[Closed] Arrrrghhh freedom of speech in the UK..... (boiling wee content)

I also grew up in the Borders and would hate to go back. Most of the councillors are 80+ yr old. Rugby players, Masons, Police. All the same innit? Just look at what the council let Tesco and Asda do to the town centre in Galshiels. For those that don't know, they basically moved the A7 so it goes straight passed these 2 stores and completely bypasses the Town Centre. Galashiels is now dying!

So what was his comment?

I have to be vey careful what I say on Facebook and other social sites as do many people in a profession as it can effect my career.

what did he actually say?

Full details here

That's not really "full details" is it ?

That's one side of the story, and not even the full bit of that side either.

The unmarked traffic police car used to always park at my road-end with their speed gun attempting to catch speeders leaving the town limits within 200yrds of the 30mph zone sign and if you wanted to turn left you had to swing around their car and cross over the broken white lines at the junction to turn left or right. If i was on my bike i used to knock on their window and ask them to move away from the junction or if i was in the car i used to phone the main police station in the area (dumfries) and say there was a car blocking the junction.

Driving the sort of car i had at the time it certainly did not endear me to the local traffic police but **** em, they were blocking the exit as i had to enter the opposite carriage way illegally within 5 yards of a junction.

He doesn't say exactly, it in the link, it wasn't exactly complimentary to the police but nothing anyone else wasn't saying...

He had NEVER been in trouble with the police in his life, exactly the opposite, his comment was along the lines of one law for them etc...

So to sum up.

We don't know what he said but we should support him for saying something, we don't know what, on a public sight where the local council seen it. Because of his comment, which we don't know remember, they refused him a new licence. So he's now asking on the same place that got him into trouble about some comment to support him.

That's not really "full details" is it ?

That's one side of the story, and not even the full bit of that side either

Sorry the way I see it is there may well be but there nobody is going to hear it unless it is publicised...

Drac... not saying support him... saying PUBLICISE IT. the truth will out then...

Maybe I'm not objective but as Jodafett said you have to have [b]lived[/b] in the borders to understand the culture of cronyisim in the region (staying a week in Inners or Peebles doesn't count :mrgreen:)

Read it, saw read... but then I'm on tins of wifebeater at the mo.. 😉 so maybe I'm being too touchy..

Drac... not saying support him... saying PUBLICISE IT. the truth will out then...

He is and yes there needs to be a report to show the full story.

From his comment;

do we have freedom of speech or should I have kept my opinion privet?

He should hedge his bets. IGMC.

In all seriousness, though, that stinks. Just stinks. Whilst he may have been weel advised to keep his cooncil, given the prevailing conditions, and even if his comment was ill-advised or inflammatory, no-one should lose their livelihood over an innocuous comment on Facebook, so I've shared the photo. Perhaps I'll lose clients over it - I photograph a LOT of police weddings, but hopefully they'll have the sense to understand that this isn't just police-bashing - rather it's a rebuttal of abuse of power and position.

his comment was along the lines of one law for them etc...

[img] [/img]

😆

He could start off by getting in touch with the local or national press for publicity, they will cover the story if there's a suggestion of gross injustice. Although they will probably want to know what he actually said.

Actually Drac technically the double yellows in that pic are in disrepair and incomplete ergo not valid in law.

But fair point well made 😯

And the corner it's on that invalid?

Is that Melrose? Their Rugby Mafia (TM) is shocking. I fully expect to have another wasted trip down there tomorrow. I'm guessing that the pitch will be unplayable due to some made up story (just like it was the last time I was there). Real reason will be that they cant field a strong team due to holidays - just like the last trip down....

Its not a corner drac... is a small cut in of about 24" s a really weird junction that one...

It's the love child of a road planner on PCP and the local Melrose in Bloom comittee

This is getting more and more common, I am a care worker and would think twice before commenting on a social network site at all as my employer, my clients and various agencies like social work dept all check them. I would never make any client related comments outside of work. Having said all that this does seem unfair

Its not a corner drac... is a small cut in of about 24"

Ok not very familiar with Gala only popped through a couple times.

