Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 9, line 39, after “Taxi Regulation Act 2003” to insert the following:“and statutory instruments under the Taxi Regulation Act 2003”.

This a development on what I was saying about the previous amendment. The House has helped the Minister to make nearly 80 radical changes to the Bill as originally presented. We support him on quality licensing. However, the quantitative restrictions in SI 250/2010, Taxi Regulation Act 2003 (Grant of Taxi Licences) (Amendment) Regulations, should fall as the Minister is repealing the 2003 Act under which this statutory instrument was made.

In its analysis, the ESRI has stated quantitative licensing has been the crucial point in limiting numbers entering the sector. I have several reservations about it. My legal advice is that the use of such an instrument to limit access to the deregulated sector is suspect as it involved overturning High Court decisions by means of statutory instrument. If we are repealing the 2003 legislation, it should be understood that statutory instruments such as the 2010 quantitative licensing order that come under the Act should also fall. This amendment wants to make sure there is no power to impose quantitative licensing on this sector again.

I am most unhappy, as is Mr. Paul Gorecki, with how this was done in 2010. Deregulation of the taxi sector was a major benefit to the economy with Goodbody estimating the overall benefit came to €780 million. Indecon’s review never refers to this quantitative limit on entry into the sector which is crucial. On Committee Stage, we worked hard to get the Minister away from quantitative licensing to quality licensing.

I must press this amendment because it is the kernel of the issue. The statutory instrument was wrongly used. If the State disagreed with the High Court's decision, it should have appealed it to the Supreme Court. Introducing a statutory instrument to limit the number of people who could operate taxis was wrong and did not make any sense in economic terms. It was done on the basis of a misapprehension about policy which we can discuss. We need to get rid of the statutory instrument. It forms part of the 2003 Act that the Minister wants to repeal, on which we will support him. However, we must dispense with the statutory instrument which imposed limits on quantities in the licensing of the sector.