Agenda item

Purpose: To allow Members to consider the responses received during the 28 day consultation period concerning the proposed fees in relation to hackney carriage and private hire licensing.

(Councillors Richard Crumly and Quentin Webb declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4 by virtue of the fact that they had previously made use of a hackney carriage or private hire vehicles. As their interest was personal they determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4) concerning the responses received during the 28 day consultation period concerning the proposed fees in relation to hackney carriage and private hire licensing.

Laura Driscoll in introducing the item noted that the last time the fees had been increased was in April 2016. The fees had not been increased during the 2017 Council fee setting process. The proposed increase represented a circa 3% increase across the Board. In addition the Council was also proposing the introduction of a fee for ‘dispensation vehicles’ which were vehicles used to carry out contract work and which were therefore exempt from the requirement to display the plate.

Officers explained that the workload associated with the detailed cross checking of the list of people the drivers had contracts with was very time consuming.

Members were concerned that the increase associated with these vehicles was significantly higher than the other increases proposed. Officers stated that this was to cover the additional time it took to do the work which should form the basis of the fees set. Licensing fees were based on a cost recovery system. Members queried how many of these licenses were issued each year. Officers agreed to provide this information to members outside of the meeting (Laura Driscoll to Action).

Councillor Quentin Webb noted the consultation responses in relation to the removal of expiry dates from plates to reduce costs. Officers commented that although they had concerns about plates not being returned when licenses lapsed but that they were looking into the option of permanent stickers. They had not had enough time to reach a decision on their use as yet though. They would report back to the Committee on this option at a future meeting.

Members considered the details of the ‘carry forward; in respect of the licensing budget. They noted that in 2014/15 the service had traded at a deficit of £70,197k. The deficit had increased to £156,287 in 2015/16 and that the deficit had reduced to only £358 in 2016/17. Officers noted that historically the licensing budget was not carried forward which had resulted in the spike in 2015/16. Members noted that there was some uncertainty around exactly what was included in the overheads and it was agreed that Sean Murphy would circulate the detail to members outside of the meeting.  (Sean Murphy to Action).

Sean Murphy noted that work in respect of licensing fees was ongoing. Work to create parity across the three areas covered by the Public Protection Partnership (PPP) (West Berkshire, Wokingham and Bracknell) was being undertaken where it was appropriate to do so. It was hoped that this work would be completed in time for implementation for the 2019/20 budget cycle. The Joint Public Protection Committee (JPPC) would consider fees at the September 2018 meeting with a view to presenting the proposals to the various Licensing Committee in the Autumn prior to approval at the March 2019 full Council meetings. Councillor Graham Bridgman queried if it would be necessary to take Licensing fees to full Council in light of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation. Sean Murphy stated that he would have to seek advice from Legal Services on that issue.

Councillor Graham Bridgman enquired if the Council incurred any additional costs by  the inclusion of an expiry date on the plate. Officers explained that the Council created the plates and the costs were met by the trade as part of their licence fee.

The Committee agreed in accordance with paragraph 7.6.2 of the Constitution (Motions that can be moved without Notice) to suspend standing orders in order to allow representatives of the trade to provide them with feedback.

Mr Graham Cox stated that the higher fee for dispensation vehicles was not justified. Checks used to be undertaken annually but he had not received a check in four years . He therefore believed that there was no justification for the fee. He asked if the Council would be able to insure that checks were being done.

Councillor Graham Bridgman was concerned that the Committee was not being given sufficient information on which to base a decision to amend the fees on. Councillor Paul Bryant stated that Officers had used the available information in order to arrive at the figures. Perhaps the issue was that this information had not been presented in a way to Members that they could understand the rational. He was concerned about delaying the implementation of the revised figures. Councillor Quentin Webb commented that while he trusted the calculations it was disappointing that the justification for the increases was not included in the report.

Councillor Bryant stated that he would like to see regular checks being undertaken and that he would like to see that work being monitored.

RESOLVED that the fees be set, without modification, and implemented on the 26 June 2018. The increases to be monitored and reported back on to ensure they were justified.