►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
B
There
is
no
exempt
information
contained
within
the
agenda,
however
members
and
would
draw
your
attention
to,
you
may
deem
it
necessary
to
move
into
a
private
session
when
discussing
certain
details
of
the
event
management
plan
for
the
leeds
festival,
which
is
item,
number
seven
on
the
agenda
and
if
so,
at
that
point,
if
members
could
make
we'll
be
asked
to
agree
to
go
into
private
session.
Thank
you
under
agenda
item
number
three.
There
are
no
late
items
of
business
and
under
agenda
item
four.
B
Please
could
ask
members
to
declare
any
interest
if
they
have
a
name.
A
Thank
you,
helen,
okay,
so,
good
morning,
everyone
and
welcome
to
this
licensing
committee
meeting
I'm
councillor
james
gibson
and
the
chair
of
the
licensing
committee.
Can
I
remind
everyone
that
today's
meeting
is
being
live
streamed
on
the
city
council
website,
so
the
public
can
observe
the
meeting
without
needing
to
be
present
and
before
we
move
on
to
the
agenda
items
for
the
benefit
of
attendees,
could
I
highlight
that
we
will
not
begin
agenda
item
eight
taxi
and
private
hire
licensing
result
of
the
consultation
on
suitability,
minor
motoring
convictions
until
at
least
11
30..
A
So
that's
at
least
11
30,
we'll
start
gender
item
eight
and
now
can
I
please
invite
council
invite
members
and
officers
to
introduce
themselves
and
please
do
your
microphone
after
you've
introduced
yourself.
So
if
we'll
go
around
this
way,
rob.
C
D
I
Jeff,
sorry,
I
thought
you
were
just
asking
the
officers
and
members,
which
is
why
I
didn't
jump
in
melvin
ben
managing
director
of
festival
republic.
C
Good
morning
everybody,
john
mulcahy
chief
officer
elections
and
regulatory
and
both
licensing
teams
fall
under
my
arena.
B
A
Thank
you
very
much
so
now
we
move
on
to
agenda
item
number
six
minutes
of
the
previous
meeting
held
on
the
27th
of
may
22..
Two
members,
except
these
minutes,
are
a
true
and
correct
record
I'll
assume
that
they're
correct
unless
somebody
indicates
otherwise,
no
okay.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
now,
we'll
move
on
to
agenda
item
number,
seven
leeds
festival,
2022,
and
can
I
invite
officers
from
entertainment
licensing
and
to
introduce
the
item?
Please.
D
Yes,
of
course,
on
q
chair,
so
this
is
in
relation
to
the
consideration
of
the
report,
which
advises
the
licensing
committee
of
the
progress
of
multi-agency
meetings
in
the
event
management
plan
for
lease
festival.
2022.,
the
festival
has
the
benefit
of
the
premises
license
granted
under
licensing
act,
2003
authorizing
licensable
activities.
Throughout
the
event,
the
committee
will
note
that
a
condition
on
the
license
which
can
be
viewed
on
page
20
of
the
report,
requires
a
license
in
authority
to
approve
the
event
management
plan
prior
to
the
festival
taking
place.
D
D
D
Additionally,
we
have
nick
garden
on
behalf
of
the
highways
department,
paul
spandler,
on
behalf
of
the
environmental
protection
team
they're
on
and
to
answer
any
questions
that
the
committee
may
have
and
that's
together
with
paul
money,
chief
officer
of
safe
elite.
Thank
you,
chair.
F
Thank
you.
I'd
just
like
to
ask
a
quick
question.
Now
before
we
approve
the
event
management
plan,
can
the
organizers
or
the
officers
ensure
that
acne
carriage
drivers
have
priority
directly
outside
the
main
gates
of
brahman
park,
since
they're
they're
the
drivers
who
are
able
to
pick
up
passengers
without
pre
the
need
for
a
pre-booking
there's
a
fear?
I
think
that
the
a
deal's
been
done
with
uber
to
give
their
drivers
at
this
prime
location
to
give
them
priority
at
this
prime
location,
and
this
is
not
in
the
interests
of
our
residents.
A
Okay,
can
I
ask
mr
ben
and
officers
to
note
that
question
I'll,
allow
you
to
do
your
presentation
and
then
you
can
come
to
that
question
afterwards.
I
think
it'd
be
pertinent
to
do
it.
That
way.
Are
there
any
other
questions
before
we
go
to
the
presentation?
No
okay,
mr
ben.
If
you'd
like
to
carry
out,
do
your
presentation
please.
I
Chair,
thank
you
I'll
I'll,
almost
certainly
get
lucy
and
genie
to
do
the
presentation,
because
they're
much
more
skilled
on
the
technology
than
I
am,
and
we
focus
in
you
know,
principally
I
think,
on
traffic
noise
and
safeguarding.
But
we
will
pick
up
on
the
hackney
carriage
issue
as
part
of
the
traffic.
I
I
think
we're
going
to
share
a
presentation.
Thank
you.
J
So
we
prepared
a
presentation
just
to
talk
through
the
traffic
management
plan
being
one
of
the
sort
of
pertinent
things
that
I
know
everyone
was
keen
to
understand
and
with
the
visual
maps,
it's
just
sometimes
a
bit
easier
to
go
through
the
routes
that
we're
proposing
this
year
that
we've
signed
off
on
and
to
run
through
how
we
plan
to
get
not
only
customers
and
festival
goers
to
the
festival,
but
also
the
diversion
routes
that
we've
put
in
place
for
local
residents.
J
So,
firstly,
yes,
just
to
run
through
the
traffic
management
plans.
We've
got
three
main
routes
into
the
festival.
We've
got
brown
route,
which
is
for
all
of
our
northbound
traffic
that
goes
on
the
a1m.
We
take
people
up
past
the
festival.
They
come
up
with
junction
45
and
then
they
come
in
on
on
a
left
turn
into
the
site,
and
then
we
have
our
white
gates.
That's
the
white
group
for
all
of
our
southbound
traffic
again
using
the
a1m.
J
They
come
in
off
of
junction
44
and
a
left
turn
into
the
site
new
for
this
year.
The
red
route
will
remain
the
same
throughout
the
festival.
So
from
the
wednesday,
when
we
open
for
early
bird
ticket
holders
right
through
until
we
egress
on
the
monday
and
that
route
is
using
the
a64
off
of
junction
44
of
raman's
change,
since
the
announcement
of
e-law
being
open
and
ready
in
advance
of
the
festival,
it's
allowed
us
to
use
that
as
a
diversion
route
for
local
residents
and
put
that
one-way
system
in
throughout.
J
So
it
should
be
a
lot
easier
for
everyone.
We've
got
one
comms
plan
throughout
this
year.
Our
traffic
is
a
lot
more
contained
into
one
area
rather
than
taking
people
up
around
the
a58
and
collingham
and
bardsey,
which
we've
done
in
previous
years
on
those
days
when
we
didn't
have
the
a64
one-way
closure
in
place.
So
they
are
the
three
routes
for
this
year
and,
like
I
say
they
remain
the
same
from
the
wednesday
right
through
until
the
monday.
J
So,
as
I
mentioned
briefly,
the
with
e-law
being
open,
that's
brilliant
in
that
we
can
now
send
local
residents
and
traffic,
especially
the
east
coast
traffic,
using
that
e-law
route
we've
sent
out
in
our
21-day
letters
on
friday,
these
routes
to
all
of
the
local
residents,
guiding
them
to
use
the
alternative
route
over
the
festival
periods
and
especially
on
those
busy
times
which
is
the
wednesday
thursday
and
then
peak
ingress
and
egress
friday,
saturday,
sunday.
J
J
As
soon
as
there
was
a
little
bit
of
congestion
on
the
a1m
we've
kept
that
in
place,
we've
been
liaising
with
residents
and
the
parish
council
of
aberford
to
ensure
that
it
works
for
everyone
and
especially
the
local
business
businesses
new
for
this
year,
however,
we
have
also
introduced
a
dedicated
village
liaison
manager,
as
we
have
with
dorner
for
the
closures
that
we
put
in
place
there.
So
we've
already
got
that
village
liaison
manager
on
board
and
into
the
community
on
hand.
J
To
answer
any
questions
that
they
may
have
or
to
allow
access
for
customers
or,
if
someone's
having
a
big
garden
party,
you
know
we're
able
to
to
facilitate
that
the
new
addition
as
well
to
help
with
our
egress
plan
this
year
is
essentially
the
stretch
of
westwood
roads
between
thorner,
road
and
wattle
psych.
That
will
become
a
dual
carriageway
for
peak
egress,
which
will
essentially
be
friday
saturday,
sunday,
night
and
into
monday
morning.
J
This
does
mean
that
the
resident
brandman
will
have
to
take
a
five
to
six
mile
diversion
route
and
not
straight
into
branham
on
those
evenings,
but
we're
working
with
them
to
make
sure
that's,
communicated
and
there's
also
a
local
shuttle
bus
which
has
been
put
in
place
and
again
we'll
just
be
working
through
the
the
diversion
routes
of
that
with
them,
essentially
that
dual
carriageway
for
west
westwood
roads
will
make
everything
a
lot
more
quicker
on
the
out
we're
hoping
to
ease
the
congestion
that
we
had
especially
around
that
area.
J
So
it
does
just
mean
that
we
can
get
people
to
to
leave
the
site
a
lot
quicker
this
year
in
two
lanes,
rather
than
one
as
in
previous
years.
We've
got
the
barrick
closures
along
kiddle,
lane
and
potterton
lane,
so
that
ties
in
with
the
a64
closure
that
we
have
in
place
and
again
that's
been
in
place
for
a
number
of
years
now
and
we
we've
got
the
residents
who
we
speak
to
and
we
allow
special
passes
for
them
to
use
to
get
in
and
out
of
closures.
