Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important legislation, which has been a long time in gestation. Since 2002, we have been dealing with the negative consequences of the disastrous manner in which the taxi sector was deregulated. When I was the Labour Party transport spokesman in a previous Dáil, the ongoing problems in the sector arose time and again, and taxi workers are still raising issues of concern with me.

The taxi sector is one of the cornerstones of public transport infrastructure in this country. Taxi workers often provide a service during anti-social hours and in rural areas where there is simply no other public transport option. They also form a key part of the hospitality industry. Everyone has noted that taxi drivers are often the first point of contact for tourists and visitors to the country, and we often form our view of a country depending on the treatment we receive from the first taxi we get into.

The underlying principles of a document I prepared for the Labour Party in 2010, entitled Hailing a New Taxi Service, were that we would aim for a well-regulated taxi sector that would achieve the highest possible quality of service for passengers as well as provide a decent and sustainable income for all taxi workers. As the Minister of State noted in his Seanad speech, there continues to be a laissez-faire approach to taxi regulation, which must end as a matter of urgency. Long ago, I concluded the industry was not characterised by a laissez-faire approach but by complete regulatory failure, as in so many areas of our economy, as a result of the Ahern-Harney legacy. I therefore generally welcome the Bill, which contains some important regulatory improvements. There are some significant issues and lacunae, and I hope the Minister of State will return to those on Committee and Report Stages.

One of the key problems of the free-for-all nature of the taxi system in the aftermath of deregulation was the total absence of any restrictions on who was allowed to drive a taxi. Indeed, it was alarming to see a statement by the Minister of State in January 2013 indicating that 6,000 taxi drivers working at that time had a criminal conviction. Many of these, of course, may have been minor convictions that should not have prohibited a person from working for the rest of his life, but for the safety of all taxi users, it is completely unacceptable that anybody with a serious conviction for rape, murder or serious assault, for example, would be allowed to drive a taxi. Over the years since deregulation, there have been numerous allegations about people driving taxis and interacting with the public, including sometimes vulnerable people travelling alone, who have been convicted of serious or very violent crimes. Law-abiding drivers are also appalled that licences would be granted to individuals who may a danger to the public. Sections 10, 28 and 29 of the Bill before us, which list the reasons a person would face a mandatory disqualification or specified period of disqualification from driving a taxi, are most welcome. Schedule 1 lists the offences which would result in a life disqualification for a driver, including a conviction for murder, rape and serious sexual offences.

An important aspect of the Bill related to the issue of mandatory disqualifications for certain offences is the requirement of an applicant for a licence to inform the licensing authority of any previous convictions that may be relevant to his or her application. Section 29(1) details the obligation of an applicant in this regard. Is the Minister of State satisfied that the vetting system is robust enough to detect the non-disclosure of any serious conviction which should, under this legislation, result in a mandatory disqualification or disqualification for a significant period? The positive obligation placed on applicants to disclose information about previous convictions may not be robust enough. There may be scope for giving a much larger role to the national vetting bureau. The sanctions in section 29 for failure to disclose information to the licensing authority about previous convictions are welcome, but the scope of the provision may not be sufficient to combat the problem of individuals with previous convictions being granted licences because they have not disclosed this information to the licensing authority.

This point is particularly relevant for applicants who may have committed offences in another jurisdiction. Section 30 refers to proof of foreign convictions. Concerns have been raised about whether international co-operation between different national vetting agencies is strong enough to detect and pass on information about serious criminality which may have been committed by an Irish national or foreign national abroad. An exchange of relevant information and contact between the NTA, the Garda Síochána and similar regulatory bodies in key EU-EEA countries, including international agencies like Europol and Interpol, should be mandatory.

Similar concerns exist about the vetting of people from outside the EEA area who have applied for PSV and taxi licences. Has the Minister of State taken any steps to liaise with the police and vetting authorities in non-EEA countries to tackle this particular issue? Many submissions were made to the Minister of State related to complaints about people on particular types of visas in this country which perhaps did not entitle them to work as a self-employed person and the implications that has for vetting applicants to the profession.

Section 14 introduces a prohibition on the transfer of licences. The system for transferring licenses did seem to facilitate, at least partly, an element of criminality in the licensing system, and it is a welcome move by the Minister of State which I hope will ensure a more transparent regime which includes all relevant background and suitability checks. Suggestions have been raised that the restriction of the issuing of SPSV licenses to one per individual should include a mechanism where just one address is associated with each taxi licence holder, which would further strengthen the system. For this reason I also welcome the Government's commitment to introduce an online register of taxi drivers.

Section 27 lays out measures for the regulation of passengers in taxis.

That is also welcome and timely, and I commend the Minister of State for that. We are rightly concerned about enhancing the safety of workers, but it is also important to enhance measures to ensure the highest level of protection for drivers and in a strict way to detail behaviours which are totally unacceptable in a taxi or other mode of public transport. As I stated, that will be a major step forward.

A problem we in urban areas experience a good deal is where certain passengers nearing the end of their journey suddenly jump out and disappear down a laneway or wherever. I wonder has the Minister of State addressed that old, and at times quite serious, problem of fare dodging, perhaps with CCTV facilities.

Part 5 of the Bill sets out the introduction of a new demerit scheme which, as I understand it, would introduce a separate penalty-points type system for taxi regulations. The range of offences included in the demerit include overcharging, taking a less direct and longer route, and non-disclosure of required information. I understand that, under section 36, if a driver reaches eight demerit points, he or she could be suspended from driving for a period of three months. Members will be aware, of course, that taxi unions are unhappy with the introduction of the demerit scheme and the way the Minister has introduced it, and undertook strike action on 28 February last in this regard. It has been argued that some drivers could reach eight demerits through, perhaps, careless and unfortunate actions which would put them off the road. I see the Minister of State may be willing to address this. It creates difficulties for the driver's livelihood. The Minister of State is aware of this problem.

See this speech in context