To report any issues with the information below please email executivecycle@westberks.gov.uk.

Agenda item

Hackney Carriage Tariff Review

Purpose: To inform Members of a request from the taxi trade for an increase in the taxi tariff.

 

Minutes:

The Committee considered the report (Agenda Item 4) outlining a request from the taxi trade for an increase in the taxi tariff.

Councillor Graham Bridgman had been made aware of a request from a member of the public to address the Committee and he asked Members if they wished to suspend standing orders to permit members of the public to address the Committee and/or be able to answer Members’ questions.

Councillor Tony Linden pointed out that historically, standing orders had been suspended and he proposed to suspend standing orders. This was seconded by Councillor Jeff Beck and the Committee resolved to suspend standing orders to permit members of the public to speak for up to ten minutes.

Councillor Bridgman invited Mr Nemeth, who submitted the letter and petition on behalf of the West Berkshire Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Operators requesting an increase in the taxi tariff, to speak.

Mr Nemeth made the following points:

·         There had been no fare increase since 2012/13.

·         A 40 pence increase was requested to an average taxi fare. On average, this equated to an increase of 3-4%.

·         The Licensing Committee was asked to set a maximum fare.

In response to Member questions, Mr Nemeth added that:

·         Fuel cost varied per gallon, but there were other key factors behind the request for a fare increase which included the increasing costs of providing and maintaining vehicles including their servicing and insurance, as well as rate increases.

·         Mr Nemeth added that historically, small increases had been requested on an annual basis.  This request was the first brought forward for five years.

·         As well as the request for the fare increase, the trade were supportive of operating the three tariff rather than five tariff system.

Councillor Bridgman then explained that he felt it was difficult to equate the proposed tariff rises (actual costs) with the 3-4% average increase described or compare West Berkshire’s tariffs to those in place elsewhere, i.e. in Wokingham. Wokingham had a different charging structure which was based on tenths of a mile, the proposal for West Berkshire was to charge for every twelfth of a mile. Mr Nemeth explained that the proposed West Berkshire tariffs had been calculated at a national level by the National Private Hire and Taxi Association. He was unaware of the approach used in Wokingham and was therefore unable to comment.

Councillor Quentin Webb commented that he was largely content with the proposal, however he also questioned the proposed increases. The letter submitted by Mr Nemeth stated that a 40 pence increase was proposed on the average two mile taxi fare. However, the table of fares showed a 65 pence increase over two miles for tariff one. The 40 pence increase was for a one mile journey. Mr Nemeth commented that the average Newbury fare was between 1 mile and 1.5 miles, which cost, on average, £5, agreement of the proposal would result in this average fare increasing to £5.40.

No other members of the public wished to address the Committee and Members agreed to reinstate standing orders.

Councillor Webb stated that he understood the reasons given for the proposed increase which went beyond increases in fuel prices and noted that prices had not been increased since 2012/13. Taking this into account, there was therefore a case for increasing the tariffs. However, he raised a concern should West Berkshire’s tariffs be overly high in comparison to other areas if this increase was implemented.

Councillor Paul Bryant noted that inflationary pressures were behind this request for an increase in fares rather than fuel costs. He did not feel that a 3-4% increase was overly high, particularly when there had been no increases since 2012/13.

Councillor Peter Argyle added that increased maintenance costs of vehicles were a further factor. He felt that the proposed increase was fair.

Councillor Beck agreed that an increase was justified for the reasons explained. However, the level of increase had to be appropriate and was an important point to determine. Currently, West Berkshire’s tariffs were similar to Reading and Swindon, and it would be useful to consider this comparison post implementation of the proposed tariff increases. 

Councillor Richard Crumly felt that the three tariff charging model was overly complex. He felt it would be preferable to charge per half mile followed by every tenth of a mile. Councillor Crumly felt that a decision should be deferred until a more straight forward charging rate had been established.

Councillor Webb felt that it was sensible that the tariffs existed as these took account of particular times of day and for particular days, i.e. bank holidays. He added his understanding that tariff 3 was rarely used.

Councillor Bridgman agreed that an approach of a set charge for the first half mile, following by set incremental charges for every tenth of a mile was preferable with a correlation between the tariffs. Councillor Bridgman felt that this approach would be more understandable with the tariffs, following this model, largely unchanged from the proposal.

Councillor Webb commented that he was not overly concerned at the existing charging model, a change to a charge per half mile would require a change to the way that distances were measured from yards to decimal measurements and this might prove difficult to implement on the taxi meters. He also made the point that any change agreed by the Committee would need to go to public consultation. Councillor Bridgman pointed out that he was not aware of another authority, outside of West Berkshire that measured distances in yards for this purpose.

Councillor Beck felt that the current system had operated satisfactorily for a number of years for all concerned. He therefore questioned the appropriateness of a significant change, including to the meters. Councillor Bryant was concerned that West Berkshire’s approach differed to common practice across the country. He felt that it would be favourable to follow the more common approach. Councillor Bridgman added his view that a move to measuring distances in metres would be preferable, to be consistent with and aid comparisons with other areas.

Paul Anstey noted the complexities involved and noted the sense of Councillor Bridgman’s comments to simplify the process. Mr Anstey commented that he was not aware that West Berkshire had a unique approach to the way that distances were measured for the purpose of setting tariffs. However, he explained that the views of members of the public were monitored on the tariffs and the number of complaints received was low. He reiterated the point that agreement to a change would need to be taken to consultation and this would offer residents a chance to comment and/or raise any concerns, as well as the members of the trade.

Councillor Bryant felt that there was uncertainty of the procedures in place in other areas and requested that this be investigated and comparisons made before setting tariffs for future years (beyond 2017/18). However, he felt that proposals for 2017/18 should be accepted and taken to consultation.

Councillor Webb felt that it was necessary to highlight, as part of the consultation, that the proposed charges were the maximum charges permitted and there was the potential for customers to negotiate charges on an individual basis.

Councillor Beck proposed acceptance of the request from the taxi trade for an increase in the taxi tariff as well as retention of the existing charging format for 2017/18. This would be taken to public consultation. It was noted that if an objection was received as part of the consultation, the matter would need to be brought back before the Committee. A review should then be undertaken over the coming year of the Council’s charges/charging mechanism to consider if changes should be made for future years, this would include comparisons with the charging models used by other local authorities and would involve residents and the taxi trade. Paul Anstey agreed this would be investigated. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Webb.

RESOLVED that:

·         The request from the taxi trade for an increase in the taxi tariff be accepted for 2017/18 and the existing charging format retained for 2017/18. This would proceed to public consultation.

·         If an objection was received as part of the consultation, the matter would need to be brought back before the Committee for final determination.

·         A review would be undertaken over the coming year of the Council’s charges/charging mechanism to consider if changes should be made for future years, this would include comparisons with the charging models used by other local authorities and would involve residents and the taxi trade.

Supporting documents: