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
Reuters
12 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK police arrest four over pro-Palestinian protest at military base
LONDON, June 27 (Reuters) - British police have arrested four people in connection with a pro-Palestinian protest last week in which military planes were sprayed with paint at an air base in England, authorities said on Friday. A woman, 29, and two men aged 36 and 24, were arrested on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, while another woman, 41, was arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender, the police statement said. Two activists from the Palestine Action group broke into the air base in central England on June 20, damaging and spraying red paint over two planes used for refuelling and transport, an act that was condemned by Prime Minister Keir Starmer as "disgraceful." Within days the government set out plans to use anti-terrorism laws to ban Palestine Action, making it a criminal offence to belong to the group. Interior minister Yvette Cooper then said its actions had become more aggressive and caused millions of pounds of damage. The government also said last week that it was reviewing security across all British defence sites following the incident.
The Guardian
13 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Four people arrested after Palestine Action incident at RAF Brize Norton
Four people have been arrested on suspicion of a terror offence after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in an action claimed by the campaign group Palestine Action, counterterrorism policing south-east said on Friday. In a statement the force said: 'A 29-year-old woman of no fixed abode, and two men aged 36 and 24, both from London, were arrested on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, contrary to section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000. 'A 41-year-old woman, of no fixed abode, was arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender. 'The arrests, which took place on Thursday in Newbury, Berkshire, and in London, are in connection with an incident in the early hours of [last] Friday during which damage was caused to two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Those arrested are currently in police custody while enquiries are ongoing.' The home secretary, Yvette Cooper, said on Monday the pro-Palestinian campaign group would be proscribed under anti-terror laws. If approved in parliament, this would make membership and support of the group illegal. She said Palestine Action had a 'long history' of criminal damage, adding that it had targeted 'financial firms, charities, universities and government buildings'. 'The UK's defence enterprise is vital to the nation's national security and this government will not tolerate those that put that security at risk,' Cooper said. 'Its activities meet the threshold set out in the statutory tests established under the Terrorism Act 2000.' Palestine Action released a statement condemning the arrest, which was made under section 5 of the Terrorism Act, saying it amounted to crackdown on 'non-violent protests' opposing Israel's war in Gaza. The government's move to proscribe Palestine Action has been widely condemned by MPs, including Diane Abbott, who said the government 'seems confused between protest and terrorism'. Palestine Action said the government has not proscribed activist groups that had taken similar action, including an anti-war protester represented by Starmer who was among a group of activists who broke into RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire to sabotage US bombers before they flew to Iraq in 2003. Josh Richards, who was among the Fairford Five, was cleared after a jury failed to reach a verdict.
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Kemi should stop playing political games
After the Prime Minister's latest U-turn, Tuesday's vote on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill may not now be as traumatic for the Government. It does though still pose a challenge for the credibility and future electability of the Conservative Opposition. In the next few days, the Government's whips will be counting the votes to see if the Government's concessions will be enough to avoid defeat. As I write, the rebellion looks to have been quelled and so it is unlikely that the votes of Conservative MPs will make a difference. But the dilemma for the Tories remains: vote against the reforms in a vain attempt to defeat the Government or vote for reforms they believe in. Kemi Badenoch has said the welfare cuts don't go far enough. Her party would only vote with the Government if they pledged further cuts in welfare spending, created more jobs in the economy and ruled out tax rises in the next Budget. These sound like impossible conditions to fulfil, particularly by Tuesday. Kemi knows this. Her conditions were not designed to be met. Their purpose was purely to provide an excuse for Conservative MPs to vote with the Labour rebels to defeat the Government. Or put it another way, Conservative MPs would be whipped to vote against cuts they knew they would have to make if they were in government. There is no excuse for such cynical politics. As a result, the reforms will now yield smaller savings for the Exchequer. I have been in the position of Conservative MPs. I understand their dilemma. I'm also convinced that recent political history demonstrates why the Conservative Party needs to vote with the Government in these circumstances. I was a new Conservative MP with just three years of experience in the year 2000 when the Conservative Opposition faced a similar predicament. Tony Blair's Government was proposing to reform the air traffic control service (NATS) and turn it into a 'public private partnership'. The previous Conservative government had similarly planned to privatise NATS but they ran out of time. Just like today, a rebellion was stirring amongst Left-wing Labour MPs hostile to any form of private sector involvement in managing our skies. To my shame, I voted with my Conservative colleagues as we were whipped into the same voting lobby as those Labour rebels, in an attempt to stop something we actually thought was good for the country. We claimed it wasn't the right kind of privatisation; it didn't go far enough. Just as today the Conservatives are arguing that the Government's benefit cuts are the wrong kind of cuts. What we meant was we wanted to defeat the government. Still smarting from an historic defeat, we were playing political games, and everyone knew it. As it turned out the Blair Government defeated the rebels and won the Nats vote with a majority of 93. The Conservatives went on to another historic election defeat at the 2001 General Election. Fast forward to 2006. Blair's flagship Education Bill sought to redefine the role of local authorities in the running of our 23,000 state schools, giving schools more autonomy, freeing them from the dead hand of local council bureaucracy. These were reforms that the then leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron, strongly believed in and they were an important element of our emerging education policy. But many centrist and Left-wing Labour MPs were deeply unhappy and, like this week's welfare reform measures, it looked like it was headed for defeat. On Second Reading 52 Labour MPs voted against the Government but, because David Cameron took the principled decision to support the Bill, it passed. And at each subsequent vote Conservative MPs voted with the Labour Government and against the rebels and thereby secured its safe passage into law. Labour had its Bill. The Conservatives had credibility because we had voted for what we believed in. This was a seminal moment for David Cameron and the Conservative Party. It showed an Opposition serious about its role and ready for government. So, it's decision time for Kemi. They can follow Reform down a road of dishonest populism – making promises that cannot be delivered and offering false hope – or they can stake out a position that is all their own. They can tell the truth about the choices the country faces and set out policies to deal with them. They can demonstrate principle, integrity and seriousness about what's right for our country. They can demonstrate in Kemi's words that her Conservative Party has changed. Or they can try to score cheap political points. For the sake of the future of the Conservative Party I hope they make the right choice.
