Taxi Driver Online

Proposals could 'destroy' passenger safety culture in taxis warns Brighton union boss



Public safety could be put at risk by proposals to deregulate the taxi industry, union figures have warned.

A GMB union representative and Brighton cab driver said drivers could resort to direct action after amendments to a Bill passed the committee stage of Parliament.

The plan to introduce unregulated taxi drivers would harm the industry and could put women at risk of assault, the union claimed.

Mick Hildreth, GMB secretary for the taxi industry and operations manager for City Cabs in Brighton, said: “The Government’s proposals will destroy the tremendous passenger safety culture, established over many years in the industry. The proposals will also potentially lead to more women being put at risk to assault and attack who have to travel late at night, by unregulated drivers.”

Caroline Lucas, Green MP for Brighton Pavilion, said: “I’m deeply concerned that deregulation could cause serious damage to the industry.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Transport said: “These proposals will bring significant benefits for the taxi and private hire trades.”

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/11124802 ... _in_taxis/

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

What unregulated taxi drivers? Pillock!

_________________
Grandad,

Ye, haven't we seen this load of untruths on here a few day ago?

You are lucky, I come across this every f***ing day.

_________________
IDFIMH

I wonder how much of what Mick said to the paper was actually printed?

Seems to me that papers in general pick up on the juicy bits of sentences and fail to publish the end of them.

The fact of the matter seems to be that what the government are proposing will allow completely unlicensed people to drive PH whilst 'off duty' - it isn't limited to partners and spouses (as was alluded to by the DfT) - if people cannot see the danger in that I give up.

I have been posting updates on TDO of operation sanctuary - perhaps the DfT should make a call to Northumbria police to find out why they're stopping licensed vehicles?

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

from the DFT (Alex may want to publish it elsewhere on TDO)


We have noted the comments made by the Meeting of Minds at its meeting on 26 March to discuss the taxi measures which have been added to the Deregulation Bill.

May I just make one comment and ask one question?

The Group seems to be under the misapprehension that the measure about allowing other people to drive licensed PHVs whilst “off-duty” relates solely to family members. It doesn’t. It would apply to any person who holds an ordinary driving licence (just like the position in London). The Government believes that family members will reap the most benefit, but the measure is not restricted to family members.

And the question is – could you please elaborate on the point made by the Group in relation to the setting of licence fees? I am afraid that I don’t follow what you are getting at in setting out the options which you think would be desirable.

Regards

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

Issue a 5 year badge for £50, and set a reasonable total amount a council can charge for a vehicle licence

I have no doubt what you are saying is correct, however it doesn't help when one member of The Meeting of Minds tells the Law Commission one thing, and then fights against it when the DfT act.

To remind everyone what the GMB submitted to the Law Commission in answer to the non licensed driver question.

Law Commission Provisional proposal 20:
Leisure and non-professional use of taxis and private hire vehicles should be permitted. There would however be a presumption that the vehicle is being used for professional purposes at any time unless the contrary can be proved.

GMB Union Answer: 20
Agreed. Restricting eligibility of only licensed drivers being allowed to drive a taxi or private hire vehicle is not required. There are many reasons adopt the Metropolitan view including the use of such vehicles being driven by mechanics and such like.

Now the GMB are at liberty to change their view, and maybe they were right to do so, but sending mixed messages to the DfT is a very amateurish thing to do.

_________________
IDFIMH

IMHO there are too many axes to grind, too many egos to polish, too many greedy people and too many stupid people in this trade and government to ever come to a sensible agreement. An overall holistic approach is needed to include public safety, driver safety & wellbeing and profits which do not need to be obscene but sustainable. Private hire drivers for instance shouldn't need a separate licence to become an operator, if they are fit & proper to pick people up and transport them then they're fit and proper to answer the phone and take a booking. App and online operators should have a national licence so their systems can be checked to ensure they hold all records necessary and that drivers they are using are indeed properly licenced. If they insist on going down the road of allowing others to drive a licenced vehicle then they should insist that all manner of signs and equipment is removed from the vehicle prior to it's social use, otherwise it should be deemed as working and the driver prosecuted.

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

I think I may have given an indication that I oppose the proposal to allow non licensed drivers to drive ph vehicles when not working. I most certainly don't oppose it now, nor have I ever done.

The proposal brings us back to where we were pre Benson v Boyce, and I fully support that position.

_________________
IDFIMH

A private hire vehicle is always working by definition;
"private hire vehicle” means a motor vehicle constructed or adapted to seat fewer than nine passengers], other than a hackney carriage or public service vehicle [or a London cab or tramcar], which is provided for hire with the services of a driver for the purpose of carrying passengers;

I understand that, but I agree with the gov when they want to change it.

As did the GMB up until recently.

_________________
IDFIMH