J
Sauna
we've
spoken
about.
They
have
agreed
this
year
to
allow
us
to
send
our
shuttle
buses
at
the
end
of
the
night
through
the
village,
again
just
to
give
them
a
quicker
route
back
into
the
city
centre,
giving
us
a
quicker
turnaround
time
to
get
them
there
and
back
me
and
again
that
we
should
be
able
to
get
people
off
site
a
bit
quicker
this
year
and
that's
the
thorny
closure
map
and
you
can
see
on
there.
J
We've
got
an
additional
closure
this
year,
just
a
provisional
one
to
stop
people
from
coming
in
again
sat
navs.
Whilst
we
have
the
ability
to
put
the
closures
on
sometimes
or
as
we
all
know,
even
to
save
a
minute,
it
will
just
send
you
a
quicker
way
down,
especially
home
farm
lane
or
some
of
the
smaller
routes
into
brandman
park.
So
we've
just
put
a
provisional
closure
on
there,
which
has
all
been
agreed
and
put
in
as
a
ttro
with
highways
and
again
just
the
skeletons
lane
closure
closure.
J
Five
has
we've
had
to
put
an
amendment
in
there
because
of
e-law
and
the
way
that
that
new
network
and
road
system
is
in
place.
J
So
that's
in
summary,
some
of
the
changes
that
we've
made
there's
been
lots
of
consultation
with
nick
gardner
from
the
city
council,
as
well
as
local
residents,
to
make
sure
that
everything's
covered
and
all
of
the
diversion
routes,
like
I
say,
are
in
place
not
just
for
the
festival
goers
but
for
everyone
else,
using
those
routes
over
the
festival
periods
and
that's
it
any
questions
on
traffic.
A
I
A
Yes,
please,
I
think
that'll
be
useful,
any
other
questions,
no.
J
I
should
just
mention
as
well
just
because
councilor
martin
mentioned
about
the
taxis
so
now
this
year,
because
we
do
have
that
a64
closure
in
place
throughout
the
taxi
gate
has
always
been
in
off
of
the
a64.
We
then
like
say
because
of
the
closure.
It
means
that
we
can
keep
it
contained
within
that
area
and
then
anyone
wanting
to
get
straight
back
out
to
leeds
we'll
use
the
gate
pretty
much.
Next
to
it.
J
We
have
to
bring
taxis
slightly
off
the
road
into
the
slot
into
the
site
to
avoid
people
then
walking
onto
the
a64.
That's
the
only
reason
it's
not
adjacent
to
the
a64.
It's
in
the
field
further
back
just
to
keep
pedestrians
off
the
road
and
avoid
any
sort
of
it
sits
next
to
our
pick
up
a
drop-off
area.
J
So
the
last
thing
we
want
is
for
parents
to
kind
of
bring
their
kids
or
whoever
they're
picking
up
to
say,
oh
just
pop
out
onto
the
road,
rather
than
we
have
to
pull
into
the
gate
and
turn
around.
So
it's
set
back
slightly,
but
the
route
that
we've
we've
put
in
a
lot
of
work
for
taxis
to
ensure
that
they're
not
having
to
drive
through
the
site-
and
it
is
very
much
contained
within
they
go
inside
one
gate,
pick
up
and
there's
separated
out
into
a
taxi
rank
carriages.
J
There
is
a
pen
for
uber
which
aren't
given
priority.
It's
simply
a
separate
area
for
them
for
anyone,
who's
booked,
an
uber
and
then
there
is
a
private
high
private
hire
area
as
well.
So
there
are
all
three
areas
next
to
each
other
and
they
use
the
same
gates
in
and
out.
F
So
you
are
assuring
us
that
that
uber
haven't
got
the
priority
area
in
terms
of
proximity
to
getting
off
the
site.
Correct
the
hackney
carriage
drivers,
because
they're
the
ones
that
can
pick
up
without
booking
will
be,
if
anything,
the
closest
to
the
entrance
and
exit
or
the
mainland.
F
If
it
is,
as
as
mr
ben
says,
then
then,
yes,
as
as
long
as
uber,
haven't
got
priority,
I
was
led
to
believe
that
uber
and
had
had
got
priority,
would.
F
Well,
yes,
simply
because
it's
the
hackney
carriage
drivers,
who
can
pick
up
without
booking
and
there's
a
fear
that
the
uber
drivers
might
be
picking
up,
people
who
haven't
got
a
booking
and
that's
obviously
not
within
the
regulations.
No.
F
A
I
think
similar
comments
have
come
to
all
of
us.
It
was
about
convenience
as
well,
given
that
hacking
carriage,
obviously
you
don't
need
to
have
a
prior
booking,
so
it
would
make
sense
for
them
to
be
directly
in
front
of
where
people
are
likely
come
out
to
come
out
of
the
festival.
Given
that
there's
pre-booking
for
for
private
hire,
they'll
be
anybody,
who's
got,
a
pre-booking
will
be
able
to
sort
of
walk
and
find
where
the
vehicle
is
a
little
bit
further
down,
rather
than
having
to
walk
to
get
to
the
hackney
carriages.
A
That's
what's
I
think,
we've
all
received
emails
to
that
effect.
Do
you
want
to
comment
on
that
and
why
it
isn't
that
way,
because
that
doesn't
seem
logical
to
me.
I
Our
customers
are
the
priority
and
therefore
we
want
to
give
them
ease
of
access
for
what
they
have
booked
or
what
they
haven't
bought.
We,
the
the
hackney
carry
carriage,
is,
is
less
the
priority
more.
The
the
customer,
our
punters,
are
the
priority.
A
A
Yeah
they're
all
together,
so
there's
no
priority.
No
okay,
right!
Okay,
we
shall
move
on.
Is
there
any
other
presentations
from
festival
republic?
Please.
J
There's
no
further
visual
presentation,
we
just
thought
it
may
be
best
to
present
the
the
traffic
in
that
way.
I
know
that
members
were
keen
to
hear
more
about
noise,
safeguarding
and
sustainability,
but
perhaps
it
may
be
more
pertinent
to
come
to
questions
unless
melvin
had
a
particular
point.
We
wanted
to
share.
I
No,
I
guess
the
only
just
in
terms
of
sustainability.
I'd
pick
up
on
the
fact
that
we've
now
and
some
of
you
may
have
seen
it
actually
may
not
have
seen
it,
because
it's
really
only
online.
We
have
done
a
we've
formed
a
partnership
with
an
organization
called
music
declares
emergency.
It's
a
a
charity
that
was
created
by
musicians
themselves,
and
you
know
we
in
terms
of
the
sustainability.
I
Again,
I
can
get
the
you
know
the
the
stuff
sent
around
in
terms
of
who
they
are
about
who
they
are.
They
have
a.
They
have
a
slogan
which
is
no
music
on
a
dead
planet
and
we
work
very
closely
with
them.
We
have
now
actually
incorporated
it
into
our
leeds
festival.
Logo.
I
don't
know
if
we
have
a
copy
of
that
anywhere
that
people
can
see.
I
think
jeannie's
probably
going
to
get
that.
I
You
can
see
it's
taken
a
very
significant
prominence
for
us.
We
are
going
to
create
a.
I
know,
music
on
a
dead
planet,
music,
declaring
emergency
eco
campsite,
where
people
commit
to
minimal
environmental
sites
minimal
environmental
standards
within
that
campsite
I
leave
no
trace
essentially,
is
the
core
of
that
that
isn't
launched
as
yet.
So
I
think
that's
the
press
behind
me.
I
It's
certainly
not
a
state
secret,
so
it
doesn't
matter
if
it
goes
out,
but
technically
we
haven't
launched
it
as
yet
yeah.
That's
probably
the
key.
The
key
thing
for
us
in
terms
of
you
know,
trying
to
persuade
people
to
take
their
rubbish
away
and
to
pick
up
their
tents
and
take
them
back
home.
A
Okay
right
do
we
have
any
more
questions
from
after
that
presentation
or
any
questions
for
officers?
No
okay,
so
moving
to
closed
session,
I
guess.
B
Thank
you
chair.
The
child
has
given
an
indication
that
we
would.
The
committee
might
wish
to
move
into
closed
session
now
to
discuss
matters
in
private
and
members
happy
to
do
so.
B
Yeah
thank
you
and
if
I
could
ask
members
of
the
public
who
are
in
attendance
to
leave
the
room
for
the
moment
and
I
will
come
and
ensure
that
you're
called
back
into
the
meeting
room
once
members
have
discussed
what
they
need
to
discuss.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
Webcast
is
now
back
on
and
for
those
watching
on
on
webcast,
we've
got
a
question
from
councillor
forsyth
councillor,
forsythe,.
L
Right,
thank
you
very
much.
Obviously,
in
planning
the
festival
you
have
plans
for
extreme
weather,
which
presumably
the
festival
is
very
often
heavy
rain
and
mud,
but
this
year
in
particular,
we
have
been
having
to
deal
with
extreme
heat
events,
and
I
just
wanted
to
ask
in
terms
of
health
and
safety.
What
planning
there
is
I
mean
if
it
was
that
time
a
couple
of
weeks
ago,
when
we
were
expect,
you
know
having
upper
30
temperatures,
I
just
wanted
specifically
to
know
what's
been
and
what
plans
are
in
place
for
that.
I
I've
just
come
out
of
the
festival
this
weekend
in
wilderness
festival
in
the
cops
walls
where
the
temperatures
were
30-ish.
I
think
nothing
in
my
veins
or
my
blood
makes
me
believe
that
we're
going
to
have
sunny
weather
it
leaves,
but
we
may-
and
in
terms
of
I
mean
we,
you
know
we,
I
guess
our
planning
for
in
you
know,
sort
of
extreme
weather
is
usually
based
on
thunder,
lightning
winds,
etc.
