Taxi Talk April 2017

 

Embed or link this publication

Description

Taxi Talk magazine - voice of the victorian taxi and hire car industry

Popular Pages


p. 1

TAXI VOICE OF THE TAXI INDUSTRY Australia’s premier independent taxi & hire car industry magazine TALK APRIL 2017 ISSUE NO 585 VOICE OF THE TAXI INDUSTRY TAXI MAGAZINE ON THE RANKS SINCE 1966 PROUDLY PUBLISHED AND PRINTED IN MELBOURNE Print Post Approved number 100004912 ting MELBOURNE INTERNATIONAL COMEDY FESTIVAL It's the time that Melbourne echos with howls of laughter from audiences in 556 shows across 100 venues in and around Melbourne. There will be new artists launching their comedy careers and the well-l­oved artists returning for the fans and the love of it. With the promise of lots of belly laughs, there will be comedy of all kinds, in every medium, for every taste. celebra YEARS THE VOICE OF THE VICTORIAN TAXI INDUSTRY

[close]

p. 2

ACCIDENTWe have Quick and COVER Easy solutions FOR TAXIS & for all your Accident Cover HIRE CARS needs VICTORIA TAXI CLUB 128 Errol Street, North Melbourne tel 9326 3808 | fax 9326 4808 | email vic.taxi@bigpond.com

[close]

p. 3

INSIDE THIS ISSUE 6 FAIR GO FOR ALL Committee calls for level playing field for all commercial passenger vehicles. 8 SUBMISSION TO VIC OMBUDSMAN It appears TSC has been directed not to enforce the ACT. 12 THE LAW & THE TAXI INDUSTRY Nobody, no matter who you are, should be above the law. 14 WHERE TO NOW MINISTER? Government has no data from Uber, because Uber refuse to give it. 32 LET'S GET HEALTHY Making just one small change can be enough to make you healthier. 39 INDUSTRY STATISTICS Figures on the number of drivers, licences, etc. for last month. Views expressed in any article in Taxi Talk magazine are those of the individual contributor and not necessarily those of the publisher. The publisher cannot accept any responsibility for any opinions, information, errors or omissions in this publication. To the extent permitted by law, the publisher will not be liable for any damages including special, exemplary, punitive or consequential damages (including but not limited to economic loss or loss of profit or revenue or loss of opportunity) or indirect loss or damage of any kind arising from the contract, tort or otherwise, even if advised of the possibility of such loss of profits or damage. Advertisements must comply with the relevant provisions of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. Responsibility for compliance with the Act rests with the person, company or advertising agency submitting the advertisement. Taxi Talk magazine has agreed to advertise taxi clubs because those clubs have stated that they and their products comply with all applicable laws and regulations relating to insurance for taxi operators. Taxi Talk magazine has not independently verified these taxi clubs’ compliance, and give no warranty and make no representation as to whether the taxi clubs are compliant. Operators should satisfy themselves as to a taxi club’s compliance with laws and regulations through their own enquiries. These advertisements do not constitute recommendations by Taxi Talk magazine that operators purchase insurance products from taxi clubs. Taxi Talk magazine does not accept any liability or responsibility for any loss or damage suffered or incurred by any operator because a taxi club or its product or service is non-compliant. Taxi Talk magazine is wholly owned by Trade Promotions Pty Ltd. COPYRIGHT © Trade Promotions Pty Ltd 2015. All rights reserved. The “Taxi Talk – Voice of the taxi industry” heading and logos are trademarks of Stanley F. White. Copyright of articles and photographs of Taxi Talk magazine remain with the individual contributors and may not be reproduced without permission. VOICE OF THE TAXI INDUSTRY TAXI MAGAZINE ON THE RANKS SINCE 1966 MAGAZINE EDITOR Toni F. Peters FOUNDER Stanley F. White PUBLISHER Trade Promotions Pty Ltd ADVERTISING ENQUIRIES Mrs Toni Peters Trade Promotions Pty Ltd PO Box 2345, Mt Waverley VIC 3149 Phone: ....................................... 0400 137 866 Email: ............................. info@taxitalk.com.au Website: .......................... www.taxitalk.com.au Media Pack containing advertisement sizes and costs can be downloaded from our website. DEADLINE All articles, editorial and artwork must be submitted by the 15th of the month prior to publication date. CLASSIFIED ADS $35 for 40 words, $70 for 80 words, etc. Email or Mail your classified advertisement by the 15th of the month prior to publication date, together with your payment. HOME DELIVERY SUBSCRIPTION $40 for your copy of Taxi Talk to be mailed to you for one year. PAYMENT OPTIONS • Direct Deposit to Trade Promotions Pty Ltd BSB 033065 A/c 312786 • Via PAYPAL to info@taxitalk.com.au • Mail Cheque to Trade Promotions Pty Ltd PO Box 2345, Mt Waverley VIC 3149 proudly supporting these organisations since inception..... April 2017 | 3

