Taxi Driver Online

But Mr Guest why should there have been a massive campaign from the PH trade?

For those that want de-limitation, they have already got the justification in the OFT study. It is for the anti's to campaign against it, and if you think a dozen anti OFT letters is a campaign that will succeed, then I believe you are wrong.

You see the powers that be expect to be bombarded by the anti's, and if what I have seen is it, then the anti's have a problem.

What you don't see in PHM is all the letters from consumer groups, from the disabled, from councils (except the odd one or two) who are desperate to be rid of the restrictions.

Many letters will also be sent from the PH trade, but you fall into a very big trap if you think PHM is the only way a view can be put over.

It's my opinion that the NPHA is an operators association, nothing wrong with that whatsoever, however it may try to act the drivers friend, but it lost it way a while back.

Like all the publications, when it comes to the crunch, it's a case of 'he who pays the piper, picks the tune'.

_________________
IDFIMH

I think PHM sums it up to a tee, when they says that operators don't want drivers clearing the street when customers are waiting in restaurants etc.

Wouldn't it be nice if the drivers could choose for themselves?

_________________
IDFIMH

But why not. I would have thought that with all the flaws of the OfT (in my view, but lets not go into that) that any interested partys would be writing in supporting the move to de-limit.

I think that if the boot was on the other foot you would have called it apathy.

As I stated, I would like to have seen a balanced view printed, But if there no representation from the ph trade then only one side can be seen.

In fact why dont you write into PH&TM and put your views accross? With respect, you have written about it here on a daily basis (nothing wrong with that I may add) but your view is very absent in print.

cannot understand your point at all, your failing is that you expected a response and it sis not come.

most mistakes come from misjudging an outcome, have you had a talk about this at the cartel?

if you require an opposition to this then its down to the good ol Tand G
so managed growth.

I find it amusing that you try to pull sussex strings, me thinks that strategy is doomed.

Your posting certainly did not disappoint me as it is exactly as I expected And I think that Sussexman is perfectly capable of speaking from himself. But I would add that his postings on here and other forums are ample and very apparant but I would like to see at least one letter in print from him.

cannot understand your point at all, your failing is that you expected a response and it sis not come.

Lack of interest from the ph sector perhaps?

most mistakes come from misjudging an outcome, have you had a talk about this at the cartel?

Who has misjudged an outcome.??? I am prepared to adapt to whatever changes may take affect. Its a big problem for you isnt it. This well organised group that we have. You post like a little jelous child I reckon I would rather be here then wherever you come from

I find it amusing that you try to pull sussex strings, me thinks that strategy is doomed

Certainly not pulling anyones string. I thought the thread was a valid point but seems to have been met with a bit of embarrasment of the lack of organistion from the ph sector. I honestly thought that there would be a lot of printed written support.

However, Whatever Mick (whatever you are calling yourself now...which of course is much better then your usual annonymous postings, and you do give yourself away with your simple typing mistakes )I do suspect that you have your own agenda for responding. But nevertheless, I do thank you for your contribution.

I suspect that many have written to the DfT on this subject, pointing out the pro's of the OFT study. The fact that they haven't sent copies to PHM, means little.

I learnt a long time ago, the last thing you do is let the other side know what you are doing. Until that is, it's too late for them to do anything about it.

Why should I need to write to PHM anyway? If I have anything to say public, then I will do it through TDO. It may not reach as many people as PHM, but at least it's never edited out.

It's my belief however that PHM will do the pro OFT side a great deal of good. Many will see the anti letters, and believe that the status quo is safe, cos no-one wants change.

But such letters as the one from Brighton just show how out of date, and how out of touch many in the HC trade are.

Change is going to happen, and thinking that a letter published in PHM will mean anything in the grand scale of things, is pure folly.

_________________
IDFIMH

I would say this thread is a very valid one, but it has no sense of embarrassment for me.

In truth the average PH driver has no-one to stick up for him. Take the Brighton letter in PHM. It states that the signatories account for 90% of 'the trade'.

So it would seem that all (or at least 90%) of the local PH trade are happy at being treated as second class. I don't think that for a second, but clearly the bosses do.

To me however, I was surprised at the lack of letters from the HC trade. They (or 45% of them) have an awful lot to lose. But only a dozen seem to want to do anything about it.

Perhaps that says more, than the lack of PH input.

_________________
IDFIMH

Ok I accept your point on that but I would take the issue that Brighton & Hove are indeed forward thinking and this is based on managed growth which I back completely and always have done even when I bought my plate 20 years ago.

Whether of course this managed growth does not fit in with the other view that there should be a mass immediate increase in plates is the arguing point ....which has been covered on other threads.

Perhaps the way that Brighton have instigated the managed growth with issuing 19 new plates and then 5 per year means that a ph driver will be serving some kind of apprentiship prior to being issued with a hack plate. Although this is only my view.

Actually, on that point perhaps it is indeed a good idea for any prospective new hackney owner to serve a minimum period as a ph driver. This would sort out those who are serious about working in the trade and rid the trade of those pesking part timers.

I don't want to go to much into 'managed growth' at the moment, but in Brighton & Hove how many un-met taxi demand surveys have you had in the last say 12 years?

And would you accept that as being 'managed growth'?

_________________
IDFIMH

Hold on, first you say you dont want to go into managed growth, You then ask a question to which my answer is:

At a guess I think three?

And then you question managed growth, So you actually do want to go into managed growth.

However, yes I do think that a regular survey is the best way forward. The last action the council took was 19 more plates straight away and 5 per year. All of these are WAV limited which is in line with future legislation.
But then is there really the point in discussing this particular issue as I know exactly what you think of that and there really no point in going over and over the same point. Sorry, lots of points there
[/i]

The reason I don't want to go into managed growth at the mo, is because if I start now, I wouldn't be finished by this time next week.

So I will save that for another day, you will all be grateful to hear that.

_________________
IDFIMH

The point about managed growth is in very short, it doesn't work.

Say your area only had one taxi un-met demand survey in the last 12 years, and that one said you need 19 new HCs in September/October 2002.

Would it be acceptable if in January 2004, not all those HCs have been licensed, for whatever reason?

Also how do we know that the un-met demand in September 2002, wasn't present in 1992? It may not have been, but there is no evidence to say it wasn't.

Thus we could have had un-met demand in 1992, that still hasn't been met 12 years later.

This is why 'managed growth' is flawed, because by the time the growth has been managed, it's out of date.

_________________
IDFIMH

Hey and here is a bigger killer, Tesco last week announced a Multi Million pound revamp of it's 2 stores super stores in Mansfield, 1 store is relocating to a new development in Mansfield, Tesco were granted permission by the Council on Monday at the planning committee meeting, restrictions were put on both stores applications with the Council saying both stores must have bus stops and taxi ranks. No medigen in Mansfield It all boils down to the cartel thing once again, Medigen did themselfs no favours last year on TV but some firms still pay them, I wonder who they are??? Any ideas Geoff????

Great story Nigel, and we will wait and see what happens, but what the **** has that got to do with the thread?

I was expecting someone to agree with the lack of PH response.

Then I was going to partly agree with them, but say that many in the HC trade also disagree with quotas as well.

Then I was also going to say that in regards to a detailed rebuttal to the scare and doom mongers, it has been, at best, minimal.

But you just never know what's around the corner.

_________________
IDFIMH

Kin ell wrong thread.