It's
very
rarely
has
been
based
on
extreme
heat.
I
We
have
the
the
key
areas
for
extreme
heat,
are
water
and
shade?
We,
you
know
we
have.
We
are
fortunate
in
that
we
have
a
very
tree,
like
you
know,
tree
populated
campsites
and
festivals.
So
we
do
get
some
shade
from
that.
I
We
have
a
large
number
of
marquees
where
entertainment
takes
place,
so
people
can
take
shade
in
that,
and
we
are,
you
know
very
strong
on
our
water
provision,
both
in
the
campsite
and
the
and
in
the
arena
the
we
will
allow
people
to
bring
in
suntan
cream,
obviously
to
the
festival
site.
I
We
have
to
be
careful
with
some
things
that
come
in,
because
people
often
use
those
containers
to
bring
things
in
that
they
shouldn't
necessarily
be
in,
but
we
obviously
have
to
be
as
lenient
as
possible
in
the
exa
in
the
event
of
extreme
weather,
we
employ
full-time,
not
full-time,
but
we
we
have
a
contract
with
a
super
weather-like
satellite
that
gives
us
up-to-date
information
on
exactly
what
we're
anticipating,
particularly
in
the
event
of
the
weather.
I
Turning
and
it
being
you
know,
thunder
and
lightning
in
the
event
of
needing
to
evacuate
a
particular
area
of
the
site
because
of
the
lightning,
for
example,
in
terms
of
the
heat,
there
isn't
a
huge
amount
that
we
can
do
other
than
ensure
that
we
have
adequate
water
provision
and
some
shade,
and
we
will
do
that
to
the
best
of
our
ability.
L
If
it
was
the
sort
of
extreme
heat
that
we've
experienced
already,
I
mean
we've
had
to,
and
you
know
some
people
have
had
to
stop
work.
You
know
at
12
o'clock
working
outside
over
the
midday
period.
Have
you
thought
about
planning
for
any
rescheduling
of
events
and
also
the
other?
The
other
issue
about
this
is
the
alcohol
too,
which
is
in
terms
of
so
I'm
just
asking
whether
this
has
been
thought
through
and
considered.
I
Well,
in
a
festival,
I've
had,
I
had
for
a
long
time
is
a
festival
in
spain
called
benny
casine
festival,
where
temperatures
of
that
nature
were
not
unusual.
I
Benny
cassine
council
allowed
us
to
start
the
festival
at
6,
00
p.m
and
finish
at
6
a.m,
and
I'm
certainly
open
to
hearing
that
from
leeds
city
council.
I
think
my
festival,
girls
would
be
delighted
at
the
thought
that
they
could
be
start
at
six
and
finish
at
six,
but
unless
and
until
that
happens,
the
rescheduling
is
not
possible.
We
certainly
can't
reschedule
to
a
different
weekend.
I
The
artists
are
not
available,
the
infrastructure
is
not
available,
etc,
etc.
I
shall
present
it
to
the
first
sag
that
we
will
be
starting
at
six
o'clock
and
finishing
at
six
o'clock
in
the
morning
and
hopefully
they
will
all
agree,
but
I
suspect
they
won't.
I
think
we
will
suffer
the
heat.
Unfortunately,.
G
Thank
you
thinking.
Maybe
a
fact-finding
trip
to
ben
kasim
is
an
order
so
yeah
just
just
just
a
quick,
quick
question
in
terms
of
welfare
for
people
who
are
going
to
be
working
at
the
festival
and
what
facilities
on
site
are
going
to
be
provided
for
for
those.
Obviously,
it's
quite
a
quite
an
intense
period
of
work
for
anybody
working
on
a
bar
or
obviously
running
security,
so
just
be
interested
to
learn
a
little
bit
more
about
the
welfare
subsidies
for
those
members
of
staff.
I
I'll
get
lucy
to
pick
up
on
this
I
mean,
obviously,
we've
got
staff
very
much
working
on
site
now.
You
know,
we've
got
areas
of
shade:
we've
got
water
facilities,
we've
got
food
and
drink
facilities,
et
cetera,
et
cetera,
and
during
the
course
of
the
festival
itself.
Again
there
are,
you
know,
break
times
et
cetera
where
people
can
withdraw
their.
You
know
they're,
not
working
24
hours
a
day
there
isn't
welfare
facility
per
se,
but
each
of
the
in
in
the
sense
of
it
there's
welfare
for
everyone.
I
Obviously,
in
terms
of
the
festival,
goes
and
or
others,
but
there
isn't
a
backstage
welfare
provision
separate
from,
or
a
working
welfare
provision
separate
from
the
main
public
welfare
position.
We've
never
had
a
need
for
that
as
yet,
but
there
is
a
each.
I
You
know.
For
example,
each
security
company
has
their
own
base,
has
their
own
facilities
of
setup
and
toilets,
and
you
know
showers,
etc.
Feeding
facilities
that
type
of
stuff
so
and
obviously
a
festival
like
any
festival
like
leeds
festival,
is
made
up
of
a
lot
of
contractors
and
they
generally
have
their
own
setup
where
they
provide
their
own
welfare
facilities
for
their
own
teams.
G
You
know
yeah,
so
I
suppose
I
suppose
it's
more
just
about
respite
and
making
sure
that
the
the
people
are
working
at
the
festival
can
take.
You
know
obviously
they'll
be
taking
breaks
but
make
sure
that
they
are
that
break.
Is
you
know
I
mean
relaxing
is
perhaps
not
the
correct
word,
but
at
least
an
opportunity
to
take
a
step
back
from
from
the
busy
environment.
A
No
in
that
case
we'll
turn
to
the
recommendations.
Then
please,
so
the
committee
is
asked
to
delegate
the
approval
of
the
final
event
management
plan
to
the
chief
officer,
elections
and
regulatory.
So
can
members
please
indicate
whether
they
are
in
favor
of
this
recommendation.
Please.
A
A
A
Okay,
we
have
the
next
agenda
item,
which
is
gender
item.
Number
eight
was
scheduled
for
half
past
eleven
so
until
that
time
we're
going
to
take
a
schedule,
break
counselor
booklet.
Yes,.
K
M
A
A
B
Views
of
inspection
of
documents
under
agenda
item
two:
there
there's
no
sorry
android
android
into
this
there's
no
exempt
information
where
the
committee
might
move
into
a
private
session
under
gender
item.
Three
we've
got
their
late
items
under
gender
item.
For
could
I
ask
members
to
declare
any
interests
that
they
may
have
in
the
forthcoming
item.
L
Well,
thank
you.
I
responded
to
this
consultation
last
year
prior
to
knowing
that
I
was
going
to
be
on
licensing
committee
from
this
may
and
whilst
I'm
confident
that
I
may
remember
that
I
would
remain
of
an
open
mind
on
balance,
I
do
feel
it's
appropriate
that
I
should
no
longer
take
part
in
this
item
so
I'll
be
leaving
the
meeting
now.
A
B
Thank
you
chair,
so
apologies
we've
received
apologies
from
council,
smart
council
flynn
and
councillor
garthwaite
and
just
one
further
thing.
I've
been
asked
to
draw
to
the
members
of
the
public's
attention,
and
I
know
that
some
of
you
are
recording
the
the
committee
meeting,
which
is
absolutely
fine,
but
if
could
I
ask
anybody
who
does
not
wish
to
be
recorded
to
indicate
now
and
then
I
would
ask
them
to
the
public
who
are
recording
the
meeting
themselves,
not
to
record
people.
Who've
asked
not
to
be
recorded.
Thank
you.
A
Does
anybody
want
to
indicate
that
they
then
unhappy
to
be
recorded
no
ticket?
That
everybody's
happy
then
can
also
ask
people
to
turn
the
phones
on
silent
because
quite
a
lot
of
ping-ponging
going
about,
and
it's
not
good
for
concentration.
Of
course
you're
allowed
your
phone's
on
to
record,
though
right.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
we'll
move
on
to
item
number
six
then
please,
which
is
the
meeting
of
the
previous
meeting
held
on
the
27th
of
may
22..
A
We
have
already
been
through
this
again,
but
just
we
will
go
through
it.
Are
our
members
happy
with
the
minutes?
Yes,
thank
you
very
much.
Well,
that's
accepted,
in
which
case
we
now
move
on
to
a
gender
item
number
eight,
which
is
taxi
and
private
tire
licensing
results
of
consultation
on
suitability,
minor
motoring
convictions,
okay
right,
counselor,
counselor,
martin.
A
I
can
see
that
you're
you're
keen
to
ask
a
question
and
represent
your
constituents,
but
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
allow
andrew
to
go
through
the
report
first
and
then
you
can
ask
the
next
question:
okay,
that's!
Okay!.
A
Yeah
yeah
good
point.
Thank
you
very
much.
We
will
go
around
sorry.
I
I
missed
out
because
we're
we're
in
the
second
part
of
the
meeting,
but
it
would
be
good
practice
for
us
to
go
around
and
introduce
ourselves
again
for
everybody.
That's
new
to
the
meeting.
Can
we
please
do
that?
I'm
sorry
for
for
that?
Yes,.
H
Thanks
chair
good
afternoon,
everyone,
my
name
is
nicole
walker,
I'm
the
head
of
legal
services
and
I'm
the
legal
advisor
to
today's
panel.
F
Hello:
everyone,
I'm
lisa
martin
and
I'm
a
councillor
from
round
hayward.
G
Hi
everyone
I'm
councillor:
sharon
hamilton
representing
motown
and
meanwood
ward
good
morning,
luke
farley
labour
councillor
for
burma's
office
in
richmond
hill.
