Indeed, that was political double jobbing. Anyway, that has been done away with. Of course the problem was that there was a shortage of taxis and I remember our best attempts in Dublin City Council to regulate the taxi plates on a gradual basis were stymied at the time, and we do not necessarily want to go into that. It was just impossible to make any progress in giving a gradual increase in numbers over a period of time. I remember Mr. Frank Dunlop was brought in as the front man to argue the case on one major occasion.
Now we have gone to the other extreme, and we have gone into total deregulation. One cannot manage any business on deregulation. Deregulation means no regulation. We talked about light regulation in the old days of the Celtic tiger, but no regulation at all is really what we have had over recent years in the taxi business. That is really at the core of it.
We must get a system in place whereby there is meaningful and effective regulation. The problem is that the regulator does not seem to be listening to the proposals that are being made, and the Minister does not seem to be listening to them either. The committee put forward a fine set of proposals some time ago but very few of these have been implemented. The only one of these proposals that is likely to be fully implemented is that relating to the Commission for Taxi Regulation being subsumed into the Dublin Transportation Office. To date, these proposals have been left on the shelf.
The central issue is simple: there are too many taxis in operation. Ordinary taxi drivers cannot make a living. I see evidence of this on the streets of Dublin each day. The city is just overcrowded with taxis. At weekends, the streets are jammed with them. There is no doubt that people are engaging in double jobbing. Mr. Gillanders's comment to the effect that approximately 20% of taxi drivers have tax compliance issues was interesting. I accept there could be reasons other than double jobbing which are responsible for this. However, we do not know how many taxi drivers may have issues with regard to their compliance with social welfare requirements. Is the Department of Social Protection checking if any taxi drivers are working and claiming? It would be useful if the Department examined this matter in conjunction with the Commission for Taxi Regulation.
Questions arise with regard to why people in full-time employment should be granted taxi licences. That makes absolutely no sense. Once a person who already has a full-time job is granted a taxi licence, he or she is being informed that he or she can break the law. As Mr. Brennan stated, most people in full-time employment work 39 or 40 hours per week. If one takes on another full-time job, that figure is doubled. Under the Organisation of Working Time Act and the organisation of working time directive, this is 20 hours in excess of the number of hours per week one is entitled to work. People in this situation are guilty of breaking both domestic and European law. I do not understand how it is legal to grant someone who is already in full-time employment a taxi licence. Perhaps the Chairman might obtain legal advice on whether it might be possible to bring this kind of practice to a halt.
I am also interested in the proposal to the effect that the Commission for Taxi Regulation should buy back licences at the purchase price. The committee put forward a similar recommendation. Surplus licences, that is, those belonging to people who are exiting the business, should not be sold back into the market. Instead, they should be bought by the regulator. This would gradually begin to limit the number of licences available. I understand that the only new licences that will be granted from now on will be those relating to taxis with wheelchair access. Effectively, there is a moratorium in place in respect of new licences.
It is important to reduce the overall number of licences, put a stop to double jobbing and have the regulator buy back any surplus licences. This will give rise to a situation where taxi drivers will be in a position to make a decent living. That is the key. Once what I have suggested is done, everything else will fall into place.
I do not believe an adequate system of enforcement has been identified. Senator Martin Brady stated that perhaps a special section could be established within the Garda Síochána to deal with enforcement. I am of the view that a model which utilises the expertise of the Garda, the Revenue and the Department of Social Protection is the way to go. Information could be shared by these three agencies and people who are engaged in wrongdoing would know that they are going to be hit hard. We could put in place an awareness campaign which would inform people that Departments, agencies, etc., are going to zero in on those who are breaking the law, who are not tax compliant, who are not compliant with social welfare requirements, who are not compliant with the organisation of working time legislation, etc.
There are many other issues which arise. For example, the huge numbers of taxis driving around Dublin, Galway and elsewhere give rise to a massive level of carbon emissions. This does not tie in well with the Government's goal of trying to reduce such emissions by 30% by 2020. In addition, having such numbers of taxis on our roads is not conducive to health and safety. Those who drive taxis work long hours and in recent times they have not been able to make a living as a result of the pressure under which they are operating. Some individuals have found it impossible to cope with that pressure. We must focus on the issues of double jobbing, the buying back of taxi licences by the regulator and putting in place an enforcement mechanism involving the agencies to which I referred.
My final point relates to the fact that taxi drivers must renew their vehicles after nine years. That requirement is too strict. Taxi drivers' vehicles must pass the NCT but this is optional for ordinary citizens. Obsolescence is not a factor with quite a number of cars and it might be a long time before a vehicle needs to be replaced. In our current straightened circumstances, it is extremely difficult for people to find the money to buy new cars and I am of the view, therefore, that the nine year requirement should no longer be in operation.
