Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 24 March 2015 and 19 May 2015.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2015 and 19 May 2015 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Chairman highlighted that as this was the first meeting of the Licensing Committee following the local elections and several new members had joined, it was important to understand that new Members might ask for clarification, particularly with regard to the two items on the agenda that had been discussed at the previous Committee.

There were no declarations of interest received.

Purpose: To consider objections raised following the mandatory public notice of a variance in taxi fare as approved by the Committee on 24 March 2015.

Brian Leahy introduced (Agenda Item 4) for the Committee to consider objections raised, following the mandatory public notice of a variance in taxi fare as approved by the Committee on 24 March 2015.

Section 65 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 required that, following the publication of the notice of variance in the Newbury Weekly News asking for the objections to be notified to the Council, a decision had to be made regarding implementation no later than 30 June 2015.

Brian Leahy informed the Committee that a great number of objections were received which included three letters and a petition signed by 46 members of the trade.

In accordance with section 65 (4) the table of fares had to come into operation no later than 30th June 2015 regardless of whether the Council decided to modify or not. However Members had to consider objections received as a result of the notice.

Brian Leahy suggested that the Committee had to decide on one of the following three options:

1. Confirm the table of fares agreed on the 24th March 2015 in both format and price.
2. Modify the table of fares both, in format, and price, or by either.
3. Revert back to the tariff already in place in both format and price.

The options with regards to the actual level of tariff were numerous and consideration should be given that: this would be the maximum level that taxi operators would be able to charge; that people’s livelihoods depended on them; that enforcement activities would be required and the role of the Council to protect the interest of the public travelling by Taxis. Reference was made to a Court case when the Judge ruled that a legal tariff was not the one set by the Council but the one set by the driver as long as it was not greater than the one set by the Council.

An alternative was to not set a tariff at all and allow each taxi provider to set the level they wished in a competitive market.

The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to ask for clarification on any matters.

Councillor Bryant asked if the five tariff table approved at the previous meeting of the Committee was proposed by the Council and Brian Leahy confirmed that the proposal was received from the taxi trade.

Councillor Webb enquired if amendments to the meters could be set up by the driver and how the change from one tariff to another was being made (from one time zone to another).

Brian Leahy explained that as the meter was a sealed unit, only a number of individuals had the ability to change the settings and reseal. The Council required evidence that any changes had been made by the authorised individuals.

The meters were not calendar meters and the change from one time zone’s tariff to another was done manually by the driver.

In addition, the taxi driver could set an arrangement, without using the meter. Section 54 Town Police Clauses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Purpose: To provide Members with further material following Licensing Committee meeting of 24 March 2015.

Brian Leahy introduced the report to provide Members with further material information following on from the Licensing Committee Meeting held on 24 March 2015. The context of this item was that a paper had been put forward by Mr Sheikh with a set of revised conditions for livery and advertising. Members agreed at the meeting on the 24 March 2015 to task Officers with carrying out some benchmarking on livery standards and to provide photographic material showing current styles of advertising.

In addition, a benchmarking activity was conducted and findings were listed on pages 30-31 of the agenda reports.

The meeting continued with a PowerPoint presentation of a number of photographs and images of livery and advertising on Taxis, being shared with the Committee.

Brian Leahy concluded the presentation highlighting that there were a range of different vehicles with different approaches to complying or not complying with the current standards. He also pointed out to Members that they should consider that those signs painted on cars would result in a cost to the trade and suggested that current vehicles should be allowed to maintain the existing standard with the change in livery coinciding with the next change of vehicle.

Brian Leahy proposed an alternative approach, whereby owners and or drivers’ vehicles, were permitted to advertise their own or another business on the rear door, within given size parameters, in addition to the Council’s livery, with the caveat that sexual, tobacco, alcohol promotions were not advertised.

Councillor Webb referred to page 8 of agenda pack which listed the minutes of the previous meeting where it was established that the proposal from the trade was to allow advertising of their own company within the agreed size of the signs and that he would tend to agree with that proposal.

Councillor Bryant commented that he was in favour of minimum regulation, in addition to European Union and Central Government requirements, and he wanted a debate to understand what the issues were regarding regulating livery and advertising on taxis. For example, with regards to restrictions on advertising material relating to tobacco, alcohol or of pornographic nature there were already laws in place and the Police would enforce them. He was of the view that as long as the message was decent the Committee should allow taxi drivers to put up whatever advertising they liked.

