the knowledge Dr Michael Galvin

Here we go again!

The problem with being reactive is that you are excluded from the process until it is too late.

What am I referring to? Two MPs are trying to get traction on two Bills in Parliament. One concerns an advanced version of the NR3 database (a voluntary register of licence refusals and revocations) and another concerns wheelchair accessibility. Both worthy and well-intentioned no doubt. But here we are again as an industry being tail-end Charlies.

Where is our Bill? What is it that we want? We might want both of these Bills – improved safety and improved access can only be good for the industry, can’t it? Well maybe, but it depends on the fine print, how it is implemented and who is involved in the scrutiny of it.

The unfortunate truth is that these Bills could end up bad for safety, bad for accessibility and bad for the industry – it would not be the first time. The saying “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” wasn’t invented for nothing. Still at least we will all have something to moan about at the next round of trade conferences and meetings, so it’s not all bad.

WHAT DO WE WANT? ERR…

This industry needs to be clear about what it wants, what it doesn’t want and to have the kind of organisation that is well funded enough to be the ‘go to place’ when someone somewhere has a bright idea. But importantly that organisation needs to be more than that, it needs to be championing the industry’s own agenda pro-actively.

Horizon-scanning, getting in early when the DfT, the Local Government Association (ALG) or others turn their attention to our industry. Safety and accessibility will no doubt be on that agenda. But how can anyone talk seriously about safety when some local councils accept certificates of good conduct in place of DBS checks?

A quick tweak on a Bill, misery for the industry, no help to those it was meant to assist and a knighthood are good for who exactly? Demonstrators often have a chant: “What do we want?” with a response of “more money”, “Tories out” or similar. If our industry had a demonstration, I fear after we shouted with gusto “what do we want?” there might be a deafening silence!

CROSS-BORDER HIRING

Cross-border hiring is also, once again, in the news. The ALG feels that the issue won’t be resolved until there is new legislation. Really? What was the Deregulation Act 2015 then? 2015 is hardly a lifetime away, is it?

I saw the Deregulation Bill as a solid attempt to deal with the Heath Robinson collection of case law that sought resolve the lacuna of cross border hiring. Before the Deregulation Act, I vividly remember presenting a diagram at an international conference and explaining to an audience who were variously in hysterics, bewildered or disbelieving that such a system could actually exist in a country with such a history of acclaimed legislation-making skill. Surely the problem we are trying to solve here is not the issue of how complex, unworkable and frankly ridiculous and unintelligible we can make crossborder hiring but how we can give more powers to licensing and enforcement officers. Isn’t the real problem that when a driver and vehicle enter a ‘foreign’ jurisdiction the licensing and enforcement officers can’t currently do anything with them, no more than they could to a van or private car driver? Shouldn’t the change be made to their powers so that any licensed vehicle comes under their jurisdiction no matter where it was licensed? We can change the law weekly if we like but trying to design legislation that can cope with every situation, with companies that operate on the borders of their licensed area, where there is a large amount of cross-border traffic for very practical reasons suggests to me that we are never going to get it right. So, if you can’t solve the problem… change the problem.

SO WHAT DO WE WANT?

The unvarnished truth is that moaning about the law, the government, the regulator and the weather is lazy policy making. Complaining about what has happened and what is happening is simple to do. It requires no brainpower, no critical thinking, no imagination and no research. It is easy. It gets the industry precisely nowhere, but hey, some good old-fashioned tub thumping and rabble-rousing gives everyone an adrenalin rush for a few minutes. After that? Where is the structure in this industry to actually define what good looks like? What are the tweaks and changes or maybe the transformational and revolutionary change needed to put this industry on its feet, if indeed it is not there already? There always appears to be a promised land but maybe we are in it already? Who tracks where we are now? Where we want to be and of course how we can get there? Surveys enquiring whether you work too hard, pay too much tax, or want your hair to grow again are not research. They are email address-gathering exercises. The hard, gruelling and tough sessions needed to define an industry’s current “The unvarnished truth pain, future prospects and the strategies is that moaning about the needed to realise them take hard work, independent thought, money and law, the government, compromise. While we sit and moan like beached whales about what has happened the regulator and the and what is happening, the industry will never reach nor maintain its zenith. weather is lazy policy Instead, smarter, better funded making. Complaining organisations will race forward, deservedly so, and where obstacles about what has happened exist they will work hard to remove, negate or in some cases ignore them. and what is happening The passengers should really be in the is simple to do....” back of everyone’s cars not directing them.