with Legislative Counsel. It was suggested to Counsel that a solution may be to retain the present enforcement powers in Clause 20(2)(c) for enforcement officers and PSNI only and to provide a separate provision which better captures the role of taxi marshals and allows their duties to be set out in Regulations. This has now been provided as Clause 20(2)(ca) and a similar amendment has been made as Clause 6(2)(ea) to cover taxi marshals within a taxi sharing schemes. These clauses allow the Department to make regulations to provide for persons to manage the use of taxi ranks, namely, taxi marshals and to regulate how they perform those management duties. It is hoped that this may remove some of the present confusion and be more acceptable to the Committee. [Point 5 of the attached Amendments]

Clause 21 – Traffic Attendants

Under Clause 21 DRD will be empowered to make Taxi Regulation Orders. These will be used to legislate for taxi ranks and for preventing taxis using any other roads for standing The Committee agreed that it would be useful for Traffic Attendants to enforce any parking infringements by taxis at ranks or elsewhere. A small consequential amendment to a piece of DRD legislation - The Traffic Management (NI) Order 2005 – is required to achieve this and this is now provided as an insertion at paragraph 12 of Schedule 2. [Point 1 of the attached Amendments]

Clause 23 – Taxi Driver’s Licences

Mr Gallagher asked why criminal record checks on licence applicants do not extend to the Republic of Ireland. Officials agreed to advise the Committee what currently happens as regards checking ROI convictions and whether any changes are proposed.

23(2)(ii) is the part of Clause 23 relevant to the checking of criminal records. What it says, in effect, is that to get a taxi driver’s licence the applicant has to be able to demonstrate that he is a “fit and proper person” to hold such a licence. The Department will (as now) have good repute guidelines which it will use to determine what is meant by “fit and proper”.

The Driver Vehicle Agency has confirmed that the current process of checking criminal records does not systematically involve checking records in the Republic of Ireland. When it comes to implement the Taxis Bill the Department will need to review the current driver licensing regulations. It will also need to review all of its related administrative processes including the repute guidelines and checking procedures. As part of that exercise it would be appropriate for the Department to consider whether any changes should be made to the arrangements for checking the repute of drivers who have lived and/or worked for a time outside of NI including in the Republic of Ireland.

Clause 30 – Fees

Legislative Counsel has also advised that we should take powers to charge fees in respect of appeals to the Department. We presently have no plans to charge fees but if taxi appeals became an administrative burden we may, in future, need to resource it through fees to maintain an efficient service and unless we had this power in the Bill we would be unable to do so. Any such fees in the future would, of course, be a matter for the Committee to consider by way of regulations and the option would still be cheaper than going directly to Court. [Point 13 of the attached Amendments]

Clause 35A – Regulations in respect of appeals

This is another ‘knock-on’ effect of the 2-tier appeal system. It simply relocates what was previously Clause 11(6) to a new Clause 35A as appeals to the Department are no longer confined to Clause 11 and, therefore, a general clause is more appropriate. It provides power for the Department to make regulations in respect of appeals. [Point 14 of the attached Amendments]

Clause 42 – Taxi Touts

Counsel has re-considered the exemption of taxi marshals from the offence of “taxi touting” under Clause 42 and is still of the opinion that an exemption is legally required and is best provided as a general exemption as was provided at point 6 of the Department’s listed amendments. However, if the Committee prefers a more specific amendment relating only to the new Clause 20(2)(ca) and Clause 20(2)(l) on advertising then this can be provided.

Amendments

Taxi regulation orders

1. Schedule 2, page 39, line 29, after ‘penalty charges),’ insert - ‘-
   (a) after the paragraph beginning “An offence under Article 19(1) or (3)” insert -
   “An offence under Article 27A(2).”; and
   (b)’

General Consumer Council

2. Clause 3, page 4, line 3, at end insert ‘(and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, regulations may include provision for the involvement of the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland in relation to any such complaints)’
3. Clause 16, page 10, line 26, at end insert -
   ‘(2A) Before the Department makes any regulations under this section, it shall take into consideration any recommendations made by the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland.’
4. After clause 48 insert -

‘Publication of information

48A.-(1) The Department may publish, in such form and manner as it thinks appropriate, information in connection with the provisions of this Act.
(2) Before the Department publishes any such information under subsection (1), it shall take into consideration any recommendations made by the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland.’

Taxi marshals

5. Clause 6, page 5, line 33, at end insert -
   ‘(ea) providing for persons to manage, and regulating the management of, the use of such authorised places;’
   Clause 20, page 12, line 19, at end insert -
   ‘(ca) providing for persons to manage, and regulating the management of, the use of places referred to in paragraph (a);’

Appeals

6. Clause 2, page 2, line 30, leave out ‘a court of summary jurisdiction’ and insert ‘the Department’
   Clause 2, page 2, line 38, at end insert -
   ‘(9) The time within which a person may bring such an appeal is 21 days from the date on which the notice of the decision appealed against is served on the person.
   (10) On an appeal under subsection (8), the Department may decide to -
   (a) confirm, reverse or vary the decision; or
   (b) approve, revoke or vary the condition,
   (as the case may be) as it thinks fit.
   (11) The Department shall, on making a decision under subsection (10), give notice of the decision to the appellant including particulars of the grounds of the decision.
   (12) A person who is aggrieved by a decision of the Department under subsection (10) may appeal to a court of summary jurisdiction against any such decision.’
7. Clause 11, page 7, line 24, after ‘2(8)’ insert ‘or (12)’
   Clause 11, page 7, line 27, leave out ‘in writing’
   Clause 11, page 7, line 42, leave out ‘in writing’
   Clause 11, page 8, line 1, after ‘2(8)’ insert ‘or (12)’
   Clause 11, page 8, line 4. leave out subsection (6)
8. Clause 13, page 9, line 7, leave out ‘a court of summary jurisdiction’ and insert ‘the Department’
   Clause 13, page 9, line 13, at end insert -
   ‘(9) The time within which a person may bring such an appeal is 21 days from the date on which the notice of the decision appealed against is served on the person.
   (10) On an appeal under subsection (8), the Department may decide to -
   (a) confirm, reverse or vary the decision; or
   (b) approve, revoke or vary the condition.
   (as the case may be) as it thinks fit.
   (11) The Department shall, on making a decision under subsection (10), give notice of the decision to the appellant including particulars of the grounds of the decision.
   (12) A person who is aggrieved by a decision of the Department under subsection (10) may appeal to a court of summary jurisdiction against any such decision.’
9. Clause 23, page 16, line 32, leave out ‘a court of summary jurisdiction’ and insert ‘ the Department’