Taxi Driver Online

Here is the council's take on Human Rights as advised to me by the Council Solicitor - Licensing:-

As regards the Human Rights Act, the Council is committed to acting in accordance with all Equalities and Human Rights requirements as set out in their Fairness and Respect, Diversities and Respect Scheme

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/f ... _2009-2012.

As you will appreciate, Human Rights is a constantly developing area of law and the courts are constantly explaining,refining and expanding the various concepts within the European Convention on Human Rights.

So, I was somewhat wrong. The council has given consideration to Human Rights.

It's prepared to consider your rights if you're black, yellow brown or tartan.

It will consider your rights if you're gay, bi, or transgender.

It will consider your rights if you're a catholic, a Buddhist, a Moslem a Jew or a Jane.

It will consider your rights if you're if you're Irish, Chinese or, I guess, even Libyan.

But it hasn't considered, and indeed does not intend to consider, your rights if you are a humble taxi driver, who is being castigated under civil procedure according to the CGSA, or if you simply desire the equality of opportunity to drive your own taxi.

Nor does it intend to consider your rights if you're a member of the public who just wants to get home and can't hail a taxi.

Perhaps the clue is in the point made that the Law is being refined, and that CEC has taken the decision to let the Courts decide how it should conduct itself.

Brill. Except CEC's lack of adherence to Human Rights is just going to cause licence and taxpayers' shedloads of their hard pressed cash.

Under the circumstances, knowing the issues were raised BEFORE they took their action to suspend a licence, when the Courts do find against them, shouldn't Nick Stormonth, Donald Macleod, Cllr Keir and every member of the RC and licensing sub-committee resign or stand down and never be heard in public office again?

Wouldn't that be the honourable thing to do for failing in their public duty to protect rights, and ignoring the matter when it was brought to their attention?

Would it not be the honourable thing, if and when you lose (love how every court/license date and subsequent appeal you fight, you claim your gonna win yet all youve won is hee haw)

Anyway, if and when you lose would it not be honourable if you dropped the human rights issues. It's a lame duck, always been a lame duck and will never hold as no human rights are being disregarded!

Couldn't you just pick one and pretend

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

Oh jimmy boy, give it a rest.

You are starting to sound like Delboy,
"This time next year I will be a millionaire"

More tripe from the three amigos above, three clowns for whom equality of life and opportunity is a stranger.

Well consider this, because this is what CEC says, as it quotes, and would agree with, the UK Equalities Review.

"An equal society protects and promotes equal, real freedom and substantive opportunity to live in the ways people value and would choose, so that everyone can flourish. An equal society recognises people's different needs, situations and goals and removes the barriers that limit what people can do and can be."

This is what the council says, but how does it bear any reality to what they do?

"An equal society protects ..."

Not cabbies. Ever looked in your licensing conditions book? Or in the council's com-plaint procedures? Did you notice any information from CEC outlining what your rights and protections as a cabby are, either within the complaints procedure or outwith it?

Nope, I thought not. CEC, claiming to protect us, rides roughshod over us, as councillors get their jollies sticking it up cabbies. Which they do because they can. And we allow them to.

"... promotes equal, real freedom ...

So, how are cabbies equal, when CEC has designed procedures and process which removes any prospect of equality, before the Law or under it.

You can't prove a cabby swore at a numpty who, by his own admission, was driving too slow, and has hang ups about black cabs, so you just take away the cabby's livelihood anyway. Equal? Freedom? Really?

"... and substantive opportunity to live in the ways people value and would choose..."

But not if that choice is to operate your own taxi, to be able to work when the market needs and spend quality time with your family when the market need is not there. No choice for cabbies then.

"... , so that everyone can flourish."

But not cabbies though. "Everyone" doesn't include cabbies, they're forced to remain at the bottom of the food chain, be exploited.

"An equal society recognises people's different needs, situations and goals ..."

But not if you're a cabby. Your needs, etc don't count. As Orwell would say, according to the council all men are equal ... but not cabbies.

"... and removes the barriers that limit what people can do and can be."

But not for cabbies of course. Because Section 10 (3), which the council fondly relies on with impunity, does the exact opposite of what CEC is claiming to promote with this drivel.

CEC says and does different things.

It trots out meaningless platitudes to comply with government posturing on Human Rights.

But then works in practice against the fundamental principles which Human Rights is built on.

All aided and abetted by "Stepford" Councillors, who have abandoned any vestige of public duty or common decency, in their drive to fulfill the expectations of their unelected masters controlling their fiefdoms.



And the numpties on this forum think we're not gonna win. You guys have got to grow up. You're so busy trying to ingratiate yourselves to the system that controls you that everything in your life is brown.

Have a look at the Prisoner TV series. It might enlighten you. Word is, it was really set in Edinburgh.