New regulations for taxi and private hire vehicles

I have few concerns. First of all advance driving test. How much it's going to cost and who is paying that burden. And are blackcab drivers also have to pass that or its only for PHV. Because knowledge has nothing to do with driving skills. If only mini cab drivers are required to go thought the test than here you go this regulation is completely bias.
Secondly would it be possible to get licence for diesel PHV after 2018 because majority of 7 seaters are diesel. If not then who going to help them to buy new cars. Why only taxi are getting tax payers money. Bias again.

fee for english test is just a way to make money,
for uber driver it will be hard as 90% of driver are in rental agrement after petrol and cost of family expence it leaves balance £0.
if any passenger or rider wants good speaking driver their is uber EXEC or uber LUX pay for the service.
we are proud UK have all type of service standards on the table.
Am having a feeling by 2020 red carpet will be inforce for uberx drivers.

By the very fact you have a "Taxi and Private Hire Action Plan" you are not creating a free and fair market. A language exam is absolutely absurd and completely degrading to all those drivers who are committed to getting people to and from their destinations safely. Technology has led us to a position where you don't need to speak the same language to communicate. For all those who have had issues with their driver not speaking English and not being able to direct them - maybe you should use the app correctly and put in the right address - the sat nav does the rest.
If you are pinning this Taxi and Private Hire Action Plan on safety then please can you disclose how many incidents have happened in Uber and Tracked taxi services vs. those that aren't. Many people feel 100% safer in a tracked car than they do a black cab.
In addition, isn't this entire thing a complete waste of tax payers money as soon enough we won't even be having this debate as driverless cars will be driving all us tech savvy people everywhere...Will you still be trying to protect outdated and overpaid black taxi drivers then?!?!?!

As a professional chauffeur, I MUST keep my standards very high else ....... As a result, I do not have any issues with the English language test nor the advance driving assessment in principle.

However, I do not agree with the new H&R insurance policy and I'm glad the mayor has asked for a review because that would simply be too burdensome to some of us.

Having said that, I have 2 questions on both assessments:
1. Regarding the language assessment, what will be the case of someone born in a predominantly English speaking (commonwealth) country and is educated to degree level? Or are people like that not expected in this industry?

2. Regarding the advance driving assessment, what of someone certified by RoSPA which comes with a requirement for regular retests at specified intervals?

Now however laudable these introductions are, unless distinctions are made, then it would appear that money is also a motivating factor here. I'll be happy for you to disabuse me on my views on these issues.
Mr Mayor, whilst looking at this, can I take this opportunity to implore you to make it easy for us to pick up and also drop off in the city. I'm just fed up with having to pay £65 for just using a road space for no more than a minute and I work nights. Thank you

I honestly believe this is all about making private hire more expensive. If ppl aren't happy with Uber or similar don't use them! I use Uber regularly and have never seen one without a satnav, so speaking fluent English and knowing the roads isn't necessary.
Let people have the option for honest work for goodness sake!

Language test is a good way to tell uber driver get of the road safely,
this industry doesnt need speaking when your driving with equipt latest technology.
some riders can't even speak english as drivers, and also based on my 24 years in taxi maybe 75% passengers wishes not to talk with driver.
remember talking with driver while moving can be dangers for the road.

Improving road safety is important. Having the correct insurance is important. Requiring licensed taxi drivers to have a better command of English than is expected in the entire rest of the service industry is not, in fact it is discriminatory. Requiring licensed taxi drivers to have a better command of English than naturalisation rules would in affect create a strange scenario where you are able to become British but not a taxi driver. Slipping this requirement into a list of reasonable improvements is disingenuous. Unlike the other improvements designed to make the roads safer this 'improvement' is only designed to stifle competition. The example provided by the mayor that without this 'improvement' you wouldn't be able to ask the driver in a sudden mid-trip emergency to take you to hospital is to ignore the reality that there is more to communication than words and that a higher-than-naturalisation language requirement is not required for someone to understand the word, 'hospital'. I would also ask why this isn't deemed a risk in the face of other service industries.

There's an element here of pandering to and protecting an entrenched cartel that is, sadly for its members, becoming uneconomic. As a global, modern city, London should be a world leader in encouraging flexible, better service, lower cost systems and services across the board.

The English test makes me uncomfortable tbh. If a driver is unable to communicate well then they will be badly rated and lose custom naturally without the state legislating for language skill. Placing a barrier to someone who may be using their job to fund English lessons seems counter productive. While I understand a case may arise where there is the perfect storm of an incapacitated passenger unable to speak with a driver with no ability to communicate (even though we all have the ability to make ourselves understood if required) it seems unnecessary to legislate for this very rare circumstance and disingenuous to suggest this is why such legislation had been brought in. It feels like anti immigrant legislation brought in to pacify the xenophobic lobby, something which in the current environment I would have preferred see London avoid.

As for insurance, I think the only beneficiary here are the insurance companies. Why not legislate for them to provide more flexible policies?

DO NOT AGREE Taxi Drivers should have to supply their details and photograph. this leaves them open to scams and mis-use of information. The passenger can make a note of the car registration, or on the receipt the driver can give name and cab details but NOT PHOTOGRAPH.

The only part of this proposal that I can get behind is the desire to push for more disabled access. What I don't understand is why this pot of money should go to Black Cabs? Why should the disabled be forced to use a more expensive sub-standard service? If there is money for this purpose it should be available to any provider in London. I note that Uber (and probably others) already offers disabled rides.