Taxis in Bus Lane

[selamlar]

No, IIRC, the taxi trade worked very hard to have themselves considered as public transport - after initially resisting the idea for a very long time indeed.

Go on then, define public transport.

Publicly owned?
Publicly regulated?
As opposed to private (owner/occupier) vehicles?
Fare collecting?

 

[laptop]

Minicabs can pick up ... in bus lanes but

But only if pre-booked, yes?

(London rules for the sake of this question. The 1931 Gödel Exception does not apply, nor any of the secret protocols to the Turing Turnoff Treaty.)

 

[Kanda]

Yeah well it isn't very likely that I'll have more sway on transport policy than the taxi riding politicians and there cronies. An increase in mobility allowance could be subsidized from the increase in public transport revenue that this policy change would bring about.

This is such a generalisation, it's NOT just politicians and their cronies that use taxis. Most companies in London, if you need to travel on business, pay for a cab.

 

[eoin_k]

Sorry I forgot to included corporate henchmen in my list.

 

[selamlar]

Sorry I forgot to included corporate henchmen in my list.

What! If you work for a London based company you are a corporate henchman!?! Or only if you use a taxi?

Purleeese

 

[Kanda]

Sorry I forgot to included corporate henchmen in my list.

Telephone engineer turned up here in a cab this morning. Corporate henchmen?? Geezus!

Poor poor you...

 

[Sunray]

Black Cabs are privately owned but very strictly regulated in many ways.

So they get to use the bus lanes. I don't see a problem, esp when I use one. They charge for time when stopped remember, so them getting to where I want to go fast is good.

 

[eoin_k]

Telephone engineer turned up here in a cab this morning. Corporate henchmen?? Geezus!

Poor poor you...

I have been in a Taxi myself actually. My point isn't that everyone who has ever travelled in a taxi is evil. My point is that most journeys by public transport would be more efficient if bus lanes weren't clogged up by taxis.

 

[Kanda]

I have been in a Taxi myself actually. My point isn't that everyone who has ever travelled in a taxi is evil. My point is that most journeys by public transport would be more efficient if bus lanes weren't clogged up by taxis.

If the buses weren't there journeys by taxi would fly by!!

I don't think you have a valid point tbh.

 

[Cobbles]

This is such a generalisation, it's NOT just politicians and their cronies that use taxis. Most companies in London, if you need to travel on business, pay for a cab.

In Edinburgh, it was the outgoing Labour councillors who used to swear by taxi usage (are politicians really so thick that they couldn't forsee the consequences of FOI legislation) - probably one of the reasons why their congestion charging scheme was trashed by a public vote - they were always dribbling on about the benefits of buses - how would they know they never used them?

I'll always use a taxi in preference to a bus - who wants to stop every hundred yards or so, never ming be frced to sit next to some dribbling old BO-pile?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

How on earth is a taxi not public transport?

It's a form of transport available to the public for fucks sake

 

[eoin_k]

You are hardly comparing like with like. What proportion of Londoners travel regularly by taxi? How efficient would a bus lane full of taxi's be at moving Londoners from A to B?

 

[selamlar]

How on earth is a taxi not public transport?

It's a form of transport available to the public for fucks sake

Thus far, no-one has managed to come up with a better answer than 'Its not! Its not! Its not!'

 

[eoin_k]

I haven't argued that taxi's aren't public transport. Tube trains are public transport but we don't let them use bus lanes.

 

[eoin_k]

oops

 

[selamlar]

You are hardly comparing like with like. What proportion of Londoners travel regularly by taxi? How efficient would a bus lane full of taxi's be at moving Londoners from A to B?

As any fule kno, an integrated public transport system would/does consist of a number of different forms of transport. Trains, buses, ferries and taxis, for example, all serve different roles.

 

[Kanda]

oops

Was that aimed at your previous Tube analogy? Yeah, it was a bit silly!

 

[eoin_k]

Okay contradicted myself slightly there - but I still stand by my basic point - Taxi's aren't buses - they aren't significantly more efficient or environmentally friendly than cars and I can't see why they are in bus lanes.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

What proportion of Londoners travel regularly by taxi?