C
A
Thank
you
very
much,
so
we
will
now
move
on
to
the
report
from
andrew
white.
We
also
have
john
mulcahy
and
nicola
walker,
nicole
walker
there
as
well
to
answer
questions
if
required,
moving
forward.
So
we'll
move
now
on
to
andrew.
Thank
you
andrew.
N
Thank
you
chair,
I'm
I'm
gonna
ask
everybody
to
turn
to
the
first
page
and
the
summary
on
the
page
21
and
just
over
the
page
onto
page
22,
and
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
I'm
going
to
talk
you
through
the
summary
and
then
I've
got
a
set
of
about
10,
slides
and
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
draw
your
attention
to
the
particular
parts
in
the
report
that
refer
to
each
I'm
just
aware.
N
This
report
is
quite
long,
particularly
with
the
appendices,
and
I
want
to
draw
your
attention
to
when
I
was
writing
the
report.
What
I
thought
were
the
main
features
I
want
to
get
those
up
front
and
to
make
those
very
clear.
The
slides
themselves
will
end
on
the
specific
options
and
the
implications
of
those
options
before
we
go
to
questions
and
answers.
N
I've
framed
it
that
way,
but
if
there
is
a
burning
question
that
we
really
can't
proceed
with,
if
you
make
a
question
to
the
chair
and
then
see
if
we
can
answer
the
question,
but
otherwise,
if
I
try
and
get
through
the
introduction
and
then
then
the
slides
and
then
we
have
the
questions
so
page
21.
What
is
this
report
about,
and
I
think
particularly,
I
think,
for
licensing
committee
members
who
haven't
been
members
of
licensing
committee
for
real
long.
N
This
goes
back
three
four
five
years
in
terms
of
regional
and
national
work
that
the
council's
been
taking
part
in
together
with
other
authorities.
N
One
important
area
of
this
work-
and
particularly
this
is
this-
is
at
the
heart
of
the
council
as
a
regulator
of
the
council,
as
the
licensing
authority
for
taxi
and
private
hire
is,
is
the
approach
to
suitability
whether
a
person
is.
It
seems
a
fit
and
proper
person
to
hold
a
license,
and
certainly
over
the
last
10
20
30
years.
The
list
of
factors
that
authorities
would
take
into
account
have
got
longer
and
longer
about
what
would
be
taken
into
account
as
to
whether
someone's
a
fit
and
proper
person
to
hold
a
licence.
N
The
focus
today
is
on
the
council,
having
undertaken
consultation
on
changing
one
of
the
criteria
within
the
council's
suitability
and
convictions
policy.
We've
actually
withheld
that
as
an
option
held,
a
working
group
held
further
consultation.
One
of
the
options
is
to
progress
with
the
recommendation
has
consulted.
One
is
to
make
some
revisions
and
one
is
to
start
again
so
the
report
sets
out
the
full
results
of
the
consultation
in
appendices.
N
Amb
also
reveals
a
very
strong
difference
of
opinion
between
the
responses
of
the
general
public
and
the
members
of
the
taxi
and
private
hire
trade,
and
that
has
made
the
the
reports
rather
longer
and
more
detailed
than
it
might
otherwise
have
been.
N
So
the
licensing
committee
are
asked
to
consider
the
outcome
of
the
consultation
and
recommend
to
members
of
executive
board
if
it's
options
a
or
b
a
proposed
way
forward,
using
the
options
or
option
c
to
not
adopt
either
of
am
a
or
b
and
that
further
work
is
required
to
determine
a
more
appropriate
approach
in
relation
to
option,
b
and
and
and
really
in
response
to
the
findings
of
the
consultation
minor
amendments
such
as
those
seeking
to
respond
to
driver
concerns
and
and
further
mitigation
that
we
think
we
can
provide
around
warnings
or
training
or
other
decisions
for
license
holders.
N
N
Option
following
the
consultation
which
I
think
addresses
the
main
findings
of
the
of
the
of
the
consultation-
are
that
we
would
we
would.
We
could
not
grant
an
application
when
someone
has
seven
or
more
points
on
their
license.
Existing
license
holders
reaching
seven
or
more
points
on
their
license
for
minor
motion
convictions
would
receive
a
warning
and
further
training
and
then
existing
license
holders
reaching
nine
points
or
more
for
minor
motion
convictions
and
who
have
previously
attended
training
on
the
posse
may
have
their
license
refused
or
revoked.
N
So
the
report
offers
three
options:
each
with
a
different
implementation
approach.
The
first
two
would
lead
to
recommendations
to
go
to
executive
board
and
again,
we've
previously
taken
the
whole
of
the
suitability
policy
to
executive
board
and,
given
that
the
the
the
level
of
interest
in
this
item
as
well,
we
are,
we
are
going
to
continue
with
taking
taking
options
for
to
executive
board.
N
So
the
focus
on
the
report
really
is
the
context
of
suitability,
the
focus
on
minor
motor
convictions,
what
we
consulted
upon
and
then
options
for
the
way
forward,
particularly
the
practical
proposals
for
how
the
policy
could
be
applied
if
option
a
or
b
is
approved
and
option
b
includes
some
more
information,
as
I've
just
provided,
but
also
includes
some
flow
charts
as
well
to
try
and
summarize
exactly
how
the
the
policy
would
be
applied
as
well.
N
Okay,
I'm
going
to
try
and
summarize
the
time
the
timeline
we've
got,
but
going
back
to
2014
leeds
city
council
implemented
a
convictions
criteria
policy,
and
we
think
we
were
one
of
the
first
authorities
to
implement
such
a
policy.
Three
or
four
years
later,
both
west
yorkshire
and
york
authorities
agreed
to
align
their
convictions
policies,
meaning
we
would
apply
the
same
rules
as
to
someone
getting
a
license
to
work
primarily
taxi
and
private
hire
drivers.
But
in
some
cases
suitability
policies
also
affect
other
licence
holders
like
operators
and
so
on.
N
The
institute
of
licensing
and
others,
including
the
local
government
association
and
lawyers
for
local
government,
developed
what
they
called
a
model
suitability
policy
in
2018,
then
in
2018
and
19,
west,
yorkshire
and
york
authorities.
That's
the
five
of
authorities
in
west
yorkshire
and
the
city
of
york
consulted
on
a
common
suitability
policy
aligned
to
the
iol
standard
and
the
the
more
detail
of
that
is.
N
In
paragraph
five
of
the
of
the
report,
where
we
we've
got
some
specific
details
about
where
west
yorkshire
and
york
differ
from
the
institute
of
licensing
standard
approach,
then
in
2019
and
20
west
yorkshire,
new
york
authorities
implemented
their
versions
of
the
suitability
policy,
lead
city
council
had
its
policy
approved
at
the
december
executive
board,
and
it
was
to
take
effect
from
the
first
of
february
the
other
authorities
that
had
implemented
their
policies.
N
Rather
soon,
as
we
were
the
last
of
those
six
authorities
to
implement
in
2020,
as
well
as
excluding
the
minor
motion
convictions,
the
council
agreed
to
retain
the
minor
motoring
convictions
approach
from
the
previous
convictions
policy,
which
meant
that,
as
long
as
a
driver
was
not
disqualified
for
minor
motion
convictions,
they
will
be
able
to
apply
for
a
license
and
they
would
be
able
to
retain
a
license
which
would
mark
the
council
hours
significantly.
N
Some
distance
away
from
other
authorities
in
west
yorkshire.
But
other
authorities
who
were
following
the
institute
of
licensing
later
in
2020
and
in
2021.
The
department
of
transport
implemented
statutory
guidance,
and
that
requires
licensing
authorities
to
have
regard
to
the
statutory
guidance,
including
suitability,
standards,
and
that
particularly
means
that
the
council
should
a
clear
and
compelling
reason
not
to
follow
the
the
approach
that's
set
out
by
the
institute
of
licensing
and
the
other
standards
for
the
department
of
transport.
N
In
2021,
literally
council
held
two
working
group
meetings
on
minor
motor
convictions
and
then,
following
that,
in
the
autumn
of
2020,
when
we
conducted
extensive
consultation
on
minor
motoring
convictions,
the
results
of
the
of
the
consultation
threw
up
lots
of
lots
of
issues,
which
is
why
we've
had
a
delay
between
the
end
of
the
consultation
and
where
we've
got
it
a
report
today.
So
that's
the
chronology,
I'm
going
to
turn
to
the
consultation,
which
then
is
the
the
focus
this
is.
N
This
is
quite
a
long
part
of
the
report,
which
is
paragraph
16
to
36.
The
questions
for
the
consultation
are
the
first
part
of
appendix
a
the
analysis.
Is
the
second
part
of
appendix
a
the
second
appendix
is
the
response
to
the
main
findings.
We've
grouped
the
findings
of
the
consultation
into
the
top
seven
or
eight
categories,
and
then
provided
a
detailed
answer
and
response
to
each
one.
N
So
in
2018-19,
elite
council
consulted
on
suitability,
policy
and
driver
training
proposals.
At
the
same
time,
we
have
many
more
responses,
some
three
or
four
times
as
many
responses
on
driver
training
and
suitability,
and
I
would
say,
we've
learned
a
lesson
that
we
wouldn't
in
future
carry
out
two
consultations
at
the
same
time.
So
it
was
very
definitely
we
had
seven
or
eight
hundred
responses
on
driver
training
and
we
had
two
or
three
hundred
responses
on
suitability.
N
It's
something
that
I
think
we've
learned
a
lesson
from
there.
2021
league
city
council
holds
the
working
group
meetings
on
minor
motor
convictions.
The
working
group
was
formed
of
councillors,
the
members
of
the
trade,
but
also
of
passenger
groups
as
well.
