Agenda item - Blue Book Review

Report of the Head of Regulatory Services (copy attached)

RESOLVED – That the Committee approve the handbook 3rd edition of the Blue Book as set out at Appendix A to the report.

29.1    The Committee considered a report of the Head of Regulatory Services setting out proposed revisions to the conditions. Advice and information for Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Drivers, Vehicles and Operators contained in the blue handbook (The Blue Book).

29.2    The Hackney Carriage Officer explained that the handbook was designed to combine and set out in one place, the many bye laws, conditions, advice and information for hackney carriage drivers, vehicles and operators. Some conditions had been amended for this third edition in order to reflect current working practices and changes in legislation and changes of policy already agreed by the Committee. Other minor alterations had also been made to the wording and sequencing in order to make the book more user friendly.

29.3    Councillor Duncan stated that he welcomed this detailed report, he was concerned at the cost implications which could arise from any requirement to retain cctv footage for 28 days. He also enquired as to the costs incurred by drivers in having cctv equipment fitted. The Hackney Carriage Officer explained that the cost for each vehicle was £280 for 2 cameras to be fitted. Councillor Duncan stated that he considered the situation was confusing as there was currently no set period for retention of cctv footage. He was concerned that there could be financial implications arising from a 28 day period. As non experts in this matter he did not feel the Committee were qualified to make a judgement as to whether a 28 day retention period was suitable or not.

29.4    The Head of Regulatory Services explained that the costs of these works were spread across the fleet as a whole. The Committee had agreed in 2010 following detailed discussion to implement this requirement and this had been accepted by the trade. Various different systems were available and it had been left with the trade to decide on the equipment to be used provided that it was of a sufficient standard to clearly record all persons in the vehicle in order to prevent disorder or crime protect the safety of those in the vehicle and to confirm or rebut complaints made against the driver or as evidence in motor insurance matters. Guidance currently available required a minimum retention period of 28 days and with a view to the cost implications for the trade it had been proposed that this requirement came into force from I April 2015 at initial licensing or renewal. This had been discussed at Taxi Forum meetings and it had been accepted that if information was kept for a shorter period of time that might be insufficient in instances where it was alleged that serious offences had occurred.

29.5    Councillor Jones thanked the Head of Regulatory Services for this clarification which answered some of the questions he had, namely why a 28 day as opposed to 14 day retention period was proposed. The arrangements that had been put into place appeared to be working and discretion had been left with the trade as to how arrangements were implemented within the guidance given.

29.6    Councillor Marsh stated that she considered that approval of a new Blue Book was premature at the present given that Members had recently communication from the GMB expressing concern that they had not been consulted in respect of this matter and stating that the systems currently were likely to overtaken by improved and cheaper technology in the near future. It would have been useful to have had a wider debate about these issues and to be re-assured that these concerns had been addressed.

29.7         The Chair, Councillor Powell stated that if re-visited at this stage consideration views would need to be sought from other groups such as the FED as well. The Head of Regulatory Services explained that the amendments and updates currently proposed had been the result of some three and a half years of work and had arisen as the result of widespread consultation to ensure that interested parties including bodies representing the trade had had their say. The resulting document gave equal weight to the need to support local business and to comply with the law; to delay publication could give rise to criticism.

29.8         Councillor Hyde considered that work in updating the Blue Book and in relation to provision of cctv had been the subject of discussion and had been on-going for some time. She did not consider it appropriate to delay the process at this late stage especially as these requirements were designed to protect the safety of the public and drivers alike, this requirement should be paramount.

29.9         Councillor Deane stated that in her view both the 28 day requirement and the proposed means of implementation were reasonable concurring with Councillor Hyde that the safety issue was very important. Drivers were also protected as a result of cctv equipment being placed in vehicles. Over successive years it was likely that costs would come down either as a result of economies of scale or due to improvements in technology. Councillor Deane asked whether the costs of such provision could be taken account of when fare tariffs were reviewed in future and the Head of Regulatory Services explained that they could.

29.10  Councillor Simson stated that much had been said already in respect of the and valuable contribution provided by cctv, she fully supported its use and the recommendations set out in the report, including a requirement that recordings should be retained for 28 days. Councillor Simson went on to refer to the advertisement space available for hire on and inside vehicles. This provided a source of revenue and could assist with costs of such as that associated with cctv. Councillor Simson asked whether the level of income received from adverting was known and whether any feedback had been received about it.

29.10    The Hackney Carriage Officer explained that it was hard to assess the level of income achieved from advertising and that no comments had been received in relation to advertising.

29.11    Councillor Jones stated that whilst he understood that cctv protected both the driver and the customer had clear indications been received that the technology was working and the current level of take up across the fleet. The Head of Regulatory Services responded that the current level of take up of cctv compliant with recommendations was approximately 60% increasing all the time and that feedback received was that those who had cctv equipment fitted were happy with it.

29.12  Councillor Duncan stated that in his view there remained a lack of clarity in respect of the whole cctv issue and for that reason he considered that consideration of this should be deferred at the present time.

29.13  Councillor Rufus referred to the views expressed by Councillors Duncan and Marsh enquiring as to the degree of discretion the Committee had in listening to or taking on board comments made by the GMB at this stage. The Head of Regulatory Services stated that comments had been received from the GMB very recently in respect of this matter against the backdrop of discussions which had been taking place since 2010.

29.14  Councillor Gilbey referred to the garages at which MOT and other which vehicle testing could take place stating that she had been advised that Westbourne Motors of Portslade had sought to be added to the list on a number of occasions over recent years but without success. It was noted that one of the garages previously on the list had now withdrawn enquiring whether it would now be appropriate for Westbourne garages to apply. The Hackney Carriage Officer explained that garages were added following requests from the trade itself and that they had not requested that any new garages be added. He also stated that it appeared that those garages currently on the list each serviced a small number of vehicles. This was a matter on which officers were guided by the trade.

29.15  Councillor Deane stated that notwithstanding that there had been a lot of discussion about cctv a number of wide ranging amendments had been suggested to the existing Blue Book and these were welcomed.

29.16  A vote was taken and of the 13 Members present the recommendations contained in officer’s report were approved on a vote of 10 with 3 abstentions.

29.17  RESOLVED – That the Committee agrees the Third Edition of the Blue Book Handbook as set in Appendix A to the report.

Note: Councillors Duncan, Gilbey and Marsh abstained from voting.