NTA 'unsupportive' of Uber's Irish plan to expand

markodaly

magicbastarder wrote: »

what i want is when a service is provided to the public for private profit, it should be properly regulated to protect the public first and foremost, and then the drivers. lack of regulation is one of the main issues with the current system, yet i keep hearing this quasi-neoliberal response that the best reaction to light touch regulation is essentially zero regulation.

No, no one has stated this. You are spreading falsehoods.

What we are saying is that ride sharing platforms should be allowed to operated in Ireland and simple set of rules and regulation that is cheap to implement. If you want to drive an Uber, present your car, with all the relevant documents, full license, Garda background check, car tax, insurance. Pay 100 euro, get your license and away you go.

I think people are trying to imagine up scenarios in order to confirm their own bias against this, yet ride sharing platforms are legal and operating in many many countries around the world without the apocalyptic prophesy of some here coming true. Why can the operate successfully in places like America, Brazil, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, China to name a few. Is this like paying for water, we Irish are some how unique in the world?

markodaly

NollagShona wrote: »

The taxi regulator. 100 wouldn’t get much

Get much what?

The high horse brigade

NollagShona wrote: »

The taxi regulator. 100 wouldn’t get much

Regulation gets lost when the main focus of the regulator is on collecting money. Just look at Comreg

NollagShona

The high horse brigade wrote: »

Regulation gets lost when the main focus of the regulator is on collecting money. Just look at Comreg

That’s a very reductive statement

trellheim

What we are saying is that ride sharing platforms should be allowed to operated in Ireland and simple set of rules and regulation that is cheap to implement

right, and we've seen that kind of light-touch regulation work well for Ireland lol /s

As for insurance does it cover proper taxi insurance with Uber ? Is the driver actually allowed to carry for hire and reward - as someone else says we've already got hack licenses, taxi licenses, and limo licenses under the same laws, Uber are free to play under any of those they want and I see no reason whatever to change . Uber are perfectly free to set up under the laws we have and good luck to them ( note I have no connection to taxi industry or related in any way )

markodaly

trellheim wrote: »

right, and we've seen that kind of light-touch regulation work well for Ireland lol /s

Do you want to go back to the 80's where an airline ticket to London cost a weeks wage or ordering a landline took 3 months? No? Thought not.

As for insurance does it cover proper taxi insurance with Uber ? Is the driver actually allowed to carry for hire and reward - as someone else says we've already got hack licenses, taxi licenses, and limo licenses under the same laws, Uber are free to play under any of those they want and I see no reason whatever to change . Uber are perfectly free to set up under the laws we have and good luck to them ( note I have no connection to taxi industry or related in any way )

Most countries that Uber operate under include insurance that applies to ride sharing. Uber are free to operate of course, once they pay 6,300 euro per car, which is an outrageous amount. However, many are happy wth this stupid barrier to entry, its the reason we have clapped out cars running as Taxi's.

What I find most illuminating is that Irish people are actually cynical, skeptical and not as embracing of the new technological revolution the world is seeing as you might think.

MJohnston

markodaly wrote: »

What I find most illuminating is that Irish people are actually cynical, skeptical and not as embracing of the new technological revolution the world is seeing as you might think.

Nonsense. Uber is a special case of awful that is unique. Irish people are more than happy to embrace new things, Hailo was a massive success until they ruined the app, Deliveroo is extremely popular too.

Besides which, they've shot themselves in the foot with their business practices, shady data "security", and their slimy and creepy attitude towards their female employees.