[close]

p. 4

How 4 | April 2017 eFdROMitToHE r’s desk Last month the Victorian Government presented the Commercial Passenger Vehicle Bill 2017 to the Legislative Assembly and it was passed, unamended, to the upper house - the Legislative Council - where it is to be reviewed and debated. It has been stated that 98% of taxi licence owners hold four or less licences. Okay, that probably is the case - but surely the people who own more than four licences are entitled to osiwmnilaIotrnec,otmwop,etnhsraeteioonr as those four. who The bill also introduces a $2 per trip levy, which supposedly will fund the industry support package and replace annual licence fees. But unfortunately there is no sunset clause on this section of the bill, which means that this levy can continue indefinitely. As at the date of publishing this edition of Taxi Talk, we are no closer to a decision on the Commercial Passenger Vehicle Bill 2017. It appears that this debate will continue for a few more weeks, perhaps even months. So as the law stands today, the ride sharing/ride hailing companies operating in Victoria are operating ILLEGALLY. Interesting to note that members of parliament still think that the Victorian Taxi Association (VTA) is the peak industry body representing every facet of the Victorian taxi industry. How wrong they are! When 13CABS withdrew their membership late last year, that was the end of the VTA being anywhere near the peak industry body. Nowadays they represent Silver Top Taxis and a handful of country/regional operators who haven't yet been swallowed up by 13CABS. It has been reported by the Ride Sourcing parliamentary enquiry that the VTA is all for deregulation of the Victorian taxi industry and that "the VTA has strongly advocated that the legislation should pass as soon as possible to create the level playing field they require to compete with new entrants". Really? I don't believe that the VTA is happy with the compensation offered and the proposed $2 per trip levy. It appears that there are some within government who are quoting past views of the VTA and not current ones. In December 2015 it was reported in The Age that a spokesman for Consumer Affairs Victoria said any Uber complaints were referred to the TSC, but its chief executive, Aaron de Rozario, said they do not investigate "unlawful transport providers". So even way back then in 2015 Aaron de Rozario knew and stated that Uber was unlawful - but yet the TSC didn't do anything to enforce the Victorian law. Well, now the Victorian Hire Car Association (VHCA) has made a submission to the Victorian Ombudsman regarding the inaction by the TSC against Uber for providing illegal ride-sharing services and the operation of commercial passenger vehicles without appropriate licences. The VHCA submitted that it is logical to assume that the TSC has been directed not to enforce the provisions of the Act against ride-share drivers. YEARS Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry

[close]

