Seanad debates

Tuesday, 12 February 2013

Taxi Regulation Bill 2012: Committee Stage

 

5:50 pm

Photo of Sean BarrettSean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

When there are paragraphs extending to the letter M and a few subsections on this area and we are nearly running out of letters in the alphabet to cover measures, my fear is that the bureaucrats are attempting to re-regulate this sector by the backdoor. I am disappointed that the Minister of State cannot give an undertaking on that. I am sure this is one of the areas the troika is looking at because it is seriously concerned that the Government is building sheltered sectors in this economy which seriously infringe the ability of the rest of the economy to operate. That is why we are in our current state and unemployment has increased from 4.8% to 14.8%. The Minister of State feels unable to give any commitment that this will always be a competitive, contestable industry. That is all we ask him to do to give a commitment that neither he nor his officials or any of the lobby groups who were in and out of his Department have any intention reintroduce quantity licensing. I thought he would be glad to give that undertaking but regrettably he is not.

I am sure this will not end here. If there is a build-up of restrictive practices and all the sheltered sectors carry on like this and form clientless relationships with bureaucracies, it will damage the overall Irish economy. I cannot see why it is such a blow to the Minister of State to have to say that he is favour of the amendment I propose and that he has no intention of introducing quantity licensing. When we examine the situation, particularly in terms of the Public Transport Regulation Act 2009, many bogus reasons were given by the Department as to why it does not like competition. It is easy to disprove them but the Department remains committed to preventing competition and will invent the safety argument, one of its favourites.

I regret the Minister of State is unwilling to nail his colours to the mast, which economists would advocate and which the High Court has told him to do but the record will speak for itself. I am sure the IMF and the Competition Authority will note that we could not get an undertaking out of the Minister of State that he will not be influenced by the incumbents to introduce more and more regulations which will have the de facto effect of preventing new entrants who, as we said, are vital for the efficiency of any sector. Paragraphs (a) to (m) comprise the list he has today and yet he seeks powers to bring in more of them. They are anti-competitive measures. The consumer benefits of them are never evaluated. We know what were the consumer benefits of opening up the market, namely, ¤70 million to ¤80 million worth of time savings and ¤250 million worth in terms of 20,000 new jobs. They do not count in the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. I believe when the Goodbody report was discussed at the transport committee it was disputed. The report is based on the soundest of economics. This was a decision by the courts which was hugely beneficial to society and it is being steadily picked at in measures like the one we are opposing.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.