Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

To receive any declarations of interest from Members in respect of business to be transacted on the agenda.

Where a Member has a new or registered Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) in a matter under consideration they must disclose that they have an interest and, unless the Monitoring Officer has agreed in advance that the DPI is a 'Sensitive Interest', explain the nature of that interest at the meeting.  The Member must withdraw from the meeting at the commencement of the consideration of any matter in which they have declared a DPI and must not participate in any discussion of, or vote taken on, the matter unless they have been granted a dispensation permitting them to do so.  If during the consideration of any item a Member becomes aware that they have a DPI in the matter they should declare the interest immediately and, subject to any dispensations, withdraw from the meeting.

Where a Member is declaring an Other Significant Interest (OSI) they must also disclose the interest and explain the nature of the interest at the meeting.  The Member must withdraw from the meeting at the commencement of the consideration of any matter in which they have declared a OSI and must not participate in any discussion of, or vote taken on, the matter unless they have been granted a dispensation to do so or the meeting is one at which members of the public are permitted to speak for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to the matter.  In the later case, the Member may only participate on the same basis as a member of the public and cannot participate in any discussion of, or vote taken on, the matter and must withdraw from the meeting in accordance with the Council's procedure rules.

Councillor P S Le Chevalier declared an Other Significant Interest in Minute No 298 by reason of his having negotiated a contract with the company for the Royal Marines Association.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 18 October 2012 (to follow).

The consideration of the Minutes of the meeting held on 18 October 2012 was deferred until the next meeting.

To consider the attached report of the Director of Environment and Corporate Assets.

The Licensing Team Leader presented the report on Fees and Charges 2013/14.  The complete list of fees, even where there were no changes, were listed for transparency and to ensure all fees and charges were properly set.

RESOLVED:    (a)        That the Fees and Charges for 2013/14 as set out in Annexes 2 and 3 be approved.

                         (b)        That, as a general principal, it be agreed that the fees were set at an appropriate inclusive level, irrespective of VAT status, and that the VAT element within the overall fee level then be determined. 

                         (c)        That the fees be adopted at, or close to government directed levels without the need for further reporting, in cases where the Council was awaiting for Government guidance and it had not been possible to set a fee level at this stage.

                         (d)        That authority to make minor adjustments to the fees and charges be delegated to the Director of Environment and Corporate Assets in consultation with the Director of Finance, Housing and Community.

To consider the attached report of the Licensing Team Leader.

The Licensing Team Leader informed the Committee that Mr Richardson of Phoenix Cars had applied for permission to place vehicle graphics promoting the business on the rear screen of on two of his vehicles.

The Committee was advised that there was no issue with the design or content of the graphics but there was concern that the graphics would obscure the driver's rear view. The company that produced the graphics, Metamark, claimed that the one-way vision film was 40% clear with 1.6mm perforations.

Mr Richardson stated that he was unable to demonstrate the driver's rear view as he had not had a specimen version produced on a vehicle due to the cost involved if the application was unsuccessful. The vehicles, which were minibuses, had significantly limited vision anyway when filled with passengers and were fitted with extra-large side mirrors and parking sensors to compensate.

The Committee withdrew to consider the application. Upon reconvening the Senior Solicitor stated that she had advised the Committee on the Council's policy and the effect of deviation from it. Mr Richardson was further advised that he had the right to appeal the Committee decision.

RESOLVED:    That the application to place advertising on private licensed hire vehicles operated by Phoenix Cars be refused on the grounds of safety due to concern over the impact on the driver's rear vision.

(Councillor P S Le Chevalier in accordance with his earlier declaration of an Other Significant Interest withdrew from the meeting for the consideration of this item.)

To consider the attached report of the Licensing Team Leader.

The Licensing Team Leader informed the Committee that Mr Saleh of Dover White Cliff Cars had applied for permission to place vehicle graphics promoting the business on the rear screen of on his vehicles.

The Committee was again advised that there was no issue with the design or content of the graphics but there was concern that the graphics would obscure the driver's rear view. The company that produced the graphics, Metamark, claimed that the one-way vision film was 40% clear with 1.6mm perforations.

Mr Sankey, representing Mr Saleh, informed the Committee that he was unable to demonstrate the driver's rear view as Mr Saleh also had not had a specimen version produced on a vehicle. 

The Committee withdrew to consider the application. Upon reconvening the Senior Solicitor stated that she had advised the Committee on the Council's policy and the effect of deviation from it. Mr Sankey was further advised that Mr Saleh had the right to appeal the Committee decision.

RESOLVED:    That the application to place advertising on private licensed hire vehicles by Dover White Cliffs Cars be refused on the grounds of safety due to concern over the impact on the driver's rear vision.

The recommendation is attached.

MATTERS WHICH THE MANAGEMENT TEAM SUGGESTS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE AS THE REPORT CONTAINS EXEMPT INFORMATION AS DEFINED WITHIN PART 1 OF SCHEDULE 12A OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 AS INDICATED AND IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE PROPER OFFICER CONSIDERS THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN MAINTAINING THE EXEMPTION OUTWEIGHS THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN DISCLOSING THE INFORMATION

It was proposed by Councillor P S Le Chevalier, duly seconded and

RESOLVED:    That, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the remainder of the business on the grounds that the items to be considered involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.

To consider the attached report of the Licensing Team Leader.

The Committee considered the report of the Licensing Team Leader on an application for a Joint Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Drivers Licence where a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check had disclosed a number of previous convictions that were relevant to the decision as to the applicant's suitability to hold a licence to drive a taxi in the Dover District. The applicant's driving licence confirmed the offences listed on the CRB disclosure.

In accordance with the approved procedure Members offered the applicant the opportunity to present evidence concerning the circumstances surrounding the convictions. The Sub-Committee withdrew to consider its decision and upon resuming the meeting the Senior Solicitor explained that she had advised Members in relation to sections 51 & 59 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 and also in respect of the Council's policy regarding fit and proper persons and how it related to offences on record.

RESOLVED:    That having regard to the evidence heard,  in view of the time elapsed since the convictions and taking into consideration the applicant's personal circumstances at the time of the convictions, a Joint Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's licence be granted for a period of twelve months in accordance with the Council's policy.