 So that works. We can hear you. Success, Aaron. Can you hear me, Aaron? Yeah, I can hear you. Is there any echo on your end? No, that's pretty done good. Thank you. Brian, can you also hear the drilling in the background? Yes, I can. Thank you. That's very nice, isn't it? How loud is that? It's not unmanageable. Where are you working? I always said the red one was Earth. Good afternoon, everyone. And welcome to this meeting of the Licensing Committee. My name is Councillor Anna Braden and I'm Chair of the Licensing Committee. I apologise for the delay. We are now starting at 23 minutes past two due to a technical fault. I apologise for the delay to everybody here in the room and also to those online. So, whether present in the chamber or virtually, please make sure that you do not switch on your microphone unless you're invited to speak. Those who are participating virtually should, if possible, use a headset microphone. Please, with those who are attending virtually, indicate a wish to speak by use of the chat box. Those present in the council chamber, do please indicate your wish to speak by raising your hand. I'll ask Erin Clark to keep a note of speakers virtually. Please wear a face covering when in the building and in the chamber except when sitting at your table to minimise the risk both to you and others. Do make use of the hand sanitizer. This meeting is being webcast live, finally. Thank you, everybody. The recording will be available after the meeting. By being present or contributing to the meeting, participants agree to their images and voices being broadcast and used for training purposes. Attendees may also make their own audio and video recordings so long as they do not interfere with the meeting. By the way, please turn off mobile phones and other alarms, set them to silent. If any member needs to leave, please could they make this known so it can be recorded? We have officers, Rachel Jackson, the principal licensing officer, John Hall, the commercial and licensing service manager will be present and at the meeting. And we also have lead member, Councillor Brian Milnes, who is the lead member for... Environmental Services and Licensing. Thank you, Councillor Milnes. Can I also welcome the sound of drilling? I apologise if that's distracting, but please do bear with us. We have to have the doors open for reasons of ventilation. So, thank you for that. So, first item on the agenda, then. Apologies for absence. Can I ask democratic services if there have been a number, actually, of apologies for absence? Thank you, Chair. We have received apologies for absence from Councillor Gavin Clayton, Councillor Joes Hales, Councillor Alex Mallian, Councillor Peter McDonald and Councillor Deborah Roberts. Thank you very much. Can you confirm the meeting's quarat as well? The quorum for this meeting is for members, so I can confirm that the meeting is quarat. Can I just ask the members online, can you hear us speaking, as I am now, that the drilling is going on? Yes, it's a distraction, but not insurmountable. Thank you. So, we won't need to stop. Thank you very much, Councillor Milnes. Right. Declarations of intent... Intent. Declarations of interest. Item two on the agenda. Do any committee members have any interest that they would like to declare in relation to the items on this agenda? I see no hands. Thank you. So, there are no declarations of interest. Minutes of the previous meeting, item three, which is on pages one and two of our agenda, are members happy to approve the minutes of the meeting that was held on the 8th of February, 2021, or are there any matters of accuracy that members would like to raise? I see no hands in the room. Fine. Okay, so I think... Councillor Handley, you're abstaining. I will abstain because I wasn't present at the meeting. Thank you very much. And, Councillor Wheelan, probably for the same reason. I'll abstain for exactly the same reason. Thank you. Thank you very much. Agenda item four is the Hackney, Carridge and Private Higher Policy Review. It's been customary for members of... Sorry, what I should say is this is laid in front of us. This is how the agenda was received, but it has been customary for members of the licensing committee to be involved in policy reviews prior to the reporting stage. As such, today, I propose that only those amendments which are pressing and need decision today shall be taken. The other matters will be deferred to a further licensing committee in November to enable members to partake in a workshop or other communication to discuss the proposed amendments. So, today, members will be asked to consider amendments under the following sections in the policy provided in Appendix A, and they will be... We'll deal with them in more detail, but they will be item six, which is on page eight in our agenda, which is the Fixing of License Plates, which is paragraph 3.6E and K. Item seven, which is the matter of CCTV, which is paragraph 3.10, also on page eight, and item 10 on our agenda, which is the Right to Work Evidence on page 11 of our agenda. And I propose that we defer the other items for discussion prior to them being brought to a further meeting of this committee. So, members, I just need to take a vote to postpone those items. If agreed, the items referred to shall be decided upon today, and the remaining items will be brought back to a future meeting of the licensing committee after the relevant workshops have been completed. So, can I just ask for a show of hands, members, if you're happy that we postpone those major items on the agenda, is that okay? Thank you. So, that's unanimous. Thank you so much. So, that's everybody in the room. And I would now like to invite, I apologize for not introducing you earlier, but first of all, Rachel Jackson, would you like to introduce yourself before you introduce your report, which I understand is to give clarity to the three recommendations that we're seeking a decision upon today. Rachel, do go ahead. Good afternoon. Thank you, Chairman. And thank you, Committee. I've been at South Cams for six months tomorrow. So, obviously, a lot to take on to account. So, you'll be seeing me a lot more often. Obviously, hopefully more in person at the next kind of meetings. Better say, today's just a couple of issues we need to discuss on the second act on the agenda being the gambling act policy. But myself and John obviously will work through the improvements we need to make to the service to make things run even better and more efficiently. So, thank you, Chairman. Would you like to put your camera on so that we can actually speak? I will indeed. Just bear with me one second. I've had a lot of technical hitches myself, and I didn't want to