Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests in any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

In accordance with Procedure Rules Nos.11 and 35 a period of 10 minutes is allocated for members of the public to address the meeting on any matter relating to the work of the body in question.  Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes but the Chairman or person presiding will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned where there are a number of speakers. Members of the public are not required to give notice to use this facility. However, as a matter of courtesy, a period of 24 hours’ notice is encouraged.

Members of the public wishing to ask a question at the meeting should provide at least three clear working days’ notice in writing and should include the question with that notice. This will enable an informed answer to be given.

A number of hackney carriage drivers spoke in respect of the proposals and asked questions concerning the implementation period, why changes were now being proposed despite the fact that some areas/taxi driver associations were already in agreement with the proposals, and what would be achieved by a further period of consultation.

The Chairman responded that the implementation period would be explained as part of the forthcoming consultations;  the Council was taking account of the responses received and he wanted all previous consultees to have the chance to respond to the revised proposals which, it was hoped, would achieve a greater consensus.  In addition the Chairman wanted to ensure the trade remained viable.

To consider objections to the proposed variation to the Hackney Carriage Table of Fares.

Having considered the information in the report, including responses to the consultation and the guidance referred to, I continue to be persuaded by the argument for harmonisation of the three tables of fares. However, from the consultation responses, harmonisation in one leap has the potential to disproportionately affect some service users, especially those on fixed or limited incomes.  My decision is therefore:

1.    To confirm that the current Tables of Fares in each zone will remain unchanged.

2.    That the Licensing Team Leader be requested to prepare option(s) for the staggered harmonisation the Table of Fares; those proposals should include waiting time, and extra charges for passengers in excess of one.

3.    That a further report be presented to me setting out those proposals prior to further consultation with the licensed trade.

Consideration was given to the Table of Fees applicable in each of the Council’s three Hackney Carriage Zones, and to responses received following the publication of statutory Notices. 

It was reported that work on the potential harmonisation of fares across the Borough had first started in June 2011 and on 7 January 2013 the Portfolio Holder had approved that, in line with an earlier recommendation of the Licensing Committee (5 November 2012 refers),  formal consultation should be conducted on the harmonisation of fares across the Borough. 

Section 65 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 gave the Local Authority the discretion to set the maximum fares payable in connection with the hire of a hackney carriage vehicle.  The legislation also set out requirements for the publication of Notices, and the receipt and consideration of objections.  It was confirmed that these had been complied with throughout the process.  A requirement was that the fares had to be set out in a ‘Table of Fares’ and on 28 April 2014 the Portfolio Holder agreed that Notices of the Proposed Table of Fares should be published without amendment.  A 21 day period was given in which responses could be made and as a result a significant number were received. 

In considering the representations and comments the Portfolio Holder reported that he considered residents needed to come first, that taxis provided a public service, and the interests of the service users were paramount.  Taxi owners were, however, also residents of Cheshire East and there needed to be a balance between the interests of the trade and the public.  If fares were set too low the quantity and quality of taxi provision would suffer and this was not in the public interest.

Having considered the information in the report, responses to the consultation, and the guidance given, the Portfolio Holder still believed that there should be a harmonisation of the three tables of fares.  Harmonisation in one leap, however, had the potential to disproportionately affect some service users, especially those on fixed or limited incomes.  In response to representations received he reported that the right to charge for waiting time would be retained.  Also, to recognize that larger vehicles were more expensive to buy and run, and to encourage the availability of taxis with higher capacity, a charge would be introduced for extra passengers.

RESOLVED

1.    To confirm that the current Tables of Fares in each zone will remain unchanged.

2.    That the Licensing Team Leader be requested to prepare options for the staggered harmonisation the Table of Fares; those proposals should include waiting time and extra charges for passengers in excess of one.

3.      That a further report be presented setting out those proposals prior to further consultation with the licensed trade.