Proceeding contribution from Lord Faulkner of Worcester (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 29 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Road Safety Bill [HL].
Road Safety Bill [HL]
moved Amendment No. 61:"After Clause 43, insert the following new clause—" ““HACKNEY CARRIAGES: SUPPLEMENTARY LICENSING CONDITIONS (1) In section 6(6) of the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, c. 115) (definition of ““matter of fitness”” for purposes of grant of hackney carriage licence) after paragraph (b) insert— ““(c) the matters set out in subsection (6A) of this section. (6A) The matters referred to in subsection (6)(c) are that any vehicle licensed as a hackney carriage under this section shall— (a) have been constructed specifically for use as a hackney carriage, (b) be used for no other purpose, (c) have hinged doors, (d) have access for disabled passengers at the side, and (e) have a rear window consisting of a single pane.”” (2) In section 47 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (c. 57) (licensing of hackney carriages), before subsection (1) insert— ““(A1) A district council may grant a licence for a hackney carriage only if the conditions in subsection (A2) are satisfied. (A2) The conditions are that any vehicle licensed as a hackney carriage under this section shall— (a) have been constructed specifically for use as a hackney carriage, (b) be used for no other purpose, (c) have hinged doors, (d) have access for disabled passengers at the side, and (e) have a rear window consisting of a single pane.”””” The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment deals with the law governing hackney carriages and taxis across the United Kingdom. The law is derived from a number of Acts of Parliament, some very ancient. The earliest that I am aware of are the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 and the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869, which the first part of this amendment seeks to amend. The amendment deals with the safety hazards created by hackney carriages that load wheelchair users from the rear, those that have split rear windscreens and those with sliding doors. It also insists that all taxis in the UK are purpose-built and not converted vans. I shall deal briefly with each issue. Numerous local authorities already ban taxi vehicles into which wheelchair users are loaded from the rear; they include major cities such as London, Edinburgh, Manchester, Liverpool and Sheffield. The main reason for my amendment is safety. Where taxis are lined up bumper to bumper at a railway station or airport rank, there is no space to pull forward safely. To load from the back they would have to put their nose into the flow of traffic and create a hazard. It is not surprising, therefore, that charities such as RADAR, the Spinal Injuries Association and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents—I declare an interest as a former president—all support that view. It has also been supported in two Early-Day Motions in another place and by fire brigades, which report that they often find it difficult to extract wheelchair users in rear-loading vehicles involved in rear-end shunts. Rear windscreens are a road safety issue. Many converted-van taxis have split rear windscreens and provide rear access through van-type doors. They have a central pillar in the rear windscreen that restricts the driver’s rear view and creates a large blind spot where children could be hidden and consequently hit when the vehicle is reversing. It also leads to drivers colliding with parked cycles and motorcycles hidden in the blind spot when they are reversing. The amendment insists that all hackney carriages should have a one-piece, single-pane rear windscreen. On hinged versus sliding doors, the amendment would adopt the same practice as exists in the city of New York, where sliding doors on taxis for non-disabled passengers were outlawed by Mayor Giuliani in 1996 and all vehicles with sliding doors had to be converted to use swing doors. Passengers who get out of vehicles through sliding doors on to a road are often at risk, as drivers coming up from behind will often not notice that a sliding door is opening. The first thing that they see is a leg or body emerging from the vehicle. Swing-hinged doors provide a visible barrier and create space for the passenger to exit. I should say a word about why all taxis should be purpose built. The iconic London black cab is the ideal for others to emulate. If all hackney carriages looked like those, the travelling public would be less confused and much safer. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 676 c167-9
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Disclosure of information Applications Costs Closures Accidents Countryside Bureaucracy Bus lanes Cars Cycling Fraud Identity cards Injuries Level crossings Large goods vehicles International cooperation Helmets Electric vehicles Police Passengers Motorcycles Proof of identity Motorway service areas Photography Taxis Registration Young people Safety Roads Road traffic offences Theft Driving licences Picnic sites
- Legislation
- Road Safety Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:19:04 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_281539
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_281539
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_281539