| Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| Eastbourne policy change http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10951 |
Page 1 of 4 |
| Author: | JD [ Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Eastbourne policy change |
Eastbourne met yesterday to consider the following policy options, I understand option D was preferred. 9.2 The Full Committee can: (a) Maintain the position of quantity restriction, meaning that the Committee agrees not to release any further licences at this time. (b) Adopt a policy of “Managed Growth.” This means that the Committee adopts a policy of releasing a specified number of licences over a period of time. For example, the release a specified number of licences to any vehicle annually which is deemed fit for purpose to effectively manage the level of demand for taxis in the Borough. (c) Opt for total delimitation. This means that there are no restrictions on the number of hackney carriage proprietor licences or the vehicles to which these licences are aligned. (d) Opt for total delimitation, subject to a Policy which supports quality control mechanisms. For example: whereby licences will only be released to vehicles meeting a required specification. This could be: All new Hackney Carriage Proprietor Licences released after a X date will only be permitted to be used by vehicles which meet European Whole Vehicle Type Specification, are designated WaVs and are no older than 1 years of age when entering the Trade. _______________________ |
|
| Author: | Stationtone [ Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Would the forthcoming court case in renfrew not have a big bearing on what option they go for. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Tue Mar 10, 2009 8:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
stationtone wrote: Would the forthcoming court case in renfrew not have a big bearing on what option they go for.
Our act is written slightly different to yours, so unless they decide on the reasonableness of insisting on WAVs, rather than the fact your councils are acting outside of their powers, then no. 
|
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
From what I can gather from my sources, it appears the cab trade in Eastbourne are as thick as pigs poo. 
Time and time again (over the last 10 years) the council has asked them to meet WAV demand, and they just ignore the pleas. Well it appears they wont need to be asked any more. 
|
|
| Author: | JD [ Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sussex wrote: From what I can gather from my sources, it appears the cab trade in Eastbourne are as thick as pigs poo.
Time and time again (over the last 10 years) the council has asked them to meet WAV demand, and they just ignore the pleas. Well it appears they wont need to be asked any more. I'll phone Eastbourne tomorrow and confirm the status but it does look like there has been a policy change. The report is substantial. Regards JD |
|
| Author: | JD [ Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Option D was passed. The committee now has to decide on the quality control criteria and whatever else they might deem appropriate? Regards JD |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
JD wrote: Option D was passed.
The committee now has to decide on the quality control criteria and whatever else they might deem appropriate? Regards JD Are you saying they adopted a policy without knowing what criteria they were adopting? regards CC |
|
| Author: | JD [ Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
captain cab wrote: Are you saying they adopted a policy without knowing what criteria they were adopting?
regards CC (d) Opt for total delimitation, "subject" to a Policy which supports quality control mechanisms. They made the decision to deregulate, now they need to decide on the quality control mechanisms. Regards JD |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
JD wrote: (d) Opt for total delimitation, "subject" to a Policy which supports quality control mechanisms. Regards JD Cheers JD....nice to see they haven't got a clue what they're doing
regards CC |
|
| Author: | JD [ Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
captain cab wrote: JD wrote: (d) Opt for total delimitation, "subject" to a Policy which supports quality control mechanisms. Regards JD Cheers JD....nice to see they haven't got a clue what they're doing regards CC I think there might be more discussion with the taxi trade regarding the type of quality controls, it would have been premature to consult before a decision to deregulate had been made. They may borrow Readings criteria, that would be entertaining. Regards JD |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
JD wrote: I think there might be more discussion with the taxi trade regarding the type of quality controls, it would have been premature to consult before a decision to deregulate had been made. They may borrow Readings criteria, that would be entertaining. Regards JD I disagree with you for the first time in months.
