Hansard

PE1960 was lodged by Edward Grice, who is also the protagonist of PE1961, which we will consider in a moment. The petition is lodged on behalf of the Scottish Private Hire Association and calls on the Scottish Government to formally recognise private hire cars and taxis as modes of public transport and to enshrine such recognition in law. We previously considered the petition at our meeting on 7 December 2022, at which we agreed to write to the Scottish Government, the Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland, the Confederation of Passenger Transport and Heads of Planning Scotland. We have since received responses from the CPT and the Scottish Government. It is noted in the meeting papers that Heads of Planning Scotland declined to provide a formal response, indicating that it would defer to the views of SCOTS on the matter. Unfortunately, a response from that organisation has not been forthcoming, so we are none the wiser. The Scottish Government responded with information on the short-life working group, which was tasked with reviewing and updating the “Taxi and Private Hire Car Licensing: Best Practice for Licensing Authorities” document. We understand that the petitioner was a member of that working group, whose work has now concluded. The CPT’s response states that it represents only the bus and coach sector and that there is no formal role for the taxi and private hire sector in its organisational structure, which really goes to the heart of the issue. It goes on to say that, although it is sympathetic to the petitioner’s concern that the sector is not being fully consulted on transport issues, it does not agree that classifying taxis and private hire vehicles as modes of public transport would help to achieve the Scottish Government’s stated desire to reduce car kilometres. I am inclined to ask: who is the Confederation of Passenger Transport? The petitioner has responded to dispute the CPT’s interpretation of the term “private vehicle” and has drawn our attention to the taxi trade’s classification as public hire as well as to licensing provisions that can enable taxis and private hire cars to offer taxibus services. I am genuinely unsure who or what funds the CPT. Is it a Government agency? The CPT’s response, which is a politically provocative judgment that the petitioner’s aims cannot be accommodated because they contradict something for which the CPT does not have responsibility, is a bit striking. Do members have any suggestions?