Agenda item

The purpose of this report is for the Committee to consider a review of the non-statutory set fees charges for licences/registrations which are administered by the Licensing Committee.

This is the first time the Licensing Authority for BCP Council has assessed the non-statutory set fees since the its creation on the 1^st April 2019.

Currently licence holders in the three legacy council areas are paying different fees for the same licences. This disparity causes confusion for applicants and makes administering the licensing function challenging.

The fees being proposed cover the following areas of licensing activity:-

·       The Taxi and Private Hire function issues licences to drivers, vehicles and Operators and the fees the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 allows the local authority to charge fees on a cost recovery basis only.

·       The Gambling Act 2005 sets statutory fees for certain activities in addition the Gambling (Premises Licence Fees) (England and Wales) 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.

·       Licenses are also issued for pleasure boats which are hired and self driven or provide passage for up to 12 passengers. This function is covered under the Public Health Act 1907 and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

The Licensing Manager presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which, together with an updated Appendix 1 Fee Schedule, appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

The Committee was asked to consider the schedule of proposed fees for licences/registrations administered by the Licensing Committee, as set out in the updated Appendix 1. This was the first time the Licensing Authority for BCP Council had reviewed these fees since the its creation on the 1^st April 2019. Currently licence holders in the three legacy council areas were paying different fees for the same licences. This disparity was causing confusion for applicants and made administering the licensing function challenging. The proposed fees were based on statutory requirements and case law. They covered three main areas of licensing activity, as follows:

The Taxi and Private Hire function, which issued licences to drivers, vehicles and operators. The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 allowed the local authority to charge fees on a cost recovery basis only. These fees covered the cost of administration, compliance and the issuing of licences, plates, etc. Hackney Carriage licensing fees also included recharges for the upkeep of taxi ranks and the requirement to undertake an unmet needs survey every three years. Driver fees included the cost of more frequent, six monthly DBS status checks under the new policy, where previously it had been every three years. It was noted that the dual licence fee in Appendix 1 should be listed under the Driver section, not the Vehicle section. 

Taxi and Private Hire fees had last been reviewed in Bournemouth and Poole in 2015 and in Christchurch in 2017. The Licensing Manager explained that the new fees had been calculated from a starting point of zero, without reference to previous fees, to reflect the actual cost to BCP Council of providing the service. The finance officer had reviewed the proposed fees and had confirmed that they were set appropriately. There was a statutory requirement to advertise the new fees for a minimum period of 28 days. Any objections received would require consideration by the Licensing Committee.

The Gambling Act 2005 set statutory fees for certain activities; in addition the Gambling (Premises Licence Fees) (England and Wales) Regulations 2007 allowed local authorities to set fees up to a statutory maximum for certain types of premises such as casinos, bingo halls and betting shops. These fees covered the cost of administration, compliance, inspection, checking of documents, and liaison with the Gambling Commission. Previous fees in Bournemouth and Poole had been the same, in Christchurch significantly lower. Fees had not been reviewed for a number of years.

Licences were also issued for pleasure boats which were hired and self-driven or provided passage for up to 12 passengers. This function was covered under the Public Health Act 1907 and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

The Head of Communities confirmed that the fees had been set in line with the cost recovery model following extensive work with colleagues in finance and accountancy. The fees had been fully considered from every aspect of the licensing process to provide an accurate reflection of what each step in the process cost to administer. This included officer time in responding to queries, undertaking checks, issuing reminders, running reports, etc, as well as office accommodation, IT software, and on costs. It was noted that these costs would be kept under regular review.

The Licensing Team responded to technical questions from Committee Members on the following issues:

·       Whether taxi ranks would be expanded if the number of licences increased. The Licensing Manager explained that no additional costs had been included, these would need to form part of a future reassessment of fees as required.

·       Whether another unmet needs survey was required to be undertaken and costed in view of the new policy. It was confirmed that another survey would be needed before the review of the new policies in 2025.

·       The difference between small and large casinos. This depended not only on their physical size but also on the type of gaming, bingo and betting available.

·       Pleasure boat and waterboatman licences did not cover jet skis or kite/windsurfing. The Licensing Authority’s involvement was limited to the administrative process of ensuring vessels were inspected and insured.

·       It was unclear what had been included in the three legacy council fees and on what basis and frequency, but the starting point for the new fees was zero.

·       The legal maximum amount had not been applied for gambling premises licences as the fee had been calculated on a cost recovery basis. The maximum amount was intended to take into account a London weighting.

·       The safeguarding course provider for taxi and private hire drivers, Blue Lamp Trust, currently charged £25 per person.

A Committee Member asked for further information about the type of gambling premises licences listed in the report. It was explained that different licences were required depending on the type of gaming machines in a particular venue. Adult Gaming Centres were able to provide machines which were age restricted, whereas Family Entertainment Centres offered more amusement arcade style games, such as push penny. The Chair suggested that a glossary of terms may be a useful addition to similar reports in future. In respect of the Track licence listed in the report it was confirmed that a track betting licence was currently in force at Poole Stadium and this would include betting facilities for greyhound racing.

A Committee Member asked about the enforcement of gambling premises licences. The Committee was advised that the Gambling Commission supported the Licensing Authority in undertaking enforcement activity, by visiting premises, checking they were compliant with legislation, and ensuring appropriate checks were in place for age restricted products.

The Committee talked about the role of the Licensing Authority, Seafront Services and other agencies such as the Harbour Commission in the jurisdiction and licensing of water-based activities. It was agreed to seek further clarity on these roles and responsibilities and report back to the Committee.

A Committee Member asked about the implementation date of the new fees and whether any amendment to the figures in Appendix 1 would impact on the budget settings for the Licensing service for 2021/22 financial year. It was confirmed that the fees for gambling premises and pleasure boats would come into effect on 1 April 2021, and the fees for taxi and private hire licensing on 1 June 2021 to allow for the statutory advertisement period. As the fees were based on cost recovery any reduction would mean that the Licensing Authority was partially subsidising the costs of providing the service and the resulting deficit would need to be found elsewhere within the Safer Communities budget. It was confirmed that there was no surplus or deficit carried forward from the legacy councils.

RESOLVED that the proposed fees as set out in the updated Appendix 1 be agreed (with the correction to list the ‘dual licence’ figure under the driver section of the taxi and private hire fees).

Voting:          For – 14        Against – 1   Abstain – 0  

Cllr G Farquhar asked for the reason for his vote against the resolution, in respect of his declaration of interest, to be recorded in the minutes.