Taxi Driver Online

Who'd have guessed the vote of no confidence would be passed almost overwhelmingly?

And who'd have guessed the whole quasi-judicial dimension would be further trashed by it all

Either I'm missing something spectacularly here, or they are

Or maybe they're just driving a coach and horses through it all and assume that no-one's paying attention, other than in the politicking, grandstanding and virtue-signalling sense...

The defensive statement from the councillor at the end is quite thoughtful and considered, though.


Highland councillors back vote of no confidence against members who continued convicted rapist’s taxi licence

https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/new ... is-445207/

A vote of no confidence has been passed against five councillors who voted for an Inverness taxi operator’s licence in the name of a convicted rapist to be continued.

At a full meeting of Highland Council this morning members voted 56 to 6 in favour of the motion against Councillors Sean Kennedy, Chris Birt, John Grafton, Ruraidh Stewart and Duncan Macpherson, with five abstentions.

A sixth councillor who had voted with them in the licensing committee on June 23, Willie Mackay, had already resigned from the council.

Introducing the debate on the vote at the meeting council convener, Councillor Bill Lobban, said the councillors who had voted for the licence in the name of convicted rapist David Brown had shown a “catastrophic failure of judgement” and brought “shame” on the council.

And he added: “They showed a total lack of regard for the safety of the public and sent a message to the women of the Highlands - ‘your safety is of secondary consideration’.”

Council leader Raymond Bremner backed the motion in similar terms.

“Going forward we cannot ever again even consider that the processes within a quasi-judicial forum of this council can fail members of our community in such a way,” he said.

With all members of the council having had access to the same information provided to the licensing committee when the decision was referred to full council in the wake of the controversy, Cllr Bremner said it was “difficult to understand” how the male members of the committee who had voted in favour of Brown retaining his licence could have done so.

Cllr Emma Knox, one of the four female members of the licensing committee who had voted for Brown’s licence not to be continued, said she believed the decision the committee had to make was very clear: “Whether a man convicted of a rape committed in a taxi remained a fit and proper person to hold a taxi operator’s licence.”

She said: “Any reasonable application of that test should have resulted in the licences being revoked.”

Cllr Lyndsey Johnston, another female member of the licensing committee who had voted to revoke Brown’s licence, and backed the vote of no confidence, said: “People need to believe that when Highland Council issues licences for taxi drivers, or premises, or any other activity, that public safety comes first.

“Events since June have very, very seriously damaged that confidence and brought this council into disrepute.”

The vote of no confidence will have no practical impact on the councillors named, but several members spoke of how it was important to demonstrate to the public that the majority of councillors did not agree with the members who had voted for Brown to retain his licence.

Cllr David Fraser said: “At the ballot box next May the public will have the opportunity to to decide if any of the five remaining councillors (who voted for Brown’s licence to be retained) will be successful if they seek re-election.”

Among the members facing the vote of no confidence who spoke out during the debate Cllr Grafton said he had not voted on the question of whether Brown was a fit and proper person to hold a taxi licence though he “might have been wrong” to take that stance.

Others had previously argued they were persuaded to vote for the licence’s continuation on the basis that revoking it would disadvantage Brown;s wife, who needed it to continue working as a taxi driver herself after he had been jailed.

Councillor Duncan Macpherson said: “The democratic decision taken by the committee on June 23 was leaked to the press and generated significant public criticism.

“I do not believe the press were untruthful in what was reported, however, that is not the same as reporting all of the facts.

“I understood the strength of feeling that many of the public expressed, and I respected their right to question decisions that affect the community. However, I became increasingly concerned that the reasoning behind my own contribution to that decision has been misunderstood and misrepresented.

“My position was never taken lightly, nor was it motivated by disregard for public opinion, or the concerns of residents and I must make it clear that from the outset of the meeting, the devastating impact on the victim of this heinous crime, perpetrated by the operator licence holder, was at the forefront of my thoughts.

“My rationale was based on the information, professional advice, statutory obligations, and legal considerations available to the licensing committee at the time.

“As committee members, we are often required to make difficult decisions that involve balancing competing interests and responsibilities.

“While reasonable people may disagree with the outcome, my decision was made honestly, conscientiously, and in what I believed to be in the best interests of all, including the safety of the wider community.”

He added: “You will be judging me today without the full knowledge of what was said in a quasi-judicial meeting, held in private, with no recording and without access to any transcript of the meeting.

“Because it was a quasi-judicial meeting and held in private, I cannot disclose what was said or discussed, in the open forum of this chamber and therefore cannot fairly defend my decision, and find myself in an impossible position.”

So if it's a quasi-judicial forum why are you all making it so political?


That's one obvious example. The guidance provided to councillors on how they should approach quasi-judicial decisions says that they shouldn't consider whether or not it's 'popular at the ballot box'.

While this councillor is explicitly saying that it should be

The P&J has also done a live update page (surprise, surprise), which has been updated for at least six hours, and must have thousands of words and umpteen graphics and images

Have to have a wade through that later on...

This is a P&J piece, but not the main live update page

Some interesting wee nuggets in here...


Exclusive: Disgraced Highland councillor WILL consider resignation after vote of no confidence, but two others remain defiant

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... d-council/

An overwhelming 56 of 67 Highland councillors voted in favour of a motion of no confidence on five men who allowed a rapist to keep his taxi operator's licence.

Disgraced Highland councillor John Grafton has told The Press and Journal he WILL consider resigning following a motion of no confidence after a taxi rapist scandal.

In June, six male councillors voted in favour of convicted rapist David Brown to keep his taxi operator’s licence.

Today, 56 of 67 Highland councillors present voted in favour of a motion of no confidence in those who voted to take no action on the licence.

After The P&J revealed the identities of those involved in the controversial vote, Willie Mackay resigned from his position.

Meanwhile, Sean Kennedy, Ruraidh Stewart, Duncan MacPherson and councillor Grafton resigned from the licensing committee, with just Chris Birt yet to do so.

The Press and Journal’s Inverness reporter Alex Banks was inside the Highland Council chamber during the vote.

‘A lot to reflect on’ for John Grafton

During today’s debate, there were tearful speeches, shouting and a range of emotions.

Caol and Mallaig councillor Mr Grafton said he is “not surprised” with the outcome of the vote.

In the chambers, he proposed the motion is “not fair or reasonable”, as he expects any person voting against the motion will leave them open to criticism.

He told The P&J: “We should have dealt with the first question and then dealt with the mitigation afterwards. I would like to see that happen in the future.

“I believe what all six of us did was to try and support a victim. For me, and possibly the others, we made the best decision we could have made at the time.

“There were lots of different factors involved in it.”

When asked whether he would resign, Mr Grafton said: “At the moment, no comment.

“I have a huge thought process to get through and there are lots of different factors.

“But I will definitely consider resigning. That is on the table as an option.”

Defiant councillors refuse to resign

Meanwhile, councillors Chris Birt and Duncan MacPherson refused to speak to The Press and Journal after the vote.

However, both confirmed they had no plans to resign as councillors.

Chris Birt said he would “consider” resigning from the licensing committee.

Ruraidh Stewart and Sean Kennedy attended the meeting online, but have been contacted by The P&J following the vote .

It remains unclear what the result of the no confidence vote will mean.

The result cannot force councillors to resign from their position.

A Highland Council spokesperson said: “A vote of no confidence is a political statement, and council officers have no involvement.”

Council leader ‘didn’t hear any reflection’ from disgraced councillors

Council leader Raymond Bremner signed the motion with convener Bill Lobban and opposition leader Alasdair Christie.

Mr Bremner said: “I think the decision from councillors was the right one.

“The councillors in question need to reflect on all the comments from their colleagues.

“They should be considering the future course of action for themselves, I know one councillor resigned and others are reflecting on that.

“But even right now, one still has not resigned from the committee. I think he (Chris Birt) really needs to consider it.”

Mr Bremner said he was “shocked” at some of what he heard from councillors defending their decisions.

During the debate, Mr Birt said: “Some women emailed me to thank me for allowing someone to support herself financially.

“Even if we are deemed to be wrong, we did please a few people.”

Meanwhile, Mr MacPherson said: “You will be judging me today without all the facts and context. I cannot fairly defend my decision, I am in an impossible position.

“I am not sure what the motion is to achieve, councillors Christie and Bremner and convener Lobban will have their own motives, you can decide what they are.”

Following the vote, Mr Bremner told The P&J: “I was shocked at some of the things. I thought there would be an opportunity for more reflection on their part – I didn’t hear any.

“They never took that opportunity. After everything they’re aware of with the public’s opinion of the decision, some are still holding to a hard stance.

“It’s difficult to reconcile with that in your possessions.”

