Sir, - I agree with your Editorial of January 5th that it is nothing short of a public scandal that the common good has for so long been undermined by the powerful vested interests of the taxi lobby. I also agree with the Tanaiste's post-Christmas statement that the industry should be deregulated.
I strongly disagree however, with your analysis of the process of liberalisation which is now finally under way.
For many years the power to issue taxi licences languished, unused, with the Department of the Environment. Finally, embarrassed by its own inaction and anxious to wash its hands of a thorny problem, central government devolved the power to issue licences to local government. So if there are any plaudits to be dispensed on this matter, they should go to the Dublin local authorities which took on and broke the monopoly stranglehold of the existing licence-holders, despite being subjected to political - and in my own case physical threats - from a few individual members of the industry.
Now that a coherent strategy is in place to redress the supply deficit it is understandable that the Tanaiste and others should seek to jump on the bandwagon. However, the last thing we need is the re-involvement of central government in an area where it has been so spectacularly unsuccessful in the past.
Licences are now being issued annually to the maximum number possible, subject only to the physical constraints of Dublin Corporation's capacity to process and vet applicants, the time taken to order and import specially adapted wheelchair accessible vehicles and the ability of the carriage office to examine and pass out these vehicles as suitable and safe to carry the travelling public. In addition, since September last, new hackney licences are being issued at the rate of almost 250 a month. This process will continue until the demand for licences is satisfied.
An industry neglected as long as the taxi industry has been is not amenable to a "quick fix". Not only was the number of taxis deficient, so was the standard of vehicles and, in some cases, the service given by drivers. It is both reasonable and desirable that the licensing authority and the carriage office should take the time to ensure, in so far as it can, that both the driver and the vehicle are fit to be given the privilege of plying our streets for trade. As recent events have highlighted, these checks need to be strengthened rather than relaxed.
I find little value in your suggestion of "buying off" existing licence-holders by giving them each an additional licence. Far from liberalising the industry, this would merely further concentrate ownership in the hands of a few. And it would not necessarily ensure greater availability of taxis on the streets, as existing licence-holders have a clear interest in maintaining the value of their licences by ensuring the non-use of any new licences.
In addition, many of the existing taxi-drivers are older, long-time owners of plates, are now semi-retired and can be regarded at best as occasional, part-time providers of a service. What Dublin needs now is a new generation of plate-holders, hungry for business and willing to respond to the needs of the market and to provide the quality of service the public requires.
It would, however, be simplistic to assume that the taxi industry can ever, on its own, meet all our transport needs. A modern capital city needs a fully integrated public transport network in which the taxis are only one, albeit important, element. It is towards liberalising the mass transport market by introducing competitive public service bus contracts that we should now turn our attention. - Yours, etc., Olivia Mitchell, TD,
Fine Gael Spokesperson on Traffic, Dail Eireann, Dublin 2.