This was the Taxi drivers point .. he made the post posting as himself .. not as his business page.. it's a freedom of speech issues here.

It's in Melrose Drac... firm Torygraph and Daily Mail Territory

Sorry the way I see it is there may well be but there nobody is going to hear it unless it is publicised...

I don't know what he said, so why would I want to publicise anything ?

The Facebook comment could be one of ten other reasons they gave for not renewing his ticket ?

Yup - entirely different from criticising ones' employer, or being cavalier with patient details. This is one mans' opinion, expressed in as legitimate a way as if he was sitting in the pub.

It could be, but the photo of the documentation suggests it was his FB comment which stymied him.

The Facebook comment could be one of ten other reasons they gave for not renewing his ticket ?

If you look at the original letter it is the [b]ONLY REASON[/b] and directly responsible for his licence refusal...

Just look at what the council let Tesco and Asda do to the town centre in Galshiels

Joda .. and the way every "Executive house", Supermarket and White Elephant Railway development... planning permission seems to get passed...

Not saying that the councillors are bent as such but drive out of the area in to Dumfries & Galloway, Northumberland, East Lothian and South Lanakshire and the number of "barn coversions" and green field "southfork" style building sites drops by about 99%

.. just saying

[b]If you look at the original letter[/b] it is the ONLY REASON and directly responsible for his licence refusal...

Where would I do that ?

Or find out what was said ?

Link in my original postd now a screen dump..

[IMG] [/IMG]

Link in my original post

I can see that's what he says.

But the picture of the letter has a load of text hidden by photoshop.

Only the bit about Facebook is shown.

So the rest could be saying anything at all.

And still don't know what he actually said either.

Ah Melrose is what I pictured in my head not sure why I said Gala.

If you look at the original letter it is the ONLY REASON and directly responsible for his licence refusal...

Link in my original post

most of the letter is obscured - so presumably says something he didn't want to share?

This was the Taxi drivers point .. he made the post posting as himself .. not as his business page.. it's a freedom of speech issues here.

It's in Melrose Drac... firm Torygraph and Daily Mail Territory

Sorry the way I see it is there may well be but there nobody is going to hear it unless it is publicised...

He [i]MAY[/i] have been badly treated by the council; but if you were fighting a license application refusal that was in some way linked to your conduct on Facebook - would you (a) choose to make a big(ger) song and dance on Facebook OR (b) perhaps avoid the trouble spot at least until the case was heard?

Neal... no matter what is blanked out the letter still does clearly state the sole reason for refusal... is the FB comment.

And nobody has mentioned his spelling? 😀

Neal... no matter what is blanked out the letter still does clearly state the sole reason for refusal... is the FB comment.

And Drac if you look it up on Google maps you'll probably be wondering why its not "a corner"! Jock's memory of 24" is obviously a little out! Its an odd junction but it is a junction.

So tell me ... when did [b]YOU[/b] last live in melrose then... i moved out this time last year... the google maps image is 2013, the photo of the taxi is as the OLD junction layout used to be... in 2012 when the one way system was still under public consultation.

Neal... no matter what is blanked out the letter still does clearly state the sole reason for refusal... is the FB comment.

No it doesn't.

It makes reference to it yes, but you must have imagined the bit where it says Facebook comments were the Sole Reason for refusal, because I can't see it ?

You are missing the point old man... it's not the holes you can pick in what ever argument you want to put forward.. as you are obviously Peter Perfect the Perfect Person.. but

..it's the simple fact that one mans PERSONAL opinion that did not express any extreme political,morally or ethically reprehensible or sexual views had ANY bearing WHATSOEVER on a licence application.

[b]No matter what else he did or didn't do .. the single fact that he was SINGLED OUT from 90 others for a PERSONAL OPINION and this was mentioned is the insidious thing... its a FREEDOM of SPEECH issue[/b]

A lack of understanding of the concepts and principles involved is not my fault..

