|
Two
overhauls a year?
I must be honest and admit it: I thought
I had read the TfL / PCO ‘Best Value
Review’ on the new proposed mid-year
inspection incorrectly. After all, no
one in the trade press had even
mentioned it. Well, that is no longer
the case and everyone is now talking or
writing about it – but what frightens me
is the prevailing attitude of "let’s
wait and see!"
Wait and see exactly what? The PCO claim that they will be
consulting with the trade on the exact
timing and nature of the inspection,
what they do not intend talking to us
about is whether they will be going
ahead with this loony idea. Their final
words say it all: "Introduction of
the new inspection will follow the
transfer of the licensing inspection
activities to SGS." There is no
"if" in that statement and any
negotiations will be a waste of time
without the leverage that other trades
muster.
Unlike The Badge, I do not blame Roy Ellis. I believe that
no one at the PCO will ever be able to
stand up and disagree with Transport for
London, just as I believe that Roy Ellis
does care about our future, but it is a
fact that Ken Livingstone can do exactly
as he likes with us.
My belief has always been that our annual overhaul makes London
licensed taxis the safest vehicles on
the road. In that case, why should we
have to undergo the inconvenience and
added expense of having another mid-term
check, because whatever anybody says, it
will turn into another overhaul?
Does anyone really believe that you will be able to go to SGS
without first presenting your cab to a
garage and they then giving you a list
of almosts – things that will
need doing in the near-future that you
will feel compelled to get done early
because of the check? Where you would,
under current circumstances, get things
done when a service is due, suddenly you
will have to get them done early.
We will be queuing up with minicabs and who would bet against them
getting waved through while we get
trounced. And why? "We expect more of
you lot," will be the stock answer.
So let’s see our trade organisations show some metal and to those
of you who belong to nothing – you
should feel ashamed. With 25,000
members, we’d at least get listened to…
On-line Poker
Following my Editorial in October in
which I explained why I had turned down
an ad from an organisation advertising
on-line Poker, I have been involved in
several discussions with drivers –one of
whom looked as though he could even turn
violent. While |
many thought I was right
in refusing the ad, others felt that it
was none of my business if they decided
to play for money. They all made the
same point in that – and as I said in
the piece – you can, if you wish, play
for nothing.
In my Editorial I wrote: If people choose to gamble, that is
their prerogative. If on-line gambling
organisations want to advertise on
taxis, then neither is that my concern,
but if they wish to advertise in Call
Sign, then I still have a say in
that and my say is NO!
Some have called me an old frump following my refusal to accept
an ad last year from a table-dancing
club because I didn’t approve of the
graphic that accompanied it. Well
perhaps I am, but whereas I have no
problem whatsoever taking a passenger to
one of the many clubs that have opened
or seeing the graphics in other
magazines, I do not consider it to be
acceptable reading material for your
young son or daughter who, if they saw
Call Sign laying around, wouldn’t think
there was any reason not to open it.
But seeing a semi-naked young lady would be nothing compared to an
Internet-using youngster seeing an
on-line poker website where you play for
nothing and possibly win. Then they
suddenly think to themselves that this
would be an easy way of getting money.
And if you were young and managed to
"borrow" a credit card from mum, dad,
sister or anyone else…
No, if you want to avail yourself of some entertainment, as
millions seem to be doing, then fine.
But as Editor, I am not prepared to take
the chance of even one young person
getting hooked on gambling after reading
an ad in Call Sign. So now you know…
The Badge and DaC’s AGM
I see that Grant Davis (L39) has
had another pop at Dial-a-Cab in his
column in The Badge. According to him,
"the signs are there" that this
could be the last year for this Society
as a Friendly Society. I suppose it
could be if someone makes an offer and
drivers vote in favour. If they don’t,
then we won’t but who is Grant to tell
drivers what they should or shouldn’t
do?
But like Grant, I too enjoy the odd bit of mischief making and I
admit to deliberately putting a photo of
Brian Rice and Brian McBride
onto the front cover of the December
issue. The shot was |
obviously
taken at the end of a long TLPA day and
they looked to be quite good friends –
and indeed they have known each other
for far longer than since Mr McBride
took a controlling share in Radio Taxis.
I looked at the photo and wondered if
anyone would put 2 and 2 together and
come up with 47.99 recurring. Looks like
Grant is that person because he goes on
to insinuate that our £4.3million in the
bank has come from Brian Mac.
According to Grant, in 2003 we had nothing in the bank and now we
have over £4million. That, according to
him, seems to infer that having money
now can only have been "donated!"
He goes on to add that Brian R is now a Vice President of the TLPA
thanks to Brian M. Of course, as Grant
is obviously such an avid reader of
Call Sign, it is perhaps
surprising that he didn’t read the
October 2004 issue where it describes
Brian becoming the International Vice
President along with Jim Bell from
Canada. Brian M wasn’t President then!
This year Brian R has been made a
Director. If Brian M wanted to sway
Brian R’s mind, then he’d have kept him
as IVP. But sadly, that would have
spoiled Grant’s theory.
Then there is his theory on why we are using a new firm of
solicitors following the retirement last
year of the one we had used for many
years of which there was a full report
in Call Sign. There was a
full explanation at the AGM that told
the membership we had spent nothing with
them on demutualisation, yet according
to Grant’s column, we’ve gone through
80,000 quid with them already just
talking about that very subject!
So should we believe what Grant writes? Well, on an Internet list,
he writes the same thing that he has in
The Badge referring to the "fat yank,"£4
million in the bank, Brian Rice being
made vice president of the Cab Washes
Society in the USA and the proxy
vote being put to the members. He refers
to Brian R as something that rhymes with
tanker!
He then adds that "we" have put 9 rule changes forward to the
membership and that "Ricey has slagged
off every one!" He ends by saying that
if the members vote for his ("Ricey’s?)
rules and "…knock us back, then we are
going to walk away and just let them get
the Society they deserve."
Ah well, I suppose we’ll survive somehow, but I wouldn’t put too
much store into him "walking away." And
besides, I’m sure we’d miss him! Mind
you, rumour has it that Mr H wants to
use Grant’s minicab on the next Lottery
Show series…!
Alan Fisher callsignmag@aol.com |