This view was echoed by Councillor Drummond.

Councillor Linden suggested that following consideration of the benchmarking information included in the report, the Committee might consider the South Bucks District Council approach.

Brian Leahy informed the Members that with this suggested approach, lap dancing or strip club establishments could be advertised as there was no law to restrict it. Councillor Bryant suggested that if the Government was not restricting this type of advertising then the local authority should follow suit.

Councillor Ellison was of the view that some of the images presented to the Committee had showed signage that was tasteful and allowing the trade more freedom would make the district’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Purpose: To advise Members of the need to make urgent changes to some of the standard conditions for hackney carriages.

Brian Leahy introduced a report to advise Members of the need to make urgent changes to some of the standard conditions for hackney carriages. He informed the Committee that the trade had not yet been consulted and asked that Members decide whether a consultation was needed and if so, what should be consulted upon.

Brian Leahy reported that there was a small number of drivers who refused to pick up people with disabilities. Some drivers did not hold ramps in their vehicles at all times. It had been reported to Officers that one operator had six vehicles but only three ramps. These practices were not legal under the Equalities Act.

It was proposed that the following conditions be added to the Hackney Carriage

Proprietors (vehicle) conditions;

1.     Any taxi which was licensed as a wheelchair accessible vehicle (WAV) must have available on the vehicle at all times whilst working, suitable approved equipment (ramps, hoist or other lifting device) for facilitating wheelchair access into the vehicle and such approved straps, belts or other safety restraining equipment as was necessary to ensure that the customer was secure and safe whilst in the vehicle. All such equipment shall be in full working order and where non metal fabrics are used, not broken, frayed or torn.

2.     All ramps and other non manufacturers standard equipment provided as disabled access facilities must be stamped, if of metal construction, with the registered number and licence number of the vehicle and all non metal equipment similarly marked by means approved by the Council. Both types of marking shall be of such proportions as to be easily readable and in the case of non metal equipment, shall be indelible.

3.     Any vehicles fitted with a swivel seat shall ensure that the seat was in good repair and was tested regularly to ensure free movement.

4.     Where a temporary licence was applied for in the event of a vehicle having to be taken off the road due to accident damage or breakdown, a licence may be issued for a period of one month. This may be extended in exceptional circumstances for a further two months in total at one monthly intervals.

5.     Any replacement vehicle would be required to be like for like (i.e. if a wheelchair accessible vehicle was replaced, it must be substituted with a similar accessible vehicle, if a swivel seated vehicle was replaced it must be substituted for a wheelchair accessible vehicle). A protected vehicle which was not required to provide disabled access by virtue of the licence may be substituted by a like for like type of vehicle.

Brian Leahy informed the Members that as a practical aspect, the Licensing Team would purchase a stamp and provide it to a designated garage where the taxi providers could mark their equipment. The straps could be marked with indelible ink. On inspection, this would evidence that equipment was complete, serviceable and marked for the intended vehicle.

It was proposed that supplementary conditions be added to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Purpose: To update Members on Licensing progress in 2014/15.

Brian Leahy introduced the report to update Members on Licensing Progress in 2014/15. He had previously organised an annual general meeting with all stakeholders, but many partner organisations, such as the Fire Brigade were unable to attend.

Brian Leahy informed the Committee that Officers had published this report for information, regarding recent changes in legislation and some proposals for the future in the field of licensing. He referred to items of the report that gave an overview of legislation which included changes with regards to live music and recorded music. Also those relevant to Members who were Ward Members, that related to issues which affected the schools, hospitals and village halls. He also highlighted that changes were made in relation to the showing of pre-recorded films which were incidental to another activity.

Brian Leahy referred to the review of the provision of Disability Awareness/Manual Handling training for taxi drivers. He explained that members of the trade had to attend mandatory training on how to help disabled customers as this was a condition for gaining a license. He mentioned that the Government had included such provisions in the Taxi and Private Hire Bill which had unfortunately been dropped, however by including this issue in the Bill, the Government had demonstrated its intentions towards disability awareness throughout the taxi/private hire trade. He was adamant that taking this proposal forward as part of the Council’s equality agenda to eliminate discrimination and effect safety was a positive move forward.

RESOLVED that Members considered and noted the progress report.