toots wrote:
I didn't misrepresent the point by saying it doesn't stop rape at all, cos it doesn't, so it's not misrepresented. To claim that it would prevent rapes or reduce rapes without facts to support that opinion is a misrepresentation.
You said that you "had knowledge" that it didn't stop rapes as if to say that some were claiming that it did.
But no one ever claimed that it did as far as I'm aware, and I certainly didn't - it's about lowering the risk.
As for the evidence, you don't have any definitive evidence either. But the issue being discussed is the relevance of the BPG, and how it relates to restricted numbers. The link seems pretty straightforward, particularly in view of the two Edinburgh cases, thus surely if you want to question the BPG then it's for you to refute the efficacy of the advice given.
And I don't think anyone is claiming that derestriction in Edinburgh would have prevented the two attacks, but again it's about risk, and it's surely a bit much to restrict when it's self-evident, in accordance with the BPG, that the risk could be reduced.
Quote:
I didn't describe taxi drivers driving their own taxis as a free for all I described de-restriction as a free for all. The two do not necessarily go hand in hand, we have drivers here that still rent cabs even though we're de-restricted.
So a free for all - your phrase - results in drivers who choose to run their own cabs being able to do so, and drivers who don't being able to choose not to?
The existence of the latter is irrelvant to my point - your 'free for all' allows drivers to run their own vehicle.
Quote:
I don't have a personal opinion of Taylor and Thomson cos I don't know them other than I don't agree with them using rape as a means to an end.
Assuming you are correct, is that worse than ignoring rape as a means to the end of featherbedding?
Quote:
BPG doesn't say you shouldn't restrict plates, but, if you are going to you should do a SUD which I do believe Edinburgh did. That survey said that another 30 plates should be issued, which again, I do believe Edinburgh did.
So who’s driving the new plates? Probably those with an existing brief, so what difference does that make?
Quote:
I wasn't suggesting that you could or should stop people from hailing taxis on the street. I was merely pointing out that having a safe place to wait on the street for a taxi is a good idea and reduces risks.
Indeed, but the essential point in the BPG was that unduly onerous licensing requirements might tempt people to use unlicensed vehicles or risk their safety by being out on the street.
The fact that some choose to stand in the safer enviroment of a taxi rank doesn't alter that, marshalls or otherwise, and was surely self-evident from the outset.
Quote:
Now who's being silly? The chances are the answer to both questions is never ever. No problem with that unless of course you're using rape as a means to get more taxis on the road. Unless you're prepared to do everything you can to protect these vunerable drunk young girls get home safely, but hey, that's not a taxi drivers job is it unless they are getting paid for it
But we're going from the extreme of Frank saying it's nothing to do with the taxi trade - it's the responsibility of others - to you and the suggestion that we should be doing everything we can to protect girls.
But we're not a charity, and it's a case of striking a balance between the trade and the public, and in my opinion restricted numbers doesn't strike that balance, and again in my opinion the BPG concurs with this.
Quote:
It took me a while work this part of your argument out but it's always been down to a perv being a perv that is why girls need to be educated and why I think rank marshalls are a good idea when it comes to public safety when waiting on the streets late at night. I think I've already address your point about BPG
Absolutely Toots, but as I said it's multi-factoral, and if restricted numbers is one of the factors detrimental to this then why try to defend it? Wouldn't it at least be more honest to say that it might help safety a bit, but that you think that's outweighed by the negatives?
Quote:
I think you will find that guessing what would happen if something else happened isn't really a good argument. Stick to the facts as you have asked me to do.
Well I think it's a reasonable question - if all UK PH were deregulated - ie the reverse of what's been happening in London with the regulation of minicabs - do you think sexual assaults would increase or stay the same?
Of course they'd increase - the reason there's more danger in licensed cabs is that they undertake a huge amount of work compared to bogus cars - it's not that they are safer
Quote:
Do you? I think you will find that the two main reasons that encourages illegal plying for hire are lack of enforcement and lack of work, but, I could be wrong. I think you will find that the purpose of making ph recognisable was to help the public know what is a licenced vehicle so that they are less likely to get in to Mr Pervs vehicle
But that wasn't my point, which was about illegal plying, not the licensed/unlicensed distinction.
Quote:
I'm not blaming anything I was just pointing out that there are lots of factors to be considered when you are trying to protect the public and not just one thing such as the BPG is the answer. So lets address the BPG again. Common sense to me is, do a survey, get result of unmet demand, meet unmet demand which in the case of Edinburgh was 30 more licences required, so 30 more licences were issued. Seems like commonsense to me, but again I could be wrong and it is only my opinion.
The BPG says:
Licensing requirements which are unduly stringent will tend unreasonably to restrict the supply of taxi and PHC services, by putting up the cost of operation or otherwise restricting entry to the trade.So even with the survey done and the 30 plates issue, plates are still going for £40k, so if the average taxi is worth 10K then it’s £50k to operate a taxi, which is surely a clear case of “putting up the cost of operation”?
And to repeat my earier point, who is driving these extra plates? Probably just the same people in different vehicles. So how does that change the "unreasonable restriction in supply" point?
Quote:
Again I was just pointing out from experience that de-restriction does not necessarily reduce ph. In fact since taxis here were de-restricted ph has doubled. Partly due to the lack of work for HC's, drivers took out loans for new cabs when we were de-restricted, the market was flooded and we hit a recession, drivers handed back cabs so then couldn't get finance for another vehicle and consquently are now renting a phv and paying settle to operator companies and working silly hours to be able to do this it's not good. Of the remaining 230 odd HC's now working here 93 of them are also paying to work on the PH system that I work from and there are others on other systems. I wonder why that might be
It certainly isn't because de-restriction works
Well the demad for taxi and PH services has generally increased over the years so no surprise that PH numbers have continued increasing, and clearly there’s pressure because of the recession - more drivers and less demand - but that’s hardly an excuse for featherbedding one section of the combined trade.
And rather than paying settle for a saloon, why didn’t those buying an HC just keep the vehicle and pay rent for a radio?
And if if it’s so tough for them on PH, why not jockey an HC? Because instead of settle they’re paying inflated rentals?
As for HCs on circuits, from what I know most HCs are on circuits - either HC only or mixed - irrespective of restrictions, so I don’t really see the relevance of your point.
Quote:
The police here warned the council that it would be detrimental to the public and road safety to de-restrict but they did it anyway. I haven't dismissed anything out of hand I have expressed my opinion through experience of working in a de-restricted area. I haven't ignored BPG I just didn't bring it in to my opinion that's all
But you’re clearly making the case for restricted numbers, so it’s not as if you’re totally objective. OK, I know I’m making the opposite case, but I’m trying to look at the BPG as objectively as possible. You say hand out plates in accordance with the survey, but how does that address the point about “unduly stringent licensing requirements” and the implications for the “public interest” generally, never mind the specific safety aspect.
Quote:
Quote:
And you're saying that drivers paying servicing a £50k loan to buy a plate or paying £300 a week rental means they work less hours?
There you go again twisty twisty how naughty are you
No, I asked a question which was clearly related to your point about settle. It works both ways. So maybe you could try to address the point instead of trying to dodge it and accusing me of twisting things? If high settle's a problem, why not high rentals for HCs and inlfated plate premiums. It's not much use saying that you don't like them.
Login
Register
FAQ
