Taxi Driver Online

OFT Response to select committee

http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/A11F1154-1A7F-4A6F-9A8B-6A2534FD54A2/0/taxiresponse.pdf

Best Wishes

John davies

Thank you John.

Do you want a job?

_________________
IDFIMH

lol doing what may I ask? I'm trying to give up work, don't burden me with extra duties.

What do u think of the OFT reply. I thought it was adequate and to the point. I also thought the response was measured without being condescending. It certainly showed that the select committee hadn't read the report properly and when they did read it, they read it with a pre conceived notion that it was flawed.

Now we await the big one next week.

One point that should be rememnered is that Select committees have a very poor record of influencing Governments. But we shall see? Intriguing isn't it lol

Best wishes

John Davies.

Why did they only survey 2 cities then????? That's why they got shot down in flames by the select commitee.

I think that OFT have worked out the best way to change the Select Committee's views, is to be nice and straight to the point.

If they had rubbished what should have been rubbished, then a siege mentality would been forthcoming from the SC.

I'm going to read it now.

_________________
IDFIMH

Pity the OFT were slated by 10 MP's into how much the survey cost.

The OFT got shafted big time, they went into room with the select committee and got ripped to bits, they were made to look like a armature outfit, they got slated by all the MP's on the committee, they were asked how come the survey was £250,000 when you only surveyed 2 cities???

The select Committees views in my opinion are set in stone and cannot be changed. Several if not all had formed an opinion before the hearing was conducted. The exclusion of those bodies which the OFT report is all about, was ample evidence that the hearing was not going to be impartial.

If you don't want to hear the truth you exclude those persons who are most likley to conflict with your own point of view. The OFT report was about the public, not about cab drivers in restricted areas maintaining a monopoly on who should pick up off the street.

Consumer groups and public representitives such as disabled organisations were excluded from this hearing. Just look at who was invited.

An organisation that represents less than five percent of the Taxi trade, most of the five percent that it does represent has a vested interest in retaining numbers control.

An enforcement officer who doesn't know his azz from his elbow and several other members of the cab trade who all had a vested interest in retaining numbers.

Couple that with the jokers on the committee and you have a real pot pouri of selective thinking.

I havent got a clue what the outcome will be next week but I hope the Government departments highlight the fact that the absence of consumer groups at the select committee hearing was an admition that the Select Committee didn't want to get at the truth.

Best wishes

John Davies

We will have to wait and see won't we?

Which ever way it goes Nigel, it wont effect you.

You work in a de-limited area, but you think it best that others can't.

Wouldn't be a member of the T&G by any chance?

_________________
IDFIMH

Because bright boy I have seen first hand what it can do, you haven't even set foot in a Taxi never mind drive one.

So because it doesn't work in your manor, or so you say, then it wont work elsewhere.

Don't do what I do, just what I say.

But hang on, didn't the T&G say that vehicle numbers fall following de-limitation? So really you should be laughing.

Or was that another lie?

_________________
IDFIMH

Exactly, the OFT decided it was better off talking to consumer groups to form the basis of their report, the two example Licensing Authorities were only named as it strengthened their case as the best way to deliver what the consumer groups wanted.





They certainly were'nt present, but it was their views that formed the basis of the OFT report so it could be argued that the OFT staff fulfilled the role.






Thats nonsense John and you know it, exactly how many people were called by the SC, it was considerbly more than the 2 you suggest in that statement.





The people concerned within the select committee, are elected representatives of us all, by calling them "jokers" it seems as though your preparing to discredit their findings when government kick out the suggestions made by the OFT.

The reasoning behind my opinion is simple, to impliment the changes reccommended by the OFT is against government policy, and the "whip's" will be pointing that out to every Labour MP. The reason they will have to do this is the Conservatives are already climbing all over their lack of implimenting promised policies elsewhere.

This whole thing has now got as far away from what is important than I ever thought or imagined it ever would, a decision will be made, not on what is best for the public but on what is best politically for this shambles of a government.

B. Lucky

The members of the select committee ARE NOT ELECTED TO REPRESENT US ALL!

they were elected only to represent thier constituencies, and have no governmental responsibilities.

having said all that thier report was just as valid as oft.

people on here are frankly childish in rubbishing 1 report and accepting the another


you Mick are just as guility of that.

Geoff,
You have hit the nail on the head. I want change,the way to go about is to ask US...the people that are going to affected. The Oft were wrongheaded right from the start because I think they were entirely subjective and were blinkered. I thought it was wrong not to include PH in the equation from the start (for the the purpose of this opinion lets assume we are all part and parcel of the hire and reward trade), can you imagine conducting a review of hospital staff without referance to nurses?
But in the cold light of day were the Oft acting within their brief or did they interpret government wishes for an excuse to rewrite the laws, and go completely off message?
Whichever way it goes next week we should be banging the drum for change but evolutionary change. We should be demanding a complete overhaul of the archaic conditions that we try to operate under.
Let us demand by right the inclusion of the trade within an integrated transport system, with all the benifits that infers. Too long we have been the Cinderella's, while the Ugly Sisters ( Road transport and the Railways ) have been subsidised to the hilt. I read today that every passenger on Virgins West Coast line was subsidised to the tune of £12.50.
Next week lads lets not be having a slanging match about the rights and wrongs but use our collective energies for long term benefit to us all.
Ged

_________________
taxi driver @manchester airport