Seanad debates

Tuesday, 12 February 2013

Taxi Regulation Bill 2012: Committee Stage

 

4:50 pm

Photo of Sean BarrettSean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for initiating this legislation here. The object, we hope, is to improve it if we can or to assist the Minister of State if we can, and if we cannot do so, I am sure it will go forward to the other House.

My response is to ask what is the point. A dispatch operator is the person who provides a booking service for an intending passenger. It is somebody who answers the telephone. Regulation is expensive and bureaucracy is expensive. What is wrong with somebody who answers the telephone? I do not see why it is necessary. It used be in the literature that this was necessary because persons could achieve monopolies to take control over the sector, but the Goodbody report shows that the dispatch operator share of the market is down, from 51.2% to 38.4%. The danger of them acquiring a monopoly is not serious.

Is this regulatory creep? Is the NTA merely looking for extra functions which really perform nothing? Does the Minister of State fancy prosecuting persons who answer the telephone? How persons get taxis these days is by hailing them in the street or by telephoning the taxi driver directly. That is now the dominant part of the market, where persons leave cards into one's house, etc. The NTA is in search of extra functions. I honestly do not see the point of trying to regulate the booking sector. If somebody can book tickets for functions, etc., and a taxi as well, why do dispatch operators need to be licensed by the National Transport Authority which has a track record of always preventing competition? This is starting off as relatively nebulous but it can be used to prevent competition because that is the track record of the body which will be administering it.

I do not see the necessity for it. It is up to persons themselves how they book a taxi. They are choosing dispatch operators ever less frequently. That is the choice they have made. That is the spirit in which I put forward the amendment. If the Minister of State thinks it is important and convinces me that it is, I would be pleased to hear that. I merely wonder. The Government is trying to cut back on bureaucracy and trying to balance the books of the country. Commendable strides were made last week and I commend the Minister of State and his colleagues. What is the point in regulating something that does not need to be regulated?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.