Page 3773 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 28 October 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
access to both rank and hail services. That means taxis are the only operators allowed to pick up people from a taxi rank. They are also the only operators that are allowed to accept hailed fares off the street. My understanding is that in the ACT market that is around 50 per cent of all taxi fares. That indicates a significant value that has been retained exclusively for the taxi industry.
Moving to the specific issue of perpetual plate owners, I want to acknowledge that this is most likely a difficult time for people who have invested in these assets. They are concerned that the value of their asset will be devalued because ride sharing services are entering the market and licence fees are being reduced. Mr Coe seems to be suggesting that the government should provide compensation to perpetual plate owners. First of all, a threshold question is this: is any devaluation the fault of the government because it regulated a service that already existed and was already operating? I would say that it is not the government’s fault. The government has done the right thing by ensuring fair and adequate regulation is in place to govern ride sharing services—services that emerged on their own as a response to technology and to the changing way that businesses work, and the changing way services are delivered.
I do not think the government is obliged to try to create a special protected market for perpetual plate owners, especially when that would entail ignoring other emerging technologies and markets, and ignoring a government obligation to make sure they are properly regulated for the sake of all stakeholders. It is also worth noting, as Mr Barr pointed out in his remarks, that, unlike many jurisdictions, the ACT has not issued a perpetual taxi licence in 20 years.
It is an unfortunate reality of investments that the world changes, markets change, and the value of investments changes in accordance with that. People have invested in video stores, now obsolete because of new technologies and products. The markets of newsagents are changing because of online publications. Personal computer markets have been changed by tablets. Transport providers and related businesses and investments are being changed by technology such as mobile phones and services such as ride share. That is the real issue.
The government has taken a proactive, broadly welcomed and by all accounts sensible approach to regulating this new area, one that gives a level playing field to all of the providers, including ride share and taxis. As Mr Barr explained, the government recognises that perpetual plate holders may be affected by the reforms. Other stakeholders may be affected by reforms as well. It is not possible to foretell exactly what issues will emerge as this is a brand-new environment. Because of this the government has committed to actively monitoring and reviewing changes in the industry over the next 24 months. The ACT Valuation Office will assess changes to perpetual plate market values over that period.
I think that is the best approach to take in this situation. We need to let these reforms take effect, to review them and then assess whether there are any areas that need further work. That is what Mr Barr’s amendment proposes, and I will be supporting that amendment for that reason.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video