I'd imagine the reception to something like Lyft would be very different, as they're not the toxic mess that Uber is.

end of the road

markodaly wrote: »

How about opening up the market to competition?

it already is open to competition. has been for years. lots and lots of taxis availible to compete for business. some regulation is necessary to insure the safety and security of passengers and drivers of course.
if ubber wants to operate, it has to abide by what regulation exists within the area it operates, should regulation exist.

markodaly wrote: »

I have asked this question a few times and no one seems to want to answer, so Ill ask it again. Why does one have to get an SPSV license for a car which costs $6,300 euro + the driver which adds another 150 euro . We have an NCT to make sure a car is roadworthy, you could easily put in a rule that says no cars older than 8 years allowed for a taxi. You could have a visual inspection of both the car and driver which proves that they have a full clean driving license, have no criminal record and their car is NCT'd, taxed and insured to drive on the roads. License approved, costs about 100 euro, away you go and drive with Uber, Lyft, myTaxi, hailo or whomever. Why is it not this simple?

it is not this simple as it cannot be, as we have to insure viability of the industry as a whole. a higher licence for a taxi says that the driver is suitable and capible (at least in theory) to operate a public transport service. all the other suggestions for rules such as NCT and lack of criminal record should be in place as well but we have to have some regulation and standards and insure a viable healthy industry.

markodaly wrote: »

Yet, why does one need to pay 6,300 euro for a vehicle license? Where does this money go?

No one can answer this. The money goes to the government. It should cost no more than 100 euro. It is plain to see that it is just an arbitrary figure to block people going into the industry.

It is clear that no one has any valid points in relation to the above on why ride sharing platforms cannot operate here. They are more than happy with the status quo, old bangers as taxis and change to be avoided at all cost. As I said in Ireland we are very conservative to change.

yes, it's a figure to insure that only those who are actually serious about operating a taxi go into the industry. it also insures that the market doesn't become over saturated which in turn would lead to an unhealthy market, as taxis wouldn't simply stop driving as we can see from the current system. having it at 100 quid means any tom dick and harry or mary can go into it, meaning we ultimately have no control of who is operating. sometimes people have to be blocked from going into an industry to protect the industry and it's users. ride share platforms can operate within ireland as long as they abide by the regulation, which must be equal for all taxis. and ultimately that is what a ride share platform is, a taxi service.

markodaly wrote: »

Do you want to go back to the 80's where an airline ticket to London cost a weeks wage or ordering a landline took 3 months? No? Thought not.





Most countries that Uber operate under include insurance that applies to ride sharing. Uber are free to operate of course, once they pay 6,300 euro per car, which is an outrageous amount. However, many are happy wth this stupid barrier to entry, its the reason we have clapped out cars running as Taxi's.

What I find most illuminating is that Irish people are actually cynical, skeptical and not as embracing of the new technological revolution the world is seeing as you might think.

supporting some regulation doesn't mean people want to go back to the 1980s. you have to have some regulation in life. otherwise things eventually don't work. there is a happy medium between full regulation and no regulation, and the taxi industry is for the most part in that middle ground. technology means nothing in terms of this debate, taxis using technology like ubber, can operate as long as they abide by the rules.

usernamegoes wrote: »

This makes no sense.

If you'd prefer to only use regulated taxis what's your problem allowing lighter touch Uber-style cars for others to use?

because light touch regulation doesn't work. we have to have 1 set of regulations for all taxis to insure fairness and equal standards, and to insure a fair, equal and healthy taxi market.

usernamegoes wrote: »

If people here believe that regulated taxis are much better than Ubers then market wouldn't be unfair as Uber will fail. I think what you really mean is you prefer regulated therefore want to protect them

no, it's protecting the market as a whole. insuring fairness and equality across all taxis. if you believe it to be protection for current taxis, then ubber will benefit from this protection as well.

iamtony

As a Taxi driver in Dublin I wouldn't be much against uber as it is in London which is basically minicabs and they are licenced. Just like Hackneys here.
What you all are forgetting is taxi in London are expensive, Taxis in new York are expensive. Taxis in Dublin are reasonable so uber couldn't undercut by very much, maybe 10 or 20 percent but then the standards of the cars will be lower than the Taxi fleet within a few years when the drivers can't afford to upgrade.
Add to that they can't use bus lanes here and the difference in price would be very little so it wouldn't gain much traction in Dublin anyway.
Completely unlicensed Uber cars isn't going to happen in Ireland so no point even discussing it.
I'm not sure but aren't Hackney licences still available to purchase in Ireland? If so uber as it is in London could be already here except market forces means it isn't a by able business based on the cost of a Taxi. Maybe outside of the cities it could work but from what I hear many drivers don't use the meters much and charge a lot less than what the meter would read.
Comparing the standards or cars in America and Ireland is nonsense. I've already explained this in another uber thread but the cost of a blacked out suv in the US is probably the same as a skoda superb over here.

