Taxi Driver Online

recently I stated that Halifax was surveying in reply to the OFT report conclusions.

this statement was made in good faith, and was the resolution of licensing and regulatory committee.

however, the resolution for funding was made to cabinet, and on 25th November the cabinet refused funding saying quantity controls should be left alone.

its a bizare resolution and conclusion, and I regret inadvertentently misleading these forums, I was not aware of the november cabinet decision.

Well don't do it again.

That aside, how are they going to review quotas, and what justification will they be using to keep them?

_________________
IDFIMH

We all make genuine mistakes but it could be interesting in Halifax if they are not measuring demand. Although if they were challenged they could always put off the decision of an applicant until they had measured demand.

Best wishes

JD

This is my view only,
but I think they are not, they are going to make the government split the quotas then blame the government.

the Halifax zone is a racial issue, and very much a stick where the 2 leading parties can beat labour .

again its my view only.

So you decided to post this after Mick had left the forums Geoff?? How hollow of you. For a person in the know Geoff you shouldn't be allowed to get away with a quote like that in my eyes.

what exactly do you mean? the original item was in reply to Sussex and JD NOT mICK!

A CORRECTION WAS MADE AT THE POINT OF DISCOVERY OF THE FACTS.

officialy mick has not left the forums merely charlie who plays Mick.

If I'm the Mick you are refering to Geoff then I "left" these forums some time ago, well you say "left" when in fact I just stopped contributing.

It has given me a great laugh reading your posts, proclaiming everyone to be me.

I suppose its just like Sussex being both Alex and TDO and JD being Mr Button himself, but lets not stop there, Wayne Casey contributes as Captain Cab on here and as The Riever within Taxitalk, it doesn't make the slightest differance to the substance of the debate nor does it deflect from their right to do so if they so wish.

You have become totally deranged because of your hatred of me Geoff, its sad to see when during TTFUK you wanted to be everyones mate, maybe some new friends you have made since have convinced you to hate rather than get on with me, or at least respect my opinions.

With regard your post within this thread, I find it hard to believe that someone who actively seeks information, as you do, would have not had the correct information until weeks after the council meeting.

The reason you kept quiet echoes the answers Sussex fails to give when asked the question IF YOUR ARGUMENT FOR DEREGULATION IS SO STRONG HOW COME YOU HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO CONVINCE YOUR OWN LOCAL COUNCIL TO DEREGULATE

I won't wait for a response.

B. Lucky

If you can still ask that question then you presumably haven't being paying attention for the last several years Mick

To answer the question properly would take some time, but it's all been done before, and perhaps a brief examination of the Trans Comm process can provide some indication of the answer:

- The committee was biased towards the vested interests, particuarly as represented by the T&G.

- The committee was biased against other interests, particularly consumers and those who would like a taxi plate - they certainly didn't call any to give evidence.

- The committee didn't have a clue about the trade - I don't think there's any doubt about that, even the supposed ex-London cabbie seemed to be on another planet.

- The witnesses often seemed equally clueless, and biased, take Mr Perkins of NATPHLEO, for example.

It would be interesting to perform an in-depth analysis into the Trans Comm meeting some day, but that would take ages, but we did a few pages on it in Myth and Reality.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

The question can be answered even more briefly - politics.

You yourself should know that it's not necessarily about the arguments, so why you should ask the question is unclear.

By the way, why haven't you been able to persuade Gateshead to re-restrict

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

In Gateshead we have protected plate premiums, in fact we have managed to increase premiums dramatically since deregulation of numbers.

In Gateshead there are to many taxis, we have a very small town centre and NOTHING else, the dayshift cars have started causing congestion already with to many trying to get onto to few rank spaces.

Its therefore only a matter of time before the council review, just it seems as many other authorities are doing as there are more considerations to providing adequate provision than to deliver a free plate to a few greedy people why do not wish to pay for the right to work independantly of the leeches.

So there you have it Andy/Dusty/Sussex Man/Sussex/Alex/TDO.

B. Lucky

So that's something to brag about??

And you complain about leeches?

So how many plates have a premium in Gateshead, and how many don't?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Yes, you've been making this argument for several years now, and it doesn't seem to have cut much ice, neither with your council or with the Govt.

I think the problem is like in my manor, too many part-timers who come and go in the trade as it suits them, particularly when they are trying to build other businesses.

I think Scanner clalled them 'potterers' or something like that.

As for the 'greedy' people who want a plate, of course that was yourself at one point (and presumably you're still pretty greedy since you want a free PH plate).

But I think that by any normal standards, I think those who promote preferential treatment for some people can hardly be considered more favourably to those who call for equal treatment.

I think this demonstrates the rather twisted nature of your interpretation of 'greed'.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Andy, Sussex Man and Sussex are all obviously the same people and no one has ever suggested otherwise, so what's your point?

Likewise, no one has ever denied that TDO and Dusty were different people and it has always been pretty obvious to regular readers, and/or it wasn't relevant.

No one objected when you changed from MP to Gateshead Angel, because we all knew who you were.

But obviously Charlie was a different story altogether.

So what's your point Mick?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

You mean the Cartel's Chief Lurker?

Well they were only 'potterers' when they wanted to run their own cars. When they wanted to drive his or his fellow leeches vehicles, they were the best thing since sliced bread.

W***er !

_________________
IDFIMH

Well Mick 6 zones out of 7 aint that bad.

you cant convince your council to do anything?

yep stay lucky.