Taxi Driver Online

Reading JD's post on another thread reminds me of a conversation I had last week with someone from Brighton.


It appears that Brighton Council are using the above reasoning, or irrationality, to justify the keeping of quotas.

They say that if the council de-limit then all the PH are going to change to HC, and ignore the phone work, especially in the out-skirts of the City.

What I can't work out is why someone would pay up to £30,000 for a WAV, for them only to sit around all day in the City centre, whilst there is bundles of phone work available elsewhere?

The biggest fans of this justification (apart from the Council) are the operators. They say they are really concerned that the phone market will get ignored.

Of course the fact that drivers will be able to leave the operators at any time, along with their weekly rentals, has nothing to do with such a view.

Alex

_________________
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Simply the best taxi forum in the whole wide world. www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I cannot understand Brighton Council, you would think highly paid officials could come up with better reasoning than that.

one character in that area justifies high plate values on the fact that its good for the trade as it demonstrates commitment, you could not make it up.

the same person started getting carried away by describing a cartel, and what is more attacked others for dealing with Medigen!

Brighton taxiwise is rotten to the core, and more than anywhere needs sorting out.

from information I have gleened such is the number of phone calls there are no taxis on rank at peak times anyway.

I can't believe these people inhabit the same wonderful county as myself, because they certainly don't share the same planet. The reason why most of the country is taxi quota free is because those living in the suburbs of restricting councils don't get a decent taxi service.

The chances of getting a cab from a rank, or a flag-down are next to nil. The more cabs that are licensed to pick up off the street in out-lining areas, the more easier it will be for customers to do just that.

If a bus operator said that they wanted to run more buses, with no council subsidy, the council would welcome them with open arms. But if properly checked drivers, driving properly checked vehicles offer, the council treat those drivers like lepers.

And this is the council with an 'Equalities Forum'!!!

But the bit that really concerns me is that the council seem to be following the taxi operators agenda in discriminating against non-plate holders, be they PH owners, or taxi journeymen and women.

I wonder if the councillors reviewing the taxi quotas know about the Brighton Cartel? The one where the operators fix airport prices, they share the contract work between them, and don't compete against one another on supermarket free-phones. I really hope they don't.

I wonder if the councillors know that school contracts are being served by non-licensed vehicles and non-licensed drivers. But hey, as long as a few quid can be saved who cares about the special needs kids?

Wouldn't it be nice if councillors actually opened up their eyes to the total discrimination of taxi quotas, and perhaps they could start by reading http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/reality.htm

_________________
IDFIMH

Cards on the table here.
I got my plate for nothing from good old Brighton Council.
I'm still on a circuit and will never leave. Its called paying for my mortgage and my wheel chair cab.
The opertaors are concerned that some ph will change to taxi. But they are more concerned that the value of there plates will be worth nothing.
When the last lot of plates got issued they were falling over themnselves to buy from the lads. Paying top dollar.
They dont give a ***k about anything bar there back pockets.
Will I be happy if loads more plates got issuesd, of course not. But they are going to be issued to proper drivers.
As someone said on here a while ago. Is it really fair to stop someone having the same chances as others.
At the end of the day it should be down to what is best for customers not what is best for the taxi operators.

With regard to Brighton and Hove, I am aware that a licensing committee meeting is scheduled for the 6th of January 2005. One of the items on the agenda is the review of a report submitted by the Assistant Director of Public Safety with regard to retaining Hackney carriage numbers control.

Having read the report several times, I find the content to be bias in favour of retaining the current policy of restriction.

For those people who live in the Brighton licensing area and who don't have a Hackney Carriage proprietors license but would desire one, without having to resort to the exorbitant financial penalty attached to buying one on the black market, I say this.

After reading the report it is quite evident that you are up against a council who is pursuing it's own personal policy of restriction and that the policy itself has nothing whatsoever to do with providing a better service to the public.

Mr Tony McNulty made matters worse for those residents who think Brighton's Taxi services are abysmal when he stood up in Parliament and said Brighton Council was an example to the rest of country when it came to implementing Taxi policy.

What we have now in Brighton is a council that believes it is a standard bearer for good practice when it comes to implementing Taxi provision for the public.

The report itself is bias in favour of restricting numbers so public consultation will probably not be entered into, apart from the available public response to the report in question. This report in practically every section goes out of its way to justify the retention of numbers. At no point in the report does it set out a case for removing restrictions. That is why in my opinion, it is bias.