If the council had decided deregulation in a similar manner to Stockport, they'd have been left with the same criteria as is now. Was it one of the Wirral / Kelly cases that basically stated the applicant should be granted a license based upon the criteria at the time of the application? Premature maybe.....but IMO bloody silly. regards CC |
|
| Author: | JD [ Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
captain cab wrote: JD wrote: I think there might be more discussion with the taxi trade regarding the type of quality controls, it would have been premature to consult before a decision to deregulate had been made. They may borrow Readings criteria, that would be entertaining. Regards JD I disagree with you for the first time in months. If the council had decided deregulation in a similar manner to Stockport, they'd have been left with the same criteria as is now. Assuming there was adequate consultation with all concerned the council were obliged to vote on one of the four options they were presented with. This they did and the option they voted for stated Opt for total delimitation, "subject" to a Policy which supports quality control mechanisms. My understanding leads me to believe that the committee voted for total delimitation and the decision to delimit was subject to a new policy of quality control which was yet to be agreed. I can't believe you are suggesting that the conditions relating to quality should have been legally put on the table before a decision to delimit was made. Some licensing officers may offer such an option but it is not a legal requirement. Option D offered two policy options, one to delimit and one to bring in a policy of quality controls. I thought it was rather obvious but I'm open to persuasion. Regards JD |
|
| Author: | JD [ Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
captain cab wrote: Was it one of the Wirral / Kelly cases that basically stated the applicant should be granted a license based upon the criteria at the time of the application?
Thats quite right, anyone succesfully appealing against a refusal to issue a license is entitled to enjoy the licensing conditions that prevailed at the time they applied and subsequently appealed. That has nothing whatsoever to do with the policy decision in Eastbourne. No license will be issued until the new conditions of license are agreed by the committee. Regards JD |
|
| Author: | captain cab [ Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Cabbies' concerns after council lifts licence limit CABBIES say they fear for their livelihoods after a decision to increase the number of taxis in the town this week. After a marathon four-hour meeting on Monday night, the council's general licensing committee voted 7-4 for 'delimitation' which means there will be no cap on the number of taxis in the town. However, councillors say there won't be an explosion in numbers because delimitation will come with a control system – most likely requiring all new cabbies to have costly wheelchair-friendly taxis. At present, Eastbourne has 90 Hackney carriages – taxis which can be hailed in the street or wait on a rank for customers – and many of those drivers packed into the meeting to voice their opposition to the new system. Cabbie Peter Smith told councillors that he has to work up to 70 hours a week just to pay his bills and that a surge in new licences will force existing drivers out of business. "You are making an important decision which will have a direct effect on our livelihoods," he said. "The trade will be flooded. We don't want cherry-pickers working only the busy times and driving the rest of us out of business. It will be catastrophic to the trade." The licence review was triggered by a 41-signature petition from the town's Disability Involvement Group, pressure from central Government to totally relax the restriction on licences, the expiry of a current unmet demand survey at the end of 2009 and a need for the council to review its future approach. Disability campaigner Ian Westgate pressed for more taxis for wheelchair users and said disabled people are denied freedom of choice, opportunity and access, because they have to organise their travel in advance and are reliant on a wheelchair-friendly taxi being available when they need it. "It was not a lifestyle choice I made to have a wheelchair," said Mr Westgate. "I just want to travel when I want, like anyone else." Attempts to broker a deal with the cabbies that would have guaranteed a set number of wheelchair-friendly vehicles being on call 24/7 came to nothing, the meeting heard. Cab drivers asked for a survey, which would be paid for by their licence fees, to prove there was an unmet demand and a need for change. After the meeting Barry Morris, chairman of 720 Taxis, said the decision did nothing for the disabled lobby and had ruined current drivers' investments and threatened their future livelihood. "The committee could have released a handful of plates now with wheelchair accessible conditions then commissioned a survey to review the matter again within six to nine months, which would have helped resolve the wheelchair issue immediately. "A survey would give the committee the full information needed to make the correct decision at a later date." 720 company secretary Dave Hopkins said, "The committee decision did not consider the far larger group with other disabilities who would find it very difficult to get into a wheelchair accessible vehicle." Susan Morris, the chair of the licensing committee, said, "We heard compelling arguments from the taxi trade and disabled people, and on balance, taking account of all views, and the interests of the travelling public, the committee voted and opted for de-limitation linked to a policy of quality control." |
|
| Author: | toots [ Fri Mar 13, 2009 10:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: The licence review was triggered by a 41-signature petition from the town's Disability Involvement Group, pressure from central Government to totally relax the restriction on licences, the expiry of a current unmet demand survey at the end of 2009 and a need for the council to review its future approach.
I find it amazing that so few signatures could have such an effect on things. Taxi associations etc could probably get loads more and have no effect whatsoever, it's really rather strange |
|
| Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|