From what I see when I work in London an awful lot of people use them.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Okay contradicted myself slightly there - but I still stand by my basic point - Taxi's aren't buses - they aren't significantly more efficient or environmentally friendly than cars and I can't see why they are in bus lanes.

To help them get from A to B faster, making them more attractive to use than private cars maybe?

Fucks sake, it's not rocket science.

 

[Kanda]

I never really see bus lanes clogged with Taxis either. I see buses clogging bus lanes. You sure you got it the right way round??

 

[selamlar]

The only logic I can see for Taxis being allowed in the Bus Lane is that anyone who has influence on the debate is likely to use them - Politician's, lawyers, newspaper editors, senior civil servants, broadcasters - they're all habitual cab passengers.

Taxi's are hardly public transport. The pump out pollution and drive around empty between fares. I say we call for a ban on Taxis in bus lanes.

I haven't argued that taxi's aren't public transport. Tube trains are public transport but we don't let them use bus lanes.

<cough>

 

[eoin_k]

Okay contradicted myself slightly there - but I still stand by my basic point - Taxi's aren't buses - they aren't significantly more efficient or environmentally friendly than cars and I can't see why they are in bus lanes.

 

[eoin_k]

Whether or not Taxis are public transport is a bit of a moot point in any case.

Public transport, public transportation, public transit or mass transit comprise all transport systems that transport members of the general public, usually charging set fares. While the above terms are generally taken to include rail and bus services, wider definitions might include scheduled airline services, ferries, taxicab services etc. A further restriction that is sometimes applied is that transit should occur in continuously shared vehicles, which would exclude taxis that are not shared-ride taxis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport

This quote isn't intended to settle the argument - which isn't really my main point. I'm just trying to flag up that the idea that taxi's offering a non shared ride service might not be universally recognised as public transport.

 

[pogofish]

Taxis are no more public than a public house - ie the public are there entirely at the discretion of the driver/licenced operator & out on their arse the moment they decide otherwise. So not public at all then.

How many complaints for fare refusal are heard/upheld in London? Not many I'd bet, if the miniscule number here is anything to go by.

 

[Cobbles]

Whether or not Taxis are public transport is a bit of a moot point in any case.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport

This quote isn't intended to settle the argument - which isn't really my main point. I'm just trying to flag up that the idea that taxi's offering a non shared ride service might not be universally recognised as public transport.

"wider definitions might include scheduled airline services" - whereas scheduled airline services are public transport - letting them use bus lanes would ease the need for the 3rd and 4th runways at Heathrow so that seems beneficialall round as then at least something (apart from Tonycades) would be regularly using the pointless bus lanes on the M4.

If it's "sharing" that counts, then why not let any vehicle with more than 25% occupancy use the bus lanes - oh I see,that would mean that buses would be banned from them during non-peak hours - oops!

 

[pogofish]

Publicly owned?
Publicly regulated?

Public ownership would be high-up there certainly, although maybe not entirely in some circumstances.

Public-interest regulation would have to be an absolute cert, yes.

However, I've seen all too often how this comes a very poor second to the demands of the trade - esp where taxis are concerned. A prime example would be the decision here to allow banned or otherwise unfit drivers to retain their licences. Or another one, where a study suggested that a very significant percentage of drivers should never have been awarded a licence in the first place. How many were revoked - none! What good does that serve anyone except them?

 

[pogofish]

If it's "sharing" that counts, then why not let any vehicle with more than 25% occupancy use the bus lanes - oh I see,that would mean that buses would be banned from them during non-peak hours - oops!

That is the latest thing here - After the taxis got the all-clear to use bus lanes, strong pressure to allow cars with more than one occupant in them as well. Of course, they still want the cyclists out.

 

[maomao]

But only if pre-booked, yes?

(London rules for the sake of this question. The 1931 Gödel Exception does not apply, nor any of the secret protocols to the Turing Turnoff Treaty.)

Minicabs (or PCO licensed executive car services ) are only allowed to pick up pre-booked work full stop.

 

[bi0boy]

Taxis reduce car use - if people know that taxis are available to get quickly from A to B should they need them, they will be less likely to use their cars all the time on the off chance they might actually need them to do a journey not possible by bus etc. This is generally the reason sited for them being able to use bus lanes.