markodaly

MJohnston wrote: »

Nonsense. Uber is a special case of awful that is unique. Irish people are more than happy to embrace new things, Hailo was a massive success until they ruined the app, Deliveroo is extremely popular too.

Besides which, they've shot themselves in the foot with their business practices, shady data "security", and their slimy and creepy attitude towards their female employees.

I'd imagine the reception to something like Lyft would be very different, as they're not the toxic mess that Uber is.

So you are not against ride sharing platforms at all, just against Uber. So, you would have no issue against normal people driving people to their destination using Lyft?

markodaly

end of the road wrote: »

it is not this simple as it cannot be, as we have to insure viability of the industry as a whole. a higher licence for a taxi says that the driver is suitable and capible (at least in theory) to operate a public transport service. all the other suggestions for rules such as NCT and lack of criminal record should be in place as well but we have to have some regulation and standards and insure a viable healthy industry.



yes, it's a figure to insure that only those who are actually serious about operating a taxi go into the industry. it also insures that the market doesn't become over saturated which in turn would lead to an unhealthy market, as taxis wouldn't simply stop driving as we can see from the current system. having it at 100 quid means any tom dick and harry or mary can go into it, meaning we ultimately have no control of who is operating. sometimes people have to be blocked from going into an industry to protect the industry and it's users. ride share platforms can operate within Ireland as long as they abide by the regulation, which must be equal for all taxis. and ultimately that is what a ride share platform is, a taxi service.

So, you are in favour or the state creating an artificial barrier to entry to ensure a 'healthy' taxi service, as in to protect those already in the industry, nothing at all about servicing the needs of the customer which you have not mentioned. So what if every Tom Dick and Mary wants to drive a taxi. The state should not decide this, it should be up to the individual themselves. Your level of thinking belongs in the 1970's.

The 6300 euro figure is nothing more then state sanctioned robbery. There is no extra training needed to be a taxi driver, anyone with a full clean license and clean criminal record should be able to take fee paying passenger and that the state asks people to pay a sum like that for the privilege is a disgrace. It is actually very authoritarian.

To be honest, its this level of thinking that makes me look forward to more automation where by a human taxi driver is no longer needed. I suppose we will have to block that too with some tax.:rolleyes:

end of the road

markodaly wrote: »

So, you are in favour or the state creating an artificial barrier to entry to ensure a 'healthy' taxi service, as in to protect those already in the industry, nothing at all about servicing the needs of the customer which you have not mentioned. So what if every Tom Dick and Mary wants to drive a taxi. The state should not decide this, it should be up to the individual themselves. Your level of thinking belongs in the 1970's.

The 6300 euro figure is nothing more then state sanctioned robbery. There is no extra training needed to be a taxi driver, anyone with a full clean license and clean criminal record should be able to take fee paying passenger and that the state asks people to pay a sum like that for the privilege is a disgrace. It is actually very authoritarian.

To be honest, its this level of thinking that makes me look forward to more automation where by a human taxi driver is no longer needed. I suppose we will have to block that too with some tax.

the barrier protects everybody, both taxis and users. for the most part nobody is going to pony up the money to enter unless they are serious about running a taxi service. of course bad eggs slip through the net currently and we need to do more to stop that, but with your idea there is a higher chance of it happening and i and many others are not willing to support the government taking that risk. the state has to decide to an extent who drives a taxi as a matter of public safety. such a regime doesn't just belong in the 1970s, it belongs in the now and the future.

markodaly

Taxi complaints have been rising year on year according to the NTA.
http://www.thejournal.ie/taxi-complaints-3-3719479-Dec2017/

From abusive drivers, drivers taking the wrong route, people especially women feeling unsafe to drivers stealing from passengers, which would be impossible with any ride sharing platform as no cash transactions are necessary.

