Route 50 minibus drivers up in arms against police

Feb 02, 2009 News

Minibus drivers plying the #50 Georgetown/Rosignol route are seeking clarifications pertaining to the recently amended road service law that prohibits them from painting slogans on their vehicles.
The police have warned the drivers that the order covers all signs except those that indicate the designated routes. The drivers were also warned to remove the signs by February 15, or face prosecution.
However, the Rosignol/ Georgetown drivers said that the police have contravened the stipulated grace period and have impounded their vehicles at the Fort Wellington Police Station. The drivers said that they were ordered to remove the signs forthwith.

Police say the signs on these buses should be removed, but drivers are contending that they need more time to comply with this directive

A senior officer at the Fort Wellington Police Station debunked the claims made by the drivers. He said that they are currently conducting a campaign in the area that covers a wide range of infringements. However, he said, the drivers are not yet being penalized for the illegal signs.
Despite such assurances, the drivers are contending that, last Thursday, law enforcement officers, after impounding their vehicles, ordered them to remove the slogans immediately, or face prosecution.
Some drivers said that they have no problem complying with the directive, but they are adamant that they ought to be granted sufficient time to do so. The drivers pointed out that some of the signs on the buses are affixed with stickers. They said that these are easily removable. However, other buses sport painted slogans that would require a complete paint- over to remove. The drivers said that the cost to remove the designs is prohibitive, and they need sufficient time to comply with the order.
When contacted, Traffic Chief Neil Semple confirmed that there is an ongoing exercise in the Fort Wellington area. However, he said that his officers are not yet enforcing the law pertaining to the illegal signs on the buses. He said that the drivers have up until February 15 to remove the signs. He warned of impending prosecution if they fail to do so. Semple said that the vulgar signs emblazoned on some busses have forced legislators to enact rigid laws against such acts. He said that law enforcement authorities are disturbed over the moral breakdown in society. He added that it is not far-fetched to assume that there is a correlation between the vulgarities displayed on the buses and the rampant loss of lives due to senseless accidents.
A team of irate drivers told this newspaper that drivers of the #50 route seem to have attracted unfair attention, since the police are not harassing the drivers plying their trade around the city and other areas. Some drivers claim that the signs on their buses are not there for decorative purposes. Keith Edwards has the slogan ‘general’ painted on the side of his bus. He said that he has a legitimate transportation company registered at the Supreme Court and the sign on his bus merely advertises this company.
In response to allegations of impartiality, Semple said that he is unaware of such actions by the police. He also said that even though some drivers are claiming that the slogans are legitimate, the law is very clear and demands that the buses should be free of all slogans, except those specified. He is also adamant that the time allocated to the drivers is enough for them to become organized.