GA wrote:
JD,
I must say that you haven't got a clue what your going on about, with regard Gateshead anyway.
There are, in fact 36 policy changes due for implementation, the temporary restriction was in place before the policy changes had been determined, the policy changes WILL put Gateshead in the position where our quality standards are set higher than neighbouring authorities and the standards of entry which will include driver training and possibly the DSA test will ensure that professional standards are introduced to Gateshead.
So there are 36 changes, which is more than the 20 odd that the LO told me there might be and which I made public several weeks ago.
At that time the LO hadn't finalised the proposed changes but when he did he was going back to the cab trade for their views and the final considerations. Are your telling us the amendments have now been finalised and are due for implementation, that would suggest the LO's report has gone before the committee and passed, or you are just assuming it will be passed in its entirety? I did state several weeks ago that the LO hoped to finalise the report by May, furthermore I do not doubt that it won't be past in its entirety but until it is. it will not be official.
Quote:
The temporary suspension is required because, as you know our Town Centre is due to be demolished and majorly redeveloped, with further developments still being undertaken around Gateshead Quays.
The LO informed me that once these new quality controls had been passed the suspension on license applications would be lifted. We shall see?
Quote:
It is also worthy of note that only 2 of our PH operations are still recruiting drivers, the fact that the others have a restriction of numbers (to ensure driver takings) is a fact that is quite obviously beyond your observations of the area in which I work.
I suppose it is beyond your comprehension that the council has not, nor cannot, suspend private hire licenses, therefore what individual private hire firms do, is neither here no there. If a person or persons want to start up their own private hire business they do not need the assistance of an established private hire firm. However, that information is interesting and probably worthy of debate on its own.
Quote:
Your claims that I'm not aware of the policy changes shows why your post and suggestions should be treated with contempt.
lol here you go again inserting your own interpretation on what I did not say.
I actually said this
"Well I can assure you that the Gateshead LO will be putting forward about 22 quality controls recommendations and if you haven't had them by now I can assure you that you will be getting them pretty soon. " Like I said,
if you haven't had them by now". I can't see any similarity in that statement and your wrongful accusation, which stated I said, "you weren't aware of any policy changes."
Being on record in the past as saying you are aware of such policy changes puts this recent misrepresentation firmly in its place.
Quote:
this is because I was involved in their implementation
We are all aware of your input into these proposed changes so that makes your comments even more fanciful.
Quote:
We lead these calls for quality controls and urged the council to take back the control of Taxi Licensing and use the fees we pay to properly enforce our conditions, new and old.
Isn't that what Skull advocates? Perhaps you're closer to the Skull on these issues than you think? lol
Quote:
You also failed to mention in your expert synopsis of Gateshead that we have just had an interim fare rise agreed,
I wasn't aware we were discussing fare rises but if it was something you wanted to mention then you found an opportunity for doing so.
Quote:
You see your claims that the so called Taxi Barons exploit the trade
When did I claim that?
In all my time on TDO I can't recall ever using the word "Taxi baron"in order to describe a Taxi Baron? It's not a word I use, however if you can show me where I said that, then I will obviously hold my hands up?
I don't think I have ever discussed the connection between Taxi Barons as you call it and trade exploitation? Are you sure you don't mean so-called taxi Barons and driver exploitation or are they one and the same in your opinion? I have spoken about people manoeuvring themselves into prominent trade positions to further their own ends at the expense of others, I suppose that might well fit into your reference about trade exploitation?
You would never harbour such thoughts of exploitation would you? After all, you were elected unanimously to represent people who come from all aspects of the trade. However the majority, by some margin, are owner-drivers and it is their opinions you are mandated to propose.
Quote:
The fact that we are achieving something in Gateshead really pi$$es you off don't it, still its working and the council are retaking control, thank god.
Why would it pizz me off? If you haven't noticed I have been advocating councils practice high standards of quality controls for a very long time. In fact I was informing them of such on a regular basis through the updated quota list. I find your comment rather odd, however it is nice to see Gateshead finally admitting that their quality control standards needed a face-lift.
I am sure we all wish Gateshead well in implementing their new standards but who do we have to thank for that? Is it Gateshead council? Is it the local Taxi organisations? or is it the influence and guidance of TDO? lol
Regards
JD