But sure, put the head in the sand and ignore any possible solutions as inertia reigns supreme. The Irish way.

markodaly

end of the road wrote: »

the barrier protects everybody, both taxis and users. for the most part nobody is going to pony up the money to enter unless they are serious about running a taxi service. of course bad eggs slip through the net currently and we need to do more to stop that, but with your idea there is a higher chance of it happening and i and many others are not willing to support the government taking that risk. the state has to decide to an extent who drives a taxi as a matter of public safety. such a regime doesn't just belong in the 1970s, it belongs in the now and the future.

Getting the state to enforce an arbitrary price to enter a business is indeed stupid, idiotic, short sighted and ultimately authoritarian. We had this mindset in the 1970's.

The only people this protects are the current drivers, it does not protect the customer at all. The customer is left with clapped out cars, due to the high price of the SPSV license. They are also left with low standards with little enforcement giving that the NTA admit that year on year complaints about drivers have increased again and again. Who is this protecting?

You are more than happy to tell would be drivers, especially women who are more than capable drivers, with a clean driving license that the 'barrier' exists to protect them. You are more than happy to let the current situation continue and pull the run under from scores of women. Oh sure, they are free to enter the industry, but first have to pony over the guts of 6,500 euro.

iamtony

markodaly wrote: »

Getting the state to enforce an arbitrary price to enter a business is indeed stupid, idiotic, short sighted and ultimately authoritarian. We had this mindset in the 1970's.

The only people this protects are the current drivers, it does not protect the customer at all. The customer is left with clapped out cars, due to the high price of the SPSV license. They are also left with low standards with little enforcement giving that the NTA admit that year on year complaints about drivers have increased again and again. Who is this protecting?

You are more than happy to tell would be drivers, especially women who are more than capable drivers, with a clean driving license that the 'barrier' exists to protect them. You are more than happy to let the current situation continue and pull the run under from scores of women. Oh sure, they are free to enter the industry, but first have to pony over the guts of 6,500 euro.

€6500 licences cannot be bought at the moment. The only licence one could buy is a wheelchair accessible licence which costs €125 and they will even give you a grant of up to €10,000 to help pay for the cost of your wheelchair accessible vehicle.
Argument null and void, moving on...

iamtony

markodaly wrote: »

Taxi complaints have been rising year on year according to the NTA.
http://www.thejournal.ie/taxi-complaints-3-3719479-Dec2017/

From abusive drivers, drivers taking the wrong route, people especially women feeling unsafe to drivers stealing from passengers, which would be impossible with any ride sharing platform as no cash transactions are necessary.

But sure, put the head in the sand and ignore any possible solutions as inertia reigns supreme. The Irish way.

the rise in complaint has risen with the level of people using taxis. If fact I would say the level of complaints per journey taken is down. Fake news!

markodaly

iamtony wrote: »

€6500 licences cannot be bought at the moment. The only licence one could buy is a wheelchair accessible licence which costs €125 and they will even give you a grant of up to €10,000 to help pay for the cost of your wheelchair accessible vehicle.
Argument null and void, moving on...

That would be an interesting development. How much is a wheelchair compliant car? Certainly more than 10,000 euro.

markodaly

iamtony wrote: »

the rise in complaint has risen with the level of people using taxis. If fact I would say the level of complaints per journey taken is down. Fake news!

