Saturday, 29 January 2011

John Mason Responds to David Clegg and Les Hoath

Sent: 28 January 2011 08:46
Subject: Private Hire Consultation

Dear Respondent,  

I would like to personally thank you for your response to the Private Hire Consultation which closed on Friday 14th January 2010. We are grateful for the time you have spent on providing your response and have been overwhelmed by the constructive views, suggestions, ideas and supporting information that you and many others have provided.

The proposal and suggestions outlined in our consultation were exactly that. We are now faced with a significant challenge of reviewing all responses and analysing the supporting information. Given the level of input we have received this will take a significant amount of work and effort at a time of significant other workloads and challenges that we face.

However, progressing the outcome of the consultation is a priority for us and we will be working very hard to do this as quickly as possible.

Once we have undertaken this significant task we will prepare a report for consideration at the Transport for London (TfL) Surface Board followed by the TfL Surface Panel and concluding at the TfL Board.

This will take time and will be subject to the normal governance rules that we are required to abide by.

Again, thank you for you input. We will provide updates as and when they are available.

Regards

John Mason
Transport for London 
London Taxi and Private Hire


More than three hundred PH operators gathered at Heathrow to discuss issues which could potentially change the shape of the Private Hire industry.



To the Anderson Shelter:

I received this response from John Mason today following TfL receiving the 32 page response myself and Les Hoath submitted in respect of the LPH Consultation.

I sincerely hope it’s true that TfL are overwhelmed by the responses and truly feel they are constructive.

I am in no doubt that they will have their work cut out analyzing all the various views, and possibly contradictory suggestions and ideas and hoping to amend the ill-considered LPH legislation and operating procedures as they were originally drafted.

I think many of us recognise that the LPH system is seriously flawed and I feel sure TfL feel much the same way in light of the serious problems created by the system since it was first adopted. I don’t think anyone doubts that there is room for major changes and improvements to make the system run smoother, more cost-effectively and in a more self-policing way.

We can only hope that the TfL Board will make the necessary changes to bring the LPH system into a much better form than it currently is. I’m sure many people feel that much of the legislation and the policing of it to-date has been a bit of a ‘dog’s breakfast’ and brought despair to many in the London taxi trade.

It really does need a major overhaul as surely no serious administrator would allow this 3rd world system to continue but work towards finally eradicating the presence of illegal minicabs (and licensed minicabs that operate illegally) that plague our streets and put the general public at risk.

Given the figures of sexual assaults, muggings and rapes, the current system is a national disgrace and it is little wonder that so many taxi drivers have been voicing their concerns for so long now, as in some respects they are being tarred with the same brush.

Major changes are sorely needed and we can only hope the TfL Board can see the wisdom of this and make the required and very necessary changes. They will need time, and I believe we must accept that if they are to get things right – once and for all.

In spite of all the often severe criticisms we’ve aimed at them in recent times I’m sure we wish them well in what will be a major undertaking on their part. Good (better considered) legislation and proper enforcement could benefit everyone in the passenger transport business in London - and the people that use it.

Let’s hope it is a major step in the right direction so that the tension can be taken out of the serious situations that have developed out on the street where taxi drivers and the general public have been put at risk.

Let’s also hope TfL can come up ‘trumps’ as a result of this Consultation process and we can praise them in equal measure to the various and numerous criticisms they have received from us, even though this may be some way off as the bureaucratic wheels turn very slowly.

Regards,

David

9 comments:

  1. Great piece of open thinking and writing. Is it any wonder that John Mason doesn't want dealing with anyone other than the truly inadequate UTG.

    The consultation is a scam and I believe a deal has already been cut with the UTG. This will roll out over many months as UTG successes.

    Look at this quote from Mason it speaks volumes!

    "We are now faced with a significant challenge of reviewing all responses and analysing the supporting information. Given the level of input we have received this will take a significant amount of work and effort at a time of significant other workloads and challenges that we face."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Remember we have a certain Mr Robert Oddy who speaks (or is apparent fronm the minutes does not speak) for the cab trade on the TfL Board after his appointment by others to do so.

    So that's us against the wall then!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cannot help but notice Mr John Mason looking a bit plump.

    Must be all that famous TfL Good Living on our licence Fee!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Given the figures of sexual assaults and rapes, which are 143 up 54 per cent.

    And still no enforcement on the streets of the Olympic City.

    And still the UTG remain silent regarding STaN.

    And still the public continue to suffer.

    We have to act as Benjamin Disraeli said " Action may not always bring happiness; but there is no happiness without action"

    ReplyDelete
  5. Slim jim
    Never mind that.... Where's our mass meeting to discuss the consultation.
    The only ones we got looking after the backs of all working taxi drivers are people with finical business interests.

    Only one of the UTG who sat on the workshops held at Windsor House last year actually drives a cab for a living.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Slim Jim

    Must be all those fish suppers courtesy of the club!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Much as many of us want to eradicate touting once and for all there are lots of other positive issues that this Consultation process could bring in terms of saving money and streamlining the whole LPH operation. Amongst other things it is pure bonkers to employ an army of 68 front-line enforcement officers just because the legislation is inadequate. This is sheer bureaucratic waste and may just be a case of empire-building.

    The LPH Consultation document highlights many of the issues facing TfL regarding the governance of the LPH trade and they have given numerous examples of what they would like to see responses to, and have, accordingly, sought views and opinions with their variety of questions, proposals and/or options. Some of the proposals they put do not cover all aspects of what they are prepared to (or would like to see) changed and to this end they were asking for comments on items not covered by their proposals.

    So, the scope of this Consultation is very wide indeed and the impression I got was that TfL are seriously looking for answers to bring about change instead of the very heated, dangerous and controversial nightmare the original LPH legislation has brought.

    We would all like to see a balanced response to this Consultation and allow the LPH trade to get on with their business and we get on with ours without blurring the edges between the two distinctly separate trades and causing continual and unnecessary friction and downright hostility.

    If LPH want to act like taxis (and ply for hire – however it is euphemistically called – according to John Mason) they only have to apply for the appropriate (taxi) licence and not try to encroach into the taxi trade via the back door with a LPH licence.

    The front door is open so if they want to operate as taxis they have applied for the wrong licence.

    They must work within the remit of their LPH licence and nothing else. The public have come to accept and use the LPH as a bona fide trade whether we like it or not as that is their choice but LPH must not be allowed to operate outside of that as if they WERE taxis. They’re not!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Off with their heads!Jan 29, 2011 06:26 PM

    This Ph consultation doc has approx 26 proposals in it. How many do you think they will implement? My guess is we will be lucky if we see 5. And 5 poxy ones at that. This goes against STaN, and STaN is what they want. They are taking us all for mugs by stringing it out for as long as they can.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's not us that they are taking for mugs, it's the UTG !

    Why oh why do they remain silent over STaN.

    I know why, silly me their all on holiday in Kent by the seaside in DEAL........DEAL ... now that rings a bell.

    ReplyDelete

Please use an ID to post comments.