tdayuk
12-01-2006, 03:40
A nasty little addition has been blocked from a transport bill that would have started a strangle hold on the pedicab industry in London.
The amendment, which reads
(by the wife of a westminster city councilor) Baroness Hanham moved Amendment No. 21:
"PARKING AND TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT FOR PEDICABS (1) In determining, for the purposes of the enactments mentioned in subsection (2), who was the owner of a pedicab at any time, it shall be presumed, if the pedicab was licensed, that the owner was the person in whose name the pedicab was licensed at that time. (2) Those enactments are— (a) Part II of the Road Traffic Act 1991 (c. 40) (traffic in London); (b) Part II of and Schedule 1 to the London Local Authorities Act 1996 (c. ix) (bus lanes); (c) regulations made under section 144 of the Transport Act 2000 (c. 38) (civil penalties for bus lane contraventions); (d) Part 2 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (c. iii) (road traffic and highways); (e) regulations under section 72 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18) (civil penalties for road traffic contraventions); (f) any other enactment whether passed before or after this Act which provides for the service of penalty charge notices or notices to owner on the owner of a vehicle. (3) For the purposes of the enactments mentioned in subsection (2) above, a pedicab business is not to be treated as a vehicle-hire firm. (4) An authority responsible for the licensing of pedicabs shall, on request, make available to a traffic authority the name and address of the person in whose name a particular pedicab is licensed. (5) In section 15(12) of the Greater London Council (General Powers Act 1974 (c. xxiv) (parking on footways, grass verges, etc.), in the definition of "vehicles", after "means" insert "a pedicab (within the meaning given by section (Parking and traffic enforcement for pedicabs) of the Road Safety Act 2006), or". (6) The London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (c. iii) is amended as follows. (7) In section 4(5) (penalty charges for road traffic contraventions), for "motor vehicle" substitute "vehicle". (8) In section 4(16), omit the definition of "motor vehicle" and at the end insert the following definition— ""vehicle" means— (a) a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads; and 10 Jan 2006 : Column 116 (b) a pedicab within the meaning given by section (Parking and traffic enforcement for pedicabs) of the Road Safety Act 2006.". (9) In this section— "licensed" in respect of a pedicab means licensed under any enactment by virtue of the pedicab's use for the conveyance of passengers, and "licensing" shall be construed accordingly; "pedicab" means a cycle constructed or adapted— (a) to seat one or more passengers; and (b) for the purposes of being made available with a driver in the course of a business for the purpose of carrying passengers; "pedicab business" means a business which consists, in whole or in part, of— (a) the ownership of pedicabs; (b) the letting out of pedicabs to riders for use as a pedicab; or (c) taking bookings for the use of pedicabs by passengers."
It's in short the same stuff that was kicked out in the last bill (law)
As Lord Berkley (hero of the down trodden!!!) put it
"There have to be some rules surrounding parking and moving offences for pedicabs, but I really do not think that this is the right way to do it until we have a national structure for licensing and for what pedicabs are allowed to do which does not smell strongly—as many of these campaigns and proposed restrictions do—of the taxi people wanting to maintain their monopoly. Yes, pedicabs occasionally congregate outside fire exits, and that should not happen. Pedicabs occasionally clog up the corner of streets outside some of the West End theatres, but the clogging is done as much by people as it is by pedicabs. Why blame pedicabs? Why should a pedicab be fined for clogging up a pavement or a street if somebody has come along in a similar vehicle, which is not plying for hire, and locked it to the lamppost? It all seems wrong to me.
There is a great deal more work to be done on this. In the mean time, I urge my noble friend not to accept the amendment and to look at the situation carefully so that pedicabs, taxis and private hire vehicles can all work and live together in what I hope will be harmony.
Well said
The amendment, which reads
(by the wife of a westminster city councilor) Baroness Hanham moved Amendment No. 21:
"PARKING AND TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT FOR PEDICABS (1) In determining, for the purposes of the enactments mentioned in subsection (2), who was the owner of a pedicab at any time, it shall be presumed, if the pedicab was licensed, that the owner was the person in whose name the pedicab was licensed at that time. (2) Those enactments are— (a) Part II of the Road Traffic Act 1991 (c. 40) (traffic in London); (b) Part II of and Schedule 1 to the London Local Authorities Act 1996 (c. ix) (bus lanes); (c) regulations made under section 144 of the Transport Act 2000 (c. 38) (civil penalties for bus lane contraventions); (d) Part 2 of the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (c. iii) (road traffic and highways); (e) regulations under section 72 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 (c. 18) (civil penalties for road traffic contraventions); (f) any other enactment whether passed before or after this Act which provides for the service of penalty charge notices or notices to owner on the owner of a vehicle. (3) For the purposes of the enactments mentioned in subsection (2) above, a pedicab business is not to be treated as a vehicle-hire firm. (4) An authority responsible for the licensing of pedicabs shall, on request, make available to a traffic authority the name and address of the person in whose name a particular pedicab is licensed. (5) In section 15(12) of the Greater London Council (General Powers Act 1974 (c. xxiv) (parking on footways, grass verges, etc.), in the definition of "vehicles", after "means" insert "a pedicab (within the meaning given by section (Parking and traffic enforcement for pedicabs) of the Road Safety Act 2006), or". (6) The London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003 (c. iii) is amended as follows. (7) In section 4(5) (penalty charges for road traffic contraventions), for "motor vehicle" substitute "vehicle". (8) In section 4(16), omit the definition of "motor vehicle" and at the end insert the following definition— ""vehicle" means— (a) a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on roads; and 10 Jan 2006 : Column 116 (b) a pedicab within the meaning given by section (Parking and traffic enforcement for pedicabs) of the Road Safety Act 2006.". (9) In this section— "licensed" in respect of a pedicab means licensed under any enactment by virtue of the pedicab's use for the conveyance of passengers, and "licensing" shall be construed accordingly; "pedicab" means a cycle constructed or adapted— (a) to seat one or more passengers; and (b) for the purposes of being made available with a driver in the course of a business for the purpose of carrying passengers; "pedicab business" means a business which consists, in whole or in part, of— (a) the ownership of pedicabs; (b) the letting out of pedicabs to riders for use as a pedicab; or (c) taking bookings for the use of pedicabs by passengers."
It's in short the same stuff that was kicked out in the last bill (law)
As Lord Berkley (hero of the down trodden!!!) put it
"There have to be some rules surrounding parking and moving offences for pedicabs, but I really do not think that this is the right way to do it until we have a national structure for licensing and for what pedicabs are allowed to do which does not smell strongly—as many of these campaigns and proposed restrictions do—of the taxi people wanting to maintain their monopoly. Yes, pedicabs occasionally congregate outside fire exits, and that should not happen. Pedicabs occasionally clog up the corner of streets outside some of the West End theatres, but the clogging is done as much by people as it is by pedicabs. Why blame pedicabs? Why should a pedicab be fined for clogging up a pavement or a street if somebody has come along in a similar vehicle, which is not plying for hire, and locked it to the lamppost? It all seems wrong to me.
There is a great deal more work to be done on this. In the mean time, I urge my noble friend not to accept the amendment and to look at the situation carefully so that pedicabs, taxis and private hire vehicles can all work and live together in what I hope will be harmony.
Well said