Taxi Driver Online

Posted in tonights Edinburgh Evening News

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/opini ... =100052007

Former council leader Donald Anderson often informs us Edinburgh’s economy is “burgeoning”. Rightly, the city needs a transport infrastructure to match and the council’s 5 year transport strategy aims to deliver this.

Curiously, the council’s plan omits taxis, although they complement all other transport types and form a significant part of the travelling public’s choice mix.

Council owned Lothian Buses’ expansion of its night bus service will be welcomed, particularly by those who experience difficulty hailing a taxi during peak periods. However, why does this taxi shortage exist?

In my thirteen years driving taxis, fleet numbers have risen from 1030 to 1260 (static for four years) - private hire from around 100 to nearly 900.

While private hire soared by over 800%, taxis increased only 20% because of the council’s policy to deliberately restrict them - causing the taxi trade to surrender its numerical presence and its market share to dwindle.

The council has refused numerous licence applications, spending tens of thousands of pounds of our money in legal fees defending its policy. With inexhaustible public funds it knows the prohibitive legal cost deters opposition.

Although claiming no significant unmet demand for taxis, the council is spending £582 million on trams to meet passenger demand and spent over £300,000 launching a taxi-bus service to the airport. These compete directly with taxis, as does the Scottish Executive grant subsidised expansion of its night bus service.

These are set against the backdrop of an expanding local economy, increased traffic through rail stations and airport (recently opened to taxis), more hotel beds with higher occupancy rates from expanding tourism, and the introduction of taxi marshals at taxi ranks to manage queues forming at peak periods because of an excess demand the council tells us doesn’t exist.

Yet, there’s no demand for more taxis in our “burgeoning” local economy?

The council’s unreasonable restriction policy has driven licence plate “values” to over £50,000 (£125,000 in five years at current rate of increase). Although legislation does not permit licences to be transferred, this is circumvented through the council’s own policy of “Incorporation”.

Rentals for drivers who can’t afford to “buy in” to secure their employment have risen towards £350 per week, their employment status no more secure than casual labour. With three drivers for every owner, the real prospect of unemployment discourages drivers from speaking out through fear of being ostracised.

However, granted their own licence, drivers could operate a brand new, fully funded, single-shifted taxi for as little as £190 per week - a huge saving, less hours at the wheel, more hours worked during peak periods and improved service for the public.

Isn’t it time for change, for modernisation in line with the London model - no quantity restriction of taxis but with quality controls like “the knowledge”? The Office of Fair Trading recommended de-restriction and over 70% of UK local authorities have, Aberdeen being the latest.

How is it acceptable, in a free market economy, for the council to compete against the taxi trade it also regulates and restricts? Doesn’t this conflict of interest work against the interests of both taxi drivers and fare paying passengers, who simply want access to taxis when they need them?

Isn’t the council’s policy to restrict taxi numbers and stifle competition unreasonable, unjustifiable, unsustainable and morally bankrupt?

That's got to sting a little, well done Jim a quality piece of work.

_________________
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

seems like more diatribe to me

CC

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

"Rentals for drivers who can’t afford to “buy in” to secure their employment have risen towards £350 per week" thanks for telling us how much some drivers are prepared to pay, should be a good bargaining tool(jim taylor said in the evening news that £350 was the going rate so it must be true)perhaps they are paying more because of a slighty tarnished driving licence that increases ins. prems or that they are priviledged to drive an top of the range TX4 with gold plated kitchen sink. i've yet to meet this man yet though but for £350 i'd let skull drive( and use the extra money to buy armour plating)

No Diesel. Peter 5 is being charged this because his car has leather seats.

Nice to know you're concerned though.

What I like about your response, and CC's, is that neither makes any mention of the customer.

We already know you don't care about drivers, they're just fodder for your greed, but you really screw up by showing your disdain for your own customers. You know who they are? They're the ones you're prepared to have wander the streets looking for a taxi until you deign to let them in your taxi.

p5 is an 03 plated tx1(the last registered?) if he is stupid enough to pay £350 then tough! i don't rent to a driver so i'm not making money from rentals. every penny i make i earn.98% of my working week i don't see people wandering around looking for taxi's, if they want one they walk to nearest rank where are loads waiting or take their pick from the hundreds trolling around. as i work broadly the same hours as you, you know this. if this wasn't the case why do you spend time waiting at the pervert's rank?

Here is Bob dewar's post on Fasties in response to the article in the News.

Perhaps Bob should have noticed the title, "Taxi cap is bad for us all". Obviously not for Bob, but yes for the News, the public and the drivers.

Here is Bobs response.

<Start>

Once more, Jim Taylor has put pen to paper in today’s News and the right hand column (all of it) on page 13, is devoted to another issue of what in my opinion is another dose of claptrap for us to read. The trouble is, the public are reading it too and some of them will believe it.

According to Mr.Taylor we can all run a brand new fully funded taxi for as little as £190.00 per week. I am of the opinion some of us, who have relatively new TX’s are unable to run so cheaply. There is nothing that can be done to change that until these vehicles become older. Mr. Taylor alleges we are charging rentals of £350 per week if we can find a driver to pay us that amount. Drivers who will be willing to drive for an owner and pay that kind of money must be out there, because Mr Taylor says that’s what they’re paying. Is he paying that? My driver would have to face an increase of well over, repeat, well over £100 per week to reach that level of rental. This being the case, all you drivers paying £350 per week for a rental should be queuing up at my door!

If the foregoing is the case, then why are we owners having to work at all? The arithmetic is simple. Accept 2 drivers – one day shift – one night shift. Two drivers at £350 is £700. Deduct the £190 it costs to run this brand new vehicle and your profit is £510. Not a bad wage for not lifting a finger. How stupid are we owners for working? How stupid is he for writing such nonsense?

