There was a change of membership for this meeting: Councillor Taylor replaced Councillor Derbyshire.

No apologies were received from Councillor Rogers.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2015 to be submitted and signed.

Copies of the minutes of this meeting are usually available seven working days following the meeting.

(All minutes are available on the Council’s website.)

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2015 were submitted and signed.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Community and Customer Services, including the report of the Consultants, who had been appointed to test and evaluate the service provided by licensed drivers to passengers with particular disabilities.

The Licensing Manager highlighted aspects of the report and the Consultant’s findings.  He informed the Committee that it had been suggested that the Working Party should comprise three Councillors, one from each political group.  The working party should be established to consider the best way to improve the standards of service provided to customers with disabilities wanting to use licensed vehicles.

The Chair invited Lee Hutchings to speak on behalf of Disability Watford.

Mr Hutchings said that he was the Chairman of Disability Watford and had roles on a number of other groups.  He commented that this was a major issue and was under reported as people had a fear of being isolated.  He outlined some of his experiences as a regular user of hackney carriages.  He was aware that some drivers did not understand the different types of assistance dogs.  He provided the Committee with information that showed how the assistance dogs could be recognised.  Some people were concerned that they might be able to get to their destination but then not able to get back home.  There was particular concern about travelling in private cars and not recognised taxis.  In his opinion there was no consistent livery for taxis in Watford.  People wanted cars which they could recognise; an easy reporting system for complaints and an easy way to identify vehicles.  The writing on the rear plates was too small.  It had been requested that larger writing was used to enable reporting.  He informed the Committee that he had been a guide dog owner for 17 years.  In that time he had made at least one report each year. 

Mr Hutchings commented that if a driver would not accept a wheelchair in their vehicle, there would be an impact for others, for example those people with walking frames or buggies.  He said that he was surprised at the number of wheelchair accessible vehicles available within the Borough.  He was unsure when the survey had been carried out.  He added that Disability Watford supported cameras in cars as it would also show when there was discrimination against a passenger.  He was looking forward to the Working Party being set up.

The Chair thanked Mr Hutchings for his comments.  She asked him whether he would like to be part of the Working Party.  It would enable him to raise all his points.

Mr Hutchings suggested that two representatives from Disability Watford would be preferable.  He reiterated that he disagreed with the statement that Watford taxis could be clearly identified.

The Chair thanked Mr Hutchings for his comments.  She opened the discussion to the Committee.

Councillor Haley commended the Council for the initiative in requesting the consultant’s report.  He had noted that 0% of private hire vehicles and 27% of taxis were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Community and Customer Services which asked Members to consider amendments to the style, delivery and cost of the test for prospective drivers.

The Chair informed the Committee that having considered the recommendations it was suggested that the date in the first recommendation, 1 April 2016, should be amended to ‘as soon as practicable’.

In response to a comment from Councillor Haley, the Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head advised that the aim was to introduce the new test by December 2015.

The Licensing Manager confirmed that drivers were not able to carry passengers until they had passed the test.  When officers provided the training they wanted to ensure a local relationship could be built between the drivers and Licensing Team.  It also enabled officers to assess the drivers, through the interaction, and consider if they were ‘fit and proper’.  A formal qualification was available, a BTEC, and some drivers held this; however it did not help build the local relationship.

Following a question from Councillor Taylor, the Licensing Manager explained that officers had a bank of questions and the same questions were not used on consecutive tests.  The questions were reviewed on a regular basis. 

Councillor Bolton sought reassurance that the new test would not enable drivers to get their licence quicker and that it was robust and not shortcutting any steps.  He felt that people had a personal responsibility to themselves when they undertook the test.

The Licensing Manager assured the Committee that the new test would not dilute the existing standards.  The current arrangement enabled drivers to take the test without undergoing any training.  The new test would be part of a full day’s training.

The Licensing Manager confirmed that drivers had to hold a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) certificate.  With regard to drivers having had prison sentences, the Council had a policy which set out how different types of offences and sentences would be considered.  It would depend on the offence.  An internal review was held to assess the suitability of a driver.

