Transcript

Good evening everybody and welcome to this meeting of the Licensing and General Purposes Committee. The first item on the agenda is for me to sign the minutes if you so authorize me. Am I so authorized? Thank you very much. Item number two, apologies and substitutes. Apologies received from Councillor Hacking and Councillor Biggs is present as Councillor Hacking's substitute. And are there any additional agenda items? No, there are none. Disclosure of interests and dispensations to receive any disclosures by members of disclosure pecuniary interests or other registrable interests or non-registrable interests in matters on the agenda and in the nature of any such interest and details of any dispensations obtained. Members are reminded of the need to repeat their declaration immediately prior to the commencement of the question. Are there any such disclosures? No, thank you. Agenda item number five, which is the first substantial item. Hackney carriage and private hire licensing policy and I hand over to Richard Parker-Harding to explain. Thank you, Chair. Members may recall that at the last meeting, it was agreed that we would carry out consultation with the trades and the public about changing our taxi licensing policy in four ways. It's previously been agreed by this committee that we would introduce a compulsive training for drivers on disability awareness attitudes and behaviours to customers and safeguarding. At the last meeting, there was a proposal that in addition to that training, that drivers should receive annual refresher training on those subject areas, and that's what we went out to consultation on. When we went out to consultation, the majority of drivers did not support this proposal, but the majority of responding passengers supported this proposal. Some passengers commented on their poor experience as disabled passengers or general customer care. Therefore, the recommendation is that we do introduce annual refresher training in addition to the training for new drivers. We also went out to consultation on changing the age limit criteria. The current age limit criteria is 10 years, but to facilitate more electric and hybrid vehicles and wheelchair accessible vehicles, we consulted on extending the age limit to 15 years, and that was generally supported. We also then consulted about changing our criteria for tinted windows. This issue of tinted windows has always become very controversial and difficult, because the majority of cars which now come into for sale do have some form of tinted windows, and the tint is getting darker and darker, particularly on the rear passenger window. We've always had this condition in terms of protecting the public's safety, and we also then were really guided by the new BIS practice guidance which the government published in November, and the BIS practice guidance was that we should allow tinted windows, but there should be a minimum allowed. At the moment, our condition is really one of practicality in whereby we say that you could have tinted windows, but the front and the rear passenger windows must be the same tint. This was really brought in to try to make it easier when drivers are buying a car, that they can see practically that the front and the rear have the same tint. But this new condition which we consulted on would just say that the tint must be a minimum of 30%, or you could have the same tint front and rear. And finally, we consulted in accordance with the government best practice guidance about whether or not all handling carriages should be of the same body colour, so the suggestion was white because that's the cheapest form of colour. That would mean that all handling carriages would have to be white, and that private hire vehicles could be any colour except white, therefore it is distinct between handling carriages and private hire. We consulted on this, the trade disagreed with this proposal, and there's a small majority of passengers in support. However, I think that obviously we will be inducing quite a few changes, and there will be cost implications for all the changes we make, and therefore my recommendation is that we don't proceed with one body colour at the moment. But because it is in the government guidance, I think we need to revisit this in two years time or sooner if this issue comes up again. So there's my recommendation, thank you, Chair. Thank you very much. Councillors, are there questions for Richard Parker Harding? Councillor Timpey. Thank you, Chair. Based on what you've just said about revisiting about the colour, would it make any sense that when a new taxi licence is required, that we make some sort of decision about what colour the car is, or is that going to be too complicated? Well, any change to the policy requiring one colour for handling carriages would only apply to new vehicles anyway. So if you were to decide tonight to recommend to full Council that all handling carriages had to be white, that would only apply to new vehicles. Vehicles that you've already licensed, that wouldn't apply to. Councillor Stanger. Thank you, Chair. Just regarding the annual, the training and the initial training and the annual refresher, how do we sit with relevant authorities in our area, Hastings, Eastbourne, et cetera, with detraining? One of the problems with taxi licensing is that all authorities adopt their own conditions and therefore they do vary. What tends to happen is that authorities adopt new conditions and other authorities catch up. I think with regard to the refresher training, I would note that at the moment half of the authorities in Sussex do require refresher training and half don't, but the situation changes. If we adopted this, then it's quite likely that other authorities adopt it. It's a forever moving field, really. I understand at the moment, do they do safeguarding training or do they do some kind of form of exploitation, something at the moment, isn't it? A few years ago, we made a comparison that all drivers did child sexual exploitation training and that was provided free through a grant from the other community safety partnership. That's the only training which has been required up to now. The annual refresher training that