Taxi Driver Online

Sorry, was I supposed to just agree with you?

There is no restriction on drivers, and if and when more cabs are required then I am sure licences will be issued, its happened a lot before

_________________
Who's been "Editing" my mailbox then ...lol

RealCabforceforum? Or whoever RealCabforceforum is ? Wrote:

I am sure you will find it has more to do with your inability to understand the market you work in, you quite simply are an individual who expects eveything handed to him for nothing.

An “inability to understand the market I work in” you have got to be having a laugh, what market, the market as you describe is dictated by the Council and the PH and your idea of everything for nothing is £40,000-£50,000 worth of nothing.



And whilst you and the rest of your wee buddies on here talk a lot, can you name one useful acheivement you have made for the betterment of the trade you work in?

I want to set the scene for anyone who is reading this, shock, horror is RealCabforce so delusional he actually believes that there is a trade waiting to be bettered?

Have YOU done anything other than call anyone who disagrees with your views "corrupt" or worse, has it helped?

I think it has, the proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say. What do you suggest, let’s all trot out and pay £50,000 for a plate while the market is being eaten away by the PHC. You are on acid boy!



Do you realise that even hiding behind this name you and him use, YOU and your fellow trouble makers are the laughing stock of the Edinburgh cab trade?


My name is Garry Thomson, I have said this before and I never thought I would have to repeat it but there you go, such as life and all that, Garry Thomson, remember, the guy in the papers with the picture on the Calton hill.

You compound your status with pointless qoutes from books I doubt you've seen let alone read.

Ask anyone that knows about how many books I have read and I think you will be surprised, the quotes that you claim I have used are as much as an enigma to me as they are to you?



Just one thing, Just one!!! , that you can show us that you have anything else to offer other than your selfish, pitiful, greedy, needs, that you could show would have a positive impact on our job.

All I can offer is the reality of the situation whether you like it or not? If you want to hand the control you might have over to the Council and the Ph, be my guessed.


It's interesting that you have had to come to this site to find similar thinking idiots, who obviously, like you can!t cope in a democratic competitive world.

Surprise, surprise, “you and me also”, “similar thinking idiots” that come to this site.



The “Democratic competitive world” you are nuts! Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
George Orwell 1984


Edinburgh Council might be daft but they are not stupid, have a look around?

Going to my bed pished as a fart the rest is all yours,carriy on gents?

Is that "BOTH" of you, or is your ghost writer staying up, no one unless totally blind can not fail to see the differance in style and content in postings from "skull"

_________________
Who's been "Editing" my mailbox then ...lol

Sorry, but the administrator has prevented you from sending private messages.

What does that mean?, are you stopping MRT posting admin?

_________________
Who's been "Editing" my mailbox then ...lol

YOU HAVE FINALLY REALISED, SO WHEN DO YOU LEARN HOW TO USE THE COUNCIL POSITIVELY AND TO THE BENEFIT OF ALL WHO HAVE TO WORK UNDER THEIR CONTROL

_________________
Who's been "Editing" my mailbox then ...lol

Kiss my arse, the day I work undre the Councils control is the day I don't draw breath.

Their Control, [edited by admin] off, in your dreams dip [edited by admin]!!

So from now on all Edinburgh cabbies who read your definition of the market, should be in no doubt as to what you mean.



From what you have stated above taking it in general terms and not just in reference to Mr Skull, you believe it was and still is perfectly acceptable for Mr Skull and the other applicants to join a waiting list but not to ask for an operator's license outright? Have I interpreted that correctly?

Where does that then leave the court session who said in reference to Dundee.

The absence of an applicant's name from a waiting list may be a circumstance to which a licensing authority are entitled to have regard in the exercise of the general discretion conferred on them by section 10(3). But it can, in our view, be no more than that. Having regard to the restricted circumstances in which the power conferred by the section may be exercised, we do not consider that it can have been the intention of Parliament to enable a licensing authority to elevate the status of an informal waiting list so that absence from it may constitute an "other good reason" compelling them to refuse to grant a taxi licence.

Do you agree with the higher court or do you have your own interpretation of the law? You say you are democratic but is our democracy not based on the principle of evolving common law?

It is noble of you to suggest Skull and by implication others could have joined a waiting list but ignoble of you to suggest by default that he didn't have the right to apply for a license.

Would it not have been fairer to say to Mr. Skull that "I don't agree with what you are doing" but you have every legal right to do it?

In your opinion does he and everyone else have a legal right to apply for a license?

Regards

JD

Know this, I don't think I am here to give anyone their position in life least of all Edinburgh Council.


If you think so little of yourself then that's your problem not mine, in other words go [edited by admin] yourself.


My existence is not dictated by the indecisive few who don't know their own value or status in life. Going to my be now [edited by admin] off"!

MY MISTAKE

_________________
Who's been "Editing" my mailbox then ...lol

_________________
Who's been "Editing" my mailbox then ...lol

I asked you to qualify the above statement, instead "you gave me this waffle".



