Taxi Driver Online

Sorry like but I still can't find where in any government published paper they recommend that councils SHOULD delimit.

What I have found is that the government state that each individual Licensing Authority is best placed to decide local policy. At no point were they asked to survey, however ALL councils will have to justify licensing restrictions by March 2005.

These restrictions can be maintained on more issues that unmet demand, impact on the local road network, provision and local experience are all justifyable points, and there are many more. This administration of this site centre on unmet demand as that is the most costly method of justification, ask any council to spend £15k+ and they will shy away from it quicker than you could say antidisestablishmentarianism.

Proper investigation is what is required ........... and the government have made it abundantly clear that the content of that investigation is best decided by the Licensing Authority.

The OFT report was hauled accross the coals bt the DfT, so any subsequent review would have to be signifigantly better informed........ the real decisive period is after March 2005 where councils restrictive policies will be tested. I have no doubt that councils retaining restrictions will be able to account for their decisions and easily justify them ............ after all all they have to do is quote the DfT and the government when they stated ......... COUNCILS REMAIN BEST PLACED TO DECIDE LOCAL POLICIES.

Charlie or is it Mick?

you are not looking far enough

can I refer you to regulatory reform published by the cabinet office?

it doesnt just say they should, it says they will.

and another one bites the dust

(stick to delivering papers and flogging fast tan)

You can refer me to regulatory reform Yorkie but the OFT report was published after the last ammendment. Within that proposed ammendment it was suggested that powers were removed from local authorities, thats why it didn't become an order and why local authorities remain best placed to decide local policies.

Proper investigation is what is needed, if that investigation shows a need for the HC fleet to double then that is what should happen, delimitation didn't work in other transport sectors it only made a select few very rich indeed.
In the main the public have never benefited, bus services have deteriorated to such a level they cannot be relied upon and as for the railways well their problems are more than apparent.

We need a balanced "taxi" service. In my area every PH office has a sign in the window advertising driver vacancies, which would suggest that they can't cover the work they have (I know ours can't), new HC drivers can't afford to pay the office fees as well as their cab payments so are in a catch 22 situation.

If a limit was placed or retained upon the HC sector then new drivers would licence PH, these signs would come down and the public would regain confidence in placing a booking their local PH office, which would lead to PH drivers, like myself, increasing the amount of work they do and therefore the amount of money they make.

The only way anyone could find out is through proper investigation, councils need to take this seriously and any council that delimits because they don't want the expense of a survey as well as the extra expense of a proper investigation is I believe not acting within the best interest of the residents, businesses or visitors to their borough.

Yes I know your views just dont aggree with them.

we are under starters orders for a general election, so we must not be offended.

we are free to chase foxes and rip them appart, because we have a prime minister with a yellow streak up his back.

after the election when we have dealt with a terrorist threat that does not exist, to terryfy us all into voting Labour, we may settle down to doing things correctly.

no government believs local authorities are best placed to do anything.

I for one realise las do taxis because at ther moment there is no one else

vosa will soon be brought forward.

got to agree with charlie here

regards

captain cab

In your opinion ................... its what you would like to see Yorkie, which isn't always beneficial to anyone other than yourself. Nothing wrong with that though, by pushing for the things we want individually we will come accross solutions that will benefit everyone.

Whoever it is that has control over licensing in the future, the overiding consideration must be to ensure that their policies actually deliver solutions to the problems and demands of the consumer in a safe manner.

We need a revised and up to date set of laws to assist councils to form policies, reccomendations are open to interpretation locally and therefore we have no set national standards. This is why we have localised argument as "council A" interpret government guidlines differently to "council B".

Well I can't even understand what you are on about, never mind relate it to my post.

Can anyone explain?

Eh?

Perhaps you or Captain Cab could explain the meaning of the following from the Govt's OFT response:

The Government is therefore strongly encouraging all those local authorities who still maintain quantity restrictions to remove restrictions as soon as possible.