According to Taylor it’s Lothian Region Transport and the Council’s restrictive practices which are killing us off. Whether we like it or not, and we don’t, the Council are entitled to put any services on they want, to work from and to the airport. It is their prerogative. It’s up to us to compete. We can, and are doing this as we speak. We will probably win this one since their new service is too restricted. For one passenger it is too expensive.

Taylor advises us, people are unable to flag a taxi at night, and there are queues at the ranks. This is true, but all of us should put this into context. If we set our houses on fire, can we flag down the fire brigade? When we want a policeman, can we get one straight away? The last time I phoned the police, a tape recorded message told me they were busy, and I could send them an email if I wanted! The cold hard fact is, that it is only when all the clubs , pubs and other places of entertainment empty out at the same time, are there queues at the ranks, and they are not there for very long. You cannot put enough taxis on the road to cover the busy periods (approx 4 hours per week ) and leave the rest of the week with too many taxis for too few fares. It is not economical. Taylor knows this but uses the queuing fact for his own purposes. The question we should be asking Taylor is “Why is the Council’s policy too restrictive when taxis are sitting about with long periods between each fare, and with nothing to do other than wait for “their turn”. Why should the Council issue more licences when most taxis are idle for more than 50% of their shift? The Council have spent a lot of money defending this policy. But then we asked them to defend the policy. That’s why!

Why does Taylor, who is almost on his own with his opinions,(with the exception of the irrelevant Skull) want the number of licences increased without limit? This guy hasn’t ever invested a penny into the trade, is relatively inexperienced with only 13 years under his belt, yet thinks he knows it all. Why should we stand aside and allow him to impose his will on the rest of us and the public? What are the chances, if he gets his way, that he will ruin himself, and will drag the rest of us along with him? He is becoming a dangerous man. We should be taking him seriously!

If he gets his way, the good citizens of our wonderful City will be choking with diesel fumes, and the lack of fares to go around the probable 5000 people who will apply for a licence, will probably mean some of them will start to heckle the public to get in their cars.

I am surprised and disappointed at the “News” in giving Taylor the opportunity to spout his bile. What have we done to deserve this publicity? He has given information out, some of it right, some of it a right load of twaddle, which should not really be in the public domain. The public used to pay a paltry sum towards the upkeep of the trade, but no longer do they pay. So why should they be told the ins and outs of how our trade works. He should button his lip. Isn’t it a cold hard fact that he wants something for nothing, and he is using his god given gift of the gab talent, which is considerable, to bring that about? His predecessors have paid and worked hard to get where they are so why shouldn’t he button it, work hard, not at spouting, but driving, and save his pennies, just like I did, to get my own licence?

I hope our representatives are ready for the forthcoming battle!

<End>

I thank Bob for his gracious comments and admiration of my writing skills. Had he consulted with me, I could have saved him considerable effort. Rather than the lengthy post, I would have advised him to use the following:-

Ouch!!!!!!
Ohyah!!!!!!
Ya fecker
Jeeeeze us
Aaaaaarrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!
Ya c..t!!
Dear oh dear.
Get yir haun oot ma pocket!!!
The bubble's burst
The party's over ....
What the fecks a customer onywye ...
Taxi driver's getting their ain motor? The country's fecked

The pervert's rank?

Diesel, that says more about you than you should be prepared to admit.

Kinda makes me wonder why everything in Edinburgh's garden is rosy, yet 70% of other LA's have de-restricted, including London.

Your problem Diesel, is that you're still trying to debate the whether. You haven't grasped that the debate has moved on to the when. And, I vouch that will be soon.

In five years plates will be selling for £125,000 (thanks to Stu for this info). Will that be the time to de-restrict?

Or, will it be when PH have tripled again in that time?

Or, will it be when night bus services operate the same timetable as day services?

Or, will it be when rentals reach £500?

Or, will it be when drivers realise that the hit and miss is being taken out of them by owners?

With the quality controls already in place, and more to come, this about double and triple shifted vehicles becoming single shifted vehicles, nothing more.

Same drivers, same shifts. Some owners having to exercise their sphincters for a change. No sleep loss there.

Heaven forbid.

_________________
IDFIMH

Does Edinburgh have a TX only restriction ?

If they do is it not fair to say that some people may still have to rent a vehicle because of the cost of these models.

Is the basis for this argument ONLY for the deregulation of numbers or is it to encombass the removal of the TX only restriction (if that is it is in place).

B. Lucky

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.

+ E7.

So you'll be requesting use of other WAVs to allow you free trade.

How many people do you think would come get a plate if the £10,000 (new) Fiat Doblo was allowed?

A question you must ask if you support deregulation.

B. Lucky

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.

What does it matter?

As long as someone meets the council criteria for personal licensing, why shouldn't they drive any vehicle that also meets the council's criteria?

Remember if they don't have a personal license they can't drive anything.

_________________
IDFIMH

What will it take for folks to understand that de-regulation is not the issue. De-regulation would be chaos and l to the fall in standards I want to protect.

What we're talking about is de-restriction. Removal of quantity controls and on to quality controls.

If the Fiat Diablo is good enough, and I don't know whether it is, then in a free market it should be available as an option.

The fall in standards is apparent in areas where restrictions have been removed ............... the problem Jasbar is that mistakes have been made by people panicking councils into removing restrictions without considering the possible consequences.

Discussions on this subject are based on fairness ............... and with considerations required for those wishing to enter as well as those already involved fairness cannot be achieved by just considering one side.

B. Lucky

_________________
"Here's a simple solution. If you don't want to pay more for a premium service then wait in the queue, problem solved".
Skull on TDO

TF pi$$ed on his chips.