we're talking about, I think, can you confirm that that's an online course, so it's not unduly onerous? All these training courses are now online, so there's no need for people to attend in person, so they can, like this, can carry out the training when it suits them. Councillor Biggs. How long does the online training take? The ones we normally recommend would take less than an hour. Who's indicating? Somebody's indicating. Oh, Councillor Kirby Green online. Come in. Thank you. Yeah, it was really regarding the online training and I'm reassured somewhat to know it's online. I just feel, as you said here, there were 113 responses, so it shouldn't really be representative. But then we're basing the online training based on the fact that the majority of passengers supported it. And I feel it's quite onerous and I feel like you're sort of solving a problem, which is probably a minority. A minority at that. Oh, Catherine's shaking her head. I mean, maybe it's not. But can I just ask, do they have to pay for that online training? And how much is it? Yes, the training has to be paid for. We did provide the sex irritation training for free because that was from a grant from the Community Safety Partnership. But the training tends to be there are different companies who provide the training, but it's sort of around the £20 mark. Oh, £20? Oh, right. That's fine. I didn't want to be putting a burden on it. Difficult at the moment. OK, fine. If it's online, it's only £20 then. Yeah, I would support that. And we have a Councillor Field. Yes, thank you. Sorry, I wasn't shaking my head to say that it was also a small problem. I'm just shaking my head because I really think it's absolutely essential that this happens in being involved in safeguarding in another area of my life. I think this must be done. But what I really wanted to ask was, how do we know it has been done? And how do we know it has been done to a satisfactory standard? Is there some form of external moderation? Yes, the courses which we recommend are certified and they go through the normal identification process to make sure the person actually taking the course and doing the assessment is the real person who's signed up. And then we will then get a certificate from the company to say that the driver has done that course and then also we don't issue the licence and that's because it's in the file. And we'll also carry out spot checks to make sure that the certificates are genuine. Does any other Councillor wish to speak? In which case? Would somebody move? I move the report and I also just want to add that I think it's really good that you're extending the wheelchair and hybrid electric vehicle because they cost a lot to get going and they definitely seem to be doing quite well and they save an environment at the same time. Yes, I move the report as recommended. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Delaney. All those in favour? All those against? Abstentions? One abstention. Carry on. Thank you. Agenda item number six, dual driver fees. Richard again. Thank you, Chair. I have to apologise to the committee that an error was made in the last fees report and this report concerns dual driver fees. When we did the last report of the fees for 2022 fees were included rather than the 2023-24 fees, therefore the increase which was approved was actually incorrect. So this report seeks to increase driver fees from tomorrow. You'll see from Appendix A a sort of represents a 5% increase, which was the CPI at the time the fees were calculated. And I think the fees represent the cost of providing the service, do they not? Yes, with any taxi licensing fee, we're not allowed to make a profit from doing the licensing, so we make sure that there's a break even between the cost we incur and the fee income. What tends to happen is we make a slight loss because it's quite difficult to achieve a break even, but we want to make sure we don't make a profit because that would cause complications. Councillor Timpley. Thank you, Chair. Going back to the previous report and all the comments, et cetera, but it does directly relate to this. Our policy about not limiting how many taxes we licence, is that going to come up for discussion or ever get reviewed in any way? Because there's lots of complaints about other taxi people coming in from Hastings and whatever, but I just wonder why we just keep churning out licences and we have no limit. I just don't understand it. You can legally limit the number of HATNA carriage licences you issue, but you can only do so if you have carried out an unmet demand survey. So what you have to do is you have to prove that there are sufficient numbers of HATNA carriages operating in the district and that is very difficult. There will probably be sufficient HATNA carriages during the day in Bexhill, but you won't find any HATNA carriages later in the evening. You won't find HATNA carriages in Battle or Rye or elsewhere in the district. So although it can be done in urban areas, in district areas, it's very hard to prove there's unmet demand. There is a cost to carrying out an unmet demand survey, which the drivers themselves would have to bear, not the local authority. So if there was a request from the drivers or owners of HATNA carriages to do an unmet demand survey and they were then prepared to pay for it, it would be something we could consider. But I think it's unlikely we'd ever prove unmet demand, rather. OK, thank you, Richard. I didn't realise how complicated it probably would be. Thank you. Things are always more complicated than we think, aren't they? And of course, that's not on the agenda for tonight, but it's very interesting to know that just the same. Yes, very interesting. Councillor Kirby-Green, is your hand up? Apologies, it shouldn't have been. Legacy hand. Does any other Councillor wish to speak on this? No. In which case, will somebody move? Yes, Councillor Cooper, you move. We have a seconder. Do we have a seconder? Yes, Councillor Rathbone-Ariel. All those in favour? I think that's unanimous. And I think that brings us to the end of the agenda. And I can bring this meeting to a close at ten to seven. Thank you, Councillors. Thank you all very much.