tempt fate, to be honest with you. Oh, OK. If you should just do it further. That's fine. I will try. Oh, there we are. We've got you. There we go. Thank you very much. Hello, everybody, and nice to meet you, albeit virtually. Thank you. OK, so do go ahead with your report, Rachel. Thank you. Thank you very much, Chair. The committee has asked to consider proposed changes to the policy for either statutory reasons or as a result of the effects of the pandemic and an opportunity to bring efficiency to both the license trade and the licensing authority. The first proposed amendment at section 6 in the annex relating to the fixing of plates. Whilst this is necessarily urgent and pressing, I feel it is quite important that if members can reach a decision today, it would be beneficial for the organisation. As you will see from the rationale, this will allow officers to explore more cost-effective and more sustainable solutions to plates. One option is to switch to an adhesive variant of the plate, which avoids the need for brackets being bolted onto vehicles. Agreeing this proposal will allow officers to undertake a procurement exercise to enable alternatives to be considered. With regard to section item 7, the proposed CCTV amendment, I wish to make additional comment if I may, as this matter of the course has been subject to numerous reports previously to this committee. In October 2017, the licensing committee approved a draft policy for consultation that required all licensed vehicles to be fitted with CCTV. Following various reports and committees, it was later agreed that all licensed vehicles would be required to be fitted with CCTV installed by no later than 31 March 2021. As this date has now passed and CCTV has not been installed into vehicles due to the recent ongoing effects of the pandemic upon staff resources, capacity and the trade, this policy must now be reviewed to allow for possible extension to this mandatory requirement. In addition, I would like to note that in July 2020, Department for Transport or DFT, Secretary of the Department of Taxi and Private Higher Vehicle Standards were published. These included new and additional guidance relating to CCTV. In particular, it is stated that the government is fully supportive of the use of overt surveillance cameras in a public space such as taxi and private higher vehicles. Whenever that use is, in pursuit of a legitimate aim, necessary to meet a pressing need, proportionate, effective and compliant with any relevant obligations. The guidance also stated that the Information Commissioner's view on this matter is that in most cases a requirement for continuous operation is unlikely to be fair and lawful in processing of personal data. The imposition of a blanket requirement to attach CCTV as a condition to a license is likely to give rise to concerns about the proportionality of such approach and will therefore require an appropriately strong justification and must be kept under review. It holds on this basis, subject to your possible extension committee today, that the licensing team in liaison with legal services wish to review the policy to ensure that it remains robust and meets the most recent guidance in light of existing evidence and local intelligence. And clearly this will be quite a big discussion. I'm imagining on our any future reviews as well, regardless of the workshops, etc. But we're looking at the date and the time implications today. Finally, the revision at Section 10 relates to the right to work evidence. And this is a mandatory change. So it's really not perhaps a matter of respect for your committee more to note this afternoon. But if there are no questions Chairman, thank you. That concludes my introduction. Thank you very much Ms Jackson. So these are the three items that we're looking at. Can I just ask before we go into any debate? Let's take them one by one to start with. So this is the first one is Item 6 Item 6 in Appendix A, a fixing of license plates which refers back to Paragras 3.6e and K in the policy. And the rationale that Ms Jackson has given us is that a greener and more cost-effective plates could be obtained which would fix directly to the bodywork of the vehicle removing the need for brackets. So my view is that that is not an unreasonable thing to request. Councillor Hunt. Thank you chair. I just wondered perhaps a little bit of clarification. Does this mean that we as an authority could explore different options for fixing or does it mean that individual drivers or taxi companies can choose something of their own? No, it would be that we specify an alternative. Ms Jackson, would you like to explain that again? Thank you Chairman, yes thank you Councillor. Just for clarity we would identify an alternative solution that is more cost-effective more importantly less more sustainable less impact on landfill than we currently have. So but all drivers would be basically we produce the plates of the licensing team and then obviously the policy would dictate how that driver must display their plates on the vehicle and the shape and format etc. the plate set of issues. So there's no kind of option for the driver they know exactly where the vehicle signage and plates must be installed unfortunately got a choice in that matter. And Ms Jackson you helpfully elucidated the sort of difference between what we the kind of brackets we have now and what you were proposing for the future would you just like to describe what you had in mind? Of course we actually there's two options available one which would look very similar to the longer plate we currently have for the private hire it would look exactly the same same size format and that would just stick without a need for bracket and adhesive vinyl goes onto the vehicle is removed it's tried and tested without any damage to the body work and it's not something that they can remove because obviously the adhesive will certainly wear off after time. But it's been a very secure measure certainly news of the authority I was previously working out for about six years and of authorities around the country and I'm sure pretty much not in hence but some other areas around here as well as neighboring authorities have used it to but it's an adhesive plate which I say is equally as effective and for enforcement it's actually been a more robust system than brackets which we haven't observed as officers being fixed to the body work and I might have been putting the rear window for example so there's no scope to do that quite frankly the plate must be a fixed securely to the body work okay so I also have a question but Councillor Howell would you like to ask your question? Thank you Chairman so when this plate fixes to the car, when it's removed does it, well what do you think it'll cause any damage to the car that will affect its retail value when if the car's sold that can be my major concern My understanding is it won't, Mr Jackson Thank you actually quite to the contrary it will cause less damage than you think of bolting on to the body work of a bracket that currently happens so the answer is no the vehicle the provider that has been no official respray have been done for example so someone's not just got a cheap kit from Holford's and done some bad paint with themselves but in that case we wouldn't have the vehicle licence of our high standards so any body work repels any kind of damage basically quite frankly it's been the plate so I might be very articulate here I do apologise the plate will affix to the vehicle and be removed at the end of its term and then can be replaced by a nervous sticker on top of that What was the point I was going to ask obviously new vehicles would be required to have the new plate what would we do about vehicles that currently have their existing plates would we wait until renewal to ask them to change Absolutely, resource wise as well chair it's probably not it's not a pragmatic approach we can have a two system running but obviously that would be coupled with subject to your agreement of course a member involvement and obviously what we have decided upon obviously that would be subject to a publicity campaign as well so people are aware there are two plates but on the base of it for people who are not as OFA with taxi licensing either general public they will see a plate which looks identical apart from the actual thickness So I can't see any other question Sorry Councillor Harvey do apologise Yes, thank you chair I just wanted to understand will the replacement adhesive plate be the same size or bigger or smaller than the existing one? Thank you councillor, yes the proposal is I mean we've got various options at the minute which I'm happy to run through with the committee but at this stage we have got options to produce a smaller plate which you might have seen say on the back of the London taxes which is a rectangular that size of shape but at this stage probably to avoid much change you might opt for the longer plate as you currently see but just in a a vinyl form rather than a rigid back Thank you So I don't see I'm not hearing any objections to that so that sounds reasonable Can I just ask if members this is not a vote at this point but can I you're minded to accept that at the moment, great because I'm thinking we'll vote these all together at the end unless anything comes up that we looks contentious So the second item then is CCTV and you'll remember members there has been it took us a long time to have this discussed to consider the implications and members voted for CCTV to be introduced into our taxis for the safety both of the public and many of us felt for the safety and protection of the driver as well and so we were very pleased to get this adopted as part of our policy and I believe we did that in February 2020 However with this new guidance we need to consider that proportionality now what is being proposed is forgive me what is being proposed we've gone past the date where we'd intended to bring it in in March 2021 and do we have an alternative date by which you proposed it should be brought in I would think being realistic and pragmatic about working with city and picking up the procurement again of the CCTV chair I would think 18 to 24 months however we need to keep this under review so I'd be quite happy to either take a so we could have a consideration now that by 2023 for example all licensed vehicles must have CCTV installed of course I'd be coming back to your committee as well with the proportionality aspect at this stage what is key for officers is to make sure we have a date in our policy which hasn't passed so we aren't so that's more the critical part and obviously we could refer back to your committee at any given opportunity to look at the proportionality aspect and then any kind of technical issues or impacts we have got because that's probably more for officer level to be quite nice to look at the wise and whereabouts how we can get the CCTV installed what steps we need to take for that whereas I think for the policy formulation having an indicative date of March December 2023 for example would allow us that time to get all the processes in place and for you to have considered all the angles of proportionality as well can I just check with you I'm glad that you suggested March not December because anything that's supposed to take effect on the 31st of December of any year seems to me a nightmare for taxi drivers because of course they're very busy around that time of year so are we talking about effectively the end of the financial year 31st of March or the 35th of March I always like to play the financial year rather than calendar year so the 35th of March okay so we're talking about changing the date for this so in the current policy we're talking about paragraph 3 10 and the date proposed was no later than 31st of March 2021 so we are this is in paragraph 3 10 C and we're simply proposing to change that to no later than and by the way I emphasise the no later than because we would like to bring it in sooner than that if it was possible but we're proposing to bring it in no later than 31st of March 2023 do members agree that does anybody have any comment Councillor Hunt thank you chair I was taking note of the comments from Panther about they think that still most suitable device has been identified does this I'm just concerned that we could pick another date do we have confidence that devices will be available then is it my understanding and perhaps Miss Jackson could clarify on this my understanding is that there are other local authorities who do have CCTV currently and so I'm seeking that we should call upon those other authorities and share best practice from them so that we have devices that are suitable and since I've been advised that there are other authorities who are using CCTV it seems possible we could be able to bring it in sooner did anybody else so Councillor okay, Councillor Howell oh, Councillor Battateria Councillor Dr. Battateria do you go ahead yeah like would you like to take your mask off while you're speaking to the microphone okay thank you chair like March 2023 it seems it seems too long and too late for the purpose of the safety and security why not March 2022 as I said we're simply setting a backstop so that we don't need to change the policy more frequently than possible but as I said and I emphasised no later than in other words we could bring it in earlier