..when the Geheime Staatspolizei kick in your doors and arrest your entire family in fifteen years time for you comment on facetwittertrackworld about a cracked paving stone in your street not being fixed don't say you weren't warned.. the same principle applies.

You are missing the point old man... it's not the holes you can pic in what ever argument you want to put forward.. as you are obviously Peter Perfect the Perfect Person.. but

Argue the point not the person.

..it's the simple fact that one mans PERSONAL opinion that did not express any extreme political or sexual views had ANY bearing WHATSOEVER on a licence application.

How do you know ?
Do you know what he said, because I don't ?

No matter what else he did or didn't do .. the single fact that he was SINGLED OUT from 90 others for a PERSONAL OPINION and this was mentioned is the insidious thing... its a FREEDOM of SPEECH issue

Taxi licenses are given to the [b]Person[/b] so if he did something that puts him outside of what is considered a suitable person to hold a license, then he doesn't get one.

But we don't know what he did because he doesn't seem to want to say.

A lack of understanding of the concepts and principles involved is not my fault

Well you don't seem to understand the concept that if you don't know what actually happened, you can't form a proper opinion about whether the removal of his license was a justified response or not.

not gonna argue.. you are right obviously

The law's the law. No matter what he said, he hasn't broken it (assuming he didn't accuse the driver of the police car of having unnatural sexual intercourse with a family of weasels).

As such, his personal opinion, voiced down the pub, to the police driver, or in the comfort of his own living room (in the company of Mrs Weasel) [u]should not[/u] impact upon his application for a taxi license.

Codes of conduct will be laid down in the terms of being a self employed taxi driver in that town, but I say with some certainty that voicing a personal opinion (no matter how stupid) shouldn't deny him the right to earn a living in his chosen field.

but I say with some certainty that voicing a personal opinion (no matter how stupid) shouldn't deny him the right to earn a living in his chosen field.

Well judging by the fact that the appeal was turned down, it would seem that whatever he said meant he was not seen as suitable to be licensed as a Taxi driver according to the codes of conduct laid down by whoever is in charge of Taxi Driver Licensing ?

There's a missing piece in the puzzle, to be sure. I'm going on blind faith and a trusting nature - you should try it some time 🙂

There's a missing piece in the puzzle, to be sure. I'm going on blind faith and a trusting nature - [b]you should try it some time [/b]

As I've already said a few times, nobody can make a judgement based on the information available.

I certainly haven't.

Couple of things from me.

Do we know why the police car was there? As iirc if they were attending an incident then parking laws don't apply?
Is it a supermarket car park? Owned by the supermarket? Do parking laws apply if it is?
Him being singled out, nope, it's just he's the only one who's commented, and now needs to renew his taxi license.
Is it not different to it being an opinion down the pub because he has put his statement in print? And not stated that its just his opinion?

Seems to me like a cleverdick has been exposed for being just that.

Seems to me like a cleverdick has been exposed for being just that.

Nothing, just don't whinge when you are pulled up on it! Or don't try to be one if it could land you in a whole world of the proverbial.

It's all been said TH - the police car likely DID have a legitimate reason for being there. The taxi driver made an ill advised comment about it. He also wasn't the only one to comment - his was 87th out of 90 comments (IIRC, can't be arsed going back to look).

The point is, that if we accept the (scant) available evidence, combined with the local knowledge in this thread, the taxi driver has been treated
unfairly, and probably unlawfully.

Weird. I hate taxi drivers usually.

From our local paper, rather than in Melrose, but I thought it might be of relevance...

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/10199522.Worcester_police_defend_use_of_disabled_parking_space/

Aracer, tbh that's what I thought this was about! Edit, it isn't, the cops somewhere had to defend themselves from folk questioning a cop car parked in a disabled space at a McDonald's. they were there attending an incident. 3 incidents of folk jump to the same conclusion in a week? Coincidence?

