Taxi Driver Online

Nothing particularly new here, but Unite keeping the pot boiling, and have managed to get a piece in The Times

And some kind of visit to parliament planned for this week, but not clear whether it's a deputation or demo...


Failure to close taxi-licence loophole ‘puts children at risk’

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/transport/a ... -25775b5c3

The union Unite criticises the government for not tightening the law to stop drivers operating in areas where they have not obtained a licence

Vulnerable women and children are being left at risk of sexual exploitation because the government has not closed a legal loophole relating to taxis, a major union has warned.

Unite, the Labour-backing union, said it was “completely unacceptable” that taxi licensing laws had not been tightened to stop drivers operating in areas where they have not obtained a licence, a loophole previously exploited by grooming gangs to perpetuate abuse.

In a report published in June last year, Baroness Casey of Blackstock said issues around taxi licensing had been a “facilitator” of child sexual exploitation.

She added it was an area that could be exploited by individuals and groups such as by using taxis to traffic victims or using a taxi business as cover for abuse.

One of her 12 recommendations to the government included adopting more rigorous standards for local authority taxi licensing — particularly the “out of area” loophole, which allows drivers to operate in boroughs where they have not obtained a licence.

Casey said the loophole meant that “local areas are unable to oversee and account for the taxis on their streets” and there were no consistent safety standards. Concerns over taxi operations were raised in reports looking at grooming gangs in Rotherham, Telford and Oldham.

Members of the union will go to parliament on Wednesday to call for “urgent action” from the Department for Transport.

Sharon Graham, Unite general secretary, said: “It is completely unacceptable that despite the Casey report laying bare the dangers of cross-border hiring and the need for urgent action, the government has not closed the loophole.

“Instead of coming up with weak alternatives, the government must implement policies that will protect passengers and drivers. Unite will not stop campaigning until our demands are met.”

The union is calling for national standards for driver vetting, a start or finish rule — requiring every private-hire journey to begin or end in the driver’s licensed area — cross-border enforcement powers allowing local authorities to act against any driver or operator working within their boundaries and stronger sanctions for any unlawful operating practices.

The union called on Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary, to publish a clear timetable for taxi and private-hire vehicles licensing reform.

In a statement after the publication of the report, the government accepted all 12 of Casey’s recommendations, including working “at pace to close loopholes in the law on taxi licensing”.

The recommendations also included a new national inquiry into grooming gangs: this three-year statutory inquiry, chaired by Baroness Longfield, is expected to begin later this year.

Wayne King, Unite national officer for passenger transport, said: “There is overwhelming evidence that out-of-area taxi and private-hire working is leaving both passengers and drivers at risk.

“Casey’s recommendations must be actioned. Heidi Alexander can close a loophole that will give vulnerable women and children greater protection from sexual exploitation.”

A government spokesperson said: “Our response to the Casey Review was clear — passenger safety is our top priority and we will take action to clamp down on rogue taxi and private hire operators.

“That’s why we’re legislating to introduce a new national minimum standard for these services and consulting on giving all local transport authorities responsibility for issuing licences.

“This is an important step towards reducing out-of-area working, strengthening oversight of individual operators, and reducing safeguarding risks.”

This is the press release from Unite.

https://www.unitetheunion.org/news-even ... vulnerable

I do agree with most of what they say, and credit them for keeping banging on, but I wish they would steer away from the start or finish rule.

It's really not a viable option, even if it does sound like it could be.

_________________
IDFIMH

Wondered why I couldn't find the press release this morning - it was reported in the Times a few hours before Unite published it on their website

Anyway, the usual mishmash of inconsistent terminology in the press release. As I often say on here, where it matters I usually use HC (rather than taxi) and PH to avoid confusion, because, you know...

But if you want to use the t-word instead of HC, then at least be consistent in a short statement on technical issues like this, from a source which is supposed to have a degree of expert knowledge...

They complain that it confuses and endangers the public, but I wonder why the public are confused in the first place?

(These are just examples, as opposed to the whole lot...)






Then the case study at the end uses the t-word four times, but nothing to suggest any difference between the two codes. Of course, readers on here will know what she's on about, but maybe not the wider press and public.