Taxi Driver Online

.

So what is this reality as compared to the fantasy? Sounds a bit like this 'keyboard warrior' business - are you saying that we aren't actually in the trade or wot? I certainly don't hobnob with Govt ministers and DfT civil servants if that's what you mean. But does that make my view any less plausible?

My only income is from taxi driving, and I don't hire drivers nor do I have any stake in a despatch operation or run a fleet of motors or suchlike. Thus that's about as real as it gets in my book, and that's the situation for the vast majority of drivers in the UK.

As for the restricted numbers business, given that this seems to be the NTA's main preoccupation, can you blame others for deeming it similarly significant? You, me and the rest of us all know that the issue is central to many in the trade, and it doesn't take a genius to work out that the approach of many to any mooted change will in the final analysis depend on the percieved consequences of such change as regards restricted numbers.

Let's face it, if legislation was proposed tomorrow that would set restricted numbers in stone the NTA would be cock-a-hoop. You're not really suggesting they would say: "Wait a minute, the legislation is fine as it is, all it needs is a bit of tinkering round the edges.




Well it certainly benefits some people, but from an objective viewpoint it's a mess, and it's beyond my comprehension that anyone can defend it, except for the restricted numbers aspect, of course.



But there are dozens of issues, surely?

What about a couple of recent posts on here - why should some LAs allow trailers and top boxes, but others don't? And where's the logic in all these LAs making up their own rules, with all the bureacracy that entails? 300 odd LAs all doing their own thing - what's the point? It's laughable.

And why should a vehicle like the Touran be allowed to use the third row of seats in some LAs but not in others?

And don't say it's about local conditions, unless of course you can cite local conditions that justify it.



If it worked I think there would be 6,000 posts on this forum rather than nearer 60,000.



I don't know because I haven't read the Button book.

However, given that both you and GA have been wrong in that you've both claimed that there needed to be SUD for an LA to derestrict, then since you don't even seem to have a grasp on such a fundamental point then are your really in a position to comment?

As I said, I think it comes down to the NTA's restricted numbers Holy Grail.

Interesting that they want the London PH legislation adopted nationally? Doesn't this slightly contradict your stance on the even older HC legislation?

And isn't there a touch of the self-interest for CC here?

For example, how interested in s.75 were the NTA before the Pink Ladies landed in Carlisle?

And it's funny that you said that you don't regard the tuk-tuks as an important issue, when in every city that they've started the local trade seems to think differently?

I assume that it would be different if they started up in Carlisle?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

It was meant in the context that we have to work within the remit we are set, and not the remit of what people may want set or a remit that doesn’t exist.



I would say you have a blinkered view on what you believe the NTA wants.



I would suggest that is again a blinkered attitude.



It isn’t down to me to justify local conditions, however, you will be aware that by virtue of the laws currently in place a person can appeal against a condition that he or she considers unreasonable.



A local authority can delimit numbers control at any time, my opinion is that if it does so I would wish to see justification. Indeed, I would want to see the same justification if an LA were to retain numbers control.



Not at all, certain sections of the 1847 act have become effectively obsolete over the years.

The calls for parts of the London PH Act to replace sections of the 1976 act would seem to me as a natural progression.




TDO are you seriously suggesting I have that type of influence?

In respect of the Pink Ladies any NTA involvement was as a result of the local association in Carlisle, who are members.

The NTA have no members in Brighton, and have not been asked for any assistance or advice.

Regarding the ‘Tuk-Tuks’, I don’t recall saying they weren’t important, I can recall questioning their reasoning behind going down the ‘O’ license route (no pun). As surely they could have used a certain section of the 1985 transport act to try to license themselves as hackney carriages.


regards

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

So what is this reality as compared to the fantasy? Sounds a bit like this 'keyboard warrior' business - are you saying that we aren't actually in the trade or wot? I certainly don't hobnob with Govt ministers and DfT civil servants if that's what you mean. But does that make my view any less plausible?



You have every right to an opinion and every right to express it, and you express your opinion on here, the difference being that people who represent trade members do so in the real world across the table face-to-face, arguing with council employees who have their own ideas how the trade should be run, But in your opinion( I think) the trade would be better off with no representation.....?