Seems very petty too. Kicking up such a stink over parking, ESP when it's cops, who can do pretty much what they like on the roads (I have no problem with this at all, let them do what they need to do)

It is kind of harsh what happened to he cabbie I guess but in the same breath, one would do well not to bite the hand that feeds.

TH - at the risk of repeating myself... We have agreed that the cop car most likely had a good reason to be there. We have also agreed (I think) that the cabbie's comment was, at best, ill-advised. this is [u]NOT[/u] a police bashing thread. Rather, it is concerned with the misuse of power by the local crony-ist council to deprive one man of his livelihood.

We don't have the whole story, and I strongly suspect someone had an axe to grind. But this is purely about transparency and fairness, neither of which appear to be in evidence here.

But this is purely about transparency and fairness, neither of which appear to be in evidence here

Agreed, we don't know what the Taxi Driver actually said.

And we don't know if the comments were the [b]full reason[/b] for license not being renewed.

nealglover = the new TJ 🙁

Unfair I know - as someone said earlier, "Argue the point, not the person".

But I'm finding it hard not to compare the two of you.

EDIT, Well, it's either you or me, and I'm pretty sure it's not me.

I agree with others,the reason for the refusal is in the blanked out part, the Facebook Comment is in a different section.

Seems fishy.

unblank and repost if nothing to hide

When reading this thread I'm imagining Officer Crabtree from Allo, Allo has written much of it. The spelling kind of makes sense then.

As I've already said a few times, nobody can make a judgement based on the information available.
I certainly haven't.

Are there published criteria for being allowed, and disqualified from, holding a Taxi License?

If so, surely he should only be refused if he is in breach of these rules.

Surely given the fact that any decision by a public body such as the Taxi licensing committee/group has an appeals process that he can appeal against, or if all else fails apply for Judicial review of the decision stating infringement of his his article 10 right to Freedom of Expression, then we can rest assured that he will be able to follow that process, the world will be put to rights, and we can all sleep safely in our beds once again.

Huzzah!

nealglover = the new TJ
Unfair I know - as someone said earlier, "Argue the point, not the person".
But I'm finding it hard not to compare the two of you.
EDIT, Well, it's either you or me, and I'm pretty sure it's not me.

I guess that was designed to be an insult.

Which is pretty weird considering I was agreeing with you 😐

Under what circumstances would being insufficiently respectful to the police be a legitimate reason for cancellation of a taxi licence?

If that's the reason for it not being renewed, which hasn't really been established properly yet, then it would be a legitimate reason only if it was in some sort of charter or guidelines I suppose.

He should have his license removed for being unable to spell Freedom correctly. I take it he never watched that' movie Highlander 🙄

He should have his license removed for being unable to spell Freedom correctly. I take it he never watched that' movie Highlander

He he..... Braveheart maybe ? 😉

"You can take his licence, but you can never take his FREEDOME !"

we don't know what the [b]Taxi Driver[/b] actually said

Aww, c'mon...we all know what he said...

[img] [/img]

nealglover the new TJ? Not seeing it myself. All he seems to be saying is that you can't reach an informed conclusion without all the information. Which is very logical. And not TJ's style.

Facebook is a very dangerous thing if u don't use it with some thought. Thousands are being caught for benefit fraud for example just because they are silly enough to have public profiles and expose their true lifestyle circumstances to anyone who wants to look.

I struggle with long sentences but yes you can say what you like in UK as long as it's not racist or homophobic etc, however you can still be held responsible for what you say e.g. libel/slander laws.

Freedom of Speech doesn't mean lack of consequences.

And as a Borders resident I suspect this guy has been a bampot for years, and if he is anything like some of the other "independent trader" types around here who get away with all kinds of stuff cos they know the funny handshakes, and the Police finally have something on him they can prove.

And be careful what you say on Facebook kiddies.

Yes you can say what you like in UK as long as it's not racist or homophobic etc, however you can still be held responsible for what you say e.g. libel/slander laws.

