Sections 120-123
1 NOVEMBER 2005
120. MR SMALLWOOD: Just to respond to
that, one of the discussions with the lawyers was this definition,
which is the valuable definition, if you like, because pedicabs
really cannot operate in any other way than ply-for-hire, so there
might be a suggestion they get put under private hire regulations,
which is a different thing again. One of the big discussions was
that if you change the definition who is to say that the next
judge that comes along, if there is another prosecution on maybe
a slightly different charge, or whatever, could possibly change
that definition but we would have to go through the magistrates'
court and the appeal court yet again. So nobody can say whether
a judge would make that judgment or not. That was made quite clear
actually by Westminster Council themselves. I said: "Can
we get a judgment on whether this would change the legal position?"
and Westminster Council said: "There is no judgment; you
cannot say." Therefore, Westminster Council said exactly
the same thing actually.
121. CHAIRMAN: Shall we leave it there?
122. MR CLARKSON: Unless there is anything
more I can help you on. The simple point is it is a sensible definition;
it is clear, explicit and accurate and it describes a pedicab.
If a pedicab, as the law currently is, is not a Hackney Carriage
it does not matter how it is described, but this happens to be
an excellent, precise, accurate definition.
123. CHAIRMAN: Thank you both, Mr Smallwood
and counsel, for putting your case. The Committee will now adjourn
and meet again tomorrow morning at 10 am, and we will see you
all then.
Adjourned until 10.00 tomorrow
|
