It will be very interesting tomorrow, to see if John Mason has (this time) done his home work.
At the LCDC AGM in may this year, Mr Mason was asked to explain what the term plying for hire was;
He was asked who James T H Button is;
He was also asked, was he familiar with case laws regarding plying for hire i.e.:
White v Cubitt 1929, Gilbert v Mc Kay 1946,Rose v Welbeck 1962 and the Eastbourne case in the year 2000.
These questions brought a pained expression from Mr Mason the Director of Taxis and Private Hire.
Astonishingly he was unable to answer any of the questions put to him and just gave a muddled response, he was obviously floundering.
It was as though Mr Mason did not understand the questions, nor their fundamental significance.
This is the crux of the matter!
These cases are High Court precedents and have never been amended by Parliament, they are still the bases for all future cases on this subject whether Mr Mason likes it or not.
Action speaks louder than words.
You know what they say about (if you pay peanuts you only get Monkeys ) well we've got a gorilla with a gold fish brain! but gets a lot more than peanuts, and it seems like maybe all he does is play with the rest of the monkeys!!!
ReplyDeleteMr Mason's personal views can not override the law, these laws are there to protect the public, and to protect our livelihoods, and in my opinion
ReplyDeleteMr Mason is on very dangerous ground here.
Now who do we believe Lord Chief Justice Goddard, LCJ Parker, LCJ Ashworth,(1961 Alker v Woodward) LCJ Pill and Mr Justice Bell, also to add to this list the case of Hunt v Morgan 1949, or do we believe James T H Button a Derbyshire solicitor, and the TFL legal team.
It's blatantly obvious that something isn't quite right here, the people that control our destiny are supposed to be the pillars of society, yet they seam to turn a blind eye to 134 sexual assaults and rapes that's at least 2 a week!
We have to get this message out there, has anybody tried the National Union of Journalists?