than that if we had the wherewithal to do so okay, Emily Councillor Whelan thank you chair could we set a date for this to come back to us to review it sooner but also to have if we're having a workshop could we have some more information on the CCTV options that are available that other people are using I have to admit it's not something I know very much about and I'd like to know more yes my view is that given that we've agreed to have a workshop many of these things that will be pending will be discussed at that workshop as well as the things that we're deferring to it and Councillor Harvey thank you I'm not sure how this will be announced but I'm quite keen that when it's announced it's kind of made clear that this was the first opportunity to review it because I think it would be dangerous to sort of create a kind of situation where we don't enforce our previous decisions without kind of good reason and I suppose the pandemic combined with the frequency of our meetings is a good explanation for that certainly the fact that we have not locally we as an authority have not locally identified any suitable hardware to do this you know the onus is on us as an authority and until we do that nobody can take it up so absolutely my feeling is that we set the date as a an ideal date but to do it sooner than that if we possibly can and we charge our offices with responsibility to go away and find the suitable hardware that we can then recommend to the as it were the service users the Hackney carriage and the private hard trade thank you Councillor Howell thank you Chairman Chairman I believe this first was passed in 2018 that we would be doing this and then the last occasion when you just referred to was in 2022 2022? sorry 2020 sorry 2020 my apologies I think we've done enough of this I think we've just got to get on with it now I can't vote for 2023 we've been beating around the bush and not actually made a decision we made a decision I think as much as we possibly can if we have to wait six months I'm fine with that because of COVID I've got no problems with that not the 31st of December but I can't accept the fact that we're going to go on to 2023 I'm sorry thank you Councillor Howell the reason we are looking at this today is because the date that we had intended this to be brought in has already passed so we clearly need to put a realistic date into the policy we do not want to be in the situation where we have a date in the policy which we then ignore which we would have to if we did it by 31st of December 2021 because we have not as yet as an authority identified suitable hardware so my feeling is it's reasonable to put this in at a long date but as I say including the wording no later than so that then when if hardware is identified earlier we can bring it in sooner than that I'm very happy that we address this as soon as we possibly can and I think partly that will come through we'll have the workshop we'll consider what's available and I think also bear in mind that during this time the pandemic a lot of our offices were very much engaged with other business and sometimes even actively redeployed into other areas so they haven't had much time to look at this and I absolutely agree ideally we would have done it sooner but I don't want us to have a date that we think it's unlikely we're going to be able to comply with in our policy I would like us to be able to work to a date as soon as possible and I absolutely sympathise with what you're saying but I think if we put December in we would miss that one too and I don't want to be in that situation Chairman if you don't mind I'll come back I can't accept 2023 but I will go for 2022 and I think that would be more than enough an adequate time since we've been discussing it's not this particular officer or I take on board it's going to come six months tomorrow but we have been this has been kicked around since 2018 when we first agreed in one shape or another so I think 2022 would be more than enough time I hear your points okay Councillor Handley I agree with Councillor Howell we have been kicking this around since I was the League Member for Environmental Services and Licensing I agree that the Covid pandemic has entirely messed up the plans I know that we've lost probably 18 months but 2023 there's a great risk I think setting it at 2023 means that that's when it will come about saying it would be 2023 or earlier if we can I just think it's too wishy-washy I think we need to set it at 2022 and go for it okay Councillor Mills I believe you would like to take part make a contribution yeah so I think in Rachel's summary she made reference to the changing legislative and environment including the requirements to have proven a proportional requirement for this to be taken into account and my concern with trying to bring this forward although I absolutely share the committee's resolve and desire to make this happen as soon as possible we have to have a response that is compliant with that new legislative requirement I think Rachel can confirm that what I've accurately described that and therefore the previous resolution that expired at the end of March this year is effectively no longer valid and we have to go through another process so I'd just be urged caution in trying to set a deadline that actually isn't achievable thank you thank you very much Councillor Mills Councillor Cohn thank you very much Chairman I just wanted to agree with Councillor Handling and Councillor Howe I do accept the points that Councillor Mills has made about realistic time scales but I do think 2022 is realistic and I think that the danger of going that extra year is that we just sort of kick this into the long grass and never really achieve what this committee set out to do and we talked about this at length and there was a huge amount of concern from this committee around safety of not only passengers but drivers which was the reason we adopted this policy and I do think it's important that it's implemented sooner rather than later and I think if other councils are already using similar systems to this it should be doable that this council can achieve that in the next year thanks very much thank you very much Miss Jackson could you just come back on the point could you just clarify for me whether my understanding was correct that other authorities are using CCTV absolutely chair thank you I mean many of us have been using CCTV for many many years well before the DFT Guards well before 2018 when it was raised as an issue in our district chair so we have the likes of Robert for example who mandated it I believe Peter were mandating it then ceased very many councils have required CCTV and obviously this is part of the