p. 5

VOICE OF THE TAXI INDUSTRY TAXI MAGAZINE ON THE RANKS SINCE 1966 proudly published and printed in Melbourne The submission also suggests that if a search warrant were to be issued against Uber, it would disclose tens of thousands of infringements committed by them in Victoria. Uber has copped a hiding in the past few months, all around the globe. At least six key executives and high-ranking employees have left since the beginning of 2017. Director of Artificial Intelligence Lab, Gary Marcus stepped down just after three months of employment and Uber lost three of its top engineers from the autonomous research department. In January Mr Kalanick was widely criticised for apparently intervening in a strike by taxi drivers opposed to President Donald Trump's ban on refugees. A campaign, called #DeleteUber, started and its intention was to encourage people to stop using the Uber app. Then there were the sexual harassment allegations, video of Uber’s CEO having a raving fit at one of its drivers, and reports of a deceitful, cunning program, Greyball, to avoid government inspectors. And just when they would have thought they were in the clear, it was reported that Taiwan’s government seized Uber assets in lieu of tax payments that the government claims Uber owes. The report also suggests that Spotify is considering cutting ties with Uber over the ride-sharing company’s recent bad PR. The amount of money owed for Taiwan taxes is minor compared to their overall worth, but having assets frozen by the government is terrible PR and the whole thing will affect how Uber is perceived by the public in Taiwan. Last month in Ottowa, Canada, Federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau stated that Ottowa will amend the definition of taxi services under GST regulations to include ride-hailing effective July 1, 2017. That means all ride hailing drivers (including Uber) will have to register for GST, then charge and remit GST on all fares, as Ottowa taxi operators already do. As a matter of fact, just as all Australian taxi operators currently do! Carolyn Bauer of the Vancouver Taxi Association said, “I think it’s a huge win. Every person operating a business has to be responsible for paying taxes.” And rightly so. If you are providing a service or selling goods you must pay your government some form of a Goods and Services Tax. What a start to the year for Uber! Oh well - they should have played by the rules in the first instance and perhaps a great deal of these complications could have been avoided. Toni Peters Editor TT Victoria's only monthly industry magamziniNesiessvsueear!n Subscribe to Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi and Hire Car Industries to stay up-to-date with the latest industry news, views & outcomes. LETTER BOX DELIVERY to your home or work each month. 1 year subscription is only $40. payment options are on page 3 OR SUBSCRIBE AT OUR WEBSITE and get Taxi Talk magazine delivered to your email inbox every month, for free. www.taxitalk.com.au Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry YEARS April 2017 | 5

[close]

p. 6

FAIR GOCOMMITTEE SAYS FOR ALL Committee calls for level playing field for all commercial passenger vehicles. On March 23, 2017 the Victorian Parliament’s Economy and Infrastructure Committee tabled its report on ride sourcing services, calling for a level playing field for all commercial passenger vehicle operations in Victoria. The Committee has recommended that the Legislative Council defer debate on the Commercial Passenger Vehicle Industry Bill 2017 while two major issues of concern are resolved: • Finalisation of a satisfactory compensation package for taxi industry members who must transition to the new regulatory regime • Determination of the effectiveness, cost of implementation and effect on users of the proposed $2 levy on all rides. “The ‘new economy’ that allows for collaborative consumerism and sharing of resources is exciting and brings new opportunities for business and consumers. But it also presents challenges for traditional industries,” Committee Chair, Bernie Finn said. “In the case of the taxi industry in Victoria their services have been undercut by unregulated ride sourcing services offered by Uber. What the government needs to do now is to implement regulations to ensure a level playing field for all participants in the commercial passenger vehicle industry,” he said. The Committee found that ride sourcing services can be defined as taxi services, even though the method to book these services is technology based, and should therefore be subject to regulation. It also found that traditional taxi industry stakeholders have invested in assets that have now lost their value and should be compensated to assist them in their transition to new industry standards. Government MPs stated that the report found that ridesharing services are operating without licences and without being subject to regulation. The report found that ridesharing service providers have an unfair advantage that require redress The Victorian Taxi Association (VTA) has also been quoted as strongly advocating that the legislation 6 | April 2017 YEARS Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry

[close]