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

As for the restricted numbers business, given that this seems to be the NTA's main preoccupation, can you blame others for deeming it similarly significant? You, me and the rest of us all know that the issue is central to many in the trade, and it doesn't take a genius to work out that the approach of many to any mooted change will in the final analysis depend on the percieved consequences of such change as regards restricted numbers.


From where I stand the only person who keeps referring to restrictive numbers is yourself, the NTA are trying to deal with issues that affect the everyday Taxi Driver, and believe you me, driver safety is an important issue.....

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

Let's face it, if legislation was proposed tomorrow that would set restricted numbers in stone the NTA would be cock-a-hoop. You're not really suggesting they would say: "Wait a minute, the legislation is fine as it is, all it needs is a bit of tinkering round the edges.



Let us face it if legislation was changed today so that every driver would receive a 10,000 pound payout each year everyone would be over the moon, but that is not going to happen so be realistic.

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

That reads like meaningless waffle, so could you be a bit more specific?




I would say otherwise, but could you remind me how much of the NTA's response to the OFT related to restricted numbers, and an outline of what it said in relation to other issues?



See below.



So you say everything is rosy regarding local decision making and support the fundamentals of the current regime yet you refuse to 'justify local conditions'? If you won't/can't justify local conditions then perhaps that demonstratest their irrationality, thus this undermines your more general stance.

And there seems to be a pattern developing here - any criticisms of local decision making and your default response is that people can seek redress in the courts. Two points - this again indicates that you can't justify local decision making per se and, secondly, for the vast majority legal action just isn't feasible - that's why councils get away with so much.

As regards the Pink Ladies, for example, why didn't you just seek judicial review rather than seeking repeal of the exemption, for example? Shouldn't you practice what you preach?



My point was that in a column of yours (a good while ago now), you fundamentally misrepresented an important legal principle.





Seems to me that you only want change when it suits you and/or the NTA, thus you're happy to pick and choose which bits need replacing?

I take a broader view.




Well my point wasn't about NTA membeship or otherwise, it was that that you and/or the NTA only seem to be interested when it affects you/the NTA personally.

You seem to be saying that you and/or the NTA only act in the interests of members - well that's absolutely fine, but that merely underlines my wider point - your stance on reform is born of something a bit narrower than the interests of the trade generally, never mind the wider public interest.

I'm quite sure that you said that you thougth the tuk-tuk issue largely an irrelevance.

As for section 16, there's no way the vehicles would have ever been considered suitable as Hackney Carriages, so there was no point in applying for licenses?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Whenever have I said that the trade should have no representation? I've certainly criticised the represenation, but not the principle per se.

And I don't get your logic, which seems to say that if you're a keyboard warrior on here then you have no contact with officialdom. How did you work that out?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Well perhaps you could answer the same question as CC? How much of the NTA's OFT response was devoted to restricted numbers? Or any other major document that the NTA has produced?

Or the T&G? Or the NWTA, NTTG or whatever?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Precisely - the chances of new legislation helping the restricted numbers case rather than hindering is remote, thus realistically it's best to downplay the need for new legislation on entirely spurious grounds rather than the real ones.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I believe I have asked you in the past whether or not you represented the trade locally...

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

I cannot speak for the captain, but as for myself as far as I'm concerned the.OFT under orders from hire officials tried to stitch the cab trade up, they wanted to deregulate us, they did not investigate, they paid for a survey that would say what they wanted, they twisted all the figures, and then they abused and overstepped the power of their our authority, so we went to war, and yes the battle was to stop deregulation by people who do not understand this trade, And because a large majority of the cab trade joined together guess who won that battle at least....

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

bollocks, most of the people who represent associations are like yourself have to work for a living, what you expect to happen would take full-time representation, meaning that people would have to be on wages full-time simply to push forward what you require, are you going to pay them,

The trade fights an uneven battle, none paid workers against full-time employed red tape manages. and a lot of people who could be full-time with the right power behind them are Looney tunes, need I say more...

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

No, I don't, but I don't understand the relevance of your question to the point under discussion

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Err...isn't that a description of restricting numbers rather than derestricting

And you still haven't answered my question.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I don't have a clue what you're on about, could you explain?




I always have to smile when the trade complains about red tape etc. Of course, the biggest red tape is the restricted numbers cartel, but since it works in some people's favour then it isn't a problem

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk