Albert Tatlock Posted December 30, 2017 Share Posted December 30, 2017 1 hour ago, finlo said: At a geuss, if nobody rings up from Andreas/Bride etc then there is an excuse to drop scheduled services to Andreas/Bride etc? They'll get a boose full of juice and become a recluse...if it has anything to do with Dr Geuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted December 30, 2017 Share Posted December 30, 2017 26 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: They'll get a boose full of juice and become a recluse...if it has anything to do with Dr Geuss. Ok you got me Tatters! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Smurf Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 17 hours ago, dilligaf said: Does not make something wrong just because a few taxi drivers don't like it. I've been in the trade and I think the taxi businesses have done a bit more than ok for many years, so I doubt you will get much support from the public. I also think you have massively misunderstood what Bus Vannin are trying to do. All I've actually asked for is a bus route as per Section 25 of the Act and there isn't one. I have not objected as a taxi owner. I'm confused as to where you see or think I misunderstand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 It’s not clear what your objection is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Smurf Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 31 minutes ago, Declan said: It’s not clear what your objection is. The reason it isn't clear Declan is because the application is not clear. I'll try to explain in a short way. A Section 25 Bus Licence must have a fixed route or a variable route. Just like any other bus service currently running. It's the fundamental difference between a Section 25 and a Section 29 Ply For Hire. In the application it states north of A3. That is not a route. That in my opinion is an area. My other main objection at the moment is simply to do with what I see as a conflict of interest. The Chairman of Travelwatch is also the Chairman of RTLC. The RTLC are hearing the case. I take the view that the application in its current form should not even be getting heard never mind me having to object to it. I am not looking for support and appreciate many might like the idea of the service although many might not be aware that some services would be removed to allow it's implementation. It is more a point of right and wrong Declan. If we the public are forced to adhere to the rules the Regulatory Bodies that put the rules in place should too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 I’m not sure of the relevance of either point. 1. Is only a bit of bureaucratic red tape that can be fixed. If having a call and ride service is seen as a good thing 2. Why is there conflict between being RTLC chairman and Travelwatch chairman? On the face of it both are independent roles with the welfare of the travelling public. What’s your underlying concern? Is it the removal of a bus service? Or that the proposed service will compete with the taxi trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinkle Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 Some are now whinging as the gravy train of the taxi mafia looks like it' coming to an end,not before time either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Smurf Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 37 minutes ago, Declan said: I’m not sure of the relevance of either point. 1. Is only a bit of bureaucratic red tape that can be fixed. If having a call and ride service is seen as a good thing 2. Why is there conflict between being RTLC chairman and Travelwatch chairman? On the face of it both are independent roles with the welfare of the travelling public. What’s your underlying concern? Is it the removal of a bus service? Or that the proposed service will compete with the taxi trade? Only bureaucratic red tape you say. Only. Indeed. It's only ever that when the Government are to benefit. The application at the very least has to be correct. I wouldn't get away with putting an incomplete application to the RTLC. Part 2. It is because Travelwatch have already publically supported the application in the media and now the voice of Travelwatch is to hear the application. Your interpretation of that is different to mine. Part 3. It is difficult to have a definite underlying concern when in my opinion the rest of the application is insufficient. I do have issues with the RTLC in relation to the way they oversee regulation to the Taxi Service. I guess part of what I see as the huge failings in the regulation of the taxi service has brought this application to the forefront. In the fullness of time I will address those concerns to the Committee of the RTLC. This here is not the place. I guess though that I'm really making a point that fairness is primary importance. It simply cannot be a case of a rule for Government and a different rule for the rest of us. I've done 14 years odd in the taxi game full time. I have every right to speak up when I see fit. I'm self employed, not part of a union and have a wife and two kids to support. The only clout I have is my voice. If Bus Vannin are successful in this application good for them. In the same voice procedures must be followed correctly. That's all I can say and for now will say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Smurf Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 28 minutes ago, twinkle said: Some are now whinging as the gravy train of the taxi mafia looks like it' coming to an end,not before time either. Is that directed at me? If so I don't explain. What mafia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 I’m at a loss to understand how the proposals effect taxi drivers. There’s a worry, certainly, that it’s a way of downgrading the bus service in that area, but if anything that will be to the advantage of local taxi firms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Smurf Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 5 minutes ago, Declan said: I’m at a loss to understand how the proposals effect taxi drivers. There’s a worry, certainly, that it’s a way of downgrading the bus service in that area, but if anything that will be to the advantage of local taxi firms. It might or it might not effect us. I am trying to explain though that the actual application itself is not informative enough. Over the years I've objected to a few applications. It's not something I do for the sake of it. I certainly unlike the Committee don't get paid for my time Firstly with this application there are no routes mentioned. It's not a bus service if there are no pre-determined routes or variable routes. It is more of a taxi service. Of course though it can't be a taxi service in a mini-bus or bigger. Secondly as I said about fairness. I don't believe having Brendan O'Friel as Chairman of Travelwatch and RTLC is in the best interest of fairness. Regarding the taxi effect. It is difficult to answer this but I do know that many of the licenced Ply For Hire Taxis from North West (includes Ramsey) have left the area and now never leave Douglas. Having a mini-bus or bigger operating like a taxi service will mean less work for those left trying their best to serve the area. Can I just add I am licenced in Douglas so from a Taxi perspective I probably have little or nothing to lose certainly with the Ramsey application. Also just to add that if the routes were on the application I probably would have been cool about it. On the other hand if allowing this application to succeed through the back door is occurring (without prejudice) I have a right to ask questions. Getting answers of course is the hard bit. I appreciate my answers are vague. That's because in my opinion the application is vague. It allows too much guesswork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piebaps Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 So essentially you're just objecting for the sake of it. Fair play, but why not just say so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 6 minutes ago, piebaps said: So essentially you're just objecting for the sake of it. Fair play, but why not just say so? No he’s said he is objecting as they are required to follow due process with their application like everyone else, and they are required in the application to confirm the routes it will be applicable to as it’s a bus service, and they haven’t. Government has to fully follow the rules that it sets down and prescribes for others surely? He also seems to have a fair point that the chairman is clearly conflicted having supported the idea as part of another agency that he also sits on and he’s the one presiding over the application and it’s acceptability. I dont see what the issue is; Bazza seems to have pretty reasonable grounds for his objection as I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Smurf Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 16 minutes ago, piebaps said: 16 minutes ago, piebaps said: 16 minutes ago, piebaps said: 16 minutes ago, piebaps said: I have no idea what's happened here but piebaps seems to be multiplied. Thanks Sultan. You explain it good. I'm off anyhow. I have a bus to catch. Good job there is a route as I have a good idea where to get it from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parchedpeas Posted December 31, 2017 Share Posted December 31, 2017 I think it's a good idea, but the government seem to want to have their cake and eat it. Either there is a public service reason to run a bus service, or there is not. If there is, but it's disproporionately expensive to provide. they should be working WITH the Taxi firms, not against them. If this came in the form of a subsidy, then fine: why not give everyone in the North a book of vouchers worth X amount of travel per year to use in Taxis. Cancel the bus service and let the market do the rest. Plenty of enterprising young people would love to ferry people around for the amount of money it costs to run an empty bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.