Precisely

I came across a council document when it was all kicking off, and it was a sort of FAQ about it all, but now seems to have disappeared online

However, it said:


So I can't quite get my head round all this

Maybe they think that because it's not the decision meeting per se then it's not part of the quasi-judicial thing. But how can you say they're not political decisions, but if the decision isn't palatable then you can be suspended from your political party or face a vote of no confidence etc

A classic case of 'virtual signalling'.

_________________
IDFIMH

This is some of the stuff from the P&J's live update page.

And this isn't all of it - mainly stuff from some of the speeches made. The whole charade went on for several hours, complete with lunch break

There's also stuff about who was present at particular times during the meeting, who was coming and going, and other procedural stuff etc. And also stuff about questions put to councillors as regard whether they intend to resign etc. But that's summarised in the section right at the end below.

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... ncil-live/

Mostly virtue-signalling and high dudgeon, but some interesting comments accusing others of making the whole thing political and about settling old scores about other things etc


What is a vote of no confidence? ‘Unprecedented’ measure explained

On August 4, the three most senior councillors in the chambers, convener Bill Lobban, leader Raymond Bremner and opposition leader Alasdair Christie, signed the paperwork to proceed with a motion of no confidence against the five councillors.

But what is a no confidence vote? This is a proposal brought forward by members to express a lack of trust in specific councillors.

It acts as a strong expression of disapproval, however, it does not legally force councillors to resign or remove them from office.

When asked if it was back in August, Mr Lobban said: “That’s a matter for the public.”

He added: “When it comes to the elections in May the public will make their views known, and loudly I would imagine.”

Council leader Mr Bremner also explained the council was taking “unprecedented” action against the five remaining councillors to show how seriously it was taking the matter.

He said: “The decisions and the actions and the follow up that the council has taken, and is continuing, reflects exactly how we feel as three leaders of the council.

“We need to show the public that what happened wasn’t acceptable.

“We need to now reflect on that and we need to restore that confidence.”


Bill Lobban speaks to council chamber

First to speak is convener Bill Lobban, who lets the room know why the motion has been brought to consideration by council leaders.

He said: “(The decision) can only be described as a catastrophic failure of judgement.

“It has been a terrifying ordeal which has brought shame upon this council.

“When an 18-year-old is getting into a taxi, the people around her trust she is making the safe choice.

“They trust the person behind the wheel, who has been deemed fit and proper.

“The councillors named in this motion fundamentally failed that trust.

“This is not a simple mistake, but instead a profound lapse in moral judgement.

“They have demonstrated a total lack of regard for the safety of the public and sent a stark message to the women of the Highlands that their safety is not priority.

“It showcased staggering complacency, followed by various pathetic excuses, legal implications and tried to shift blame to others.

“The massive public backlash has been entirely justified.

“As convener, I have lost faith in there members’ ability to act in a competent manner.

“People in the Highlands have also lost faith in these members’ ability.

“The only way to rebuild trust which has been shattered is to hold those members accountable.”


Council leader Bremner backs vote of no confidence

Council leader Raymond Bremner has backed what Bill Lobban has said, saying councillors now have a chance “to do the wrong thing”.

He said: “I am fully aligned with comments above. Senior leadership believe this was necessary and the correct course of action.

“Members of our community have been terribly affected by the committee.

“As a council, the responsibility is on us to look after those who should have been protected by our processes.

“Going forward, we can never fail members of our community in such a way again.

“It is difficult to see how some members came to the decision that day.

“Those who considered David Brown was fit and proper to hold a taxi operator license, they were wrong.”


Women in Licensing Committee say decision was ‘indefensible’

Two of the four women in the licensing committee who voted against David Brown to keep his taxi operator’s licence have made their position clear on today’s debate.

Councillors Emma Knox and Lyndsey Johnston insisted the decision was about David Brown being a “fit and proper person”, which clearly, he was not.

Emma Knox said the decision was “indefensible”.

She said: “Sometimes we make mistakes as councillors, but the decision made about David Brown was indefensible.

“We had to decide whether a man convicted of raping a female passenger in his taxi was a fit and proper person to operate a taxi business.”

“They tried to blame the council officials for not supplying enough information and even blamed the public for holding them into account.

She added: Councillor Stewart did not resign from the committee until a few weeks ago and it is absolutely astonishing that Chris Birt has not stepped aside from the committee.

Lyndsey Johnston said: “I was in that licensing committee on June 23. I heard the same evidence and the police objection. I believe there was a misunderstanding of what it means someone is a fit and proper person.”


First support for councillors facing vote of no confidence

After several members spoke in support of the motion, some councillors showed support for the questioned five.