p. 7

should pass as soon as possible to create the level playing field they require to compete with new entrants. A degree of regulation of new entrants to the commercial passenger vehicle industry is important, both to ensure certainty for the taxi industry and to remove barriers to new businesses that offer services. It is also important that this happens soon. But not until compensation for those who have purchased costly licences, even as recently as last year, has been properly negotiated and finalised. Samantha Dunn, Member for Eastern Metropolitan Region, stated that the Commercial Passenger Vehicle Industry Bill 2017 requires the scrutiny of a Parliamentary Committee Inquiry. An inquiry would allow the opportunity for an in depth examination of the bill and allow for input by experts, individuals, business and government organisations. In relation to the $2 levy proposed by the government to help fund compensation for the taxi industry, Mr Finn expressed concerns about how that has been developed and whether there might be more sensible alternatives. “A major concern is that there is no sunset clause attached to the levy. An open ended tax that could potentially raise many millions beyond what its stated funding purpose is, and continue indefinitely does not seem like an efficient or welcome development for Victorians,” Mr Finn said. State Revenue Office CEO, Paul Broderick has stated that "We understand that payers may not be happy about making this payment, so we do not want to add to this unhappiness by making the collection process onerous". "The high-level administrative framework around the $2 levy has been designed to minimise as much as possible the burden on those liable to pay the levy. Levy payers will self-assess their levy liability and lodge an electronic quarterly return with the levy payment. The information required to enable a selfassessment is essentially the same information that industry participants are currently required to collate and keep," Mr Broderick continued. But with regards to the self-assessment process, the Committee is most concerned about the compliance of same. Committee members expressed their belief that overseas-based companies (eg Uber) may not provide access to data held overseas. Also cross border situations are uncertain, as they were initially with the MPTP system for many years. $2 proposed levy unresolved issues remain • • • • • cTlWcTeoofhToohvpshhernyeteoe:saaroaiabpclwfdcatiopeietctllhiunlrlktiieiasycnenouladnlogfmcetedfiavooGfesyisunsSnmr.tpsuiTotoaneoaflfaslblrtyptehsbhb.pteoeuulcrislslcbleieianainvvunbeyeysg.sislewsTistth?hiyhtneo.eetncalheobevssyBtooimrlbflattyhhee pWahyetthheerletvhye?elderly and disabled riders will • • • nRTrTereTeehahxdwhveicesieeeslpencateadrroucdmoibsekbgttouyrhOouoatefitfmnfnhfaiptcgec.uoboetlrlfuhelpfedrevooecgyrvslteeieieimnstvnyogauup,flenlltiteohschpmeceeurarelenttledeanekvdiivtnyncayo,ttt.eaiowaondnnntdhdt.ooemfbSatehtyaistfear It appears that full consideration has not been given to how the levy will be applied in situations where licences are held in both NSW and Victoria. For example, will businesses operating in Victoria but registered in NSW be required to pay the levy? The Victorian Government has not yet finalised arrangements for how eligible MPTP members will receive transport support through the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). There is concern that users of the MPTP will be required to pay the $2 levy plus associated GST on top of the fares currently paid. Furthermore there are concerns about payment of the levy by the elderly and disabled for whom the levy represents a significant further cost. TT Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry YEARS April 2017 | 7

[close]

p. 8

VSIUCBMISOSIOMN TOBUDSMAN It appears TSC has been directed not to enforce the Act against ride-share drivers. Last month the Victorian Hire Car Association (VHCA) (via their legal representatives – Mann Lawyers) wrote and submitted a complaint to the Victorian Ombudsman, Ms Deborah Glass. 8 | April 2017 In brief, the VHCA stated in their submission that the Taxi Services Commission (TSC) has failed to enforce and/or is in breach of its statutory obligations under:- • s158 of the Act against operators, drivers and owners of vehicles acting as commercial passenger vehicles without a licence to do so; • s165 of the Act against operators or drivers of ride-sharing vehicles such as Uber; • s191YJ of the Act in disregarding offences committed by ride-share operators under the Act and in systematically declining to enforce the provision of the Act against them; So, in other words the TSC has failed to take any action against Uber Australia Pty Ltd for providing illegal ride-sharing services and the operation of commercial passenger vehicles without appropriate licences; • In undertaking the above conduct, the TSC acted unlawfully in following direction from the Transport Minister, Jacinta Allan and/or her office, and hence Deborah Glass Victorian Ombudsman disregarding its obligations under s191YJ of the Act; and • The Taxi Services Commission has continued to enforce the provisions against legal operators of commercial passenger vehicles, for the duration, resulting in undue harm and commercial disadvantage to legitimate operators. The VHCA submitted to the Victorian Ombudsman that it is logical to assume that the TSC has been directed not to enforce the provisions of the Act against rideshare drivers. YEARS Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry

