Personal and corporate investments in the taxi business are enormous. New services immediately devalue plates
At the risk of never getting a cab again, let me say that few truer words have been written as these: “The ‘check engine’ light is glowing on the dashboard of the Canadian taxi industry.”
It is a vivid image of a visceral business in no small desperation locally. It is difficult not to feel for the plight of today’s cabbie, nor to feel for the frustrated consumer and business.
But the federal Competition Bureau, in those opening words of its thoughtful discussion paper on the taxi business, is recognizing what most British Columbians – if not their government – have known for some time: the on-demand economy can’t be stopped or much controlled. The emerging ethos of sharing, of gigs and of immediate gratification has made the cab quaint and seemingly uncompetitive.
In other words, it’s time to permit Uber’s entry into Vancouver. The question is how, not if, and to recognize that how is not an easy question to answer.
We have too few taxis in Vancouver at peak hours. We have mismanaged the industry and its associated costs. Any move forward is inherently messy.
Regulations unduly restrict taxis: fixed fares, limits on plates, only certain eligible vehicles, and plenty of driver and vehicle safety and insurance provisions. The cost of a Vancouver plate surpasses $500,000; the debt servicing is often back-breaking. Poor plate management has made the entry and operating costs excessive and any sunset more difficult.
First and foremost, we need to find a way to ease taxi restraints to permit transformation.
Uber has entered markets with comparable freedom: generally cheaper but varying fares, unlimited number of vehicles, different makes and ages of them, and fewer safety and insurance provisions. This has created an illusion of ease in an industry that requires prudent public policy.
Second, and near foremost, we need to find a way to impose sensible restraints on them to permit their own transformation.
Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick likes to say ground transportation should be “like running water,” and he may want to reconsider the imagery, because he makes an inadvertent point for his opponents. We make sure our running water is safe, not just accessible, and that takes significant oversight – the kind Uber would not easily countenance.
We have to have compassion and perhaps some compensation in disruption. Personal and corporate investments in the taxi business are enormous. New services immediately devalue plates.
But, as the Competition Bureau also says: “Prohibition … is a blunt regulatory instrument.” Simply put, we can’t hold to form.
The problem is that even the bureau can’t figure out how to get us from here to there, so to speak, without possibly throwing the taxi business under the bus.
But there is a basic framework – featuring a lighter regulatory approach – our city and province should discuss with some urgency.
A wise policy would ensure the same insurance, mechanical safety requirements and rigorous background checks for Uber and taxi drivers.
We would need minimum levels of service, but not necessarily a standard dress code for drivers. We would ensure drivers were trained, but not necessarily retrained with such regularity and at such expense.
We might want to leave street hails and stands as the sole preserve of the taxi – after all, not all of us are handy with apps – and provide subsidies and incentives (perhaps via Uber) to taxis to ensure there are vehicles for residents or visitors with disabilities.
Eventually, once an adjustment has taken time, all vehicles for hire might fall under the same rules of the road. At that point the playing field would be level.
The taxi industry is a strong lobby and credibly points to the danger of too-swift deregulation. But we know the situation is untenable, so it is time to talk about change.