We
have
representatives
from
adult
social
care
representatives
from
safer
roads
represented
from
the
police,
to
make
sure
that
there
is
a
rounded
discussion
about
this
policy.
So
the
working
group
generated
the
revised
criterion
2021.
N
The
city
council
then
conducted
extensive
consultation
on
minor
motor
convictions
and
we
got
over
2
200
responses
from
license
holders.
A
large
majority
objected
to
the
proposal,
members
of
the
public,
a
majority
in
favor
of
the
proposal,
including
some
members
of
the
public,
who
objected
to
the
proposals
that
didn't
go
strongly
enough
in
terms
of
assuring
them
of
passenger
safety.
The
many
comments
revealed
license
holders
feared
automatic
revocation
of
the
license,
which
was
not
proposed.
N
N
So
the
council
has
taken
the
responses
into
account
in
developing
the
proposals
for
discussion
at
licensing
committee
and
and
particularly
the
the
response
to
specific
comments
in
appendix
b
as
well,
and
then
we
provided
some
additional
communication
materials
to
make
sure
that
that
we
can
share
those
with
taxi
and
private
hire,
trade
and
other
stakeholders
as
well.
I'm
aware
that
this
could
be
quite
quite
a
dry
issue
and
actually
what
people
want
to
know
really
is
where
how
the
policies
or
the
options
would
be
applied
as
people
stand.
N
So
we
provided
that
in
a
much
more
sort
of
graphic
form
than
we've
been
able
to
do
before
so
turning
to
the
comparison-
and
this
is
something
that
we
we've
done
really
following
the
consultation,
so
the
comparison
is
in
paragraphs
31
to
35
of
the
reports
after
receiving
the
consultation
responses,
elite
city
council
contacts,
all
of
the
licensing
authorities
in
england,
for
whom
the
department
for
transport
statutory
guidance
applies.
They
must
have
regard
to
that
whole
statutory
safeguarding
approach,
including
on
suitability.
N
85
authorities
responded
to
about
a
third
of
all
the
the
author,
the
licensing
authorities
in
england,
all
five
of
the
other
west
yorkshire
and
york
authorities
have
applied
the
suitability
policy,
including
minor
motion
convictions,
a
majority
of
authorities
72
out
of
85,
have
a
minor
motoring
convictions,
criterion,
identical
or
close
to
the
institute
of
licensing
standard.
A
minority
of
authorities
13
out
of
85,
have
a
minor
motor
conviction
threshold
in
variance
with
the
with
the
institute
a
licensing
standard.
N
Actually,
when
we
ask
authorities
what
they've,
what
they've
done,
they've
done,
something
similar
to
what
leeds
has
done,
which
is
they've,
had
some
consultation
and
they've
made
some
steps
to
change
and
to
clarify
exactly
how
the
the
policy
would
be
applied.
Only
three
out
of
the
85
that
responded
had
said
we
had
a
12
point
threshold
before
and
it
hasn't
changed
as
a
result
of
the
the
either
the
discussion
or
the
consultation
on
suitability.
N
Okay
turn
into
the
options
and
the
options
are
set
out
in
paragraph
39,
so
the
options
for
licensing
committee-
and
I
me
it's
a
it's
an
unusual
report.
Normally,
the
report
comes
with
very
clear
recommendations,
so
the
option
a
is
the
proposed
criteria.
That's
the
one
that
the
working
group
developed
and
the
council
consulted
upon
is
approved
without
further
amendment
b.
The
proposed
criterion
is
amended.
N
Applications
for
a
new
taxi
or
private
higher
driver
license
will
not
be
accepted
when
applicant
for
seven
or
more
points
for
minor
motoring
convictions.
Existing
license
holders
reaching
seven
or
more
points
for
minor
motor
convictions
would
receive
a
warning.
N
The
intention
of
the
policy
would
only
be
to
refuse
or
a
vocal
license
where
there
are
very
clear
concerns
for
public
safety
and
just
put
a
note
in
there
to
say,
draw
your
attention
to
the
flow
charts
in
appendix
c
as
well.
We've
gone
into
some
detail
about
the
different
options
and
permutations
and
then
thirdly,
third
option
the
proposed
criteria
should
not
be
approved
or
amended
and
that
further
work
is
required
to
determine
a
more
appropriate
criterion.
N
That
might
be
a
repeat
of
a
working
group,
further
options,
further
further
areas
for
discussion
so
for
option
b
and
in
relation
to
the
consultation
sponsors.
I'd
like
to
advise
you
that
minor
amendments
such
as
seeking
to
respond
to
driving
concerns
or
provide
further
mitigation,
such
as
warning
or
training
action
short
of
a
refusal
to
renew
or
a
revocation.
N
We
can
recommend
that
to
executive
board
for
approval.
We
don't
need
to
go
out
to
consult
again,
even
if
that
wasn't
in
black
and
white
in
the
consultation.
So
I'm
gonna,
I'm
gonna,
stop
there.
The
next
slide
just
says
questions
and
answers,
so
I
won't.
I
won't
put
that
put
that
up
on
screen
I'll,
probably
leave
the
options
slide.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
that
andrew
and
it's
very
concise,
and
we
appreciate
it
so
we're
going
to
turn
now
on
to
the
the
question
phase
and
members
are
invited
to
ask
questions,
but
before
we
we
start
the
item.
I
wanted
to
thank
all
the
taxi
and
private
hire
drivers
that
live
and
work
in
leeds
on
behalf
of
the
licensing
committee
and
drivers,
do
play
an
enormous,
enormously
important
role
in
our
city
and
they're
vital
to
our
economy
and
so
often
go
above
and
beyond,
to
support
vulnerable
people
in
our
communities.
A
F
Yes,
I've
got
two
questions,
one
about
the
points
and
and
one
about
the
process
of
revocation
of
a
license.
So
point
12
of
of
your
report
or
of
the
report
highlights
that
fewer
than
two
percent
of
taxi
and
private
hire
drivers
in
leeds
had
nine
points
or
more
on
their
license.
F
F
So
that's
my
points,
question
and,
and
I'd
also
like
to
ask
a
question
about
the
process,
so
the
report
states
that
licenses
will
only
be
considered
for
revocation
when
a
driver
reaches
nine
points.
However,
this
introduces
subjectivity
for
the
individual
officer
and
so
the
the
that
that
takes
the
the
decision-making
process.
F
I've
been
sort
of
considering
how
we
can
ensure
that
there's
enough
transparency
in
that
decision-making
process
that
gives
our
drivers
confidence,
that
it
will
be
a
fair
process
and
and
only
and
revocation
will
only
be
used
as
a
final
resort,
and
only
when
it's
deemed
that
the
license
holder
is
a
risk
to
public
safety
and
I've
taken
some
time
to
speak,
to
lots
of
my
constituents
who
are
drivers
and
in
these
discussions
it's
been
suggested
that
a
licensing
subcommittee
would
be
a
sensible
way
to
ensure
that
no
one
who
receives
nine
points
as
a
license
revoked
unless
they're
a
genuine
risk
to
public
safety.
A
Thank
you.
I
know.
There's
work
been
done
on
licensing
subcommittees
from
councillor
cooper
and
previous
chair.
Councillor
ray
had
asked
for
work
to
be
done
and
I'm
taking
this
up
as
well,
so
there
should
be
an
answer
for
that
who's
best
to
to
come
back
with
the
subcommittee
question.
Please
I'll!
Do
it
sorry
we'll
go
with
lisa's.
First
question
is
that
yeah.
N
Okay,
yeah
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
evidence
on
point,
so
I
think
I
think
that
the
it's
about
the
second
or
third
highest
area
of
complaints
that
the
council
get
the
public
are
concerned
about
the
manner
of
driving.
N
N
I
would
agree
that
it's
10
of
all
complaints
is
probably
fewer
than
100
complaints
a
year
in
comparison
to
30
million
journeys.
It's
a
very
small
percentage.
N
I
think,
in
terms
of
the
risk
around
that,
if
you
have
a
small
number
of
drivers
who
repeatedly
break
speed
limits
or
go
through
traffic
lights
at
red-
and
I
think
they're
generally
the
sorts
of
things
that
would
fall
under
minor
motor
convictions,
I'm
afraid
that
the
we
we
have
to
take
an
approach
where
it
comes
to
driving
standard
that
we
would
say
we
need
to
be
reassured
that
everybody
reaches
that
level
and
I
think,
particularly
in
terms
of
the
department
of
transport,
thought
the
threshold
of
seven
points,
which
was
recommended.
N
That
was
that
were
seven
points
accrued
over
a
five-year
period
and
leads
in
the
other
way
structure.
Authority
thought
it
should
be
seven
points
over
the
last
three
years.
We
thought,
if
you
took
into
account
the
likelihood
that
someone
would
be
offered
one
a
speed
awareness
course.
Two
three
points
for
the
first
incident.
N
Second,
sorry,
third,
three
points
for
the
third
incident.
Someone
who's
accrued
seven
points
or
more,
has
probably
had
three
separate
incidents
within
recent
memory
of
poor
driving
standard
so
that
that's
the
suggestion
from
the
the
institute
of
licensing
and
others
and
then
endorsed
by
the
by
the
department
of
transport
in
terms
of
the
position
in
leeds.
N
I
would
agree
with
you
that
we're
talking
about
the
drivers
with
the
with
the
very
highest
level
of
points
and
again
it's
fair
to
say,
80
percent
of
drivers,
don't
have
any
points
on
their
license,
but
I'm
afraid
that
the
focus
of
regulation
has
to
as
well
be
on
the
the
small
minority
that
would
pose
a
higher
risk
and
again
the
numbers
I'm
going
to
tell
you
are
probably
not
very
large
in
terms
of
that,
but
we
have
maybe
200
300
accidents
reported
to
us
the
licensing
authority
for
taxing
private
hire.
