Giving taxi drivers a fare go

Taxi drivers protest outside Flinders Street Station

They form an integral part of our public transport workforce, yet their working conditions, safety and welfare are largely ignored. They work in a multi-million dollar industry, but regularly take home less than the minimum wage. Welcome to the world of the Melbourne taxi driver.

The taxi industry has been in the spotlight in recent years, not least for the 2008 Flinders Street station protest when, following a violent attack on one of their own, drivers stopped work and removed their shirts to bring attention to their plight. As a result, driver safety was improved with the introduction of security screens and pre-paid fares.

But the story doesn’t end there. Recently, I met with a large number of taxi drivers to gain a first-hand account of life as a Melbourne cabbie. The picture is bleak.

Drivers often work 16-hour days and, depending on demand, can take home less than $7 per hour. There’s no holiday pay or sick leave. They fund their own uniforms, clean up after drunken patrons, and pay the fare when a passenger does a runner.

Perhaps the most critical issue, though, is that of insurance. Third-party insurance is not mandatory for taxi cabs, and is expensive because mainstream insurance providers refuse to insure taxis. Many taxis operate uninsured and if a driver causes an accident with another vehicle, he or she is personally responsible for the damage. Bankruptcy beckons.

Melbourne’s drivers have little power in the taxi game. They sign unregulated bailment agreements with operators, with a recommended 50-50 fare split. Thus they become independent contractors, looking out for themselves in an industry where taxi licences change hands for up to half a million dollars, but little filters down to the driver.

Taxis are an essential part of Melbourne’s public transport system and taxi drivers deserve fair treatment, just like bus, train and tram drivers.

The taxi industry needs reform to ensure a more equitable distribution of income and to ensure safe and reasonable working conditions for drivers. It’s only ‘fare’.

Cycling and the City

With a Greens cycling group opposite the Windsor

Although I often drive an electric car and catch public transport, I'm a regular and enthusiastic cyclist. At this time of year, it's a pleasure to pedal around Melbourne on two wheels, taking in the sights and sounds of the city at her best. The Melbourne electorate is one of the most convenient to navigate by bike, but my aim is to make it even more cycle-friendly by working to resolve the issues repeatedly raised by cyclists, pedestrians and drivers. There are some general issues which usually involve the disappearing bike lane - whether because of a parked bus, road works, or just bad planning. But there are several specific issues which can use some attention. Here are my top ten:

1. North bank of Yarra River

Like Southbank, there is now a good pedestrian route along the North bank of the Yarra. However, there's no specific provision for cyclists, who often use this route to avoid pedestrians on Southbank. A safe cycling route east-west though Melbourne along the north bank of the Yarra is urgently required.

2. Albert St 'Copenhagen' bike lanes

Melbourne City Council has provided Copenhagen-style bike lanes along Albert Street, East Melbourne, greatly improving safety and convenience. Although some industry groups such as VECCI have campaigned against these bike lanes, they retain my full support.

3. "Parkiteer" cages at Southern Cross

Southern Cross station does not have simple and secure parking for bikes - even though it services regional Victoria as well as suburban Melbourne. We should have proper bike cages here for storing bicycles between train rides.

4. Swanston Walk

Swanston Street is the busiest cycle route in central Melbourne. Cars are banned but commercial vehicles, buses and taxis clog up the route when they park, particularly when trams go through. A cyclist was recently killed by a bus this route. Better support for cycling here is important.

5. Crossing Curtain, Lee and Princes Sts on the Canning St bike path

The passthroughs of bollards at Lee and Curtain Streets are dangerous. Some bollards have a spacing so narrow that being 15cm off line at 25 or 30 km/h will result in a nasty crash. Cyclists have marked these up with reflective tape. The Princes Street crossing has a wait of about two minutes - far too long. Too often, cars stop in the middle of the intersection, blocking cyclists.

6. Moonee Valley Creek Trail

This is a good trail, but at the southern end has no clearly marked and safe route into the city. This is urgently needed.

7. North Melbourne station

Cyclists and pedestrians need a way to cross from North Melbourne to Docklands without passing through ticket barriers.

8. Pedestrian and cycling access blocked

VicUrban recently blocked pedestrian and cycling access to Village Street from Village Place in Docklands, putting up hoardings around the South end of the Goods Shed and offering no alternative access.

