Comment

EDITORIAL
Save
Print
License article

The route to reparation for taxi licence owners

Taxi owners are planning to blockade the Tullamarine Freeway on Monday, creating another needless disruption to the community following the chaotic scene last week when yellow cabs jammed lanes on the Bolte Bridge. Protest action of this type is misguided and will elicit little public sympathy for what are very real challenges to the livelihood of taxi owners – challenges over which there is understandable distress.

The protest has been sparked by anger over the deregulation of the taxi industry after the recent onset of ride-sharing services powered by mobile technology. The most recognisable ride-sharing service, Uber, has completely upended the monopoly once enjoyed by taxi owners, who had previously only been allowed to operate under a limited number of licences purchased at great expense.

Up Next

Million Dollar Cold Case

null
Video duration
01:03

More Victoria News Videos

Inside Melbourne's taxi protest

Why taxi licence owners and their supporters disrupted Monday morning's peak hour traffic.

The taxi industry is hardly alone in feeling the consequences of new technology – we in the media know something about that challenge, too. The digital revolution has dramatically transformed, or effectively put an end to, many once-stable businesses. You won't find many shops to process camera films these days, for example, and video libraries are almost extinct.

The advent of new technology has mostly benefited consumers. The ride-sharing pioneers saw an opportunity to offer an alternative to the domain of taxis, where complaints about musty cars or lacklustre service have been common. Ride-sharing allows personal reviews of driver performance, in contrast to the bland anonymity of a homogenous fleet.

But the plight of taxi owners should be distinguished from a market-driven transformation of business. The significant licence fee – often running to hundreds of thousands of dollars – was driven by a government-mandated cap on licence numbers. The cost of taxi licences had ballooned to such an extent owners had often failed to properly invest in the quality of cars or, when leasing their licence, pay drivers sufficient wages to ensure quality service.

There was also a public safety justification, for passengers and drivers alike. The government required uniform standards for taxis and that cameras be installed inside cars to deter crime.

Advertisement

It was reasonable for taxi owners to assume the licence would carry an ongoing value, allowing them a level of certainty for their investment. But the decision to deregulate the industry has effectively taken away the property of taxi owners. For this, they deserve fair compensation. The Andrews government has pledged to buy back a single taxi licence for $100,000 and pay $50,000 for the second licence of owners, and set aside a fund to assist with financial hardship.

Clearly it remains open for dispute whether this amount is sufficient, and it is important to recognise a potentially tragic intersection of forces at play here. Technology has outpaced public policy, challenged the community, disrupted business, and had a potentially devastating impact on people. Warnings that despairing taxi owners could take their own lives must be taken seriously.

Taxi driver Lou Bougias, who rose to prominence for his calm bravery when helping the injured on Bourke Street, captured the distress well when he addressed protesters last week. "Something very, very wrong is happening," he said. "It's immoral. It's literally illegal and it's not right. It has to stop."

Mr Bougias is at least half right. It would be immoral not to compensate taxi owners, and that should be the focus of their campaign. Railing against the technological revolution is not going to stop it. A fair outcome is best achieved by negotiating with the government, not inconveniencing the broader community in Melbourne.