Councillor Sinclair Coghill, who is part of Highland Alliance, co-lead by Duncan MacPherson, said: “I was not in the meeting, I have not seen the evidence, so can not come to a conclusion.”

He was followed by fellow Highland Alliance member Richard Cross, who also said he will not be backing the “unpopular” decision.

Councillor Chris Ballance staggered to hear decision is “unpopular”, a lot inside of the chambers tap their table in support

He said: “The decision is wrong, ethically wrong, morally wrong. I am staggered to hear it described in that way.”


Councillor John Grafton says he made decision ‘to protect individuals’

Councillor John Grafton is one of the five councillors under fire to speak, defending his decision to approve the operator’s licence.

He said: “The decision I made on the day was not about the taxi driver being a fit and proper person. That may be wrong, I admit that.

“But the decision I made was made on the basis of protecting the public and individuals.

“It’s sad people seem to put the point about giving a rapist a licence, we did not do that.”

Councillor Grafton also proposed the motion is “not fair or reasonable”, as he expects any person voting against the motion will leave them open to criticism.


Chris Birt: ‘We did please a few people’

Councillor Birt, who was one of the five councillors who voted to allow Brown to keep his taxi operator’s licence, has defended himself before convener Bill Lobban gave him advice he may be verging on breaking confidentiality.

The former SNP councillor asked for his decision on the day to be “respected”.

Councillor Birt said: “At no time did I state Mr Brown was a fit and proper person. It is a general belief all members of the council seek to take decisions in the best interest of the Highland population.

“I believe I was acting in that way. I respect members who voted differently, just as I expect mine to be respected.

“Some women emailed me to thank me for allowing someone to support herself financially.

“Even if we are deemed to be wrong, we did please a few people.”


Councillor Sinclair calls out Highland Alliance members supporting Duncan MacPherson

Councillor Glynis Campbell Sinclair is the former chairperson of Inverness Women’s Aid.

She said: “I speak as someone with profound and deep disappointment.

“We must remember the core of this matter. A young girl has been a victim, she has endured an unimaginable trauma.

“Our first duty should have been to protect and support her.

“Instead, six male members voted to allow a convicted rapist to retain his taxi operator’s licence.

“Highland Alliance members standing by Duncan MacPherson sends a devastating message to a young girl and all victims of sexual assault.

“It tells them political survival matters more than them.”


‘You should be gone from this chamber’

Campbell Sinclair’s intervention was followed by other members showing strong support for the motion of no confidence.

Councillor David Fraser told all five councillors who voted for Brown to keep his licence “you should be gone from this chamber” and never come back through this door.

Meanwhile, councillor Andrew Mackintosh labelled their decision as “unacceptable”.

He said: “You have to accept the consequences of your conduct.

“Your actions were not responsible.”


‘My daughters will be utterly horrified’

Councillor Morven Reid has given a powerful and emotional speech as she was almost reduced to tears.

She said: “I am astonished. In the best case scenario, these members failed to understand their remit.

“In the worst case, these members knew their remit, went against Police Scotland advice and decided convicted rapist David Brown was a fit and proper person to hold a taxi operator’s licence.

“I will be showing my teenage daughters this meeting later, who were disgusted by the original decision. They will be utterly horrified to hear what has been said in defence of that decision.”


MSP is ‘beyond anger’

Andrew Baxter, MSP for Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch, said he is ‘beyond anger’ today.

He said: “I have seen things in council which have angered me in the past.

“I am beyond anger today, I am astounded.

“To hear colleagues suggest we are backing this motion of no confidence to settle old scores is beyond belief.

“I had the greatest respect for those councillors, but they have lost it over the past few months because of their continued self-justification on the decision they made.

“Today, other councillors in the chamber have also lost my respect by attempting to deflect what has happened to suggest others are to blame by leaking the information.

“I believe they had a public duty to do so.”

Mr Baxter also claims a councillor contacted him yesterday to accuse those voting in favour of the motion of party politics.

He added: “I am saddened I received a WhatsApp message from a councillor suggesting those voting in favour of the vote were doing so on party politics grounds, were whipped by parties or due to public pressure.


‘Someone ignored council procedures by leaking it to the press’

Highland Alliance Duncan Macdonald has shown strong support for his fellow colleague Duncan Macpherson and the other male councillors who voted to allow Brown to keep his licence.

He said that even though they should have focused on whether Brown was a “fit and proper person”, he has no intention to “condemn anyone”.