Anyone who is expecting a change of policy in Brighton is perhaps being overly optimistic. I think even if Brighton's policy was exposed as being legally and morally wrong they would still fight to the bitter end to retain their control on numbers.

I'm not going to dissect this report here and now it would be too much to digest but perhaps I'll get the opportunity to address some of the points at a later stage.

Best Wishes

JD

I wonder if the report will have what the new Transport Minister recently said?

Just in case it escaped the report's authors mind in a speech to NATPHLEO on 21st October 2004, Charlotte Atkins MP asked "is it really right to bar those who meet the application criteria and want to run their own taxi service?".

Alex

_________________
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Simply the best taxi forum in the whole wide world. www.taxi-driver.co.uk

To show how blatantly bias this report actually is, in section 5 under "observations" the author goes out of his way to highlight what Mr McNulty actually said in Parliament with regard to retaining a numbers policy, word for word.

Yet the author conveniently fails to give the same prominence to the Government guidance which suggests councils should only restrict numbers if they are sure the public will be better served by such restrictions.

Best wishes

JD

Sorry, but aren't LOs meant to give facts not biased opinions?

I haven't seen the report, but surely all the facts should be put before members for them to decide on the issues, not on the sort of biased info that the T&G are famous for.

The governement wanted justification for retaining quotas, not flawed rhetoric.

They wanted the customer to come first, not the vested interests.

_________________
IDFIMH

It may also be worth going back to what the OFT Study said about reduced service to customers.

4.62 Another potential argument is that, if drivers are unable to earn enough from taxi work, operators will take on other jobs and only undertake taxi work at evenings and weekends, when it is most profitable, leading to a lack of availability of taxis outside these periods.

4.63 Our analysis leads us to reject this argument, as does the experience of LAs that have de-restricted. When quantity controls are removed taxi supply increases. The evidence on waiting times shows that availability increases at all times of day. In any event it would run counter to common sense for the lifting of quantity controls to result in less supply.

I take it that the Brighton report has evidence from other LAs backing up their conclusions that OFT got it wrong?

It might also be worth noting that large chunks of the OFT Study was done by Halcrow, the self same Halcrow that councils are now falling over themselves to try to keep quotas.

_________________
IDFIMH

Whats all this about then sussex?

Sussex
you are not into this at all, an officers job is to place the facts and give his proffesional opinion based on those facts

if they did not councillors would go round in circles.

Well I would have thought that all the facts should be put before members, not just half of them. And if members needed any clarification, then they could ask that at the meeting.

Then it would all be above board.

_________________
IDFIMH

I don't understand why certain people argue against the rights of people because they have a "vested interest", surely all those arguing for a free plate have the same "vested interest".

Examples shared on these forums have highlighted increased demand being unmet within the PH sector, because of a reduction of numbers.

Please try to remember that "taxi services" include PH in the minds of many, restriction of HC plates doesn't mean that fit and proper people cannot provide "taxi services". Maybe the statement from the new minister was made without proper knowledge of how either HC or PH actually work, PH operators across the country use the word taxi within their trading name, if the minister considered their operation to be a taxi service then she was right to state that entry into the market shouldn't be restricted to those who meet the councils criteria.

Like almost every other "governemnt" statement people read between the lines or pick out certain statements to strengthen their own argument.

I think Mr McNulty was foolish to identify one council as the example of good taxi policy, different areas have different requirements and no consideration was given to these needs within his statement.

It all boils down to councils properly identifying what services the community needs, they need to hold a full investigation in order to achieve an increase in available services and conquer, as much as possible, of the unmet demand.

What I'm saying here is that the councils shouldn't take the word of any vested inetrest group, both have a self interest agenda. The governemnt have stated they are best placed to decide local policies regarding this issue, maybe they should undertake this responsibility with more caution.

Most regular posters on here claim their arguments are right and that opposing arguments are wrong ................... that makes for good debate but it doesn't make for good policy making.

I have just been e-mailed requesting that I confirm that none of the information I have received about Brighton & Hove's justification, has come from the officers of the Brighton & Hove Private Hire Association.

Alex

_________________
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

Simply the best taxi forum in the whole wide world. www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Well both have an INTEREST, but only those that have an interest in the continuation of the status quo have a VESTED one.