The facts are the facts. Year on year complaints about taxi's have increased again and again.

end of the road

markodaly wrote: »

Taxi complaints have been rising year on year according to the NTA.
http://www.thejournal.ie/taxi-complaints-3-3719479-Dec2017/

From abusive drivers, drivers taking the wrong route, people especially women feeling unsafe to drivers stealing from passengers, which would be impossible with any ride sharing platform as no cash transactions are necessary.

and what are the NTA doing about this.
the answer to problems with the taxi industry isn't complete deregulation, we tried that already. the answer is some regulation to insure a minimum standard, which we have. the answer is also to enforce those regulations, which isn't being done.

markodaly wrote: »

But sure, put the head in the sand and ignore any possible solutions as inertia reigns supreme. The Irish way.

we had complete deregulation, it failed. the current system for the most part works. lots to do to make it work in full however.
ride sharing platforms can operate, they just have to abide by the rules. sometimes, sometimes in life people have to abide by rules.

markodaly wrote: »

Getting the state to enforce an arbitrary price to enter a business is indeed stupid, idiotic, short sighted and ultimately authoritarian. We had this mindset in the 1970's.

The only people this protects are the current drivers, it does not protect the customer at all. The customer is left with clapped out cars, due to the high price of the SPSV license. They are also left with low standards with little enforcement giving that the NTA admit that year on year complaints about drivers have increased again and again. Who is this protecting?

You are more than happy to tell would be drivers, especially women who are more than capable drivers, with a clean driving license that the 'barrier' exists to protect them. You are more than happy to let the current situation continue and pull the run under from scores of women. Oh sure, they are free to enter the industry, but first have to pony over the guts of 6,500 euro.

correct, i'm not willing to support a complete free for all. especially on the basis of a failed attempt by yourself at emotional blackmail.
women can enter the industry. the bar shouldn't be lowered to facilitate them, just like it shouldn't be for any other groups. i'd reccan many women would find such an attempt to do that insulting to them, as it would be saying they aren't capible of operating within the current industry, which is absolute nonsense. the industry should and does offer an equal footing to anyone who wishes to enter it, and that is absolutely correct and just.
if women aren't particularly interested in entering the industry, then that is fine, that is their right. some jobs will have more women within them then men and others more men within them then women. however as long as the opportunity for both sexes to enter such work exists, it does in the taxi industry, then there is no issue.
as for the quality of cars, that is down to lack of rules around them. we don't need deregulation and free for alls for ride share platforms only to deal with that issue.

iamtony

markodaly wrote: »

That would be an interesting development. How much is a wheelchair compliant car? Certainly more than 10,000 euro.

Its been like that for years. Don't know how much a wheelchair car is I'm sure done deal could answer your question.
And you need a car to be a taxi driver so you can't start saying the cost of the car is a barrier to entry unless you want even lower standards for the vehicles?

iamtony

markodaly wrote: »

The facts are the facts. Year on year complaints about taxi's have increased again and again.

Yes I'll give you that but I'm sure the nta can produce facts that the amount of people taking Taxi journeys has also increased year on year and by far more than the complaints have. Facts are facts when they suit your agenda.

howiya

iamtony wrote: »

Yes I'll give you that but I'm sure the nta can produce facts that the amount of people taking Taxi journeys has also increased year on year and by far more than the complaints have. Facts are facts when they suit your agenda.

Do taxi drivers report the number of journeys they make to the NTA?

iamtony

howiya wrote: »

Do taxi drivers report the number of journeys they make to the NTA?

No but I'm pretty sure they research it somehow.

trellheim

Jaysus the amount of Uber love here is amazing. Have any of you shares perchance ?

Like I said above, we've hack,taxi,limo licenses already and they all come with regulation and strong insurance requirements for the driver themselves

And as for "ride sharing" give me a break. Its work for reward and should be taxed and insured appropriately, and if the courts decide Uber's an employer, well they should be employees too

Look at the parade of "oh taxis are unsafe" type arguments you are trotting out above . If you want to get things changed then get elected and change them.

In your world how does Uber use the bus lanes , which is one of the major advantages of taxis , wait .. .there's Uber Taxi .. which is a taxi !!!

markodaly

trellheim wrote: »

Jaysus the amount of Uber love here is amazing. Have any of you shares perchance ?

Like I said above, we've hack,taxi,limo licenses already and they all come with regulation and strong insurance requirements for the driver themselves

And as for "ride sharing" give me a break. Its work for reward and should be taxed and insured appropriately, and if the courts decide Uber's an employer, well they should be employees too

Look at the parade of "oh taxis are unsafe" type arguments you are trotting out above . If you want to get things changed then get elected and change them.