Considering you introduced the word's "democracy" and "competition" into the debate don't you think you should answer the question I posed, purely on the grounds of what you deem to be democratic?

Either you believe Mr Skull and everyone else who wants a license should have the democratic right to apply for that license. Or you believe they don't have the right to apply for a license and instead should be placed on a waiting list?

Now us folk south of the Border might not be as bright as you folk up North but there are people following this debate who will no doubt conclude that when you talk about democracy in one breath and totally disregard it in another, you are being somewhat contradictory.

They will also wonder why you fail to answer a simple question that evolves around the very principal of democracy, which as I have already stated is a word, you yourself introduced into this debate.

Now do you believe or do you not believe, that Mr. Skull and anyone else who wants a license should have the democratic right to apply for that license?

Regards

JD

JD, as usual your interpretations remain somewhat dogmatic rather than democratic, so I'll come to RealCabforceForum's aid!
Let's take it to basics.
Democracy is government BY the people for the people (usually through elected representatives) - basically majority rule. Hopefully we agree on that. No-one could ever claim that ours is perfect, but it works fairly well.
It is clear that in Edinburgh, the overwhelming majority of the taxi trade and, indeed, population regard restricted taxi numbers as both equitable and adequate. If you lived and/or worked here, you would know that - so take it as read.
Within this framework a tiny minority mounted a legal challenge - and failed.
Now to your semantics. Of course skull et al are entitled to apply for anything they want - what they are NOT entitled to, is automatic success. The majority are entitled to expect that their wishes are respected. So, is it not right that the decision of the many be respected by the few?
Competition is possible within this restricted market - remembering that numerical controls are in place not to benefit members of the trade but to allow compliance with other qualitative controls and for the purpose of improving safety standards and also providing a better service by allowing workers to earn enough to maintain the required standards.
You, because of your obvious desire for no numerical restriction, continually quote judgements seeking to disprove the court ruling.
Take the Barclay case for example - read it again and note that the appeal was allowed, in part, because the council failed to ask for an extension of time, thus requiring the licence to be granted by default. Yet you contend Edinburgh council should not have been granted any extension. How can you argue against Edinburgh's application for an extension, despite the previous higher court ruling suggesting that this was the corrrect course of action?

On the contrary, I asked a simple question that deserved a simple yes or no answer.



No one would disagree with your interpretation of democracy in that sense and indeed I would go further and state that democracy is a form of government under which the power to alter the laws and structures of government lies ultimately, with the citizenship. It is no doubt a matter of fact that under a democratic system, legislative decisions are made by the people themselves or by elected representatives who act with the consent of the people, with periodical elections and the rule of law to enforce that consent.

In this modern age there are many concepts of democracy including social democracy and liberal democracy, just as our common law continually evolves likewise does our reasoning and understanding of democracy.



I have never commented on the adequacy of Taxi provision in Edinburgh nor do I intend to. Even if I was standing in your shoes I would never assume that I know what the majority of the public want? With regard to the Taxi Trade I would first need you to define what you mean by Taxi Trade? I assume you mean Hackney Carriage owners and perhaps Hackney Carriage drivers with the P/H sector excluded from the term Taxi Trade? I would agree that those with a vested interest to protect would no doubt say there are enough Taxis available. I don't know if the vested interests are in a majority or minority? All I know is that under a democratic system it is the legislature that make the laws of our land and they have deemed that everyone has the legal right to apply for a license at any time they like. Whether or not they get that license is another matter but they have the democratic social right given to them by a democratically elected Government.



As I previously stated I have never commented on Edinburgh's Taxi provision and nor would I. For the record, "I hardly take anything as being read".



I don't know if they have failed, I was under the impression the council had gained an extension in time? Do you have knowledge as to their demise?




Well it is gratifying to know that you accept the fact that Mr. Skull and anyone else who wishes to obtain a license has the legal right to apply under our democratic legal system. I am sure Mr. Skull will be heartened to hear you say that?



Just what are the wishes of the majority?

I doubt the majority of the citizens of Edinburgh would like to see someone excluded from participating in the legal process of applying for a license, do you? You have already conceded that you believe anyone should be able to apply for a license, I am sure the public of Edinburgh would agree with you. Unfortunately we can't pick and choose which laws we abide by. It is like you said "Democracy is by the people for the people" and the people in this case have already decided that anyone can apply for a license.

I suspect there will always be those who try to bend the meaning of democracy to suite their own purpose but democracy is a double-edged sword, it can either work for you or against you. What it does do however is place a burden on all those living in a democracy to accept the framework in which that democracy has evolved and that means you, me, and everyone else accepting the laws as laid down in our legal system.

That is what the people of Edinburgh are to expect and not your warped notion that you personally believe there is a majority who would rather see the status quo of taxi provision retained, at the expense of denying persons their human right to apply for a license.

Regards

JD