process we'll go through now but I just wanted to one of the reasons why I did suggest chair if I may the 18 month period was actually to look at the actual logistics of the installation of around 800 vehicles if we had 25 vehicles I'd say absolutely agree with you councillors they should have been done and we should have the 25 vehicles in fact 1,000 drivers about 800 vehicles in fact maybe even a few more then it is a huge implication and at a time where I'm in the process of actually reviewing our testing garages as well our compliance test of garages will obviously be responsible for ensuring the camera equipment is actually present in the vehicle when they come to say renew their plate as well so there's a lot of work while I fully appreciate the concern that we feel like we're dragging this process I can just give you an assurance today if of course we're in a position of the authority to have I can have confidence that our testing stations are at a level where they can have the capacity and ability to undertake the CCTV checking and we have the system in place getting a system idea shouldn't be that difficult but if we have a specification for example available then that won't take time but for me it's actually delivering it and implementing these changes which is a big risk for a service which unfortunately has gone through a huge amount of change over the last 12 months and I'd be very very hesitant as a professional officer to say I can meet that chair because I don't think I can guarantee and this is to give me some cushion and then to come back and to satisfy you as members that actually the licensing authority is able to enforce this policy correctly and effectively this is my concern so we're talking about an additional maximum of six months from what is proposed from the members concerns today the safe and sensible pragmatic option considering the level of work that needs to resume again we are working with city as well so as you know sometimes two heads are better than one sometimes that can cause other delays as well it's just to resurrect that because there's a lot of work that has to be required for the licensing service to actually get us to that position where we can actively enforce and introduce a system so it's not just a matter of picking up a system that's a rather I'm using for example and taking that on board we've got a lot more work to prepare for that but as you say quite rightly your committee as soon as we are ready there's no benefit for me delaying this at all there's no benefit for you delay the installation it is just we need to be prepared and do the job effectively and say I'm very concerned that previously we have not addressed the proportionality aspect and legitimate aim and pressing need these three matters obviously the whole intention of why you had CCTV and why you so support of it was without obviously full merits of that exactly everybody can appreciate the merits of that however and I think it's very important that we do have a good understanding of what we are trying to provide by the legislation as well which is something that members have not had chance to discuss properly. Thank you very much Mr. Jackson. What I think we need to do is to come up with a form of words that indicates to it also requires of us as an authority that we give them the spec of what we want them to install but we don't want the situation where the drivers and the operators wait until the before date before they install if we've given them a specification so I'm just wondering if we can come up with a form of words that gives that impetus but allows the flexibility. Sorry I just had two points my first one is that where we're talking about the delay caused by Covid but we still don't know how the recovery will take place because there are a lot of the private high drivers have taken a big financial hit and it's how soon we can require them to go to this expense also when we're looking at other authorities who are using these CCTVs are those CCTV machines doing the same thing that we were expecting to have and that is that the film was only accessible by the licensed in authority or the police that people could control whether there was sound or not and that they were only looking inside the cab so it's whether the specification will meet what we were expecting. Okay thank you Councillor Harvey Thank you chair Yes I agree with the Councillor's howl and Hanley in that we need to get on with this but same token I take sort of risk setting ourselves up for another kind of non-implementation so I think the chair's suggestion of emphasising no later than would be the right way to go from Michael and Hugh but also just to get an idea of the complexity that might lay ahead with Richard Jackson you could talk around this proportionality issue which I don't really understand what that is and what needs to be decided Mr Jackson do go ahead Thank you chair I mean obviously it is it's the imposition, not the imposition of a requirement that if you wish you can have CCTV installed if you comply with X, Y and Z it's the whole proportionality of is it reasonable, practicable proportionate to counselling the pressing need so you could look at that and think how many, that sounds horrible now to say this but how many say sexual offences, sexual attacks or allegations have taken place in licensed vehicles between 2010 and 2020 for example it's looking at the history of the allegations and it's not just about prevention because of course CCTV would prevent somebody from doing something wrong we know that merits off CCTV but we also have to look and this is why I want to explore this more closely and in depth with legal services as well to have their input about what is proportionality because obviously we can look at nationwide, yes of course it's merit in having CCTVs blanket it's all about protection of the passengers however we also need to look at the local proportionality as well so if it's right for one area for example for our district there's a lot of information but that will of course form part of our discussions, our workshops so we can talk about that now we know that's the approach you wish to take so we'll discuss when I've got that evidence which isn't going to be 18 months minus a day I'm not one of these but so it will be we'll have the workshops to discuss this is a huge issue about CCTV so we need to look at all this before it comes back to your committee as well but also my understanding of the proportionality is it's a balance between what are the harms that we have experienced in this district that might have been resolved had there been CCTV in other words are there lots or not very many at all or indeed none versus