In response to a question from Councillor S Williams about checks and balances, the Licensing Manager responded that the Council did not have the resources to check on each new driver once they had qualified.  If a driver were the subject of a number of complaints, officers would review the case through the enforcement process.  If a driver was deemed unsuitable their licence would be revoked.  He confirmed that a test would take place on the same day as the training.  The Licensing Enforcement Officer carried out regular operations with the Police, checking vehicles and drivers.  He assured Members that all complaints were investigated.

It was confirmed that it was not legal to single out individual drivers for checking.  The Chair said that Members should encourage people to take details and then report problems to officers.

Councillor Silver referred to the costs for the training and test.  He asked for details of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services

The Committee received a report of the Head of Community and Customer Services setting out the key differences between the current Chauffeur Knowledge Test and the one for private hire drivers.  Members were asked to consider whether officers should review the scheme and introduce any changes.

In response to a question from Councillor Haley, the Licensing Manager explained that there were technical issues that would need to be worked through in order to align the chauffeur licence scheme with the private hire driver scheme.  It would be necessary to discuss any proposed changes with drivers, as there would be changes to their licences.

RESOLVED –

that officers review the current chauffeur scheme and bring a report to a future Licensing Committee with any recommendations for changes following appropriate consultation, and whilst this officer review is occurring any new applicants for “chauffeur” private hire driver licences be required to first complete the Council’s knowledge test before being granted a licence.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Community and Customer Services seeking Members’ approval to continue with the interim policy.

Councillor Haley suggested that it might be better to specify which products would not be permissible rather than the preferences.  He also questioned why the policy restricted competition between stallholders. 

The Licensing Manager acknowledged the comment about competition law.  The aim was to ensure that there were a variety of things available and not, for example, six ice cream stands.  The policy was flexible but there were strict criteria to manage the impact on businesses and that the goods were of a high quality.  In response to another question he explained that ‘roundsman’ was similar to a door to door salesman.

Councillor S Williams commented that this was generally a very good policy.  He asked whether it would be suitable for other parts of the town.

The Licensing Manager advised that the Council already had a street trading policy for locations outside the Town Centre.  It permitted street trading except on the main roads.  It had to be provided in a suitable safe location.  The proposed Business Improvement District may have views about more traders in the Town Centre.  It may be necessary to take another look at the policy in a year or 18 months time.

The Chair questioned whether the policy should be reviewed as it had been agreed in 2001.

The Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head responded that the policy was very flexible and there were few barriers put in the way of traders. 

Councillor Silver referred the Committee to paragraph 3.16 of the officer’s report.  He noted that some of the items listed appeared in the policy and others did not.  He asked if officers could provide an explanation.

The Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head explained that the policy referred to promoting healthy foods.  However it did not exclude those foods. 

Councillor Watkin commented that only three concessions had been granted, there did not appear to be huge demand.  He asked how officers would encourage people to apply for permits.  He also enquired whether an operator had to apply for each event individually or if they were able to apply for one permit to cover all events.

The Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head informed the Committee that officers worked with the Big Events and Communications Teams.  The policy was not a barrier to applicants.  The Big Events had only just started and as they continued it was likely the number of applications would increase.  It would be promoted as a business opportunity.

In response to a question from Councillor Taylor, the Licensing Manager confirmed that Section 4, Paragraph 6 covered reasons for refusing an application.

Following a question from Councillor Williams about the impact on the Charter Market, the Licensing Manager reported that there had been no anecdotal feedback.  The footfall counters had been installed in the Town Centre.  This would enable officers to review any impact from events,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services.

The Committee received a report of the Head of Community and Customer Services providing an update on the progress and performance of the Site Management Agreement with the Public Fundraising Regulatory Association, which was related to direct debit fundraising in Watford Town Centre. 

RESOLVED –

that Members note the report and authorise officers (in consultation with the Chair of the Licensing Committee where necessary) to make minor amendments to the site management agreement with the Professional Fundraising Regulatory Association.