Issue - meetings

The purpose of this report is for the Licensing Committee to consider a cost of living increase in of the non-statutory set fees charged for licences/registrations which are administered by the Licensing Committee.

The fees under review are as follows:

The Gambling Act 2005 sets statutory fees for certain activities. In

addition the Gambling (Premises Licence Fees) (England and

Wales) Regulations 2007 and the Gambling (Temporary Use Notices) Regulations 2007 allows local authorities to set fees up to a statutory maximum for certain types of premises such as casinos,

bingo halls and betting shops.

Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 sets the framework for issuing licences for scrap metal collectors and sites. The legislation allows local authorities to set fees to cover the costs of administering the licences and includes any necessary compliance checks.

The Public Health Acts Amendment Act 1907 (Section 94) and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (Section 18) governs the licensing of pleasure boats which are hired and

self-driven or provide passage for up to 12 passengers.

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 (Schedule 3) and the Policing & Crime Act 2009 (Section 27) legislate the licensing of sexual entertainment and sex establishments.  Schedule 3, para 19 states that an application for the grant, variation, renewal or transfer of a licence under this Schedule shall pay a reasonable fee determined by the appropriate authority.

The Licensing Act 2003 sets the national fees all Local Authorities can charge for the administration of all licenses under the Act which includes the annual fees. The fees were set when the legislation was created in 2005 and there has been no review of these fees since then.

The Interim Head of Safer Communities presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

The purpose of the report was for the Licensing Committee to consider a cost of living increase in the non-statutory set fees charged for licences/registrations administered by the Licensing Committee. Options available to Members were to agree or amend as they deemed fit the proposed fees set out in the appendices to the report or maintain the current fee structure.

The Interim Head of Safer Communities responded to questions and comments from committee members on the reasons for the proposed increase in fees and the levels at which some fees had been set. Key points raised and clarified included:

·       The proposed fees were calculated on a cost recovery basis, taking into account all factors involved in providing each element of the service.

·       It was noted that staff salaries and the cost of supplies had increased and could increase further.

·       It was noted that there was a statutory set maximum which could be charged for some fees.

·       The proposed fees would ensure overall costs were recovered. This may not be the case if considering each fee in isolation, however it was not the intention to calculate fees on the basis of some fees subsidising others.

·       The Council had no control over Licensing Act 2003 fees as these were set by Central Government and had not been reviewed since 2005. It was noted that the Local Government Association were among those lobbying for change. The level of the existing fees was somewhat mitigated by the high number of licensing act applications and efficiencies in process.

A Committee Member felt some fees were excessive in terms of the percentage increases proposed and was concerned for the impact on small businesses. A move to amend the proposed fees to be accepted but with a limit of a 15% increase in any individual fee was seconded but was unsuccessful when put to a vote, with 2 votes in favour and 9 against.

The majority of Committee Members did not consider a fixed percentage increase across the board would give a true reflection of how each individual fee was calculated. It was noted that this was a complex process which required significant input from the Council’s Finance Officer. The fees as proposed would ensure that overall cost recovery was achieved.

RESOLVED that the proposed fees as stated in the appendices to the report be agreed.

Voting: For – 10, Against – 1, Abstain – 0