the cost to drivers and operators who are certainly the evidence given by Mr Paul Clair in our appendix from Panther was that their takings have been 25% of their normal takings from the beginning of March 2020 between 25% and 50% and they are now back to still only 65% of their previous takings and many of the drivers have left the trade for less lucrative but more reliable employment now I'm not saying that finance is the only decider in this that's absolutely not what I'm saying it's just a proportionality balance and I don't know if that helps Councillor Harvey what is reasonable I think bearing in mind certainly some of us who sit on panel hearings will have often wished and in this is the justification that we rehearsed during the prolonged and previous discussions that often it would have been extremely useful to have CCTV imagery of the interior of the vehicle in making our deliberations about appeals about licenses having been refused so having an independent witness would have been very useful so we have some more speakers can I suggest in view of the time I'm not going to take any more speakers after these I have the following Councillor Hunt Councillor Howell, Councillor Milne's and Councillor Dr. Baticharia and I think I'll call a halt there unless there's any real discussion going on and then we'll come to a decision so Councillor Hunt Thank you chair I think the principal officer for licensing made something of the point I was going to make about the 800 vehicles if we set a six month deadline from now, March 2022 even if we could have the system available to buy next week I think you wouldn't have 800 vehicles there would be a restricted number of people qualified to fit them so I think that's out of the question and I think the fact that we don't have identified an actual piece of equipment that fulfills the specification or other authorities are doing CTPE but have they got exactly the same requirements as Councillor Wilson suggested possibly not we may need to rewrite the spec when we've identified something that's quite close to it we're probably revisiting this none of that's happening in six months in my opinion so what I think we should do but if I was planning a project like this I would set a deadline by which we identify the equipment the actual equipment or units of equipment that are acceptable and have a deadline for that and then say and we can make that no later than as you wish chair and then say operators would be required to implement it within six months of it being identified I think that solves a lot of the problems I hear what you say I think even so six months would be too quick for the delivery or some number of months I think we do not want to twist ourselves on our own by actually setting a deadline for us to identify equipment that's also too quick I hear what you say so I am minded to simply charge the local authority our licensing department with identifying such equipment at the earliest possible date making sure it meets the specification that we identified in our earlier policy and then making sure that's informed to the the licensed the private hire and the carriage trade so they know that they've got to do it because they get regular newsletters but then make the final deadline the 31st of March 2023 would you would we have a reasonable support for that I understand Councillor Howell doesn't want to do that okay um we have got some other speakers yes Councillor Howell then Councillor Milne then Councillor Buscherry Chairman I would like to propose that the CCTV policy is implemented by the 1st of September 2022 which is exactly one year's time I have not heard anything this evening which I have this afternoon which I haven't already heard back in the years gone by everything seems to be exactly the same we keep on seem to be waiting for government guidance we keep on seem to be waiting for the appropriate CCTV and yet there are others already gone forward to this in the end we're talking about people's safety we're talking about taxi driver's safety I believe the 1st of September 2022 is an acceptable date to get this up and going I hope I get a seconder okay you've made a proposal for that um so that would be for the installation or for the identification installation and you have a seconder Councillor Cone did you say um interestingly we don't actually have a proposal on the table for the work the form of words that we would have used um so let's just take that proposal at the moment so Councillor Howell's proposal is that we have equipment the wording to be confirmed do you want to give us a wording yeah I'm not going to bind everybody up with word in different things like that we all know what we're talking about here installation by 1st of September 1st of September 2022 I think we've all discussed this let's just clarify the wording the detail of the wording we can sort out the gist of it is that you would like your proposal is that we have installation by 1st of September 2022 and Councillor Cone is happy to second that to indicate by a show of hands members whether you support that proposal from Councillor Howell so that's 1 2 3 4 and if you would prefer to stick with the later date sorry I should have said that at the beginning but if you prefer to stick to the later date of 2023 sorry we're in the middle of a vote Councillor Wilson just I personally will accept the view of the officers and I will vote for 2023 that's 1 1 2 3 4 5 is that acceptable did you want to take the names no well it doesn't have to be a recorded vote I was just going to say the lead cabinet member also requested to speak on the proposal yes he did yes absolutely so Councillor Milnes would you like to say what you wanted to it's rather too late because you voted on this now and I think I really understand the committee's impatience to get on with this and it's one I share I'm going to say that having seen Rachel in operation for the last six months delaying things is not her style in fact hanging on to her coattails as she gets issues addressed is the more an issue so I'm more than comfortable that we will make progress with this as soon as we can I'm happy to work with the the committee on doing that and I think if we've got a deadline of March 2023 that does give us some scope to get the large number of installations covered I think the practical issues of actually installing this equipment in 800 vehicles is the biggest impediment to getting it done speedily and we don't want to get to a situation where some people have got a reasonable use let's put it that way to not have installed the equipment thank you thank you very much and we've taken the back now but did you want to say thank you I have a quick