18 11 2004

 

An apology for inability to attend the meeting was received on behalf of Councillor Mrs Salter.

 

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

 

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 23 September 2004 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record.

 

 

The Committee considered the progress of the working group undertaking scrutiny on the following issue:

 

 

The Committee considered the progress made and the interim report of the Working Group undertaking scrutiny of delimitation of hackney carriages.  A revised copy of the Working Group’s report was tabled at the meeting:

 

(i)  amending Paragraph 2.6 to read: ‘Members of the Working Group were agreed in principle with the concept of delimitation of hackney carriages in order that additional hackney carriages are made available within the Borough’; and

 

(ii)  inserting clarification on points raised by the Private Hire Operators referred to in paragraphs 3.1.2 and 3.1.4.  Private hire vehicles by law are not permitted to ply for hire at any time.  All hiring must by law be by way of booking – Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions)  1976.

 

Before consideration of the Working Group’s report, a Member of the Committee tabled additional papers proposing that a questionnaire be sent out to assess public perception of ‘quantity and quality controls of Hackney Carriage (taxi) vehicles’ and also submitting a draft report from the Committee to the relevant Council Board.

 

The Working Group recommended in their report that further consultation should be undertaken seeking the views of the wider community.  The Chairman reported that it was proposed to issue a press release and to display posters around the Borough, inviting the public to write or e-mail Democratic Services with their comments on taxi provision and that a dedicated telephone line would also be set up for this purpose.  The Committee were of the view that the method of consulting the public proposed by the Working Group would be adequate and less expensive than targeting 30,000 homes in the Borough.

 

 The Committee discussed the implications of the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) regarding availability of vehicles with disabled access. The Head of Environmental Health (Commercial) informed Members that Gosport was not included in the first tranche covered by the new regulations to achieve minimum vehicle specifications by 2010 and that the Government would issue further guidance at a later date.

 

In answer to Members’ questions, the Head of Environmental Health (Commercial) explained Government requirements in respect of DDA, defined ‘economic life’ of a vehicle and outlined Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Conditions that might need to be reviewed.

 

The Head of Environmental Health (Commercial) further reported that the Working Group’s recommendations would preserve the existing taxi fleet and improve the provision of disabled accessible vehicles in the best interests of the people of Gosport.

 

Having considered the Working Group’s report and following a full debate, the Committee recognised that this was an interim report before them and that a further report would be submitted in the light of the results of consultation with the public. In the meantime, the Committee were minded to concur with the Working Group’s view that, in principle, the number of hackney carriages should be delimited.

 

RESOLVED: That, in principle, the Council be recommended to remove the limit on the number of hackney carriage licences issued, subject to:

 

(a) 

All new applications for hackney carriage vehicle licences will only be considered in respect of vehicles that are disabled accessible;

 

 

(b)

The existing ‘Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Conditions’ of the Council being amended to ensure that the existing high standard of vehicles in the Borough is maintained;

 

 

(c)

Holders of hackney carriage vehicle licences issued prior to any change in the policy of limiting is introduced being allowed to continue to use their existing vehicles until the vehicle has finished its economic life or any need to comply with future Government requirements with regard to the Disability Discrimination Act 1998.  The transfer of a licensed vehicle between owners would be permitted, subject to the age criteria of the vehicle;

 

 

(d)

Further consultation being undertaken seeking the views of the wider community, by means of an advertisement in the press or an article in the local newspaper, displaying posters in strategic locations around the Borough and the availability of a dedicated answer-phone.

 

 

 

The Committee received the report of the Travellers in Gosport Working Group, which outlined the background and methodology of their scrutiny process.

 

The Working Group had examined evidence of potential locations for the provision of a temporary or transit site for travellers, using the recommended criteria, but the two possible sites identified had either been earmarked for alternative use or were unsuitable by failing to meet the criteria.

 

The Chairman informed the Committee that Hampshire County Council had established a Joint Authorities Gypsies and Travellers Panel, which included three Gosport Borough Councillor representatives, to investigate issues in relation to unlawful encampments.

 

The Committee expressed their thanks to officers for their hard work and vigilance in dealing with illegal encampments and incursions and acknowledged that working with the County Council, neighbouring local authorities and other agencies was the best approach to facilitate resolving the problems.

 

RESOLVED:  That

 

(a) 

The Working Group’s report on Travellers in Gosport be noted;

 

 

(b)

Officers be thanked for their sterling work in developing security and preventative measures for illegal encampments and dealing with traveller incursions;

 

 

(c)

The Council be recommended to continue liaison with Hampshire County Council and neighbouring local authorities, with a view to solving the problems encountered by travellers’ incursions in Southern Hampshire; and

 

 

(d)

The Committee’s recommendation be forwarded to the Community and Environment Board to note.