N
So
we've
got
8200
complaints
here
about
driving
standard
200
to
250
accidents
a
year
where
there
is
a
a
likelihood
of
the
vehicle
not
being
on
the
road
that
doesn't
mean
that
drive
is
the
cause
of
it.
N
But
if
someone
is
speeding
as
well,
they're
more
likely
to
be
involved
in
a
more
severe
accident
as
well,
so
for
us
there
in
terms
of
the
the
the
evidence
there,
the
the
the
suggestion
is
that
we
would
say
drivers,
taxing
private
hard
drives
drive
a
higher
number
of
miles
than
the
average
motorist
they
are.
Their
passengers
have
fewer
options
or
alternatives.
N
Their
drivers
have
a
lot
of
control
over
what
their
passengers
do
and
therefore
those
passengers
are
entitled
to
feel
safe
and
therefore
the
council
has
a
an
obligation
to
make
sure
that
it
applies
an
appropriate,
proportionate
approach
to
points.
N
What
I
think
we've
been
doing
over
the
past
two
years
is
refining
that
option
around
where
we
think
that
the
the
points
level
should
be
in
terms
of
that,
and
that's
that's
very
much
a
focus
on
the
public
perception,
as
well
as
on
the
views
of
license
holders,
the
majority
of
whom
haven't
got
any
points
probably
will
never
possibly
will
never
get
any
points
in
terms
of
that.
So
that's
the
the
the
the
position
on
points
in
terms
of
revocation
and
subjectivity.
N
I
mean,
I
think,
particularly,
I
don't
think
the
two
necessarily
come
together,
but
the
sorts
of
factors
that
an
officer
would
take
into
account
when
it
comes
to
the
circumstances
of
the
individual
case
would
sort
of
thing
that
would
would
very
definitely
come
into
account
might
be
the
the
how
recently
someone
would
have
been
on
the
remedial
training.
So
I've
seen
the
presentation
and
the
content
of
the
driver
training
the
driver,
training
that
we're
proposing
to
put
people
who've
got
more
than
seven
points
on
it's
about
six
hours.
N
It's
a
significant
driver
train
if
you've
been
on
a
speed
awareness
course
it's
at
least
as
long
again
as
a
speed
awareness
course,
in
terms
of
it's
significant
areas
of
training,
drawing
attention
to
the
particular
areas
that
taxi
and
private
hire
drivers
find
themselves
coming
into
conflict
with.
So
one
would
be
the
how
quickly,
after
going
on
remedial
training,
someone
then
accrued
a
further
conviction,
but
other
areas
there
and
again,
I'm
not
sure
they're
necessarily
subjective,
might
be
around
the
depend
on
how
long
the
point
to
stay
on
someone's
license.
N
If
the
points
are
about
to
come
off
someone's
license.
This
isn't
about
us
saying
we'll
see
if
we
can
revoke
somebody.
If
we
think
someone
is
if
they're
going
to
have
the
points
come
off
their
license
in
september
and
we're
aware
of
a
current
issue
in
august,
our
approach
very
much
there
will
be
to
take
that
into
account
when
making
the
decision
and
saying
well,
actually,
this
individual
they're
going
to
be
dropping
back
below
a
certain
level.
N
Let's
just
see
when
was
when
did
we
do
the
driver,
training
or,
for
example,
are
the
other
other
circumstances
for
the
particular
endorsements?
Are
they
the
same
issues
you
know
are
they
is?
Is
this
a
pattern
of
behavior
that
that
somehow
we
we,
we
think
we're
able
to
to
make
change
short
of
a
revocation,
and
I'm
just
I'm
just
trying
to
check
in
terms
of
the
third
area
in
terms
of
just
discussions
around
revocations
and
whether
there
could
be
another
step
put
in
there
which
isn't
in
the
in
the
report?
N
In
terms
of
that,
but
it's
open
to
the
council,
it's
within
the
scope
of
the
council's
constitution
for
a
subcommittee
but
very
very
open
to
have
that
discussion.
In
fact,
that's
one
of
the
areas,
that's
also
in
the
statutory
guidance
that
the
council
should
consider
ways
to
involve
councillors.
C
Yes,
thank
you
chair.
Just
a
couple
of
additional
com
comments
there
about
the
the
referral
for
training.
C
If
members
were
to
adopt
recommendation
b,
which
is
mended
the
amended
wording,
what
that
would
actually
mean
in
practice
is
that
is
that
nobody,
who's
licensed
by
the
council
would
actually
be
revoked
in
the
first
instance
if
they
were
at
nine
points
or
more
because
those
people
would
not
have
had
the
opportunity
of
having
the
training
that
they
would
have
had
if
they'd
have
been
at
seven
or
eight
before
so
everybody
above
seven
points,
including
those
above
nine
points,
will
be
considered
for
further
training
in
the
first
instance,
and
then
only
if
further
points
were
accrued.
C
That
would
mean
that
they
would
then
be
considered
for
revocation
dependent
on
the
seriousness
of
the
matter.
So
that's
just
to
clarify
that.
Secondly,
regarding
the
the
suggestion
of
a
licensing
subcommittee-
yes
you're,
absolutely
right
chair
this
had
been
considered
by
councillor
cooper
before
we
have
done
some
work
on
this.
There
is
a
route
that
we
can
set
up,
so
that
members
would
be
so
that
if
anybody
was
considered
for
revocation
it
could
come
to
a
licensing
subcommittee.
There
is
a
method
for
us
to
do
that.
C
We've
had
a
discussion
with
our
legal
team
about
that.
We
can't
put
that
in
place,
so
that
would
be
something
that
we
could
support
quite
easily.
If
that
was
an
additional
recommendation
that
members
would
like
to
make
today.
A
Can
I
ask
the
goal
to
to
come
in
and
clarify
some
of
the
legal
points?
Please.
H
Thanks
chair,
yes,
just
what
my
colleague
john
has
just
explained
there.
At
the
moment,
officers
have
delegated
authority
from
this
committee
to
make
decisions
about
revocations
of
licenses,
but
if
members
wanted
to
say
for
a
pilot
period
have
a
little
bit
more
involvement
in
that
decision-making
in
relation
to
revocation
for
matters
that
related
to
minor
motor
and
offences,
then
that
is
a
procedure
we
can
put
in
place
like
like
john's
described.
H
A
F
Yes,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
that,
and
I'd
suggest
that
we
do
move
to
that
option
and
I
may
have
misunderstood
the
officer,
but
yes
to
the
training.
I
wasn't
arguing
against
the
training.
Yes
to
that,
and
then
the
subcommittee
so,
but
just
to
go
back
to
my
first
question,
which
is
about
the
the
points,
and
I
may
have
missed
you
making
answering
this
specific
point.
But
what
I
was
after
was
do.
N
N
But
there
was
a
small
number,
maybe
10
percent,
maybe
50
out
of
the
800,
who
thought
it
should
be
even
more
demanding
than
than
a
refusal
at
seven
points
in
a
revocation
with
you
know,
after
after
after
training,
so
there's
evidence
in
the
consultation
as
well.
I
think,
without
going
maybe
going
back
and
asking
asking
in
more
detail
around
that,
I
don't.
I
don't
think
we
have
that
information.
Counselor.
M
Yeah,
thank
you
chair.
I
think
the
questions
that
councillor
martin
asked
were
completely
sensible
and
I
think
they're
the
basis
on
I've
got
several
things.
If
I
may
to
to
talk
about-
and
I
just
wondered
whether
is
is
all
of
this-
a
solution
in
search
of
a
problem.
M
So
that's
question
number
one
and
in
terms
of
commenting
on
this
on
this
whole
process,
the
feeling
seems
to
be
particularly
in
the
private
higher
trade
that
the
consultation
which
has
been
talked
about
and
discussed,
hasn't
been
in
their
view
as
extensive
as
they
would
have
wished,
and
even
if,
as
andrew
will
obviously
say,
the
consultation
process
has
been
fair
and
and
correct.
M
There
seems
to
be
a
perception
out
there
that
it
hasn't
been,
and
it
hasn't
come
to
a
full
discussion
just
talking
about
the
and
I'm
jumping
around
a
little
bit
here.
But
this
is
the
nature
of
the
discussion
just
jumping
around
onto
this
consultation
with
the
public
of
800
people
yeah
these
800
people,
some
of
whom
are
specifically
referred
to
in
the
survey
as
being
at
various
ages.
M
People
public
will
tend
automatically
in
these
situations
to
say:
oh,
yes,
we
should
go
for
the
highest
penalty
because
they
don't
know
the
background
to
it.
We're
trying
to
understand
all
these
strands
of
of
the
background,
but
they
simply
don't
so
they'll
automatically
say
they
want
more
safety,
even
when
that's
not
necessarily
the
outcome
that
they'd
actually
have
in
terms
of
counsellor
involvement.
I
think
we
need
to
be
very
careful
here
very
carefully.
Indeed.
M
A
great
a
huge
majority
of
the
private
hire
drivers
are
against
these
proposals.
M
There
are
other
things
I
want
to
say
sure,
but
I'll
leave
that
there
for
the
moment,
but
I
think
the
overwhelming
thought
in
my
head
as
things
stand,
is
that
the
consultation
that
we
say
has
been
concluded
hasn't
satisfied.
The
trade.
N
Okay,
I'll
I'll
reply,
I
there
is
no
doubt
that
the
perception
of
our
of
our
consultation
has
been
that
we
did
not
consult
widely
enough,
and
I
think
it's
no
consolation
to
us
that
we
consulted
more
effectively
than
our
neighboring
authorities.
