Shouldn't the Taxi Regulator be conducting their own audits/reviews to ensure that these backhanders are not being done to get cars passed?
The car that was passed (black Toyota) in the Prime Time show was a private car and there was no mention of it being a taxi. The NCT should be regulated and audited correctly for all Private vehicles and this includes Taxi's and Hackney's. Why should two organisations (or three if you include the Gardai) or four if you include the AA, be responsible for this when the NTA is the sole authority currently responsible.
I agree...and I don't really care whether it's the Taxi Regulator or the NTA, but someone must be responsible here for this failing.
There is, the NTA and in turn the Minister for Transport - Leo Varadkar, who only this morning said that investigations are under way, by the Gardai and by his Department and the NTA.
It must be noted that Applus(contract provider for NCT) initially ignored requests from Prime Time in relation to the programme and only instigated an invetsigation when the hay hit the fan. I would imagine that their contract will be reviewed now.
I'm also still not sure why Kathleen Doyle is being mentioned in the press when as far as I know her powers were dissolved at the start of the year. The NTA are 100% responsible for Taxi Regulation now.
That's one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is that the Govt set up a fairly effecient process that allows the Taxi Regulator to concentrate on core taxi-related matters and leaves other existing bodies to continue to concentrate on their own core areas.
It's always mildly amusing for me to see the absolute confidence of the AAM hurlers-on-the-ditch that they know so much more about these matters than the people who work in the area every day.
Would you care to be more specific, and identify what person/role(s) should now be sacked in these bodies?Swift action from the company running the NCT tests...3 people sacked
[broken link removed]
I wonder will there be any sackings from the identities listed above?
They can and do regulate the core taxi business - licences, training, quality of service, overcharging etc. They don't have legal responsibility for every possible taxi issue.What's the point in having a regulator if they can't regulate? Maybe they should be renamed to something more apt like The Taxi Quango?
Right, so now the Gardai should be reporting operationally to the Taxi Regulator, and to every other regulator as well in case of crime in their areas? That's just a mess. You're digging a big hole for yourself here. Stop digging.The issue here is that there are so many identities that the buck cannot stop anywhere. The Taxi Regulator should IMO be ultimately responsible for all of these. This way, the TR would make sure that the guards did their job, the NCT testers did their job and so on.
So tell us what kind of reviews would you propose to ensure that backhanders are not being done? How will you guarantee 100% compliance with the law in this case (or in any other case)?Shouldn't the Taxi Regulator be conducting their own audits/reviews to ensure that these backhanders are not being done to get cars passed?
Or else it means that sometimes, people break the law. Sheesh, is it the Gardai's fault every time you break the speed limit?If all these "experts" were doing their jobs correctly we would have no need for Prime Time investigations which means that
a. the relevant legislation IS in place in which case the regulator wasn't doing his or her job correctly, or
b. the government of the day failed to give the regulator the necessary powers to enable them to regulate the industry properly
Or else it means that sometimes, people break the law. Sheesh, is it the Gardai's fault every time you break the speed limit?
Would you care to be more specific, and identify what person/role(s) should now be sacked in these bodies?
Right, so now the Gardai should be reporting operationally to the Taxi Regulator, and to every other regulator as well in case of crime in their areas? That's just a mess. You're digging a big hole for yourself here. Stop digging.
So tell us what kind of reviews would you propose to ensure that backhanders are not being done? How will you guarantee 100% compliance with the law in this case (or in any other case)?
You can be as flippant about it all you like but if someone continually and constantly breaks the law (eg speeding) without punishment then yes it is the relevant authorities fault if the systems that are in place are not adequate to catch that person and punish them appropriately
I would have thought that was obvious
That's a cop-out. The responsibility for regulation is perfectly clear in law. Responsibility for safety of the vehicles lies with the Gardai - so again, please get off the fence and specify what person/role should be sacked for this?That's my point...there are so many bodies it's impossible
So the regulator should be meeting with, and working with the Gardai to regulate the industry? Brilliant idea, now why didn't someone think of that before the AAM armchair experts came up with it? Ooops - they did!I never said the gardai should be reporting to the Taxi Regulator...the Taxi Regulator should be driving this. They are meant to be regulating the industry so they should be meeting with all the other bodies on a regular basis to determine if all's healthy in the taxi business.
Not really. The Prime Time methods will never prove that "these backhanders are not being done to get cars passed". If they failed to get a car through, this would just prove that Prime Time failed to get a car through. So please do detail what kind of audits/checks you are proposing to ensure that " these backhanders are not being done to get cars passed"?Maybe the Taxi Regulator should pick up the phone to the Prime Time researchers and find out?
That's a cop-out. The responsibility for regulation is perfectly clear in law. Responsibility for safety of the vehicles lies with the Gardai - so again, please get off the fence and specify what person/role should be sacked for this?
So the regulator should be meeting with, and working with the Gardai to regulate the industry? Brilliant idea, now why didn't someone think of that before the AAM armchair experts came up with it? Ooops - they did!
From http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/3739-0.pdf "The membership of the 16 member Council will be drawn from representatives of the taxi, hackney and limousine industry, local authorities, the Gardai, consumer, disability, tourism and business interests".
