Why Vancouver’s cab community strongly believes someone inside Vancouver City Council was paid off by UBER. (Evidence Below)
In 2012 Uber was sent running from Vancouver after it was unable to conform to the taxi laws set forth by the Passenger Transportation Board. Fast forward to 2014 and Vancouver City Council is holding a hearing in order to see if UBER can be introduced into the city.
So this begs the question… What exactly changed? Why did Vancouver City Council give Uber (a company that intentionally broke the law in 2012) a second chance. What was with the sudden change of heart? Well that’s what we are here to examine..
We believe it has to do with the relationship between Vancouver City Councillor & Vision Vancouver Director Geoff Meggs and Vision Vancouver Executive Director Brittney Kerr (seen in photos below)
Just so happens that Geoff Meggs colleague from Vision Vancouver Brittney Kerr just recently announced she is the latest lobbyist for Uber. [source]
The Province News Paper reported Brittney’s lobbying activities as the following:
“The intended outcome of her lobbying activities is to arrange a meeting ‘between an individual and a public office holder,’ according to the records.” [source]
The suspicion starts to grow when you analyze the following timeline of information and events:
- In 2012 Geoff Meggs seemed rather neutral on the subject of Uber. If anything his blog post on his site from 2012 suggest that he believes that PTB regulations (the regulations that were holding Uber at bay) are necessary for the safety of passengers. He even states in his blog post:
“deregulation has never produced the right balance. That’s why regulation is in place around the world.” (read full blog post here)
2. A sudden change in character -In September of 2014 in a Globe and Mail News article Geoff Meggs says the following:
“Mr. Meggs said an executive from Uber came to see him two weeks ago to talk about the company’s interest in coming back to Vancouver. He said the executive did not spell out exactly how it wanted to proceed. “It was a good conversation.”” [Source]
Lets take a second to look at some very peculiar things within his response.
First off he stated an “executive from Uber” came to see him. No job title or individual was named. It wasn’t something like “ I met Johnathon Smith Ubers Vice President of Canadian Operations”. Why is that? Is this possibly because the “executive” in question was his old friend Brittney Kerr who just happens to be Uber’s newest lobbyist?
Then he goes on to say “the executive did not spell out exactly how it wanted to proceed.” and then he closed out by saying “it was a good conversation”
Ok, so lets get this straight. A company who has a history of operating illegally in Vancouver met with councillor Geoff Meggs, but didn’t explain how they had a solution to change their on going problems with current regulations set by the Passenger Transportation Board. Yet, Geoff Meggs thought “it was a good conversation”.
We ask this question, How can you have a productive meeting or conversation with a company who has deified you in the past and shows no signs of changing in the future? How could that be labeled ‘a good conversation’ ?
3. Shortly after Geoff Meggs encounter with an “Uber executive” he puts a motion forth to city council named “City Action to Ensure Innovative, Increased Taxi Service.”
It was an interesting choice for a title, especially the use of the word “innovative” which only supports the core premise of Uber which labels it’s self as a “innovative technology that disrupt the cab industry” . Wonder if Geoff Meggs had that as his 2nd or 3rd title choice for his motion.
Ask yourself these following questions and see if you can see the problem:
If Vancouver kicked out Uber for operating illegally in 2012. Why did it give this company a second chance, let a lone it’s own motion at a City Council meeting?
We believe that Geoff Meggs was incentivised or persuaded in an unfair manner to re-evaluate Ubers entrance into the market. When has Vancouver City Council ever shown forgiveness to any other company that has broken the law in the past? Exactly.
So why did they do it this time? Perhaps because someone had a motive or a pre determined agenda. This is why this smells like an inside job. Instant reconsideration after one- meeting with an ‘Uber executive’. Wonder if a cash filled envelope was part of that “good conversation”?
Why did Councillor Geoff Meggs go from being somewhat neutral on the subject of Uber to all of a sudden proposing a motion for “innovative taxi services” in the Vancouver region?
Because we strongly believe someone within the Uber organization got to him. We believe they leveraged pre-existing relationships with Meggs and or used financial incentives as a means to persuade him to re-open discussions.
Conclusion:
In the end Vancouver’s cab community is worried that members of Vancouver City Council may have been compromised through relationships such as the one between Geoff Meggs and Brittney Kerr or just through financial incentives baited by Uber itself. It seems very strange a man once neutral on the subject of Uber is now organizing a special council meeting to facilitate Uber’s re-entrance.
