Council Leader Alan Melton said there was a “gradual shift” of licensing duties to councillor Kay Mayor, the new chairman of licensing, He felt before long there would be no perceived conflict of interest.

MP calls for talks to settle escalating fears by taxi drivers they are losing out unfairly to community transport group

MP STEVE Barclay has called for a top level meeting to tackle increasing concerns by taxi drivers fearful of losing even more trade to fast expanding community transport group FACT. The MP held talks with taxi drivers’ representatives after they approached him about losing work to the Fenland Association for Community Transport, which now has close to 1,800 members and employs 50 drivers.

In a letter to FACT board member and county councillor Jill Tuck, the MP says taxi drivers told him of the losses they had incurred because of “client overlap”. Mr Barclay explained that taxi drivers were fearful of the services that FACT provides and how this “impacts on their daily business and on their ability to generate income.

“They refer particularly to services that transport individuals to events, shopping, doctors, train station, etc. This type of hire is historically taxi centric business.” Mr Barclay said there is “obviously a need for both types of service and a balance needs to be struck between the two – FACT and taxi drivers- to ensure that their businesses are sustainable.”

He has asked Cllr Tuck to arrange a meeting of taxi drivers, councillors and committee members of FACT to tackle the escalating row. Although he has not requested being at the meeting, Mr Barclay says he supports such an initiative “and if I can be of any assistance please do contact me.”

Dave Humphrey, one of the drivers who met with Mr Barclay, said the MP “instantly seemed to recognise there are indeed problems to be resolved.” He said he would like the MP to be present at the joint talks. “I believe that’s it is not going to be worthwhile unless he is there,” said Mr Humphrey.

He added that he felt FACT “by working outside its criteria is breaking the law. If FACT is able to compete for our business then we need to level the playing field. Taxi drivers should be able to take bus pass concessions for example.”

Recently I met both Cllr Tuck and Councillor Kit Owen, another board member, with FACT manager Jo Philpott. Cllr Tuck insisted a lot more people now need their services than ever “vital for those without a car”. Cllr Owen pointed out that one in five households in Fenland does not have access to a car.

He said FACT was a charity “run in a business like manner”. He said they employed a “damn good manager who knew what she was doing.” His personal view was that Fenland had too many taxis, which was the main reason “they are making the noise they are about FACT”.

Ms Philpott insisted the passengers who use their vehicles are different to those using taxis, Christchurch being an example. There was no public service to the village “so the FACT Dial a Ride is vital, going there three times a day. The service is always nearly full to capacity.”

Cllr Tuck also wondered if perhaps taxis could utilise the concessionary bus pass scheme. She also promised that the annual accounts of FACT would show more detail “so that we all understand better how they operate.”

IN a separate development, Councillor Dave Patrick, also chairman of the Wisbech Taxi Drivers’ Association, said he was “disappointed” that Fenland Council had yet to reply to his complaints about Cllr Owen. Cllr Patrick said that Cllr Owen, as a portfolio holder and with responsibility for licensing, had a clear conflict of interest.

He said Cllr Owen took part in Cabinet discussions this year which allowed a grant of £17,710 to be made to FACT even though he is an executive member of the latter. “We have major concerns with how FACT operates as we believe they are also undertaking commercial work which we would consider not community related,” said Cllr Patrick.

“FACT is a registered Industrial and Provident Society and it is also a registered limited company with net assets of over £450,000. “We believe that Cllr. Owen, as portfolio holder for Licensing who is therefore responsible for the Regulation of the Private Hire and Hackney Carriage Trade, that there is a serious conflict of interest.

“I also have serious concerns regarding Fenland District Council’s input as in the FACT report it also names and thanks two officers for their support with marketing.”

Council Leader Alan Melton said there was a “gradual shift” of licensing duties to councillor Kay Mayor, the new chairman of licensing, He felt before long there would be no perceived conflict of interest.

There's a guy round here who's just spent £18,000 of his own money fighting these community transport groups, JA Travel's Martin Allen lost a valuable contract to a Community Transport Group, he's got someone called Lord Lester representing him. Martin Allen is using the European Community law which prohibits the use of state aid that prevents fair competition for contracts.

It sounds like he's got the right chap representing him in Lord Lester, he's an expert in this field.

I wish him well.

I wish him well too, I'm fed up of these Parasites Hiding behind the word "Charity" whilst their Managers/Directors take big chunky wages sponsored by the generosity of the Public and Local Authorities (Public Money)....and then when they decide they cant be arsed to run a Voluntary on any given day of the week they Expect the Taxi/PH trade to cover for them...


It's More a Con than a Charity....

yep yer being MUGGED ORF the question WOT YER GONNA DO ABOUT IT OTHER THEM BLEAT ON HERE AND WISH OTHERS GOOD LUCK FFS

Perhaps, when asked, unions/associations will take this matter up. I often wonder if they can't or just don't do anything until asked, which is a shame as prevention is better than cure imo. I mean why wait until members are in strife before action is taken?

Perhaps, when asked, unions/associations will take this matter up. I often wonder if they can't or just don't do anything until asked, which is a shame as prevention is better than cure imo. I mean why wait until members are in strife before action is taken?

Because most of the moaners and people in strife aren't members?

NO THE UNION TOOTS IS THE MEMBERS, THEY DECIDE WHATS ON THE AGENDA AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT, IN LONDON I HAVE NOT HAD ONE MEMBER RAISE THIS ISSUE BUT WHEN THEY DO WE WILL GO FOR IT OBVIOUSLY!!!!!!!!! MAYBE ITS NOT OCCURING HERE CERTAINLY I HAVE HAD NO REPORTS OF IT!

NATURALLY THE A UNION IN THIS AREA SHOULD BE DEALING WITH IT BUT I SUSPECT THE DRIVERS THERE ARE NOT UNIONISED SO THEREFORE NOTHING HAPPENS AND THE COWBOYS CLEAN UP AGAIN [WHEN WILL THEY EVER LEARN GET ORGANISED??]

I wouldn't want to Join a union, their leaders for the most part have seem to have become little more than working man sponsored Fat Cats with Big Pay, Big mouths, big Ideas and even Bigger Pension and perks.

I remember when unions where proactive and actually went out to seek members, pointing out the problems, explaining the benefits etc has something happened to stop that? Btw there's no need to shout