Freedom of Speech doesn't mean lack of consequences.

And as a Borders resident I suspect this guy has been a bampot for years, and if he is anything like some of the other "independent trader" types around here who get away with all kinds of stuff cos they know the funny handshakes, and the Police finally have something on him they can prove.

And be careful what you say on Facebook kiddies.

It's an odd conclusion that the guy that's getting stitched up by the polis and the cooncil is the one that wields some sort of Masonic influence.

If that's the reason for it not being renewed, which hasn't really been established properly yet, then it would be a legitimate reason only if it was in some sort of charter or guidelines I suppose.

Under what circumstances would it be legitimate for the police to complain about a "lack of respect for the Police authority" from a taxi driver? And under what circumstances would it be legitimate for the council to refuse to issue a licence for someone's livelihood on the basis of that complaint?

Under what circumstances would it be legitimate for the police to complain about a "lack of respect for the Police authority" from a taxi driver? And under what circumstances would it be legitimate for the council to refuse to issue a licence for someone's livelihood on the basis of that complaint?

As I said above, whatever the Taxi Licensing rules and guidelines are would dictate that.

And none of us seem to know what those guidelines are do we ?

So, from what I can see here:

a couple of people want us to be outraged because of part of one side of a story has been presented.
None of us are aware of the license process, the rules applied or any other factors, or even the subsequent appeals process that he also failed.

Why on earth would any sane person think the residents of stw have enough information to say anything other than 'tell me more'?

So tell me ... when did YOU last live in melrose then... i moved out this time last year... the google maps image is 2013, the photo of the taxi is as the OLD junction layout used to be... in 2012 when the one way system was still under public consultation.

Bing arial photography shows the same road layout in May 2011.
The google streetview is dated August 2010.

There might have been some rejigging in that time - but there has been a junction there for a long time.

There might have been some rejigging in that time - but there has been a junction there for a long time.

Round the corner, to the right in front of the taxi, is now a paved area with benches and flower beds, the junction no longer exists. The High St is now a one way system going down the street towards the rugby club.

whatever the Taxi Licensing rules and guidelines are would dictate that.

Let me turn that question around for you: do you think it should be a state requirement that one respects the police in order to run a private business?

Local councils rules regarding taxi licences are often archane and don't take into account modern employment laws and human rights legislation. I can't see how if this went to a proper court the refusal to renew his licence would be upheld.
To give you an example, in Cardiff there used to be a rule that 2 children under 5 counted as 1 in a cab. My taxi is licenced for 4 passengers, so when I wouldn't pick up a woman and her 5 children she complained. The pitchforks were out for me, untill the police confirmed that I could have been prosecuted if I had picked her up. The council backed down but they werern't happy that the law got in the way of their rules.

Probably a bit late to point out now, but there is [b]NO[/b] Freedom of Speech law in the UK. In the US yes, but not in the UK. Never has been to my knowledge.

I can only conclude your all watching to many Hollywood films!

Edit: Unless you become an MP and evoke Parliamentary Privilege

hels - Member

Freedom of Speech doesn't mean lack of consequences.

Yup. Freedom of speech has not been restricted here, he's perfectly free to say what he said.

Maybe I'm going blind but I've not seen the original facebook comment? If it was something like "*ing police are all a bunch of *s, that's why I never do what they say, the *s, they're always wrong. And *s." then they might have more of a point.

From his own facebook

In my comment I wasn't at all flattering towards the police saying that I have no respect for the police that break there own rules and that they should be leading by example, I even went on to say that they are mere civil servants on a power trip.

(Don't know if anyone cut and pasted it already)

well the consequences must surely have dispelled the power trip claim

he was foolish but what they have done is, IMHO, abuse of power

If his explanation of the situation is both entirely complete and entirely correct then I agree

If the police were responding to an emergency then there should be no problem with them being in a disabled space.

W don't have the whole picture here, I suspect there is more to it than his side of the story.