He said: “Unfortunately, someone ignored council procedures by leaking it to the press.

“We’ve never heard any of the representations that were made on 23 June.

“We don’t know what legal advice was given to the committee. We know very little. There have been a lot of speculation.”


Duncan Macpherson says ‘heinous crime’ was at ‘forefront’ of his decision

Councillor Duncan Macpherson gave a long speech to defend his actions.

He started by highlighting how the “democratic decision was leaked to the press”.

He added that although the press reports were “not untruthful”, some of them were “selective”.

Macpherson said: “The heinous crime was at the forefront of my thoughts.

“We made the decision based on the legal information we had at the time.”

He also highlighted the “complexity” of the decision.

Duncan MacPherson said it was with “regret” he submitted his resignation to the license committee, before explaining his decision.

He said: “A democratic decision was leaked to the press and generated significant criticism.

“While I don’t believe the press to be untruthful, reporting was selective.

“My own decision has been misunderstood and misrepresented.

“The devastating impact on the victim of the heinous crime was at the forefront of my thoughts.

“My rationale was based on the information, statutory obligations and legal powers available to the committee at the time.

“While reasonable people may disagree with my outcome, my decision was made honestly, consciously, and what I believe protected the safety of the public.

“You will be judging me today without all the facts and context. I cannot fairly defend my decision, I am in an impossible position.

“I am not sure what the motion is to achieve, councillors Christie and Bremner and convener Lobban will have their own motives, you can decide what they are.”


56 of 67 councillors vote for the motion – All five facing no confidence vote disagree

56 of the 67 councillors present at today’s debate, both in person and online, have agreed they have “NO CONFIDENCE” in John Grafton, Ruraidh Stewart, Duncan Macpherson, Chris Birt and Sean Kennedy.

Five councillors abstained while six members, including all five facing the vote of no confidence, disagreed.

Sean Kennedy, John Grafton, Ruraidh Stewart, Duncan Macpherson, Chris Birt all voted against the motion.

Conservative councillor Liz Saggers also disagreed with the motion.


What happens next?

Now the vote of no confidence has been overwhelmingly backed, what happens next?

The vote is a political statement which acts to express a lack of trust in the five councillors.

However, it does not legally force councillors to resign or remove them from office.

Duncan MacPherson and Chris Birt have already confirmed they will not be resigning.

A Highland Council spokesperson said: “”A vote of no confidence is a political statement, and council officers have no involvement.”

However, during today’s debate, members highlighted the public will have their say in the local May 2027 election.

Convener Bill Lobban previously said: “When it comes to the elections in May the public will make their views known, and loudly I would imagine.”


A summary of today

That’s all from Highland Council regarding the vote of no confidence on the five men involved in the taxi rapist scandal.

56 of 67 councillors voted in favour of the no confidence motion, which has added pressure on Sean Kennedy, John Grafton, Duncan MacPherson, Chris Birt and Ruraidh Stewart to resign.

It comes following the five men and already-resigned Willie Mackay voting in favour of convicted rapist David Brown keeping his taxi operator’s licence.

Councillors MacPherson and Birt have confirmed they will NOT be resigning despite the vote against them.

Councillor Grafton confirmed he will consider resigning as one of several potential outcomes.

Highland Council leader Raymond Bremner said he believes the five men need to reflect on what their colleagues have said and was “shocked” by the attempts to deflect blame.

The P&J has now concluded its live coverage of today’s meeting.

Also saw this wee nugget at the end of the STV News report - the mind boggles


So it would be interesting to know who has lodged this complaint, and what the precise grounds are...

But in my opinion a more prima facie case for breach of the councillors' code would be to the extent that they've driven a coach and horses through the fundamentals of quasi-judicial decision-making, and self-evidently and indeed brazenly politicised the whole thing

I mean, I'm still not entirely clear the precise legal basis for assuming Brown couldn't be deemed fit and proper to hold an operator's licence.

Unedifying as it may seem, I can't see how it's specifically illegal for him to be a plateholder - after all, if there had been some specific legal bar then councillors wouldn't have been invited to decide whether he was fit and proper in the first place

Or, for example, the police input would have been to say that he couldn't hold a licence, as opposed to their advice that he shouldn't hold a licence.

And this kind of confirms what I was saying a few hours ago - that there's no automatic ban against a convicted criminal (even a murderer, presumably) holding a tax plate

Otherwise, why would this MSP (who also happens to be one of the Highland councillors who voted for the no confidence motion yesterday ) be calling for legislation for an automatic ban on sex offenders?


