WASHING MY HANDS OF 'MAD DOG'
Dear Ms Street-Porter,
I have no idea how to contact you, so this is the best I can do.
I believe I know why you wrote that piece about DDD, and I empathise.
I empathise because a cab driver pestered a friend of yours.
I have had to block that same driver from my phone.
He is an incessant pest.
He is not a part of DDD. Nor do I know anything about the USA version.
My friend and I came up with the name over fish and chips in Whitecross Street.
DDD is not about Uber. It is about TfL deregulating the Private Hire industry to appease Uber. Therefore background checks are not as stringent as they should be. Male and females have been attacked as a result.
Uber are not so much a threat to Taxis, as they are to other minicab companies.
The threat to the Taxi is TfL's mismanagement of our roads, leading to a high volume of congestion. Nothing to do with DDD.
I am not here to apologise for someone else's actions. And believe me, I sympathise with your colleague. Her protagonist is as thick skinned and backward as you will ever find.
You have written your article, which I agree is straight about most things.
We all have to bare the burden of Warboys.
As you know, there are nasty bastards in all walks of life. Seventeen police officers committed rape during this past year. Paedo rings involving prominent MPs, judges, doctors, celebrities, milkmen, postmen, etc.
A Taxi driver was charged with rape in 2014.
It is not about the odd teacher or priest, it is about the scale of rape and sexual assault by TfL licensed minicab drivers in London alone.
Getting into a minicab or Uber does not have to be dangerous. If TfL are backed by this Government to do proper background checks via a minimum of a three year DBS, most of these sexual and physical assaults can be avoided. This is exactly in line with Mayor Khan's wishes.
The scale of minicab rape is backed up by a Metropolitan Police freedom of information application, and acknowledged by Sadiq Khan during his Mayor's Questions by the GLA, earlier this year.
Staggering statistics, I know. It was a shock to us too! This is why we organised Dads Defending Daughters.
I do not have to discredit Uber, they do that to themselves, all across the globe.
Uber will never go away. They will just become another AddLee, when they are regulated.
As for DDD's hidden agenda, we simply do not have one. No egos, no sought after limelight. Nothing other than the desire to inform the public.
The media refuse to acknowledge the problem. Murdoch scuppered the story. The BBC remains silent (nothing new there).
You are not the first to question our motives. And why not? Our aim comes across as obvious protectionism. I can see that. Val Shawcross views us that way too.
I personally do deal in protectionism, but not under the guise of the DDD. The DDD is pure of heart.
We can talk about a corrupt TfL, the 'Great Bus Scam', the CSH, the mismanagement of building sites and roadworks that are affecting and destroying our city and my trade. But that has little or nothing to do with DDD.
I honestly believe Uber has had very little impact on my pocket.
I do not hate Uber drivers. I know they are as much victims of Uber as their rivals. But neither do I feel sympathy for them.
When Uber are toeing the legitimate line, and TfL have been made to take their duty of care seriously, DDD will be satisfied.
Although, I do see a problem with an understaffed and under policed 24 hour tube.
Click here for Janet Street-Porter's article.