From [broken link removed] "Members of the Commission for Taxi Regulation's enforcement team, backed up by a team of Gardai, swooped on Navan at the weekend to check that the taxis operating in the town were complying with their licensing regulations.The high-profile presence of the enforcement team and Gardai spent two nights, Friday and Saturday, stopping and checking taxis on the streets and taxi ranks of the town. The Commission for Taxi Regulation this week confirmed that it visited Navan as part of its an ongoing national operation in conjunction with An Garda Síochána. The Commission undertakes a number of joint enforcement operations around the country throughout the year."
Not really. The Prime Time methods will never prove that "these backhanders are not being done to get cars passed". If they failed to get a car through, this would just prove that Prime Time failed to get a car through. So please do detail what kind of audits/checks you are proposing to ensure that " these backhanders are not being done to get cars passed"?
OK, so let's think this through. Every day, I see drivers breaking the speed limit and talking on their mobile phones around Dublin. So please let me know who specifically you want to be sacked? And who you expect to replace them? And how long will you leave the replacements in place before they too are sacked? And when all the Gardai get absolutely focused on speed checks and mobile phone checks, what do you think is going to happen to other types of crimes? And who will you sack when those other types of crimes go up? I really do want to see how that sacking thing is going to improve things.
Apologies, I misread your post. Still, the fundamental point still applies - What relevant authorities are 'at fault' for the 50% of drivers who broke the speed limit and 20% who used mobile phones on my commute today? The follow-up questions will go along the lines of 'do you really want a zero tolerance police state'? What extra taxes are you prepared to pay to fund this police state?Where did I say I wanted people sacked?
It is terrible to see this kind of driving around kids, from taxi drivers or other drivers. Did you report him to the Gardai or the regulator?This morning a taxi driver came out of a side road near our school,he was coming at such speed in a residential area that I had to stop the car as I felt he would hit my car,he then rolls his window down,and screams and I mean screams,"ahh whats wrong with ya...I was goin to stop.I wasnt going fast..blah blah blah".
This kind of abuse among dozens of kids and parents at a school in a residential area does their image no good what so ever.
No, it is a reflection of the fact that there is no appetite here for a zero tolerance police state.For some ,the sacking of those who do not carry out their duties seems to mean that their replacements will do no better,which is a sad reflection on how things are done here.
That's wrong. I do NOT consistently refer to them as armchair experts. Sometimes I refer to them as barstool experts.It seems that(Complainer ) has a bee in the bonnet and consistantly refers to those who have an opinion other than his, is an AAM armchair expert..
I think people should consdier their own lack of knowledge before jumping to conclusions. Just think about how much the average man on the street knows about your role or profession, and how much they could usefully contribute to telling you how to do your job, and that's about as much the average AAM poster knows about every profession. And I promise not to mention Sid Vicious's views on the 'man in the street'.I would like to ask complainer,if he thinks only experts should post their opinions? And if he is an expert on everything he comments on?.
Clearly, it's not. But let's not kid ourselves that a few AAM posters have the solution.Ahh I see. Nothing to see here so, move along. Do you think it's working well given the Prime Time report?
What relevant authorities are 'at fault' for the 50% of drivers who broke the speed limit and 20% who used mobile phones on my commute today? The follow-up questions will go along the lines of 'do you really want a zero tolerance police state'? What extra taxes are you prepared to pay to fund this police state?
No, it is a reflection of the fact that there is no appetite here for a zero tolerance police state.
But let's not kid ourselves that a few AAM posters have the solution.
In all fairness, that's all a bit motherhood and apple pie stuff - fairly vague. I'd be interested in hearing specifically what you'd like to see happen about the 50% of drivers I see breaking the 50 kmph speed limit around the city every day?I never said I wanted a police-state. I do, however, expect either current laws to be enforced correctly and if this is not possible, then I expect better laws to be enacted to enable those who break the law to be caught and punished.
Whether it is achievable or not, we should be aiming for perfection and nothing less.
I'll share your anger here, though I'm not quite sure I see the relevance to the taxi discussion.You seem to be under the impression that people either want no enforcement or a police-state type scenario. The practical reality is that virtually every single man (and woman)-on-the-street in this country wants better enforcement of the existing laws or, as I mentioned above, better laws.
It angers the ordinary man on the street when
1. He has to waste his time bringing his car back to the NCT test centre because a bulb was loose when he sees that some people just hand over a few Euro to get a death-trap passed
2. He has to tell his kids that they have to give up swimming or football because he can't afford it when he see people owing millions still being allowed to send their kids to private schools
3. He has to take a pay-cut so his job is safe for another few months when he sees people in charge of massive loss-making companies getting huge bonuses and/or severance packages
4. He sees people go to court for crimes like rape, murder, assault etc and the judiciary, who appear to hugely out of touch with reality in this country, see fit to impose less that the mandatory minimum sentence as set down in law, because of extenuating circumstances. As far as I can see, everyone has an excuse for what they did.
The list is endless so don't try to argue that the ordinary man on the street doesn't want better enforcement of the laws
There is some truth in this, because there are some social issues that don't have any particular solution. There is always going to be some level of crime out there.Well lets not kid ourselves that the appointed experts have the solution either.
Isn't it funny how everyone else's job is really easy, but you never bother changing career into one of these 'easy life' jobs yourself?
I wouldn't disagree with that, by and large.I merely pointed out that the lack of good investigative journalism in the print media is, to me, really apparent in this country.