solution why cannot we have a systematic professional approach it's kind of it's a kind of like 25% completion of work in six months and then the 50% completion of work like that means a 25% 25% vehicles are done by this month and then 50% vehicles are done by this month and 75% vehicles are done otherwise five years of delays is too damaging concept even for the press public, community, everyone sorry, Dr. Bhattachary it's not five years delay we're talking about a delaying from this date 31st of March 2021 I do like to understand that but that's why I'm saying nothing has been done so far in terms of in the names of COVID and something more that's why I'm just proposing or asking I'm asking to council, to officer and to you why cannot we have some kind of a I'm sure Councillor Bhattachary excuse me for interrupting that is exactly the sort of thing that we will be discussing in the workshop so that we can work out how we can best implement this and make sure that we do it before 31st of March 2023 and I very much welcome your input to that when we're workshopping it because my intention as I said before is that we will do this before you are very welcome you are very welcome but the showing in the workshop of the five years of the total delay in the 2023 does not give we are where we are Councillor Bhattachary thank you I think we'll call a halt we have agreed by vote that we will implement this no later than the 31st of March 2023 and we will make every effort through our workshop to ensure that the stages are gone through to ensure that we a have a decent specification for the equipment that we want to install and that we give them time to install them in a timely fashion Councillor Hunt Thank you Chair I would like to suggest that when the time of the workshop happens we should have identified an actual supplier an actual piece of equipment and no any gaps with the specification We were hoping to have the workshop for the other aspects of the that are on this agenda sometime around the third week in October now I'm not sure that's going to be that's going to be whether it be possible to identify a specification in that time so I don't think it would be fair to tie offices to that I absolutely understand the spirit of this and my intention has always been that we do introduce this as quickly as we can and I think at the workshop we need to go through the steps of how to make sure we do this as soon as possible we need to support our officers in this to make sure that we achieve this deadline of everybody having it installed by 31st of March, 2023 Thank you Okay so that's the second item So the proposal for that one is that we introduce CCTV by 35th of March, 2023 The final item is perhaps thankfully mandatory so we don't get a say in it but we're being courtesally advised of it this is the right to works evidence which is item 10 on the appendix A page 11 in our agenda papers where this is simply a change to the reference material being given in support of an application to show evidence of a right to work the only thing that I found slightly confusing was that the narrative in the report refers to the policy referring to an EU passport being sufficient evidence but my understanding when I search through the policy it doesn't refer to an EU passport anyway it refers to through a web link to the gov.uk website and I just wanted to check whether I was misunderstanding that Miss Jackson could you perhaps clarify on that point we can't hear you Miss Jackson Apologies I must remember to unmute myself it's not a common thing I tend to do with the EU passport but the has been referenced apologies it could well have been within the handbook but I say it was referenced within either the handbook and or the policy referencing to EU passport being sufficient evidence however of course this has changed obviously we have lots of identity requirements when somebody is applying for their DBS check and this process but this is another form of identity checking is proof to work so apologies if it might well it should have been referenced to as reference within our documentation right so thank you very much so that's something that we don't get to say on that's a government requirement so I'm hoping that we'll all agree with that is that okay agreed did you okay so thank you very much indeed yep sure just before so in principle these are the three things that we've been discussing Chairman just for convenience would it be easier if we also did number nine that's also mandatory and we can just get it done and move on then for the future I asked Ms Jackson to identify the things which had to be done now this has to do with tax compliance Ms Jackson absolutely Chair absolutely if Councillor Howe is a good point I was just trying to keep because obviously what was absolutely certainly pressing now because we will have another committee in October but obviously our committee are happy today to agree the imposition of number nine as and when we need to have it done then obviously helps me completely so I'm all for if members will agree with the amendment to the policy I'll be very supportive of that today I certainly would be happy that we agreed item nine on page 10 of our members agree would you like to show and good okay so that's four items that we've agreed are you happy with that so thank you very much members and thank you for your concerned contributions to that Councillor Whelan I don't think we actually voted on item six I think when we did that one we said we would leave it to the end and take it all together fair point so could I just take your indication that you are happy with the item six yes agreed okay okay is there anything else we've missed out okay so the remainder of the items will be brought back to a subsequent committee following a workshop to consider our views on it thank you very much members I'd also for the record I would like it to be noted to thank Paul Claire of Panther Taxis for putting such a useful and informative response to the consideration. Councillor Hunt thank you chair I just wanted to slip this in now that as I mentioned to you before the meeting I will have to unfortunately leave just before four so I thought I'd mention that now rather than interrupt this thank you very much let's hope we can sort this one out very straightforwardly so Mr. Jackson would you like to so item five on our agenda is the gambling act 2005 review of statement of licensing policy and it starts on page 27 and the recommendation is it's recommended that the licensing committee recommend to council the adoption of the statement of licensing policy under the gambling act 2005 for a period of up to three years from the 31st of January 2022 and the