9. Carlton Gardens

Cyclists use this green space as a route between Canning and Rathdowne Streets, partly because of dangerous cycling conditions along Rathdowne Street, creating a source of friction for other park users. I'm working with local residents, the Council, and Bicycle Victoria towards a positive solution.

10. Pin Oak Crescent and Eastwood Street

This route beside the railway line is popular with cyclists but has no marked bike lanes. It's time it did.

Westlink nightmare

The freedom of the open road

So the government has announced its route options for Westlink - its "number one priority project".

Whatever option is chosen, the outlet ("hell mouth" as one resident calls it) will come out south west of JJ Holland Park at Dock Link Road, with further links to Dynon Road and Footscray Road. The government has admitted there will be 60,000 vehicles a day using Westlink. A three lane freeway at peak hour would be expected to deliver about 5,000 vehicles an hour.

The result will be gridlock in Footscray Road and Dynon Road. That means much of the traffic will move up Kensington Road and along Macaulay Road - causing massive traffic jams in Kensington. Each evening the process will be reversed, with cars using Kensington to get back on to Westlink.

When planners were asked about this, they answered that trucks would not be able to get under the railway bridge on Kensington Road. This may be true of some trucks, but not all. It will have no effect on the thousands 0f cars which will constitute the majority of the traffic from Westlink.

The heavy traffic load will also mean gridlock in West Melbourne as cars and trucks try to get to and from the city on every available route.

Westlink is the first stage of the controversial Eddington east-west tunnel. The government said so in its documents sent to Infrastructure Australia, obtained by the Greens under the Freedom of Information Act. The RACV is already calling for completion of the whole tunnel.

The build up in traffic will be used to advocate further tunneling, and the result will be ventilation stacks and outlets across the parkland between Kensington and Fitzroy. We don't want to struggle to win something we thought we'd already won.

There is something decidedly dodgy about the government's figures. The say that Westlink will cost only $3 billion. They told Infrastructure Australia that the shorter version of the tunnel would cost $5.8 billion.

There is no federal funding for this project, because Victoria could show no net economic benefit for the project: we would be spending $3 for every $1 gained. Just what is the economic justification for this white elephant?

We don't want the pollution, the noise, and the traffic of Westlink. The entire route follows an underutilized train line. For a fraction of the cost we could have a proper commuter service.

In an era when climate change is a pressing reality, and when peak oil is rendering the combustion engine too expensive, we should be well past thinking of building more roads for gas-guzzling vehicles.

External links

• Westlink: three options, three nightmares
• Westlink route options
• Westlink, Schmestlink
• The People Plan

Bulldozing Freeways through Community Rights

When a freeway is proposed, the community defends the places we stand to lose.

Not many people have seen the Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act, which has just become law in Victoria. Under this Act, the government can declare any project a “major transport project”. There is no definition of what “major” is. It could be a boat ramp. It could be a bus stop. It’s whatever the planning minister, along with the premier, think it is.

But once the government calls it a major project, the proponents can drive freeways through the rights of the community.

The Act gives decision-making power on any declared project to the Planning Minister. Community input is in some cases removed altogether. In other cases the time lines are incredibly short (often only days - to give input on projects whose documentation will run to thousands of pages) so the "right" to comment is in practice an illusion.

Many of the decisions made under this scheme will not be subject to any right of review in the Supreme Court, removing judicial oversight from important government decisions.

The most serious change, however, is in section 77 of the Act. This section requires the Minister to "have regard to" certain laws - but not to comply with them. The Minister will not have to obey these laws, just note their existence. The laws overthrown by this stroke of the pen have been built up over decades, and provide key protections to our environment.

The list of laws now cast aside in such decisions is long, but includes:

• Coastal Management Act 1995
• Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987
• Environment Protection Act 1970
• Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988
• Heritage Act 1995
• National Parks Act 1995
• Planning and Environment Act 1987
• Water Act 1989
• Wildlife Act 1975

So now, when a freeway is in question, the government of the day can ignore these protections and thumb its nose at the community.

Jeff Kennett, at the height of his hubris, would not have dared to propose this legislation. But now Labor has made it law.

The real damage under this Act will not occur until after this year's election. Labor won't want to upset people before they vote - but watch out afterwards.


External Links

• Major Transport Projects Facilitation Act
• Video of Rally on the Steps of Parliament
• Frankston Bypass, Greenlivingpedia