The ACT govt welcomes Uber, but with caveats

The ACT government has decided to get on the front foot, and will allow Uber in, but with strict regulation.

Josh Taylor — Journalist

Josh Taylor

Journalist

While the state governments in Queensland and New South Wales seem to be hell-bent on fighting ride-sharing app Uber’s “disruption” of the taxi industry, the ACT government has attempted to get ahead of the looming battle between Uber and the taxi industry before the app’s launch in our nation’s capital at the end of October.

7 comments

Leave a comment

7 thoughts on “The ACT govt welcomes Uber, but with caveats

  1. mikeb

    The more I read about Uber the less I like it. The regulated taxi industry is bad enough, I can only imagine what could happen in an Uber environment.

  2. drsmithy

    I really wish people would stop calling it “ride sharing”. It’s not “sharing” anything, it’s a bog standard vehicle-for-hire arrangement with a fancy online booking system.

  3. softgrow

    At last, in the ACT there will be a smaller license plate “rent” built into a fare with only $5000pa going to the government. However there still is around $20,000pa rent in the private (monopoly) hands of license plate holders. Until that’s tackled the public is still dealing with a rent seeking provider and all the problems and distortions the Productivity Commission keep banging on about will remain.

  4. Cut Snake

    Rent seeking?!
    Taxi owners been rippping off drivers for years, cozy cabcharge arrangements thanks to mr kermode, visacard bans a few years ago, nobody likes their sweet little monoply being disrupted, about time i say!

  5. Gavin Moodie

    I’m very pleased to read this, for 2 reasons. First, there will be an alternative to ACT’s taxi service, which I found poor compared to other Australian cities. Secondly, it is good to read that the States have a good example from ACT Government’s progressive approach.

  6. sceptical_believer

    Can we stop calling Uber “ride-sharing” now, and just call it a taxi company? If uber is “ride-sharing” then our arborist is “chainsaw-sharing”. Which she is not.

  7. HDMAGeditor

    The Uber concept is very good and it doesn’t need interference from governmental process.
    It seems to be lost on regular cabbies that this is about service – better service than they provide as an industry. I live in Melbourne and the taxi industry is poor at the best of times. It’s all about the drivers and their needs not the poor bastard who waits for hours to get home after a night out, or a day at the races or a 15 hour flight from overseas.
    Here’s a thought; instead of legislating Uber away provide better at your service.
    We don’t give a fuck that you overpaid for your cab licence, we just want decent service which the Melbourne cab industry does not offer – in abundance!

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...