I
don't
think
the
perception
that
authorities
are
seeking
to
implement
the
toughest
criteria
without
really
going
going
through
the
consultation,
I'm
not
sure
that
that
can
be
upheld
in
leads
we've
after
the
consultation,
we
extended
the
consultation
in
leeds
at
the
request
of
several
license
holders.
N
When
we,
when
we
did
the
original
consultation,
we
then
held
a
working
group
and
involved
members
of
the
trade
councillors
officers,
stakeholder
passenger
groups,
stakeholder
stakeholder
groups,
who
had
who
had
their
say,
and
it
was
those
working
groups
that
came
up
with
the
recommendation.
N
It
wasn't
officers,
it
was
the
working
group
themselves,
it's
hard
for
me
to
think,
because
when
I
say
that
people
I
think
sometimes
feel
that
they
don't
believe
that
we've
that
we've
done,
that
we
have
the
the
option
in
our
in
our
in
our
back
pocket,
but
genuinely
came
came
from
the
working
group.
I
I
do
think
that
it.
This
this
has
exposed
a
real
difference
of
opinion
from
members
of
from
the
trade
license.
N
Holders
are
members
of
the
public
and
I
absolutely
agree
with
you,
council
buckley,
that
if
you
put
a
survey
in
front
of
people,
some
people
will
say
more
regulation,
no
way
tougher
standards.
I
don't
want
it
even
though
we,
the
specific
provision,
we're
talking
about
here,
is
very,
very
likely
not
to
affect
the
majority
of
license
holders
and
he's
very
likely
to
reassure
the
public
and,
on
the
other
side,
people
looking
at
this
from
a
public
safety
point
you
would
say
well
I
want
I
would
demand
even
tougher.
Why
not
what
you
know?
N
What
why?
Why
stop
at
seven
or
why?
Why
stop
at
nine?
Do
I
not
have
tougher
conditions-
and
I
think,
that's
I
think,
that's
the
the
feature
of
consultation
and
matters
such
as
this,
and
I
think
it
just
reveals
that
when
we
do
large-scale
consultations,
it
reveals
the
opinions
of
people
with
very
come
from
very
different
standpoints.
N
In
terms
of
that,
I
I
I
do
think
in
terms
of
the
the
first
point
going
by-
and
this
is
before
my
time
in
taxi
licensing,
the
earlier
convictions
policy
was
certainly
implemented
in
2014.
There
may
have
been
something
before
2014
on
driving
points.
N
When
we
did
the
report
for
comparisons
on
the
implementation
on
suitability.
I
think
I
looked
at
the
annual
licensing
reports
and
revealed
that
we
had
probably
revoked
one
license
every
two
or
three
years
for
people
exceeding
the
12
points
and
reaching
disqualification.
You
actually
see
from
the
table
in
section
12
on
page
25,
we
actually
have
now
six
people
who
are
not
revoked
in
some
cases,
they've
reached
12
or
more
points.
They
are
appealing
their
conviction
or
endorsement.
N
We
have
not
revoked
their
license
because
we
want
to
let
the
courts
go
through
that
due
process
there,
which
I
think,
gives
again
councilman
some
confidence
that
we
aren't
quick
to
jump
in
and
revoke
where
we
can
but
to
see
the
the
the
the
policy
the
policy
through.
I
think,
in
terms
of
the
direction
of
travel
nationally.
N
There
has
very
definitely
been
a
focus
on
driving
standard
over
the
last
several
years,
not
just
in
west
yorkshire,
but
with
the
institute
of
licensing
lawyers
for
the
government,
local
urban
association
and
the
department
of
transport.
The
department
of
transport
has
fully
endorsed
the
point
that
licensing
authorities
should
be
able
to
impose
a
policy
that
that
sets
a
lower
point
threshold
other
than
avoiding
disqualification
for
someone
to
carry
on
holding
a
taxi
and
private
hire
license.
N
I
think,
in
terms
of
the
the
licensing
subcommittee,
I
think
is
very.
We
would
very
definitely
need
to
establish
the
terms
of
reference
for
a
licensing
subcommittee
to
make
sure
that
we're
absolutely
clear
exactly
what
the
terms
of
reference
are
for
for
how
for
how
how
that
would
take
place
in
my
five
years
in
this.
In
this
role,
I've
never
actually
contributed
to
a
licensing
subcommittee.
N
We
were
very,
very
keen
to
follow
exactly
the
guidance
that
we
would
take
in
terms
of
how
we
would
present
the
information
to
the
members
of
the
subcommittee
so
that
it
would
be
very
clear
exactly
how
then,
that
that
discussion
could
take
place
on
whether
that
case
could
be.
You
know
that
case
could
be
treated
on
its
own
merits.
A
Thank
you
andrew
for
that.
Do
you
want
to
come
back
with
some
more
yeah
yeah.
M
M
M
I
think
I've
been
to
two
over
the
years,
and
typically
retired
police
officers
go
through
the
motions
of
telling
you
what
you
already
know
and
what
they
already
know.
They
know
the
the
highway
code
and
regulations,
and
it's
it's.
Everyone
pretends
that
the
training
courses
do
good
and
in
fact
my
view
would
be
that
it's
two
hours
of
your
life
you'll
never
get
back
and
they
already
know
the
law
and
they
know
when
they've
broken
it,
I'm
not
sure,
I'm
a
great
fan
of
of
training.
M
I
just
think
this
whole
thing
just
needs
to
be.
I
think
the
whole
point
of
the
consultation
just
needs
to
be
thought
very
carefully
about
further.
A
N
N
It
actually
is
a
it's
probably
a
very
good
template
for
what
we
would
do
by
way
of
refresher
training
in
terms
of
taxi
and
private
hire,
and
particularly
the
sort
of
thing
that
we
feed
back
to
the
to
the
trade
through
our
bulletins
license
holders
about
the
things
that
we
think.
Sometimes
people
lose
sight
of,
bearing
in
mind
that
the
changes-
that's
not
just
to
do
with
the
the
highway
code,
which
has
changed
significantly
this
year,
but
also
the
legislation
and
other
guidance
that
relates
specifically
to
taxi
and
private
hire.
N
So
I
very
much
think
it
isn't
going
through
the
motions
and
therefore
it
is
worthwhile.
I
will
get
myself
to
attend
one
of
those,
so
I
can
actually
see
see
for
myself
as
well
in
terms
of
what
we
do.
It's
definitely
an
enhancement
on
what
we
have
previously
done.
N
I
couldn't
say
if
it's
a
much
longer
process,
but
for
me
if
the
fact
that
it's
sort
of
two-thirds
of
a
day
suggests
suggested
it
isn't
some
sort
of
lip
service
and
just
a
rubber
stamp
just
to
just
to
say:
we've
provided
warm
words
and
then
and
then
on
your
way.
I
think
it's
something
I
was
actually
very
impressed
with
the
depth
and
the
content
and
the
thought
that
had
been
given
to
that.
Thank.
C
Yeah
just
to
help
answer
the
question
about
passenger
transport,
the
council's
passenger
transport
standards
you're
correct
councillor.
These
standards
don't
apply
to
council
passenger
transport
drivers.
I've
spoken
to
the
chief
officer
responsible
for
passenger
transport
to
find
out
what
what
criteria
is
considered.
There
they've
confirmed
me
that
there's
no
intervention
until
a
driving
licence
is
stopped.
For
any
reason.
C
This
could
be
from
topping
up
of
points
to
12
or
more
before
the
driver
is
banned,
disqualified
for
other
reasons,
due
to
drink
driving,
etc
or
revolt
for
not
sending
the
license
to
deviate
dvsa
after
an
incident
or
if
the
license
has
chosen
to
be
not
reviewed,
not
renewed
when
it
expires.
C
So
it's
it's
very
similar
to
well
it's
exactly
the
same
as
a
member
of
the
public
is
how
the
standards
are
applied
to
the
council's
passions
transport
section.
A
A
Okay,
councillor
wilson,
please.
E
Thanks
chair
and
just
to
start,
I
just
wanted
to
lend
support
to
councillor
martin's
proposal
on
the
subcommittee.
That
sounds
like
it
could
be
a
very
reasonable
thing
to
do
to
address
drivers,
concerns
and
I'd
like
to
see
more
thought
put
into
how
that
would
work
in
terms
of
reference
and
so
on.
E
E
We
have
a
legal
obligation
to
regard
this
guidance
unless
there's
a
compelling
local
reason,
as
you
said,
and
that
the
institute
of
licensing
framework
now
performs
part
of
the
statutory
guidance
to
licensing
authorities,
but
we
did
receive
an
email
which
I
think
went
to
all
councillors,
which
I
now
don't
have
in
front
of
me,
which
talks
about
the
regulators
code
from
2014
and
saying
that
this
supersedes
statutory
guidance.
E
So
just
want
a
bit
of
clarity
about
whether
that's
the
case
and
following
that,
could
you
just
let
us
know
what
would
happen
if
the
council
doesn't
follow
dft
or
institute
for
licensing
statutory
guidance?
What
are
the
consequences
of
that.
H
Thanks
chair
just
in
relation
to
the
regulator's
code,
that
is
a
code
that
applies
to
local,
sorry,
public
bodies
that
are
regulating
third
parties.
So
it's
not
first
of
all,
it's
not
just
in
relation
to
licensing
matters
and
really
that
goes
through
10
points
about
what
should
happen
when
you
are
bringing
in
a
new
policy
or
procedure
or
practice.
H
Now
I've
considered
those
10
points,
and
I
have
provided
legal
advice
that
we
are
very
much
full
holy
within
all
of
the
matters
that
they
have
to
that
have
to
do
it's
about
making
sure
people
are
clear
about
what
compliance
involves.
It's
about,
making
sure
that
ev
everything
is
really
clearly
set
out.