Perhaps the Gov/DfT have never actually said that LAs have to survey, but if you read the Govt's response and the DfT's letter it's difficult to see how LAs can justify restricted numbes without a current survey that takes account of latent demand.

Please bear in mind that my limited knowledge of local government law suggests that the DfT cannot actually order LAs to do anything in this regard, which is the crux of the point made earlier in relation to Halton.

So it will possible come down to whether or not someone locally mounts a legal challenge (or at least sabre rattles very strongly), and since that hasn't happened in the past in many areas then in many areas it seems unlikely that it will happen in future.

But please remember that the Govt said, in relation to justifying quantity controls, that:

"...this would help LAs with quantity restrictions if they were challenged about refusing to issue a taxi license in the courts.""

Considering the case law, it seems unlikely that any LA not carrying out a survey (and an independent one at that) would get away with it in the courts.

The Halton methodology would be laughed out of court, I strongly suspect.

You seem to be confusing reasons why an LA might restrict and the concept of unmet demand.

Assuming an LA has decided to restrict (perhaps on the grounds that you indicate) then if there's unmet demand then it has to issue more plates to meet that demand, that's the law.

That's why this site centres on it, not because of the cost involved.

No, the Transport Committee made up of MPs hauled the OFT report across the coals, the DfT/Govt agreed with the OFT in broad terms.

Anyway, the Trans Comm meeting and report was hardly the most credible of processes, as I pointed out to you a week or two ago, but you said nothing then - it was partisan and sloppily conducted, to coin a phrase

As I said then, have a look at the Annex to our Myth and Reality, and if you have any comments then please outline them on here. But to occassionaly spout the same old nonsense without addressing our response makes your strategy about as credible as the Trans Comm meeting.

Yes, but please also remember that the Govt strongly encouraged LAs to delimit, as per the quote above.

And how do you square your statement above with this other Govt statement?:

The Government considers that it is wrong in principle to restrict entry into a market and refuse a taxi license to those who can meet all the local requirements to hold such a license.

The apparently contradictory nature of some of these statements is due to the nature of the Govt's response that we outlined at the time - it was a fudge.

I've no doubt either that many LAs will retain restrictions, but the question is what the Govt will do about it, if anything, because at present they can only really give guidance and recommendations to LAs, they can't force them to do anything.

But please remember yet another statement from the Govt:

The Government itself will review in association with the OFT the extent of quantity controls in three years' time to monitor progress towards the lifting of controls. If necessary, the Government will then explore further options through the RRO or legislative process if insufficient progress has been made.

I disagree with you on this point.

I think that the current laws are adaptable for every differing licensing district, going down the route of us all being the same is dangerous. It makes things like the OFT easier to implement. The ambiguous nature of the profession from town to town , city to city protects it.

Adaptable or open to interpretation, it is this that bothers me though Captain.

I didn't mean that Licensing Policies should be written Nationally, as the government quite rightly points out, the local authority remains best placed to do that.

What I did mean though is that most things published by the government can be interpreted different ways, in order for it to appeal to as many people as possible.

Whilst trying to get through the 1847 & 1976 Acts I discovered a multitude of contradictions, nothing new in that I know, but after reading it again and again I can see how I picked up on certain passages and statements to mean one thing, yet when I read it again I found that it could quite easily have mean't something else. Then you discover that there are more recent ammendments which offer a completely different meaning.

What I am asking for is clear up to date laws, which clearly define the differance of usage for HC and PH, without this we rely on individual councils relying on interpretation and comparison with other councils. This is where things have fallen down ............. any investigation into the trade must start with the laws that govern usage, if these laws are unclear there is little chance of finding an acceptable solution.

vosa have slightly different rules to different areas, actually I would like the police to do it but it just is not practicle.

Laws are the same and are not misiterpreted at all, just that some councils take the [edited by admin] frankly.

in a perfect world councils should be ideal, however alas they respond too much to different groupings lobbying for the unatainable.

you have experience of that dont you Charlie? up there in Gateshead.