Transferable licenses, a concept of the past

Taxi drivers are angry and we understand them. We change the rules of the game and they can only lose.

The government bears some responsibility for the changes that affect them, but it is not alone in having things to blame. It is the entire community that is responsible for the chaos and taxi drivers of the past who have enriched themselves with the speculative profits from the sale of their licenses at the end of their career are certainly no strangers.

In all the sectors of activity which the State deems appropriate to regulate the practice, it raises the question whether it should also limit the number of authorized participants. It does not do this for driving licenses for example, but to have the right to drive a taxi, it was thought desirable to limit the number. We will not go into details, but say that it had the advantage of promoting the quality of service, reducing costs for regulatory authorities in terms of controls. For example, we all know the high costs of quality controls for driving motor vehicles in terms of police surveillance, radar operations, finding of offenses, demerit points and the judicial system.

For taxi drivers, limiting the number of licenses is a prerequisite. If there are too many to do this job, as the rates are also regulated, there will not be enough customers per license holder and they will not be able to live decently from their job. As a taxi vehicle has always been specially equipped for this kind of activity (meter, dome, display), everyone has found it normal, so to speak, to attach the taxi permit to a vehicle rather than to a person. Fault. Even worse, it was also thought that it would be a good idea to allow the transfer of “property” as if it were a good, when it was a right. Re-error. We can limit the number of permits, but we must do so by tightening the delivery and control mechanisms,

Everyone was at fault in this comedy of errors. The “owners” of taxi permits attributed to them a value that was ultimately not much, just a paper right to practice a trade with a motor vehicle virtually identical to that of other road users. They have all seen speculation seize the thing. They mistakenly believed that they could win, never lose, and in this they should accept some responsibility for what is happening.

It is now time to end the scheme and the arrival of services like Uber may have been the trigger because it simply revealed the ridiculous situation. Other times, other morals, certainly, but Minister Bonnardel still has a lot of courage to face a situation that will only losers. The government must certainly compensate the drivers because it has done wrong, but taxi holders also have to do their mea culpa, as Perrette had to do once she broke her pot of milk.

Share Button