Working for wins on ride-hailing

Dec 1, 2018 | Blog, Governance | 8 comments

The politics of winning or good public policy. What is more important?

I can tell you what is more exciting. Winners and losers! Earlier this week I wrote about how the debate in the Legislature on ride-hailing went down.

I described how on my way into question period I was stopped by the media and asked whether I was going to help the BC Liberals win the public relations battle.

Wins take work

My response was boring. No, I said I am going to try to make the legislation the BC NDP put forward better. Perfect? No. Better? Yes.

When the BC NDP Bill was first put on the table, BC Liberal Leader Andrew Wilkinson tweeted an invitation for the BC Green Caucus to work with his Party to amend the legislation to improve it.

When the amendments were shared with us we quickly saw what they were attempting to do. Primarily, introduce what they should have introduced when they were government. And, that is exactly what they did with their private members’ bill stunt the following Monday. Too little, too late.

Neither we, nor the BC Liberals are government. If they wanted a completely deregulated marketplace for ride-hailing companies then they should have found the political will to do that when they were government.

Amending with care

The Bill put forward by the current government is not that. Nor is it possible to amend it to make it that. Not, without being completely irresponsible and potentially causing some really damaging unintended consequences. But, that did not stop them from trying!

And, it was all inspired by the politics of winning. After all, their newly minted slogan of “winning takes work” tells you what their focus is on. Winners and losers, not improving public policy.

So, during our work to improve what the BC Green Caucus felt were deficiencies in this Bill, we asked the government to refer the discussion to a Select Standing Committee so we can hear witnesses and provide recommendations on the regulations. Government never offers the opportunity for opposition parties to be involved in regulation making. But, this time they did.

Invited to the table

Initially, the terms of reference was limited to looking at supply, boundaries, rates and the application of the passenger transportation board public convenience test. But, when the issue of drivers licenses was raised in the debate, we encouraged them to add this to the discussion as well. Minister Claire Travena agreed. All of these issues are very important to the industry. And, both the BC Greens and BC Liberals are welcome to the table. I am thankful for this opportunity.

So, how will we use it?

I have already started the work. I will fully participate. And, the outcome will be much better with the full participation of the BC Liberals. I look forward to working with them to make the absolute best of the legislation, and the regulations, put forward by our government.

Perhaps somewhere in this situation we will find that everyone benefits from the politics of winning, when we all put our heads together to develop good public policy.

8 Comments

  1. David willows

    Hi Adam:

    I also have a concern about accessibility. The availability of wheelchair accessible taxis is already an issue. If we loose the taxi service or if it is deregulated, wheelchair users will be dealt another bow after losing accessible parking from the building code. There needs to be a requirement for maintenance of a wheelchair accessible service.

    Reply
    • Adam Olsen

      Thank you for raising this important point David. One of the recommendations includes ensuring that there is a surcharge that is collected to increase and improve options for wheelchair accessibility. This is part of the reason why it needs to be a regulated environment so we don’t lose these services altogether.

      Reply
  2. Ian Bruce

    Good work Adam…there are so many potential benefits to British Colombians with a responsible ride-hailing industry. Less vehicles downtown = less pollution and congestion. More people leaving their vehicles at home or downtown when they may have a drink (or now a toke) too many = less impaired people on the roads. With ride-hailing, downtown dwellers can use ride-hailing for short trips and car sharing (like Modo) for longer trips…again less vehicles on the road and less need for parking altogether. Safety – people in need of immediate transportation are more likely to get it…the list goes on. I didn’t realize the utility and convenience of Ride hailing until I was in Seattle last spring – I became an instant fan. I’m not sure why governments are so afraid of the taxi industry lobby….over-priced and poor service in the past has been my experience…

    Reply
    • Adam Olsen

      Great comments. Thank you for sharing Ian!

      Reply
  3. Rod Brindamour

    Let’s hope we see all 3 parties work toward better legislation. That is why we elect them. Winning and losing is for sports not public policy.

    Reply
    • Adam Olsen

      Agreed!

      Reply
  4. Bob

    Hi Adam,

    I’m glad to see progress being made on this file. (finally) I agree with the Class 4 requirement, but I don’t agree on the PTB having the power to control fares and limit the amount of ridesharing cars on the road. We’ll just end up with taxi industry 2.0 if this doesn’t change…

    Reply
    • Adam Olsen

      Fair comment Bob. We are going to be working through these important issue in the Select Standing Committee on Crown Corporations in the new year. I encourage you to stay up to date on this through my blog and the news. Happy Holidays!

      Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share This

Share this post with your friends!