Taxi Driver Online :: View topic

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldbills/020/amend/am020-a.htm

Section 159 of this bill is death note for private hire.

require the driver of a regulated private hire vehicle which is plying for hire

All I have to say is god forbid you should require a vehicle in which you'd like to put your bum in first :roll:

Also does Baroness Warsi and Baroness Morris of Bolton not realise that this is illegal (159(3)(A)

Quote:

require the driver of a regulated private hire vehicle which is plying for hire

But why do they use the word "May" before every paragraph..

But why do they use the word "May" before every paragraph

(4) The driver of a regulated private hire vehicle which is plying for hire or has been hired commits an offence—

Ive another question, if it all goes through what is the time span for every Taxi or PH to conform to any new rules..is it Months, Years or Decades?

Author:	tom2907 [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 3:03 pm ]
Post subject:	Lords Amendment.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... m020-a.htm Section 159 of this bill is death note for private hire.

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 3:59 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Lords Amendment.
tom2907 wrote: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldbills/020/amend/am020-a.htm Section 159 of this bill is death note for private hire. Not in my view. Too many mays, and no musts.

Author:	toots [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:28 pm ]
Post subject:
All I have to say is god forbid you should require a vehicle in which you'd like to put your bum in first Also does Baroness Warsi and Baroness Morris of Bolton not realise that this is illegal (159(3)(A) Quote: require the driver of a regulated private hire vehicle which is plying for hire

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 5:34 pm ]
Post subject:
toots wrote: All I have to say is god forbid you should require a vehicle in which you'd like to put your bum in first Also does Baroness Warsi and Baroness Morris of Bolton not realise that this is illegal (159(3)(A) Quote: require the driver of a regulated private hire vehicle which is plying for hire What the lazy bone heads in the Lords have done is merely copy the taxi bits in the 1995 act, and added the words 'private hire'.

Author:	bloodnock [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 5:53 pm ]
Post subject:
Well...looks like if i need to look like a Taxi, act like a Taxi and conform like a Taxi...then I may as well become a Taxi and compete directly with the Taxis in my area..Im sure a few thousand more Private hire types will be thinking along the same lines if this applies. But why do they use the word "May" before every paragraph..is it down to individual authorities or the secretary of state as to whether not these things are implemented? No winners here...either side of the TAXI/PH divide...

Taxi Driver Online http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Lords Amendment. http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13084	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 5:57 pm ]
Post subject:
bloodnock wrote: But why do they use the word "May" before every paragraph.. They use 'may' to allow the Secretary of State to do nothing, or not as the case may be.

Author:	tom2907 [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 6:08 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote]Bloodknok says No winners here...either side of the TAXI/PH divide... That may not be true. In Cities like Manchester it is possible to buy a KIA or similar at auction for less than a grand and work part time. Those days will go and Manchesters private hire trade will lose massive numbers. However Hacks like myself will be in greater demand and will take up the slack. This however may be short lived because more demand means more demand for hackney plates, Manchester has to review every two years. So it might be time to "make Hay while the sun shines"

Author:	cabbyman [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 6:47 pm ]
Post subject:
bloodnock wrote: But why do they use the word "May" before every paragraph It will be what's known as an enabling act. The secretary of state may make regulations by statutory instrument in accordance with the act. It makes it straightforward for the s of s to simply make an s.i. saying 'implement sec 1 of act' rather than having to spell out the whole verbiage that is otherwise necessary and returning to parliament for approval.

Author:	Doc G [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 7:36 pm ]
Post subject:
I noticed this gem from the bill amendment proposal Quote: (4) The driver of a regulated private hire vehicle which is plying for hire or has been hired commits an offence— Too bl**dy right they would be! Or perhaps they know something we dont? What chance have we got if the regulators still dont know the difference?

Author:	bloodnock [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:
Ive another question, if it all goes through what is the time span for every Taxi or PH to conform to any new rules..is it Months, Years or Decades? what of those people that have just bought new vehicles and who would lose a fortune to change them..thats if they could afford to change them at all...Times are hard..doesnt the bloody govt numpties realise that?

Author:	cabbyman [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 8:52 pm ]
Post subject:
The great thing about leaving it to the s of s is that the provisions can sit on the statute book for years without ever coming into force. The Land Registration Act 1925 didn't apply in many parts of the country until the 1970s.

Author:	tom2907 [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 9:15 pm ]
Post subject:
Bloodnok The time span for these implimentations was intended to take 12 years. This was on the basis that maximum every vehicle on the road had that "shelf" life. Manchester and other large Cities have a shorter "shelf" life.(manchester 7 years). It is intended that as a vehicle needs to be replaced, a vehicle being licenced for the "first" time will have to be WAV. This would mean if implimented tomorrow it would happen every month every year on a rolling basis.

Author:	tom2907 [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 9:27 pm ]
Post subject:	cabbyman
Cabbyman Your right it could take years NORMALLY. however this bill is being "steamrollered" through quite quickly. The next committee stage is 11 January. It can have royal assent ? by the end of January. This dying goverment need THIER s-of-s to implement this. There are a lot of votes in it. However even a new goverment will not bury this. The Lord who introduced this amendment was Baroness Warsi. a muslim peer of the Conservative party and Goverment Shadow spokesmen for Community Cohesion and Social Action. Do you think it was a coincidence she was fronted to make this amendment. I dont.

Author:	cabbyman [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 9:36 pm ]
Post subject:
Good point, well made, Tom. I hadn't considered that aspect of it! That really does change things!!!

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Dec 18, 2009 10:04 pm ]
Post subject:
bloodnock wrote: Ive another question, if it all goes through what is the time span for every Taxi or PH to conform to any new rules..is it Months, Years or Decades? In my opinion it could be a just a few years for the hackney side of our trade, and never for the PH side of our trade.