[close]

p. 9

It was stated in the submission licences issued was reflective of ac- • Transparent: Industry partici- that since Uber commenced op- crued demand in the industry and pants must be in no doubt as erations in Australia in 2012 it has also reflected substantial revenue to the criteria used by the TSC not required that vehicles used by for government. in coming to a decision. Deci- its drivers are licenced commercial passenger vehicles or taxis. By contrast, Hire Car operators have It was noted that pursuant to s191YF of the Act, the TSC has a statutory duty to "develop, maintain and re- sions and their reasons must be clearly communicated to relevant stakeholders. been required, in order to legally op- view a taxi industry monitoring, com- • Proportionate: Decisions erated under the Act, to comply with pliance and enforcement policy". made by the TSC will be the following: The enforcement policy was up- proportionate to the identi- • purchase of a Hire Car licence for each commercial passen- dated in 2015 and key terms of the policy are: ger vehicle; • Accountable: To ensure full • completion of examination and receipt of a commercial accountability, our enforcement decisions and the con- fied risk to safety or the seriousness of any perceived breach and the level of noncompliance with legislative requirements. passenger vehicle driver li- duct of staff will be explained • Fair and Reasonable: The TSC cence for each driver; and and open to public scrutiny. seeks to strike the right bal- • payment of annual fees for the • Consistent: Like situations will above. be treated in a like manner. At present, the TSC continues to sell licences for Hire Car vehicles for $40,000 each. The regulation and enforcement of the industry was, for operators, critical to their business model. The number of hire car Industry participants need to have full confidence that the TSC's decision making and actions will be equitable and that comparable situations will have comparable outcomes. ance between assisting voluntary compliance and undertaking enforcement actions, while responding to the competing interests of industry participants, stakeholders, government and the public. ..../ continued page 10 New EFTPOS Taxi & Hire Cars With Manual Card Number Entry Get Best Commission Paid Daily Payout Driver Card It’s Free! Get it Now! support@cabcue.com www.cabcue.com/order Or call: 0422 592 003 Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry YEARS April 2017 | 9

[close]

p. 10

VSIUCBMISOSIOMN TOBUDSMAN continued from page 9 On 23 August 2016, the Minister for Transport, Jacinta Allan, announced that the government intended to deregulate the taxi and hire car industries, but still as of the time of printing this edition, the Act remains­ unchanged. Prior to Minister Allan's announcement of 23 August 2016, the TSC brought a number of enforcement actions against Uber drivers. These were relatively trivial compared to the enforcement actions taken against licensed operators, but they did involve issuing penalty notices to Uber drivers. But never to Uber despite Uber being clearly implicit in facilitating and inducing the provision of illegal services. Enforcement against licenced operators also included other dimensions that were never applied to Uber vehicles, such as in the case of hire cars, this included requiring operators to present vehicles for inspection to ensure that they met standards for safety and size. In January 2017, for instance, 1,258 vehicle inspections were undertaken. To the VHA's knowledge, none of these were rideshare operator's vehicles. For a full copy of the submission to the Victorian Ombudsman visit www.vhca.com.au The VHCA submitted that it is logical to come to the conclusion that the TSC has been directed not to enforce the provisions of the Act against rideshare drivers. The VHCA submitted to the Victorian Ombudsman that the TSC, as a statutory body, is bound in its decision-making to apply the Act. The Act obliges the TSC to have regard to s191YJ in undertaking enforcement actions and decisions. The decision not to enforce the law has caused loss and harm to tens of thousands of Victorians. This is separate to the impact of proposed changes to licences and compensation, because the failure to enforce created an uneven playing field, with a strong advantage to brazen, public noncompliance with statutory obligations. The submission also states that this is an issue of importance beyond the particular circumstances of hire cars, taxis and the TSC. Rather, it concerns approaches to departmental implementation of stated government policy where such policy is not yet legislated and is in contradiction to current Victorian law. The submission compared this non-compliance of the law with VicRoads waiving fines for speeding where a government has announced a future intention to increase speed limits, but has not yet done so. The Ombudsman's role is to investigate the decisions and actions of Victorian government bodies. The Ombudsman seeks to ensure the highest possible standards of public sector service delivery to all Victorians. The Ombudsman is independent and impartial and provides a free service. The VHCA has requested that the Victorian Ombudsman considers and investigates the decisionmaking process undertaken by the TSC resulting in the non-enforcement of the law against rideshare operators and unlicensed commercial passenger vehicles and their operators. They also requested that the financial impact and consequences of the selective enforcement on licenced operators, who have continued to be obliged to comply with the requirements of the Act at great financial expense, be considered. The submission also suggested that were a search warrant or notice to produce be issued against Uber Australia, it would disclose tens of thousands of infringements committed by unlicensed and unaccredited operators within the state of Victoria. So, we now just need to be patient and wait to see the outcome of this submission to the Victorian Ombudsman. TT 10 | April 2017 YEARS Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry

[close]

p. 11

TAXI COVER #1 SINCE 1978 Serving the taxi industry for 38 years • Trustworthy • Reliability • Service • Peace of Mind CALL TO DISCUSS YOUR TAXI COVER NEEDS THE OWNERS ASSOCIATION 108Ta4xi TaClke- Vnoitcreeof RtheoTaaxidIn,duOstray kleigh South 9563OFFICE 7812 YEARS 9092 6082MEMBER LINE April 2017 | 15

[close]

p. 12

THELATWAANDXI INDUSTRY Nobody, no matter who you are, should be above the law. I can understand that people are angry when politicians change our laws so that big business can operate. The so maligned taxi licensing system served the public very well for many decades. It was not the system that caused some faults to emerge; it was the greed of people who wanted something that they did not work for. This includes the Victorian government, taxi drivers, the radio networks, Uber and other dispatch systems, and last but not least taxi licence lessors and taxi licence lessees. All of them contributed to the present mess that is happening in the taxi industry, especially in Victoria. It is incomprehensible to hear and see so much misinformation from politicians, the press and TV with respect to the present deregulation of the taxi industry. It seems that only sensational news is reported and most journalists do not bother to look for facts and the truth, but report their own uninformed views or a populist version of the facts. Our politicians seem to be more interested in their own welfare than that of their constituents. It is frightening to see how little our politicians know about our taxi industry and how receptive they are to the populist and big business views. They are willing to make decisions that negatively affect thousands of hard working Australians without any benefit to the community at large. The facts are relatively simple. We have laws in Australia that state simply that paying passengers can only be transported in vehicles that carry commercial registration. So do we follow Ms McManus’ view where people and big business only abide by laws that they find just, or do we uphold our laws till our democracy sees fit to change them? Nobody, neither rich nor poor, nor of any ethnicity, race or colour of the skin, nor of any social standing should be above the law. The law is the law and those who choose to break the law should be held to account for their actions and wear the consequences. This will in no way stop people from breaking or in certain circumstances wantonly breaking the law, but it would make people more responsible for their actions and help to 12 | April 2017 YEARS Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry

[close]

p. 13

reduce lawless behaviour in our state. So where are the major instances where our laws get broken by our so-called competitors to the taxi industry? 1. Uber drivers do not hold commercial registration on their vehicles. 2. Uber drivers do wait on ranks in close vicinity to taxi ranks to ply for hire. 3. Uber drivers seem to get away with paying incorrect GST and taxes because our laws are not enforced. 4. Some Uber drivers defraud insurance companies by not declaring that they are carrying people for reward when they make a claim on their insurance. 5. Uber misclassifies their drivers, and therefore gains an unfair advantage over the taxi industry, by declaring their drivers as independent contractors when they should clearly be classified as employees. 6. Uber is a taxi business but by claiming to be a digital platform they charge passengers non-regulated fares and thereby gain a commercial advantage. 7. Uber uses an algorithm to charge, at times, many times more than the regulated taxi fare, but still claim that they are cheaper than taxis. We can ask ourselves how is it possible for a company like Uber to continuously break laws in many countries around the world and get away with it. There is no simple answer to this, as different countries have different laws and have not always the same desire to enforce them. Several countries have not changed their laws in order to accommodate Uber but allowed Uber to operate within existing laws. However, faced with heavy penalties Uber decided it was not worthwhile or impossible to work within the law and decided to suspend their operation in several European countries. A clear indication that the business model of Uber is flawed and that it can only operate by exploiting loopholes in the law as well as exploitation of their workforce and customers. So why is our Victorian Government accommodating a foreign multinational company by changing our laws rather than enforcing them? Is it the sheer weight of money or is it ignorance that makes our politicians act against the interests of its own citizens? Could there be a pattern emerging in the philosophies of our governments over the last decade, where governments act rather in their own interest or the interest of their political alliance and big business groups, than that of ordinary Australians? Glaring examples of this are the desalination plant, Myki, the oversupply in the taxi industry, the Eastwest Link, CFA dispute, the closing of Hazelwood, and last but not least, the Heyfield Timber Mill dispute. Personally, I am disgusted by all this and especially the patronizing and spin doctoring flyers that I receive from the Government from time to time. Hans Althoff Taxi Owner / Operator TT Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry YEARS April 2017 |13

[close]

p. 14

TO NOWWHERE MINISTER? The Andrews Government has no data from Uber, because Uber has refused to give it. As we write this article the Andrews Labor Government has initiated the Parliamentary process to dismantle the taxi and hire car industry as we know it. They do so knowing full well they will cause financial and emotional harm to thousands of families whose only crime was to work in Victoria's public transport system. They do so, also knowing data they have made their decision on is flawed. How could they possibly come to the conclusion that they will raise $44 million (net) from the taxi tax? They have no data from the hire car and limousine industry, no data from Uber, no knowledge of the size of the hire car and limousine market. No knowledge of the size of the ride share market. When challenged they could not produce market share numbers. Perhaps the Andrews Government should release the financial modelling, research and assumptions that have been made? The Andrews Government has used financial excuse not to pay market price (which they set for hire cars) they need to prove it. The only place they could have got that information on the hire car and limousine industry is the hire car and limousine industry! The Andrews Government has no data from Uber, because Uber has refused to give it. So the Andrews Labor Government is making life changing decisions on our lives so a Labor Government can accommodate a law breaking, tax avoiding American multi-national. Congratulations! Minster Allan stood on the steps of Parliament and promoted a ride share service (London Rides) that has not even moved a passenger in Victoria, quoting them as some sort of expert authority. Maybe Minister Allan should have consulted with those who have done the miles? She also inferred we should just absorb the Andrews Government's new tax. Well let's put that into some context. 14 | April 2017 YEARS Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry

[close]

p. 15

Feedback from our members is reporting a 30% drop in business since the Taxi Services Commission allowed and encouraged the illegal UberX business to operate, making many small businesses financially stressed and others inviable. This is costing jobs, full time and part time NOW! Because of this new tax, we will now have the financial burden of reporting to not the Taxi Services Commission (TSC), not the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) but now, four times a year to the State Revenue Office (SRO) apparently this is removing red tape!! We will be expected to bear the cost of that compliance and now, on top of all of that, the Minister expects us to absorb the tax! The cost to my little 3 car business would be in the $7000 to $9000 range per year without administration costs factored in. We will have no choice but to pass on this ill-considered burden to small businesses. Recently Mann Lawyers acting on instructions from the VHCA lodged a formal complaint with the Victorian Ombudsman:Complaint – Conduct of Minister Jacinta Allan and the Taxi Services Commission. For a full copy of our submission to the Victorian Ombudsman please go to www.vhca.com.au. Victorian Hire Car Association TT JOIN OUR FIGHTING FUND M$2H50Licence S$V10L0icence If you wish to become a member of the VHCA and join them in fighting for your rights as a Victorian Hire Car Licence holder, send the following via email to treasurer@vhca.com.au 1. Membership details • Your Name | Email Address | Mobile Phone number • # MH Licences | # Special Vehicle Licences 2. A remittance notice of your applicable payment advising your bank reference and value of payment made. (A receipt will be sent to you) Please pay direct into our bank account Account Name: VHCA #2 Account BSB: 083337 Account no: 408246370 Taxi Talk - Voice of the Taxi Industry YEARS April 2017 | 15

[close]

Comments

no comments yet