 

Anti Social Behaviour

 

 

With regard to paragraph 4.1 of the report, the Head of Environmental Health (Commercial) took the opportunity to explain that the amount of £85,000 quoted for enhanced noise equipment was not the cost of the equipment but did in fact relate to the cost of staffing resources to implement the provisions of the original Noise Act.  The Head of Environmental Health (Commercial) reported that there were now a number of options for dealing with noise complaints and the estimated figure of resourcing such matters was closer to £18,000 per annum.

 

The Committee discussed the various evolving implications of the Anti Social Behaviour Act 2003 and considered that there was a continuing role for scrutiny, by being involved with monitoring the effectiveness of Accredited Community Safety Officers, anti-social behaviour as it related to Housing policies, partnership working for crime and disorder, community partnership and the Local Strategic Partnership.

 

It was reported that powers in respect of closure of noisy premises was delegated to individual officers of councils and, at present, this authority was assigned to the Chief Executive.  It was thought to be more appropriate if that authority was delegated to an officer within the Environmental Health section.

 

With changes to legislation that were continually taking place, the Committee considered that there should be a corporate approach to the Council’s anti-social behaviour policies and it would seem prudent to set up a sub-committee to look at anti-social behaviour issues in all areas of the Council.

 

RESOLVED:  That

 

(a)

The report by the Working Group on anti-social behaviour be noted;

 

 

(b)

The Working Group’s findings in relation to noise equipment and out-of hours service be noted and forwarded to the Community and Environment Board for consideration;

 

 

(c)

The Community and Environment Board be requested to ask officers to consider ways of addressing the problems of fly tipping, graffiti, fly posting and the implications of resourcing such measures;

 

 

(d)

Delegation of power from the Chief Executive to the Head of Environmental Health (Commercial), in respect of the closure of noisy premises, be considered;  

 

 

(e)

A Sub Committee, with membership comprising Councillors Carr, Philpott and Redrup, be established to look at anti-social behaviour issues in all areas of the Council, with the following terms of reference:

 

 

 

(i) 

To assist the Council and other agencies in the developments of     strategies and policies and initiatives to deal with anti-social behaviour;

 

 

 

(ii)

To monitor the effectiveness of the strategies, policies and initiatives in tackling anti-social behaviour.

 

 

 

 

A report by the Leisure and Amenities Manager had been submitted for consideration at the Community and Environment Board pre-agenda meeting. The report sought guidance on the number, type and location of catering concessions that the Council wished to see provided along the coastline of Stokes Bay and Lee-on-the-Solent both on long-term and short-term bases.

 

However, in accordance with Standing Order 5.4.2, the Chairman of the Board had referred the issue to this Committee, requesting that consideration be given to scrutinising the matter.

 

The Committee were asked to decide whether they wished to undertake investigation and, if so, the method by which scrutiny was carried out, together with an indication of the timescale.

 

Following discussion, Members were not minded to scrutinise this issue.

 

RESOLVED:  That the matter of a review of coastal catering concessions not be scrutinised by the Committee and that the Community and Environment Board be advised of the decision.

 

 

The Chairman suggested that the Committee might wish to consider exploring the viability of a fourth secondary school in the Borough.

 

The Committee acknowledged that whilst scrutiny could be undertaken on any wider issues that were of concern to the community, it was felt that numbers on roll at the three existing schools were falling and provision of funding a new school would be at the behest of the Government and/or Hampshire County Council as the Local Education Authority.

 

As a consequence, Members were of the view that they did not wish to undertake a review at this time.

 

RESOLVED:  That a review of secondary school provision in Gosport not be undertaken.

 

 

The Committee considered the work programme and produced an update as follows:

 

 

 

Travellers in Gosport  (Councillors Mrs Champion, Langdon and Train)

To investigate the problems arising from incursions in Gosport

By the November cycle

Final report presented

 

Forward to Community & Environment Board 10 January 2005

(Councillors Carr, Philpott and Redrup)

To consider the protocols, policies and enforcement to deal with anti-social behaviour.

On going

 

Sub Committee established

Report submitted

 

Forward to Community & Environment Board

10 January 2005

(Councillors Allen, Carr and Redrup)

To investigate the delimitation of Hackney Carriages in Gosport

ongoing

Final report to Committee on 10 February 2005

To be involved in a review of contract procurement

To be determined in consultation with the Chairman

Councillor Train

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm and concluded at 7.35pm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAIRMAN