Taxi Driver Online
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Wolverhampton cry 'crocodile tears' in PHTM
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=40938		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Sussex [ Tue Nov 05, 2024 9:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Wolverhampton cry 'crocodile tears' in PHTM
I suppose they were offered the chance by PHTM to give their side of the story. :---)

https://content.yudu.com/web/43sy4/0A43 ... gin=reader
Author:  StuartW [ Wed Nov 06, 2024 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wolverhampton cry 'crocodile tears' in PHTM
Where to start with all that? :-o

Makes some reasonable points, but a lot of it is just pure spin, for example:

Wolverhampton City Council wrote:
This is not a loophole in the legislation, as is often
stated. A loophole is where an activity is permitted
because it has not been considered when legislation
was enacted. This is a feature of the legislation – the
Government intended for cross-bordering to be
permitted.

To an extent, yes. But the Wolves issue isn't about cross-border working per se - it's more about Wolves acting as some sort of national licensing authority, and thus the attendant problems with standards and enforcement etc.

If the Wolves scenario had been Parliament's intention then they would have legislated for a national licensing authority and/or national standards. Point is, Parliament didn't do that, thus to that extent it is a loophole [-(
Author:  StuartW [ Wed Nov 06, 2024 5:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wolverhampton cry 'crocodile tears' in PHTM
Can't be bothered going through all the details (for example, it's fair to point out that it's a bit pointless mandating fire extinguishers when drivers not trained to use them, but I suspect that whether or not a fire extinguisher is required is hardly a deal-breaker when drivers are considering which local authority to licence with :lol: ).

But, as regards CCTV for example, even if it can be switched off, it hardly helps the driver in any proceedings against him if it is switched off. And are councils which do mandate CCTV acting disproportionately, as is implied? And what they say about the DfT's guidlines in their defence is hardly consistent with what the DfT actually says about CCTV.

And there's this recent article in TaxiPoint, which says Wolves actually considering allowing CCTV audio recording because of various incidents etc.

https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/wolve ... -recording

Of course, that's purely voluntary as far as the driver is concerned, but it's all hardly consistent with saying that mandatory CCTV is disproportionate in the first place :-k

And this also points to a wider problem with the whole of the council's piece - it's basically saying nothing to see here in terms of safety and enforcement etc, but that's largely inconsistent with the recent stuff about rolling it all back because of CSE, Rotherham, Telford etc :?
Author:  edders23 [ Wed Nov 06, 2024 6:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wolverhampton cry 'crocodile tears' in PHTM
Quote:
If the Wolves scenario had been Parliament's intention then they would have legislated for a national licensing authority and/or national standards.


But it is now a "ready made" solution for a national licensing system bearing in mind it already handles a lot of the nations licenses and has the experience. Seperate enforcememt from licensing and that might work and be more cost effective for drivers than the £500 to £600 pounds many now have to fork out
Author:  Sussex [ Wed Nov 06, 2024 7:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wolverhampton cry 'crocodile tears' in PHTM
I take issue with their repeated 'we don't benefit finacially' bo*****s.

They do. They have 123 staff who benefit, and I would be amazed if most of them haven't been reassigned from other departments rather than made redundant.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/