In your world how does Uber use the bus lanes , which is one of the major advantages of taxis , wait .. .there's Uber Taxi .. which is a taxi !!!

Uber is not a publicly floated company, which shows us about as much as you know about them. The rest of the post is just a well oiled rant.

markodaly

iamtony wrote: »

Its been like that for years. Don't know how much a wheelchair car is I'm sure done deal could answer your question.
And you need a car to be a taxi driver so you can't start saying the cost of the car is a barrier to entry unless you want even lower standards for the vehicles?

The reason why taxi cars in Ireland are clapped out rubbish is the high fees for the SPSV license. If that fee didn't exist, money instead of being handed over to the NTA, would be put into newer, safer, cleaner and more efficient cars.

end of the road

markodaly wrote: »

The reason why taxi cars in Ireland are clapped out rubbish is the high fees for the SPSV license. If that fee didn't exist, money instead of being handed over to the NTA, would be put into newer, safer, cleaner and more efficient cars.

unfortunately there is no real tangible evidence to back that up.
the people who would buy newer, safer, cleaner and more efficient cars are already doing it dispite the licence cost, as they are serious about operating a taxi service and want to insure the best possible experience for their customer. you can sort out the unsuitible cars via regulation, as that has an actual chance of working.

trellheim

Uber is not a publicly floated company, which shows us about as much as you know about them. The rest of the post is just a well oiled rant.

Utter crap - nobody said anything about Uber's stock price, you could own some of Uber shares and not buy them on an open market . As for a rant, you are the one on the shill . Everything I've said is factual. All you seem to come out with is reddit-type "DAE" posts ( does anyone else think its awful etc that actual regulation costs money )

Do you have any connection we should know about to Uber ? I've publicly stated above I have zero connection to the taxi industry except being a service user . If you're a paid advocate thats fine, you might want to see the admins here about buying ad space though.

As for your "oh noez crapped out taxis" post above, theres a ton of 161,162,171,172 cabs . Get off the shilling.

iamtony

markodaly wrote: »

The reason why taxi cars in Ireland are clapped out rubbish is the high fees for the SPSV license. If that fee didn't exist, money instead of being handed over to the NTA, would be put into newer, safer, cleaner and more efficient cars.

Nonsense.

usernamegoes

trellheim wrote: »

Utter crap - nobody said anything about Uber's stock price, you could own some of Uber shares and not buy them on an open market .

Do you honestly think that those of us who support Uber-stlye car services in Ireland and posting about it on Boards are part of large VC funds investing billions!

mdebets

markodaly wrote: »

So, you are in favour or the state creating an artificial barrier to entry to ensure a 'healthy' taxi service, as in to protect those already in the industry, nothing at all about servicing the needs of the customer which you have not mentioned. So what if every Tom Dick and Mary wants to drive a taxi. The state should not decide this, it should be up to the individual themselves. Your level of thinking belongs in the 1970's.

The 6300 euro figure is nothing more then state sanctioned robbery. There is no extra training needed to be a taxi driver, anyone with a full clean license and clean criminal record should be able to take fee paying passenger and that the state asks people to pay a sum like that for the privilege is a disgrace. It is actually very authoritarian.

To be honest, its this level of thinking that makes me look forward to more automation where by a human taxi driver is no longer needed. I suppose we will have to block that too with some tax.:rolleyes:

You need some barrier to entry, to protect the taxi industry, but also to protect the customers and the general public.

If every Tom, Dick and Harry could get a Taxi could get a license, the market would be oversaturated, especially with part-time drivers who are only there, to earn some additional money on a side job (and people are already complaining of too many taxis clogging up the streets on Saturday nights). Most of them would only work on lucrative shifts, taking the average income per taxi down, which would lead long term to the exit of full time taxi drivers and a severe reduction on non-lucrative shifts, So longer waiting times for people.