draft policy is at appendix A the two details that have been identified are the removal of a date at section seven and this for us with an agenda is on page five of the policy which is page 35 of our agenda under the heading enforcement and inspection and the sentence reads this licensing authority will operate to the south camps district council corporate enforcement and inspection policy which is considered consistent with the gambling commission guidance and the regulators compliance code full stop the final element is allowed a longer paragraph replacement under planning which refers to the gambling commission guidance to licensing authorities Mr Jackson would you like to speak to us about this thank you chairman it is purely as you've actually detailed in the introduction it is the gambling commission had guidance relating to planning in safaras an operation for example an amusement arcade a bingo hall must be ready basically in terms of planning to operate that was how the crux of it 2005 or whatever the legislation came through but basically the guidance has changed so obviously our policy now reflects the law changes which in effect are the building doesn't have to be up and ready and operational albeit for needing a license so in a crux in a very layman's terms that is a kind of the effect of the change but it is purely to reflect chair the the gambling commission regulations and guidance thank you very much and the other change of course is the review date which is on the first page referring to three yearly review in 2022 does anybody want to raise any issues about this sorry did you issue with the sorry councillor dr. Bhattacharya I just have issue with the I could not see anywhere in the specific specific age is mentioned in the entire page number page number 31 to 41 page number 36 in the paragraph is mentioned the third like it is mentioned the mention about the protection of the children but in the entire entire notes and the statement I could not find any specific age for age for the gambling note age is 12 years 14 years 16 years or 18 years no arithmetic number of the specific age is not mentioned anywhere for this gambling business um I have a feeling that comes under other documentation can I miss Jackson could you advise us on that of course chair basically there's different age limits within what is constitutes the child but it's all specified within the gambling act itself so the actual act of 2005 obviously this policy is not to replicate what is within the legislation it's just to support how we would deal with applications so in general terms obviously an adult gaming centre for example councillor obviously no admission by those under the age of 18 and protection of young people is 16 17 year olds as well that would include in there but we don't have it here which is why we haven't laid the points for example about family gaming centres where a child could go and you say a push penny machine or a low prize where you receive tokens for example as a prize at a at a fun fair in a pier for example so that kind of thing so but basically 18 is the correct solve adult gaming centres admission to if we had in here any adult what they call adult gaming centres which is just a term for an amusement arcade where we've got jackpot machines or obviously bookmakers and this kind of thing like the William Hills for example and of course 18 year olds it must be 18 to play a fruit machine in a pub and bear in mind pubs and clubs are all we license here under the gambling act obviously for amusement arcades which we do PTAs and stuff in the lotteries but in terms of the gambling act to the amusement arcade machines they're only relating to about 30 clubs and pubs which have amusement machines in there or quiz machines which can only be played by people of the age of 18 but that is within the legislation chair and indeed Mr. Jackson we do have reference to it in item 6 betting premises on the bottom of page 39 where it refers in brackets it is an offence for those under 18 to bet so it does refer to it obliquely if you like because it refers to it under betting premises and indeed elsewhere under section 1 the paragraph at the bottom of page our page 38 page 8 of the policy says only adults are admitted to the area where these machines are located and that is recognised to be the age of 18 so I think whilst I hear what you say Councillor Dr. Batescheri this policy is not permitted to duplicate that which is in the gambling act I have seen that under 18 but I would really prefer if my children are going to a gambling place or anything page number 33 when in the part 1 where there is a complete statement for the licensing objectives why not a couple of time mentioning the age for the children children of 16 years, 18 years a couple of just mentioning about that age is actually makes a good proper statement it's the requirement in relation to children we can easily give a little bit of number there which makes things much clearer and stronger I would remind you that Miss Jackson has pointed out we may not repeat what is in the gambling act but we may not repeat legislation sorry, Councillor Hall did you say Councillor Hall Chairman may I make a suggestion that for clarity sakes we define the age of a child up to what age and the age of an adult up to what age where are you suggesting we would do that I'm just saying we maybe in the introduction into the actual what is a child and what is an adult is a purpose Miss Jackson would there be any objection to us adding that into the introduction absolutely not Chair, there's no problem with that, so whether I can give the definition and put that in there which will reaffirm a child in this purpose means anyone under the age of 18 years that would be helpful thank you very much Miss Jackson so with that we can work out where the best place is to put that and we can put that definition of the policy, thank you and thank you Councillor Hall for suggesting that alternative thank you with that amendment so with those three well there are actually four amendments then on page one the date page two the introduction or somewhere around there page five the which is paragraph seven the enforcement and inspection removal of the date and the matter to do with planning are we all in agreement with those amendments can we take that by show of hands please members that's unanimous thank you very much members and we've still got Councillor Steve Hunt with us so thank you very much okay so with that thank you very much and thank you members for your patience earlier on today when we had difficulties with the IT and can I ask for the live stream to end I call the meeting to a halt thank you to an end thank you