Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Feb 23, 2017 5:07 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 8:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 36159
Location: Wayneistan
Child safety worries over taxi reforms


A Crawley councillor raised concerns vulnerable children would be put at risk under proposed changes to taxi licensing.

Cllr Michael Jones (Lab, Bewbush), chairman of Crawley Borough Council’s Licensing Committee, and Amin Mirza, chairman of Crawley’s Hackney Carriage Association, opposed Government plans to allow Crawley’s licensed taxi firms to sub-contract bookings from out of the borough.

In a letter on October 15, Cllr Jones urged the Secretary of State for Transport to withdraw clauses 10 and 12 within the Deregulation Bill, which is being debated in Parliament.

Clause 12 would let minicab firms sub-contract Crawley bookings to companies from out of the borough.

A spokesman for the Department of Transport (DfT) said clause 10, which would have allowed unlicensed drivers to share vehicles with licensed taxi firms when ‘off-duty’, had been removed from the Bill.

The letter stated: “This authority firmly believes that only people who have been vetted and licensed by the local council should be able to drive private hire vehicles.”

Cllr Jones said the risk of individuals or gangs using private hire vehicles to exploit passengers, particularly vulnerable children, would rise.

Mr Mirza said clause 12 would destroy the council’s “very high” vetting standards.

He added: “If cross border hiring is allowed the local licensing officer would have no control over the drivers or the vehicles.

“When a customer rings a cab they expect the controller to have a good knowledge of the area.”

The DfT spokesman said: “The safety of taxi passengers is our first priority in taking forward these reforms. We believe there is scope for reducing the burden of regulation whilst maintaining safety standards. Licensing authorities will continue to carry out criminal record checks on taxi and private hire vehicle drivers every three years as they generally do or they can carry those checks more regularly, where there is an case for doing so. The reforms are tried and tested in London and councils have strong enforcement tools.”

source: http://www.crawleyobserver.co.uk/news/l ... -1-6391634

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:24 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 16130
A bit late on clause 10 isn't he?

_________________
Grandad,
old fart with no heart


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:27 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 16130
The Councilor does not seem to have a problem with a private hire operator passing work to an out of town Hackney.
The Councilor does not seem to have a problem with a Hackney passing work to an out of town Hackney.
The Councilor does not seem to have a problem with a Hackney passing work to an out of town Private Hire Operator.
All of which are legal and all no different to what is being proposed.
He only has a problem with a Private Hire operator passing work to an out of town Private Hire operator.

_________________
Grandad,
old fart with no heart


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 37848
Location: 1066 Country
captain cab wrote:
Clause 12 would let minicab firms sub-contract Crawley bookings to companies from out of the borough.

And make them able to operate in the same way as hackney firms, and PH firms based in London.

Maybe someone should ask said thick bandwagon jumping politician why he hasn't written to the Minster asking why hackneys and London firms are allowed to do what he thinks puts the vulnerable in such a position.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:22 pm
Posts: 14109
Location: On the move
Sussex wrote:
captain cab wrote:
Clause 12 would let minicab firms sub-contract Crawley bookings to companies from out of the borough.

And make them able to operate in the same way as hackney firms, and PH firms based in London.

Maybe someone should ask said thick bandwagon jumping politician why he hasn't written to the Minster asking why hackneys and London firms are allowed to do what he thinks puts the vulnerable is such a position.


Quite right, he should do :wink:

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 20157
Location: A City near Birmingham
Do they not realise school runs are generally COUNTY council organised and any contractor can bid on work, there is no rule about who does what ...

_________________
Freedom is never free


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 37848
Location: 1066 Country
wannabeeahack wrote:
Do they not realise school runs are generally COUNTY council organised and any contractor can bid on work, there is no rule about who does what ...

More and more are being run by Unitary Authorities, who also do licensing.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 23, 2016 9:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 8495
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
Sussex wrote:
wannabeeahack wrote:
Do they not realise school runs are generally COUNTY council organised and any contractor can bid on work, there is no rule about who does what ...

More and more are being run by Unitary Authorities, who also do licensing.



not up here in Lincolnshire they aren't

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 24, 2016 5:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 37848
Location: 1066 Country
edders23 wrote:
Sussex wrote:
wannabeeahack wrote:
Do they not realise school runs are generally COUNTY council organised and any contractor can bid on work, there is no rule about who does what ...

More and more are being run by Unitary Authorities, who also do licensing.



not up here in Lincolnshire they aren't

But your in the land time forgot.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 24, 2016 7:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 8495
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
Sussex wrote:
Sussex wrote:
wannabeeahack wrote:
Do they not realise school runs are generally COUNTY council organised and any contractor can bid on work, there is no rule about who does what ...

More and more are being run by Unitary Authorities, who also do licensing.



not up here in Lincolnshire they aren't
But your in the land time forgot.


No we are the land that is very selective about which aspects of the modern world we adopt and that gets constantly shafted by the government over funding

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group