We believe Geoff Meggs will aggressively push to approve Uber in Vancouver because we believe he is potentially being financially motivated by Uber directly or indirectly. This is why we ask the Ombudsman of British Columbia to investigate the role of City Council members and Uber to make sure that no unfair incentives or bribes were made. We want an independent investigation into the current Uber vs Vancouver City Council decision process. We want to insure that the decision is made fair and above board.
Allegations of corruption are very serious. But when you consider you are dealing with a corporation that depends on breaking the law in order to enter new markets you understand it may be part of their business plan.
Keep in mind that Uber has been found to consistently break laws regarding transportation regulations, but have also even tried attacking their competitors by using a hacking method known as a ‘Denial of Service Attack’. Evidence of this was posted on mainstream tech news outlet [TechCrunch]
Breaking the law is how this company operates.
Why this is so important to us.
This does not give Vancouver cab drivers who need to protect their livelihood a fair chance in the upcoming 6 month decision. How can Vancouver cab drivers protect them selves against Uber, if Uber has managed to get a member of City Council in their pocket?
At the end of the day Uber is an $18 billion dollar company with financial resources to influence key members of local council to favor their entrance. This company has destroyed the cab industry in cities like Seattle where business is down over 40% thanks to the entrance of over 2,000 Uber vehicles.
Uber may like to cleverly brand it self as a technology company, but in reality its a global cab company. It dispatches vehicles to pick up customers just like every other taxi company. Uber is trying to leverage its financial resources, and lobbying experience to buy its decision from Vancouver City Council.
This is not fair for the other parties involved. This is not fair to the average cab driver who works 12 hours a day to feed their family. We can’t fight Uber if they have already bought the votes.
What the public should know.
Uber is unable to get approved through the transportation board because it could not prove to the transportation board it would not “destabilize or steal business from existing vendors”.
Uber in their city council meeting said that “the big four taxi companies are keeping us out, it’s like Starbucks trying to say no to Tim Hortons coming in”
This is totally false — Here is why. When filing for a taxi license in BC the submissions from current vendors is given small weight in the final decision.
Uber failed to mention that several licenses have been approved over the last 5 years regardless of submissions made by competitors. Why? because the transportation board issues licenses where it see’s public need. It doesn’t just side with existing cab companies.
The PTB makes each applicant prove that their is need for every additional license on the road. This is an amazing safe guard to keep the market from getting over saturated.
Understanding the underlying problem.
People complain about waiting for a cab for 15 mins on Granville on a Saturday night. Well folks, hate to tell you but this is a problem around the world, not just in Vancouver. If anything Vancouver has a more reasonable wait time then most other cities. The PTB over the last 5 years has issued special weekend taxi’s just to help offset demand (over 100 of them).
Also consider that you can’t just put cabs on the road just for bar rush. How will these taxi’s have business from the start of their shift until midnight when the bars start letting out? Consumers tend to look at just the inconvenience of a 15 min wait over the actual economics of how each cab has to be able to sustainable 24hrs a day. You can’t just over stuff the system with more cab licenses just to offset the 4 hours of the week when the demand for taxi’s surpasses the supply.
Uber’s has a place in Vancouver.
Uber has a place in our society, but it needs to enter our society using the front door that is available to everyone else. This door is the Passenger Transportation Board. Who does an amazing job to protect the industry from collapse — They balance real world demand with supply of transportation services.
In order to circumvent this Uber is trying to lobby its way through the back door. Think about this way, these regulations have been set in place since the 70's and every transportation company in existence in British Columbia has been able to get properly licensed and approved through the PTB. Even cab companies that offer identical app services to Uber.
The only company that refuses to use the system that every other transportation company is happy to abide by is Uber. If Uber wants to operate it should follow the rules set forth for Taxi’s in the Passenger Transportation Boards guidelines. Uber is no different a technology than the dispatch apps put forth by existing vendors therefore it should be subject to the same regulations.
Uber your welcome in Vancouver, just go through the front door and get properly licensed by the Passenger Transportation Board.
Please don’t bully your way into the city by trying to buy off council members.
Sincerely,
A cab driver who is about to lose his ability to make a living.
