7 minute read
THE BUTTON PLAN
The case for national standards for Private Hire is a strong one, and its one we’ve supported for some time. In a world where bus, coach and truck driver and vehicle licensing is carried out nationally, why not private hire?
After all, the requirements for private hire are a lot less rigorous than those required to drive a much larger vehicle. A standard driving license covers all the basic skills. And the vehicles themselves shouldn’t require more than basic checks for safety and suitability.
But the problem is in the way private hire and taxi licensing has been allowed to develop over the years.
Local authorities have long held the responsibility for administering licenses, and as a result, different local rules, requirements and, crucially, fees are applied for essentially the same service – driver and vehicle licensing.
For national standards to be put in place, this intensely local system is a major obstacle. Private hire and taxi licensing is a major revenue-earner for cash-strapped councils, and for many licensing departments, there is a resistance to outside influence on their little empires. Squaring this particular circle may pose problems.
But one man believes it can be done. James Button has a plan. Button is a solicitor who specialises in taxi law, and he believes there is a way to get national standards in place that does not require legislation or major structural change.
In a nutshell, this is the plan: Allowing one particular local authority to become the national licensing authority for England and Wales. This “principal authority” would effectively set the standard, and its choice would be agreed by all other licensing authorities in England and Wales. “This radical proposal is readily achievable using the current legislation,” Button says.
Moreover, he believes there would be support for his scheme from Government, as universal standards was one of the key suggestions of the Task & Finish Group report into the industry that the Government agreed to take up.
The looming General Election and likely change of Government may kick this can down the road, however. “It seems unrealistic to assume that these vital matters will be high on any government’s agenda,” Button says in the preamble to his big idea.
The issue has become more pressing thanks to the unintended consequence of the 2015 Deregulation Act, which allows private hire drivers licensed anywhere in England or Wales to undertake pre-booked journeys in areas where they are not licensed.
This in turn has led to the growth of local authorities that are keener than others to raise revenue by gearing up to handle PHV licensing. Wolverhampton is the key example, where the council has geared up its licensing department with more than 100 members of staff , processing thousands of applications from other cities such as Birmingham and Manchester.
Recently, Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham raised concerns about the number of Wolverhampton-licensed drivers operating in Manchester, and his complaints – that public safety may be compromised by what he feels are lower standards –have been echoed elsewhere.
In reality, the reason drivers are heading to Wolverhampton for licenses is the inefficiency and relatively high cost of their own authorities. Under Manchester City Council, it costs £255 to register as a new private hire driver plus costs for tests and between £222 and £342 to register a vehicle (depending on its age).
Under Wolverhampton Council, the application fee for a new private hire driver is £49 for a one-year licence or £98 for a three-year license and £95 to register a vehicle under 10 years old.
Is Burnham justified in claiming Wolverhampton allows a lower standard? Not really. The main difference in
standards relates to the age of vehicles allowed, with Greater Manchester councils requiring slightly newer vehicles.
Wolverhampton Council claims applicants undergo a “strict and rigorous” process that includes a one day training course, enhanced DBS checks, a medical certification and a face-to-face English assessment. In 2021 and 2022, 55% of applicants failed the checks, the council says.
These arguments seem relatively trivial, and indeed, Button’s plan addresses them quite neatly. “The law allows a private hire operator to advertise its services anywhere, accept a booking from a passenger located anywhere, and fulfil that booking provided the PH driver and PHV are also licensed by the same authority that licenses the PHO,” Button says.
“If the only local authority that issued private hire licences was the principal authority, there is an immediate and automatic private hire industry controlled by the same, effectively national, standards.”
Sounds simple. Though in practice it would require significant co-operation between every local authority, perhaps co-ordinated by the Local Government Association (LGA).
“Obviously, this It would require local authorities to relinquish their control over PH licensees, but that would be outweighed by national safety standards and the removal of a local authority’s requirements being undermined by other PHDs and PHVs. It would also require the principal authority to accept this responsibility and expand its licensing operation accordingly,” Button says.
How is this possible within the current legislation? “While the ability of a local authority to license PHDs and PHOs is mandatory, the power to license PHVs is discretionary,” Button says. “Therefore, every local authority (bar the principal authority) could refuse to licence PHVs. As a PHO can only use vehicles and drivers licensed by the same authority that licensed the PHO, only a PHO licensed by the principal authority could fulfil a booking.”
“Local PHOs could accept bookings, but would have to sub-contract them to a PHO licensed by the principal authority. It would remain to be seen whether there was a demand for locally licensed PHOs or whether the operators would move wholesale to be licensed by the principal authority.”
So it’s not as simple as it seems –and it would involve local authorities voluntarily giving up on a lucrative revenue stream from PH licensing. “This could be offset in relation to enforcement against principal authority PH licensees by such costs being recharged to the principal authority,” Button suggests.
“Those costs would be recoverable by the principal authority via its license fees. This would also remove another concern expressed by local authorities about their funding of action against licensees from other areas.”
The other problem would be the standards themselves. “Good, high standards already exist and could readily be used by the principal authority,” Button says. But he adds with caution: “Whether those would be acceptable to all the other local authorities who would be asked to relinquish control would remain to be seen.”
Any agreement would involve some compromises, and the absolute highest possible standards might not be achieved. “But this approach would undoubtedly raise the standards applied by many local authorities,” Button says.
Greater London might be problematic, as TfL might choose not to become involved. “This might not be an immediate issue as London has its own legislation,” Button says. Effectively, London would be an “island” with its own rules.
Ultimately, the ‘Button Plan’ will only work if everyone buys in to it. “There needs to be a concerted desire by local authorities for this to happen. Those authorities would need to agree this is a more desirable situation than the current one,” Button says.
That would involve compromising on standards and control, and some horse-trading regarding revenue.
“Experience indicates this would not be easy, but it is surely not beyond the wit of those involved,” he concludes.
In a way, carrying out the plan would at least mean local authorities were in the driving seat. And with more pressing problems for a new Government to solve, that might be the only way that something like national standards will happen.
