A political move more worthy of Venezuela
Britain is the digital capital of Europe – a global powerhouse that attracts billions in investment from Google, Amazon, Facebook and a host of the start-ups. We’re peerlessly placed to power the next generation of an industrial revolution the like of which we have never seen before. Yesterday, in threatening to ban Uber, Labour Mayor Sadiq Khan sent the message around the world that he didn’t want London to lead that charge, and sowed seeds of doubt in the minds of global investors.
Some 40,000 London drivers, many part-time, seeking vital extra income, now find their jobs at risk, and
3.5 million customers have less choice over how they get around the city. When foreign companies consider whether London is the place to invest, it will be hard for them to say with absolutely certainty that regulators operate unfettered by political interference. That instability risks putting excruciating brakes on continuing growth, just at the moment those very regulators will be free to introduce greater flexibility as we leave the EU.
London’s black cab drivers, and all the private-hire drivers in the UK, deserve a level playing field with Uber. They don’t have one currently.
Uber has genuine issues to address around the reporting of crimes committed by its drivers, around criminal records checks and around its own attitude to regulators. But a mayor from a party that understood business, and the rapidly emerging digital economy, would back both black cabs and existing private hire firms such as Addison Lee, and work with Uber in the interests of Londoners and his city’s global reputation. It may be politically advantageous to be seen to be the strong man, standing up to a global corporation, but it cynically damages the UK economy and the national interest. It’s hard to say whether not comprehending that is worse than doing it knowingly.
Properly regulated, London’s various modes of transport can complement each other. Black cab drivers have proved they’re willing to take real steps forward with, for instance, the guaranteed option to pay by card, and they offer a unique combination of manoeuvrability and disabled access alongside drivers whose characters are impeccable. That has evolved thanks to years of effective regulation – in the face of changing digital competition, some deregulation might even be in order. But it’s also clear that minicabs accessed via apps are hugely popular and rapidly becoming the global norm. It cannot be the role of an impartial regulator to seek to limit consumer choice or to unnecessarily cramp the free market.
The credulous will say this shows simply that those operators who don’t play by the rules aren’t welcome in London, or argue that Labour is seeking to provide the level playing field that is required. In fact this meddling with stable business does precisely the opposite: it says the playing field in London is capricious, unpredictable and indifferent to consumers. Come to London under Labour not for regulation but for a rollercoaster. What sensible business would sign up for that?
So this is categorically not a question of setting Uber against the black cab – both, effectively regulated, can coexist. Uber is no stranger to controversy, whether that be for the record of its founder Travis Kalanick or for where it pays its taxes and how it treats its workers. All these things are real challenges. It’s right for each of them to be tackled – but the Uber that operates in 40 locations around the UK and over 700 around the world is clearly globally engaged with a host of regulators. For London to declare itself an outlier is damaging in the extreme – just not for Uber.
The ride-hailing service will, of course, appeal against this quasijudicial decision, and will continue to operate in the meantime. Some will suggest this is simply a negotiating tactic by London to seek to get the company to play ball with regulators who feel they’re not being listened to, black cab drivers who rightly feel aggrieved there’s no level playing field and a city that’s arguably overloaded with private hire licensees.
If that’s the case, it’s a desperately naive way to treat a global business – and it says that London’s business conditions are not set by regulators, or indeed politicians, but by the courts. It undermines not just TFL but regulation in general – those of us who are glad the UK is not Venezuela just got a worrying taste of what counterproductive treatment all businesses risk under a meddling Labour government.
Matt Warman is MP for Boston and Skegness
‘Mayor’s bid to ban Uber cynically damages the UK economy and national interest’