BOROUGH OF POOLE
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY GROUP – THURSDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2004
REPORT OF HEAD OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
ON petition from the hackney carriage taxi trade
1.Purpose and Policy Context
1.1To consider a 45 signature petition from Mr Mike Gale and other members of the taxi trade regarding the hackney carriage fares increase introduced on 29 June 2004 and the performance of the Borough’s Taxi Licensing Officer.
2. recommendations
2.1It is recommended that members endorse:
(a)That the process undertaken to establish the last hackney carriage fares revision was appropriate and correct
(b)The professional approach and effort taken by the Borough’s Taxi Licensing Officer to introduce the fares revision.
3. Information
3.1At its meeting on 19 March 2004 the Transportation Advisory Group considered a report which, inter alia, recommended a revision to the hackney carriage fares tariff. The report asked members to consider two options for the change.
3.2Option 1, which had the support of the majority of the trade was to adopt a tariff in parity with Bournemouth. Option 2, which was supported by Dolphin Radio Taxis and the independent hackney carriage drivers (24 hackney carriage and 3 private hire), involved retaining the existing “flag” pull-off rate but reducing the distance this was valid for and reducing the distance travelled for each subsequent 20 pence increment.
3.3The report recommended that Option 1 be adopted as this had significant benefits for the passenger. The Transportation Advisory Group supported this recommendation and the decision was subsequently made by the Transportation portfolio holder.
3.4In accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 the proposed rates were advertised in the local press with a statutory 14 day period to receive written objections. Twelve letters were received for consideration, with one in favour and eleven against. The latter included one private hire operator previously in favour of the change.
3.5The principal individual objections received were from independent taxi driver/owners. These do not subscribe to any radio circuit and primarily operate from the town's main taxi ranks at the George and Poole Railway station. Their representative, Mr Mike Gale, wrote "These proposals will actually amount to a pay cut in real terms with the jobs I, and the other taxis have to do from the ranks, because 60% of the work is small jobs under £2.50".
3.6The objections were discussed with both the Head of Transportation Services and the Chairman and Vice Chairman of Transportation Advisory Group. It was agreed to delay the introduction of the change pending further consultation.
3.7The principal concern was that the reduction in the fare for the shorter trips would not be fully compensated by the increase in the cost of journeys over two and a quarter miles. It was agreed to survey journeys at the George rank. The Chairman of Transportation Advisory Group took part in the survey.
4TaxiRank Survey
4.1113 different journeys were recorded from this rank between 0900 and 1800. Customers were asked for their destination. The data was analysed by accurately calculating the distance for each job and comparing the Poole rate with the proposed new Bournemouth rate. It was found that:-
- 55 jobs would be cheaper with the proposed Bournemouth rate
- 58 jobs would be more expensive with the proposed Bournemouth rate
- Overall income would increase.
- It established that the shorter trips (less than 2 ¼ miles), used by many elderly people to the hospital or for shopping, became cheaper. 17 out of the 113 jobs (15%) would have resulted in a fare totalling £2.60 or less. This contrasted strongly with the statement that 60% of work off the rank is "small jobs under £2.50."
4.3The introduction of the tariff change was therefore seen to be beneficial overall to those independent drivers working from the taxi ranks in the daytime. Other members of the taxi trade continued to show considerable support for the proposed change and after further consultation it was agreed to proceed as originally recommended. The new fares were introduced from Tuesday 29th June and the meters were recalibrated on this date.
4.4Since the fares change there has been just one complaint to the Borough (the Council’s telephone number is listed on the fare chart). This was from a passenger making a regular, unusually long journey, by taxi. There have beenno complaints about the increased booking fee for pre-booked work.
4.5There is daily contact with taxi and private hire drivers. Since the introduction of the new fares, many have commented that the public has welcomed the simplified rates. Similarly, claims that an overall loss of income would be experienced have not been reported.
5Trade Representation
5.1Several taxi drivers have commented that they felt that their representative at the Taxi Forum had failed to consult with them fully in the process. This was of great concern as this is the primary interface between the Trade and the Council and it is essential that everyone’s views be heard. It was therefore decided to write to every driver with a short questionnaire. Replies could be made anonymously and an SAE was included.
5.2365 letters were sent on 29th July and just 26 replies received. 15 of the 26 thought that their representative did not adequately consult with them on issues and 13 expressed an interest in being involved in future meetings. There is a need for a form of selective representation as open meetings have not been successful in the past. It is proposed to seek representation from the drivers side in future meetings.
6ThePetition
6.145 Poole taxi drivers signed the following petition sent to the Council:
PETITION FROM POOLE TAXI AND PRIVATE HIRE DRIVERS
We the undersigned wish to express our views as below:
Are You Happy with the new rate: YES/NO
Were You Happy with the performance of the Taxi Licensing Officer: YES/NO/No Comment
Drivers were also asked to state their licence number.
6.242 indicated they were not happy with the new rate, 2 indicated they were happy with one “50:50”. The 43 drivers represent 11.8% of the total of 365 drivers. 22 indicated they were unhappy with the performance of the Taxi Licensing Officer with four others saying 50%.
6.3The petition is not significantly representative of the overall taxi and private hire trade in Poole, with only 45 of the 365 drivers questioned. None of the 61 people licensed solely as private hire drivers have signed and only one of the 107 private hire vehicle owners.
6.4Analysis of the petition shows that one driver’s badge number has been recorded twice with differing signatures written against it - neither of which match that given on the annual renewal form for that driver’s badge number. Other signatures also do not appear to match those associated with the badge number given. In addition Council Officers have been informed that some taxi drivers had felt pressured into signing the form.
6.5It is unusual for there to be universal agreement to taxi tariff proposals and objections are normally received. This is due primarily to the diverse nature of the industry. There is probably no ideal fare tariff which would suit all of the different sectors. Alignment with the Bournemouth tariff ends many of the arguments as future fare proposals are based on an agreed formula taking average wage settlements and increases in motoring costs into account.
6.6At a recent meeting of licensing officers throughout Dorset the idea of common fares throughout the County was raised and had considerable support. Both East and North Dorset District Councils use the previous year’s Bournemouth tariff as a basis and stated that it has ended the “majority of the disagreements”.
6.7Members are recommended to endorse that the hackney carriage fares increase introduced on 29 June 2004 followed the correct procedure and that the Taxi Licensing Officer acted in a thoroughly professional manner throughout this challenging process.
JAMES T BRIGHT
Head of Transportation Services
Background Papers
Minutes of Transportation Advisory Group meeting - 19 March 2004
Name and Telephone Number of Officer Contact
John McVey (01202) 262221
6 September 2004
TAG230904T3K
1