TfL set to regulate pedicabs in London for the first time amid safety concerns
The consultation, carried out by Transport for London (TfL) found that out of nearly 7,700 respondents, 75% currently felt unsafe while using a pedicab in the capital.
The rickshaws, common sights in London's main tourist destinations, are not currently regulated.
Nearly all (97%) of participants backed mandatory insurance for pedicab operators, 95% support the introduction of criminal background checks for drivers, and 85% believe that pedicab fares are too expensive.
Draft policy proposals include a TfL licensing system, along the same lines as that currently in place for London taxi drivers, with requirements including a minimum age of 18, a UK or EEA-valid drivers' licence, and English language skills.
TfL are also considering the introduction of insurance requirements, alongside safety equipment mandates.
The proposals could come into force from 2026 – but will become more detailed over the coming months, and are subject to a second consultation at the end of the year.
The use of music by pedicab drivers sparked particular frustration among the survey's respondents – including over 2,400 comments, double the number relating to any other topic.
96% of participants were in favour of volume limitations on music and other audio from pedicabs, and 78% believe these controls should be in place 'all the time'.
Helen Chapman, TfL's director of Licensing & Regulation, said: 'Pedicabs can provide a unique and green way to see the capital.
'However, they have an impact on the safety of the road network and are currently unregulated.
'We look forward to working with the pedicab industry to ensure it is run fairly and safely and continues to be a sustainable mode of transport.'
The move comes in the wake of parliamentary calls for regulation last year – which culminated in the Pedicabs (London) Act, granting TfL the statutory powers necessary to go through with the licensing system.
The transport authority proposes to take the lead on enforcement of any new regulations themselves, with all expenses recouped through the fees for pedicab licences.
In a campaign response to the survey, the London Pedicab Welfare Association (LPWA) said: 'While the intention behind this requirement is to ensure the safety of passengers and regulate the industry, it has created challenges for pedicab drivers who do not possess a driving licence.'
The LPWA instead proposed alternatives, including the introduction of a theory test for drivers to obtain their licence.
Ros Morgan, chief executive at the Heart of London Business Alliance, welcomed the proposals, saying: 'For far too long, members of the public have been at the mercy of rogue operators who do nothing to enhance the reputation of the West End.
'Implementation of the scheme could not come soon enough.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Starmer still faces Labour anger over risk of ‘two-tier' disability benefits
Keir Starmer is battling to stem the revolt over his cuts to disability benefits, with about 50 Labour MPs concerned the new concessions will create a 'two-tier' system where existing and new claimants are treated differently. Senior government sources insisted things were 'moving in the right direction' for No 10, with the whips phoning backbenchers to persuade them to support the bill on Tuesday. Government insiders said they believed they had peeled off enough of the original 120-plus Labour opponents of the legislation to win the vote, after the work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, promised to exempt current disability claimants from the changes, and to increase the health element of universal credit in line with inflation. However, rebel MPs will attempt to lay a new amendment on Monday giving colleagues a chance to delay the bill, which will still involve £2.5bn of cuts to future disability benefits. The continuing row over the changes is likely to blight the week that will mark the first anniversary of Labour's return to power. In an interview on Thursday, Starmer admitted to a range of mistakes – including using the phrase 'an island of strangers' in an immigration speech, and hiring his former chief of staff Sue Gray. His government has made a series of U-turns in the last 12 months, but his handling of the welfare bill might be the most damaging episode of them all. Starmer will next week be hoping to draw a line under the difficult period, in which the government has also reversed cuts to winter fuel payments and changed course over holding an inquiry into grooming gangs. Dozens of Labour MPs are continuing to criticise the welfare cuts on a Labour WhatsApp group. Many MPs are still undecided about how they will vote and are pressing for more assurances that it is ethical and legal to set up a division between current and future claimants. Disability charities have said the bill remains 'fatally flawed' and will lead to an 'unequal future' for different groups of disabled people, making life harder for hundreds of thousands of future claimants. The government confirmed on Friday night that people who have to make new claims for Pip after November 2026 will be assessed under the new criteria. This means those reapplying after losing their Pip or who have fluctuating health conditions will not have the level of their previous awards protected. Starmer defended the bill on Friday, saying it struck the right balance. The changes will protect 370,000 existing recipients who were expected to lose out after reassessment. The prime minister said: 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right.' Asked how the government would pay for the £3bn of concessions, which experts believe will have to be funded by tax rises or extra borrowing, Starmer replied: 'The funding will be set out in the budget in the usual way, as you'd expect, later in the year.' There would need to be at least 80 rebels to defeat the bill, and government sources were quietly confident they had given enough ground after Meg Hillier, the chair of the Treasury committee, said she would back the legislation following changes. Others were unconvinced. One leading rebel said 'everyone but a handful of people is unhappy', even if they do end up reluctantly backing the changed legislation. Another expressed frustration that No 10 and the whips were 'trying to bounce people into agreeing before we've seen enough details'. Rachael Maskell, the Labour MP for York Central, a leading opponent of the bill, said: 'They are going to have to go back to the negotiating table … deaf and disabled people's organisations are rejecting these changes as it fails to address future need and gives no security for people with fluctuating conditions, for instance where people are in remission.' Other critics who plan to vote against the bill include the MP for Crawley, Peter Lamb, who said: 'Despite many improvements to the system set out in the bill, at its core the bill remains a cost-cutting exercise. No matter the level of involvement of disability groups in co-producing a scheme for new applicants, to save money the new scheme has to result in people with high levels of need losing the support necessary to wash themselves, dress themselves and feed themselves.' Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Simon Opher, the MP for Stroud, said he still opposed the bill. 'The changes do not tackle the eligibility issues that are at the heart of many of the problems with Pip [personal independence payments]. The bill should be scrapped and we should start again and put the needs of disabled people at the centre of the process.' Diane Abbott, a leading figure from the left of Labour, said the rebellion was 'far from over', while another Labour MP said: 'The bill starts from the premise of cuts, not reform. It's also arse about face in terms of impact assessments and co-production. It's simply a negotiated dog's dinner. In that sense, nothing has really changed except the fact they've negotiated more [people to] misguidedly to sign up to it.' One thing Labour MPs are pushing for is more clarity on the review of the Pip system, due to be done before autumn by Stephen Timms, a work and pensions minister. Many expect that process to change the points system from the current proposals. Some in the party also want Starmer to reinstate Vicky Foxcroft, who quit as a whip to vote against the bill before the U-turn was made. Stella Creasy, a leading Labour MP who had initially signed the amendment to delay the bill, said she wanted to see more details. 'We need to understand why we would treat one group of claimants differently from another,' she said. A Labour MP from the 2024 intake said: 'I'm waiting to look at the details before making any decisions. Many are in the same place as me and need to get something more than a midnight email on an issue of this much importance to hundreds of thousands of people.' The Labour MPs opposed to the changes are citing a fundamental rejection of the idea that a Labour government will be making disabled people worse off. At the same time, many of them have also been alienated by what they say is a No 10 operation that is out of touch with the parliamentary party, and has tried to strongarm MPs into backing the legislation with threats and promises of preferment. 'Good will has been lost and there is still huge suspicion about whether they will try and pull a stunt at the last minute,' said one Labour MP. The majority of disability charities and campaign groups still opposed the cuts. Ellen Clifford, from Disabled People Against Cuts, said: 'Many people who rely on Pip to survive have fluctuating conditions which means our support needs can go up and down. By penalising existing claimants if we go out of and then go back to the benefits system depending on our health, more people will be denied the support they need. 'This is exactly why no disabled people's organisation across the whole of the UK has welcomed these concessions because we know the complexities of the social security system and bitter experience from years of cuts that there are many ways in which grand sweeping statements about protections translate to very little in practice when you go into the detail of it.' The disability equality charity Scope said that despite the concessions, an estimated 430,000 future disabled claimants would be affected by 2029-30. Its strategy director, James Taylor, said: 'It is encouraging that the government is starting to listen to disabled people and MPs who have been campaigning for change for months. But these plans will still rip billions from the welfare system. 'The proposed concessions will create a two-tier benefits system and an unequal future for disabled people. Life costs more if you are disabled. And these cuts will have a devastating effect on disabled people's health, ability to live independently or work.' Additional reporting by Frances Ryan
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
‘Worse than anything under the Tories': changes to welfare bill anger disability campaigners
'As a community we feel totally let down and these last-minute concessions do nothing to make up for that,' Andy Mitchell, a disability campaigner and a member of Unite Community, says. 'My friends are scared. Some have spoken about suicide. This is worse than anything that happened under the Tories.' With the government offering major concessions to the welfare bill, ministers will be hoping critics have at last been appeased. But many campaigners have reacted with anger and concern over the changes. Disabled people's organisations, such as Inclusion London, WinVisible and Long Covid Advocacy, have told the Guardian that plans to exempt only existing claimants from the cuts will create a 'two-tier' benefit system that 'condemns' future disabled people to poverty. 'Protecting entitlements for current recipients is the right thing to do and if it's right for current recipients then it has to be the right thing for future claimants too,' says Tracey Lazard, CEO of Inclusion London. 'Even with these concessions, the bill before parliament is not a reform – it's still rationing. There is no moral or economic case for balancing the books on the backs of disabled people. MPs must not condemn future disabled people to the poverty and indignity these devastating planned cuts will cause.' Claire Every, spokesperson for Long Covid Advocacy said: 'A last-minute napkin deal will not assure safety for disabled people. The concessions create an unfair two-tier system – it is unethical to only throw some people under the bus. 