Scottish Parliament to be pushed for law change by Highland and Islands MSP following David Brown taxi licence scandal

https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/new ... ri-445330/

A Highland MSP is to push for an “automatic ban” on convicted sexual offenders holding a taxi licence following the David Brown scandal.

Regional MSP Morven-May MacCallum has said she will bring the issue to the Scottish Parliament next week, following the vote of no confidence in the five Highland councillors who backed a licence in Brown’s name being retained despite his conviction for the rape of an 18-year-old woman while she was a passenger in his vehicle.

When the Inverness Courier broke the news of the June vote not to revoke the license it ignited public outrage, ultimately leading to the council’s agreeing a vote of no confidence in the five councillors who made the decision on Thursday (September 17): Duncan Macpherson, John Grafton, Sean Kennedy, Chris Birt and Ruraidh Stewart. A sixth councillor, Willie Mackay, had earlier quit the local authority in the wake of the row.

Ms MacCallum - who is also a Highland councillor and voted in agreement with the no confidence motion - said after the debate on Thursday: "The decision of Highland Council to pass a motion of no confidence in those councillors who voted to allow a convicted sex offender to keep his taxi licence is the right one.

“My first thoughts throughout this entire ordeal have always been with the victim. At each stage of this process the perpetrator has chosen to frustrate, manipulate and control this situation, causing deep distress and unnecessary hurt.

“My position on this is clear. A law that can be manipulated by a convicted sex offender is not a law that is fit for purpose.

“That is why I will be returning to Parliament next week to push the Scottish Government to automatically ban anyone convicted of a serious sexual offence from holding a taxi licence."

I don't think they could legally remove the plate unless the council deemed him not to be 'fit and proper'.

_________________
IDFIMH

The first part of what Swinney says here maybe once again underlines that the quasi-judicial angle was a charade - sounds like he thinks it should be about politics. And he's the leader of the SNP, thus the party of numerous councillors who were involved in the whole Highland Council thing

The second part of what he says is perhaps more considered.


Swinney open to changing taxi rules after rapist driver allowed to keep licence

https://news.stv.tv/highlands-islands/s ... ep-licence

David Brown was jailed in May for seven years after raping an 18-year-old in a lay-by in December 2023

John Swinney has said he is open to changing the law to bar sex offenders from being able to work as taxi drivers.

It follows outrage over a decision in the Highlands by six male councillors to allow a taxi driver convicted of raping a teenage girl to keep two operator licences.

It has been reported that David Brown, who was jailed in May for seven years after raping an 18-year-old in a lay-by in December 2023, chose to surrender his licences voluntarily.

During First Minister’s Questions on Tuesday, Liberal Democrat MSP Morven-May MacCallum, who is also a Highland councillor, urged Swinney to change the rules to ensure sex offenders are not allowed to work as taxi drivers.

She said: “Last week, Highland Council passed a motion of no confidence against male councillors who voted to allow a convicted rapist to keep his taxi licence.

“Regardless of these men’s decision, the taxi driver should never be given the opportunity to retain his taxi licence in the first place.

“Can the First Minister commit today to reviewing Scotland’s licensing laws and bring forward legislation to bar convicted sex offenders from holding taxi licences?

“If we are to encourage women to use taxis as a safe means of transport, then we need to ensure that we are doing all we can to ensure that they are safe.”

Swinney said he agreed “unreservedly” with Ms MacCallum over the handling of the licences at Highland Council.

He said there should “never have been any question when a licensing decision was being taken on a case of this nature to continue the licence”, adding: “I agree wholeheartedly on that question.”

He said: “The issue she raises, of course, gets to the heart of the division of responsibility or the degree of flexibility that is exercised by licensing authorities at local level.

“There is licensing legislation presided over by this Parliament, which leaves substantial discretion to local licensing authorities.

“I am very open to the point that she raises as being an issue that should be considered in an amendment to the licensing legislation.

“But I simply make the point that Parliament has to determine the degree of discretion that it leaves to local licensing authorities.

“It is very similar to the debates that we have often about the degree of flexibility that should be exercised at local level.

“But of course, we will consider the point that Ms MacCallum has put to me today.”

It has been reported that four of the councillors resigned from the Highland licensing committee while another also quit the council.

More of the usual badge/plate conflation and confusion.

In particular, the highlighted paragraph could be construed as meaning that he was still entitled to drive taxi after the committee had allowed him to retain his plate