Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Mon May 21, 2018 7:02 pm

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 11:04 pm
Posts: 725
Location: Essex, England
187ums wrote:
anyone remember how good British Rail used to be? much better than this lot, and it was done for the same reasons that you now espouse.


How good BR was?

Memeory is a wonderful thing.

So who runs the railways now? And I suppose they have never been subsidised?

The railways are the very worst example. Tens of Billions wasted.

_________________
There is Significant Unmet Demand for my Opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 8:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 6:33 pm
Posts: 1112
Location: City of dreaming spires
really, so why did the govt dissolve RailTrack and take back control of the network? why were various operators stripped of thier franchises and placed back with SRA?

anyway guys rejoice in your own downfall, because when you start having more and more cars, and you start taking less and less money, dont say we didn't warn you....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 7:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 12:27 pm
Posts: 305
Location: London LPH
To me the draft propsals seem fair. In fact they aren't that much different to what we have to adhere too.

All it needs now is for the black cabs to up date their sheds and London will have a service to be proud of. :wink:

Ollie

_________________
Happy to be legit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 11:04 pm
Posts: 725
Location: Essex, England
187ums wrote:
really, so why did the govt dissolve RailTrack and take back control of the network? why were various operators stripped of thier franchises and placed back with SRA?

anyway guys rejoice in your own downfall, because when you start having more and more cars, and you start taking less and less money, dont say we didn't warn you....


The government never took back control, as it never gave it away in the first place, read Tom Winsor's report.

_________________
There is Significant Unmet Demand for my Opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 1:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 6:33 pm
Posts: 1112
Location: City of dreaming spires
so who were the shareholders of Railtrack?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36907
Location: Wayneistan
Ironically, even under privatisation the rail companies will still need government subsidies. The franchising system is designed to give them the best of both worlds: introducing the discipline of competition, that is, encouraging them to cut lines and jobs, while maintaining government subsidies to those businesses that struggle to make a profit. Indeed, the net result of the rail market madness has caused the basic costs of train operators to rise substantially--so much, in fact, that the government grant required to keep the railways going rose from £1,061 million in 1993-94 to £2,090 million in 1994-95, an increase of £1,029 million. British Rail and Railtrack had to return £646 million of this to the government. But figures have been produced showing that a privatised railway will cost taxpayers up to £560 million a year more than when it was public.

Source...RMT

Captain Cab

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 11:04 pm
Posts: 725
Location: Essex, England
Source: RMT.

So, are you suggesting that if they removed the subsidies, then there would be no more railways?

The simple fact that subsidies exist, completely eliminate any true competition, and just continue to fuel the spiralling costs of the franchised concerns.

Note that, for example, Railfreight Distribution, which had historically down-sized every year since privatisation in 1948, nonetheless managed to keep swallowing a million pounds a year in subsidy. However, when it was privatised without subsidy, managed to turn in a profit within twelve months.

"Work expands to fill the time available to do it" someone famous once said.

Likewise, subsidy always seems to just be spent in sufficient volume to just get to the end of the contract.

Railtrack, and privatisation in general was a total fiasco, because it wasnt ever truly privatised. The whole lot was just a dogs dinner.

_________________
There is Significant Unmet Demand for my Opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:55 pm 
i hate train but am now a fan of the people who get off them. :D
even if it did cost me £400. :sad:
But back to the draft proposals I think they are on balance quite good.
some of my ph mates are too pleased about the roof lights going.
but some of them might be joining me in the station if the surveys are up dated. :shock:


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:22 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 40373
Location: 1066 Country
So if the DfT want rid of zones, as per their draft guidance, does that mean that the yellow badge holders in London will be allowed to ply their trade throughout the smoke, not just a tiny part of it? :wink:

Maybe Ollie will be able to join ranks with GBC via the back door. :D

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 11:04 pm
Posts: 725
Location: Essex, England
I used to be apathetic about all this. But now I just don't care.

_________________
There is Significant Unmet Demand for my Opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:53 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 40373
Location: 1066 Country
Sorry to dig this old thread up, but in an e-mail to Mr Roland in Sept's PHM the DfT say that the Best Practise Guidance will be out shortly.

Let's hope that doesn't mean another year or so. :roll: :roll:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36907
Location: Wayneistan
Quote:
Sorry to dig this old thread up, but in an e-mail to Mr Roland in Sept's PHM the DfT say that the Best Practise Guidance will be out shortly.

Let's hope that doesn't mean another year or so.


I hope so too, although there needs to be at least one addition to it concerning non UK residents.

CC

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:53 pm
Posts: 10381
Sussex wrote:
Sorry to dig this old thread up, but in an e-mail to Mr Roland in Sept's PHM the DfT say that the Best Practise Guidance will be out shortly.

Let's hope that doesn't mean another year or so. :roll: :roll:


In a very recent telephone conversation I had with the man dealing with the document, I was informed that it wont be out until the end of the year at the earliest. A more likely date is next year?

The slow progress was attributed to ministers and in particular Gillian Merron.

Regards

JD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36907
Location: Wayneistan
Quote:
The slow progress was attributed to ministers and in particular Gillian Merron.


what? a minister looking at DFT guidance? whatever next? :shock: :shock:

CC

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 6:25 pm
Posts: 36907
Location: Wayneistan
Current guidance O licenses;

Small vehicles suitable for carrying 8 or fewer passengers

a. if you give lifts in a car,or take part in a social car scheme run by a local authority, you can charge people enough to cover your running costs (plus general wear) and your car will still be treated as a private vehicle, not a taxi, hire car or PSV;




:shock:

CC

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bloodnock, Google [Bot] and 18 guests


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