'These changes will negatively impact people with long Covid as they discriminate against those with fluctuating disabilities and will see those who contract the illness in the future receive less support than those who fell ill earlier in the pandemic,' she added. Some campaigners warn that a system that treats new and old claimants differently could lead to future legal challenges against the government. 'How can you justify someone with the same impairments getting two different rates of social security payments based solely on [when they applied or how long they've been ill]? Is it even legal?' says Linda Burnip from Disabled People Against Cuts. 'The concessions are ridiculous and [effectively mean] anyone not already ill or disabled in Britain can't become ill or disabled and expect to have enough money to live on in the future.' Others have accused the government of trying to sow division within the disabled community to quell opposition to the bill. 'We refuse the government's divide-and-rule between old and new claimants, and MPs should keep voting against the horrendous cuts they are planning,' says Claire Glasman from WinVisible. 'We won't stop campaigning – new claimants lose out massively across Pip and universal credit, especially women with invisible and fluctuating conditions. Labour is still going after sick and disabled people. 'These offers of concessions are a glimpse into the window of the soul of the government; that they think people are protesting these cuts for their own gain not the wellbeing of all disabled people,' says Cherylee Houston, co-founder of the #TakingThePIP campaign. It is still unclear whether the concessions will protect eligibility for the connecting benefits to Pip, such as carer's allowance, she added. 'We don't agree to anything which doesn't safeguard future disabled people from abject poverty and despair. How can they draw a line to which people who become disabled after a certain date will not receive the support they need?' The government has pledged the entire criteria system will be reviewed in conjunction with disabled people, but disability groups told the Guardian they are concerned any changes from the review will not be made before the bill passes, while MPs will not have sufficient time to consider proposals. 'MPs are going to be voting on these concessions without people having a decent enough time to look and understand them,' says Mitchell. 'One of the points from the amendment was that disabled people hadn't been properly consulted, so how can it be right when these concessions have not been consulted on at all?' 'If concessions are possible, so is proper reform,' added Lazard. 'Fast-tracking a bill with such major consequences is irresponsible and cruel. It denies parliament, disabled people and the public real scrutiny. We urge MPs to stand your ground, stop this dangerous bill and demand better for everyone.'
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
I was a Question Time panellist on an episode that left viewers LIVID - Fiona Bruce showed her true colours when the cameras stopped rolling
YouTuber TommyInnit's mum has revealed what it was really like starring on Question Time - including her experience with BBC host Fiona Bruce. The internet star, who goes by the real name of Thomas Michael Simons, 21, had his mum Sarah Simons in the audience when he took part in the show - and she went on to appear on the panel backstage during a recent episode of the BBC programme. Last Thursday's episode (19 June) saw the YouTuber, 21, Katharine Birbalsingh, 52, Adolescence writer Jack Thorne, 46, the secretary of state for science and technology Peter Kyle, 54, and MP Lord Willetts, 69, discuss on challenges growing up in the 21st century. Sarah took to her X account to share how much of a good time she had while appearing on the show. Sharing some pictures of her and her son in the studio, alongside a selfie with host Fiona, 61, she wrote: 'It was a surreal and wonderful experience to watch my lad be brilliant on BBC Question Time tonight. So proud of him.' She added: 'Obvs we did a few daft pics too. LOVE Fiona Bruce, she was glorious, and the BBC team was so kind and welcoming.' Many rushed to reply to the tweet to share the love. 'Absolutely LOVE this!! QT already my favourite Thursday tradition so this is a crossover…' 'Totally impressive performance by Tom last night. Measured and charming, a great combination. Distinct lack of young uns. Blaming the tools rather than their application.' 'That's amazing! Well done to both of you.' While watching the installment last week, some viewers shared how odd they thought it was that only one person on the panel was under the age of 45. Many took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to share their thoughts. 'I thought the Youth focused #bbcqt was a great and overdue idea. Until I saw the panel had an average age older than me.' 'Next generation you say?' 'Why is there only 1 actual youngish person on this panel? Comedy.' 'The average age of the panellists debating what it's like being young in Britain today? 48. Farcical.' At the start of the episode, Fiona said: 'For tonight's question time, we're asking a specially convened panel and audience about the challenges of growing up in the 21st century and what it means for all of us. 'Roughly half our audience is from what very generation - under 30 or mostly Gen Z and the rest are just a little bit older, but like every other week, they reflect the range of political views across the country. 'Welcome to Question Time - the next generation - from Greenford in West London on BBC, iPlayer and Sounds.' Despite their ages, the guests do all have their own opinions from their fields about the matter. Katharine Birbalsingh is a headteacher at the Michaela Community School. Many took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to share their thoughts She is known to be the 'UK's strictest headmistress'. Meanwhile Jack's latest Netflix hit Adolescence hit headlines earlier this year. Back in April it was revealed that 114 million people had watched the drama - which follows the story of a boy called Jamie Miller (Owen Cooper), who murdered his female classmate. It brought misogyny among young boys to light and the resulting potential for violence against women. TommyInnit - real name Thomas Michael Simons - has 15.1M subscribers on YouTube. Meanwhile Peter Kyle and Lord Willetts are figures in the political sphere.
