Continued from page 9


LONDON BOROUGHS OF CAMDEN AND ISLINGTON:


Tender for private hire, taxi and attendant services: 1 September 2011 - 31 August 2014 / 2015


The above authorities are looking to invite expressions of interest to tender to secure suitably qualified contractors to support their duties in providing transport for children and adults with special needs and disabilities to various locations in and out of the boroughs. To meet this need, both councils employ in-house fleets or commission contractors. Currently an estimated 20,000 contracted journeys are undertaken annually, with a combined value of £3 million, but volumes could increase as the new arrangement will be open to the London Borough of Haringey.


The range of journeys for users undertaken by contractors will vary from daily journeys, Monday to Friday, for example to and from day and resource centres and schools, throughout the year or school term; regular but infrequent journeys such as taking a child to or from a residential special school at the beginning or end of term; one-off journeys including hospital appointments; and on occasion, in emergencies. The vast majority of journeys take place between 07.00–18.00 hrs Monday to Friday and 07.00–16.00 hrs on Saturdays, although provision is required at other times and on Sundays and bank holidays. The types of vehicle required under the contract are: saloon cars, mobility cars, accessible taxis, MPVs, minibuses and accessible vehicles. Around 78 per cent of journeys require the provision of an attendant. A priority will be placed on achieving a punctual, safe and reliable service with a high standard of customer care and sensitivity to the users’ needs.


The intention of the councils is to appoint three or more service providers for each of the ‘lots’ (defined by vehicle category) and for each, with and without the provision of attendants. Organisations only able to offer services in one or a few ‘lots’ will be treated with equal merit to organisations able to offer solutions across all requirements. Similarly, organisations with limited capacity in any ‘lots’ and unable to provide attendants will receive equal merit to those with the potential to meet all needs.


To be considered for inclusion on the select list of tenderers it is necessary for interested organisations to register their details by going to www.londontenders. org/procontract/supplier.nsf/frm_home?openForm. Please note the completed questionnaire needs to be returned by 16.00 hrs on 4 April 2011. An open meeting will be held at 10.30 hrs on 2 March at the Camden Centre, Bidborough Street, London, WC1H 9DB for interested organisations to learn more about the nature and requirements of the service and the tendering process.


camden.gov.uk PAGE 10


When we have a line of private hire drivers touting in the streets, or queu- ing up to illegally ply for hire outside a club, technically there’s no money in the till to go and enforce. Now all right, all right, fair enough: I accept that many of our readers have been complaining about this lack of enforcement for the last 35 years. But it would also mean that where coun- cils have deregulated, and they now have over 200 hackney carriages and only half a dozen rank spaces, they’re not supposed to have the money to go and enforce on over-ranking. Perhaps that is why more and more coun- cils are resorting to fixed penalty tickets for so doing.


Frankly, this is just another mess created by that mother of all mess-mak- ers, the Miscellaneous Mummified Act of 1976. And in that respect, as the House of Commons Select Committee is presently looking at our industry, I for one will be drawing the Committee’s attention to this particular loop- hole.


All right, I know there’s going to be a queue of drivers screaming and yelling that they’ve paid too much for licence fees already, and if the law is changed and charging for enforcement is allowed, it will make it even more expensive. But against that I have to balance the logical outcome of such extra charges; this would be one of two results: the first being that the extra money could only be used for enforcement, and as there is no enforcement at the moment, it might in the fullness of time stop my phone ringing with complaints about lack of enforcement. Enforcement could indeed be boosted.


On the other hand, local authorities could decide that they weren’t going to enforce at all, and the last time you saw your enforcement officer was the day before they made that decision. So that’s it: enforcement could grow, or – as many of you complain – the status quo could remain thus.


It’s a two-sided coin; the coin comes from your pockets, and it is for you to decide whether the result is worth the fee charged. I have no doubt when such fees do come in, it won’t take very long before the District Audi- tor is once again requested to examine the efficacy and the results of such enforcement against the money charged.


So there you have it: these are the results of the investigation, and we wait with baited breath to see what the end results will be.


So what else do we have to look at this month? By the time you read this, it will be nearly time for the next session of the House of Commons Select Committee on the 15th March, where we have no doubt that the issue of cross-border hiring will once again rattle round the Parliament buildings.


Frankly, why the House needs to take evidence I don’t know; there are more court cases having been decided on cross-border hiring than any- thing else since the Miscellaneous Mummified Act came in. But there is now a new consultation which may well affect some of you who are dia- betic, who have eyesight problems and so on. The consultation can be found on the Department for Transport website; just look up DfT consulta- tions, scroll down and you’ll find the document.


The document is about amending the driving licence standards that peo- ple with vision problems and/or diabetes have; this in line with European standards, and in many respects the new rules will be less vigorous than the present ones.


So for instance, remember that visual acuity meant being able to read a number plate at a distance which in my day used to be feet, but is now probably in metres. What the new rules say is that you won’t have to be so far away in order to pass the test. That’s really difficult, isn’t it? And there are other bits about horizontal visual fields.


As far as diabetic drivers are concerned, if you remember, the major changes to the diabetes situation is that if you recall, Group 2 qualification if you are insulin diabetic means that you have to get a C1 licence that has to be renewed every year, but that was effectively allowing people to drive vehicles under 3.5 tonnes, but not buses.


The new rules mean that insulin diabetics may apply for entitlement to drive all Group 2 categories as long as they can comply with a list of med- ical criteria, which effectively may well affect quite a few drivers who were drivers of larger vehicles but had to give up because of their insulin dependence. If all these new rules go through they might be able to re- apply for their jobs.


The Department for Transport does not appear to want to follow the EU regulations, which allow a three-yearly licence; they want to stick with the yearly licence, and I do think there are a few drivers who might want to respond to that.


If you go on line, the document is only 26 pages long – which is why I am not printing it all here. But the last page is a simple three-question response which anybody can fill out.


On that note, and until next time, sayonara. PHTM MARCH 2011


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96