H
So
someone
knows
what
would
happen
if
they
didn't
comply
and
what
they
would
need
to
do
to
come
back
into
compliance,
and
it's
also
very
much
about
the
extent
of
consultation
and
how
that's
carried
out
so
there's
nothing
in
the
regulators
called
that
the
council
hasn't
hasn't
had
regard
to
and
that
code
sits
below
a
piece
of
legislation.
H
It
certainly
it
sits
alongside
those
other
codes,
it
doesn't
trump.
It's
something
else.
In
addition
to
these
other
matters
that
the
council
has
to
consider
just
moving
on
to
the
other,
the
dft
guidance,
so
that
is
statutory
guidance.
H
It
was
brought
in
as
a
result
of
an
act
that
required
the
department
of
transport
to
bring
in
guidance
to
deal
with
minimum
standards
for
taxi
drivers
and
vehicles
and
operators,
and
it's
very
clear
that
the
department
expects
that
the
recommendations
within
the
guidance
to
be
implemented
unless
there's
a
compelling
reason
not
to
do
so
and
also
beside
that
sits
beside
that
but
below.
If
you
like,
is
the
institute
of
license
and
guidance.
H
So
that's
guidance
brought
together
by
all
stakeholders,
including
members
of
the
trade
to
and
it
doesn't,
it
doesn't
just
deal
with
those
standards,
but
in
relation
to
standards,
it's
the
institute
of
license
and
guidance
that
sets
the
interpretation.
That
seven
points
is
evidence
that
there's
been
multiple
non-compliances
with
minor
motor
and
offences.
So
the
dft
guidance
says
that
a
license
should
not
be
revoked
or
refused.
H
If
someone
only
has
one
minor,
modern
offense,
so
you
would
think
that
was
about
three
points
or
or
a
driving
or
a
driving
awareness
course.
H
H
And
so,
if
you
think
about
like
what
what
what
andrew
explained
earlier
is
that,
by
the
time
you
get
to
nine
points,
you
may
well
be
on
to
your
fourth
minor
minor
minor
motoring
offense,
because
you
may
well
have
been
offered
a
course
first,
and
so
that
is
why
the
interpretation
around
the
seven
and
nine
points
has
come
into
being
through
the
institute
of
license
and
guidance.
So
I
don't
know
if
that's
any
help
to
members,
it's
not
just
an
arbitrary
seven
points.
H
It's
a
reason,
because
the
evidence
shows
that
multiple,
multiple
non-compliance
with
minor
motrin
convictions
shows
that
the
standard
of
a
driver
for
a
professional
driver
which
the
department
and
the
government
have
decided
should
be
higher
than
people
who
don't
drive
for
a
profession.
And
that's
that's
how
the
points
triggers
have
come
into
being
and
that's
the
context
behind
how
we
got
to
where
or
presumably
how
the
working
group
got
to
the
trigger
points
that
they
had.
H
Obviously
we
do
have
to
have
regard
to
that.
If
there's
a
compelling
reason
not
to
do
so.
H
We
need
to
be
very
clear
about
what
those
reasons
are,
but
I
think,
as
officers
have
explained
and
as
the
report
fully
explains,
that
we
do
also
have
to
have
regard
to
the
the
representations
received,
and
that
is
why
the
additional
proposed
amendments
with
regard
to
putting
in
that
additional
training
between
points,
seven
and
nine
and
not
an
automatic
revocation
option-
is
being
suggested,
because
then
that
shows
that,
as
a
committee,
you
have
considered
the
you
have
considered
the
representations
made
by
the
public
because
they
want
the
safety,
other
stakeholders,
but
also,
very
importantly,
the
trade.
H
And
that
shows
that
you
would
be
having
regard
because
if
you
were
to
go
with
that
I'll
call
it
the
tweaked
option:
option
b.
That
shows
that
you've
we've
looked
at
the
proposals
that
were
consulted
on,
but
actually
you
just
want
to
change
them
slightly,
because
you
want
to
have
more
regard
to
the
specific
comments
of
the
people
who
responded
to
the
consultation.
A
H
Yes,
chair,
just
like
I
explained,
you
really
need
a
real
compelling
reason
not
to
do
so,
so
you
would
need
to
decide.
You
would
need
to
be
of
the
view
as
to
why
that
seven
to
nine
points,
proposals
that
you're
putting
forward.
You
don't
believe
that
that
is
necessary
and
you
would
need
objective
evidence
for
that.
H
So
we
would
need
to
think
very
carefully
if,
if,
if
you
were
going
to
go
against
that
guidance,
but
the
dft
guidance
is
the
you
should,
you
know
say:
for
example,
we
had
an
authority
wanted
to
not
apply,
not
allow
a
license
or
not
grant
a
license.
If
someone
had
three
points
well,
that
would
be
going
against
the
dft
guidance
because
it
very
clearly
says
one
infringement
should
not
be
sufficient
to
not
grant
a
license.
E
Yeah,
I
I
assume
then
essentially
the
consequences
is
that
our
decision
could
be
revoked
in
court
or
by
the
department
of
transport
or.
A
K
Thanks
chair,
one
thing
I
find
difficult
about
this
is
that
we've
been
given
national
guidance
for
us
to
have
a
decision
at
a
local
level.
I
would
have
thought
something
like
this
should
be
decided
on
by
the
government,
and
then
we
all
know
where
we
are
and
there's
consistent
approach
across
the
whole
country,
and
I
think
it's
regrettable
that
for
something
as
important
as
this,
the
government
haven't
made
it
mandatory.
However,
we
have
options.
K
So
I
thank
you
for
those
go
back
a
year
or
so
to
a
previous
committee
meeting,
and
I
did
ask
officers
at
the
time
and
I'm
about
the
possibility
of
a
subcommittee
personally,
I
favor
that,
because
I
think
that
it
means
that
there
isn't
a
decision
made
by
officers
which
might
be
difficult
for
them,
but
it
would
be
something
that,
as
councillors,
we
would
have
that
opportunity
to
make
that
decision
and
there
has
been
a
precedence
in
the
past.
I
used
to
sit
on.
K
I
forget
the
exact
name
of
it,
but
it
was
an
employment
tribunal
and
I
have
had
members
of
staff
of
council
staff
that
have
been
dismissed
and
I
have
had
to
listen
to
that
case,
and
that
is
very
difficult
because
you
are
deciding
somebody's
livelihood
there.
So
I
have
done
this
before
and
yes,
there
are
pressures
involved,
but
I
think,
as
elected
members,
they're
pressures
that
we
should
be
taking
and
it
perhaps
shouldn't
be
down
to
officers
to
take
those.
K
So
I
would
certainly
do
that
one,
a
couple
of
other
things.
I'd
just
like
to
point.
This
is
more
of
a
comment,
but
there
are
some
things
that
perhaps
officers
can
pick
up
from
one
is
that,
on
the
option
b
in
particular,
it
doesn't
have
any
time
scales
for
things.
So
it
says
that,
upon
it
says,
existing
whole
license
hold
is
reaching
seven
points
or
more
for
minor
motoring
convictions
will
receive
a
warning
and
will
be
only
be
required
to
attend
appropriate
training.
K
It
doesn't
say
what
time
scale
that
training
has
to
be
done
within,
and
I
think
there
should
be
a
time
frame.
K
The
interesting
thing
is
what
happens
if
somebody
gets
to
a
certain
level
and
then,
before
the
training
comes
on
their
points
drop
below
that
level,
so
that
technically
the
training
is
no
longer
relevant
and
it
is
the
something
within.
I
don't
think
this
is
quite
clear
enough
on
points
like
that,
and
then
the
other
thing
is
that
existing
license
holders
reaching
nine
points
again.
How
quickly
would
a
subcommittee
have
to
meet
bearing
in
mind
that
there
might
be
issues
for
public
safety?
K
Would
that
driver
then
be
permitted
to
carry
on
until
the
hearing
and
what
happens
if
points
are
dropped
off
the
license
before
that
hearing
comes
so
there's
one
or
two
issues
around
that.
You
mentioned
that
the
training
looked
very
good
and
it
wasn't
just
lip
service
to
let's
turn
up
and
tell
people
what
they
already
know.
I
think
it
might
be
useful.
K
My
colleagues
might
not
agree,
but
I
would
be
very
interested
to
attend
one
of
those
courses
so
that
we
understand
what
the
trade
go
would
be
going
through,
so
that
we
actually
fully
understand
the
importance
and
the
value
of
that
training.
I
think
that'll
be
something
useful
for
councillors.
I'll
just
have
a
quick
look
see
if
I
made
any
other
notes.
Oh
and
the
other
thing
which
I
find
disappointing.
K
Is
that-
and
I
don't
know
if
this
can
be
addressed
or
be
as
a
recommendation
outside
of
our
remit,
but
to
the
fact
that
there
are
young
people
being
transported
around
by
this
council
potentially
by
drivers
that
have
perhaps
nine
points
on
their
license.
If
we're
insisting
that
taxi
that
taxi
and
private
hire
drivers
are
reviewed
after
nine
points,
we
should
be
insisting
that
our
own
drivers
are
refused
sorry
reviewed.
There
is
a
clear
inconsistency
there
to
me
now.
K
They
may
not
be
classed
as
professional
drivers
that
are
driving
all
day,
but
they
are
transporting
around
some
vulnerable,
potentially
vulnerable
people.
So
I
just
wonder
if,
if
that
can
be
fed
back
to
whoever
is
responsible
for
issuing,
though
you
know
telling
people
to
do
that
that
we
have
appropriate
drivers
within
the
council
for
consistency.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
for
those
questions
which
are
very
pertinent.
I
just
to
say
that
with
regards
to
drivers
and
the
rest
of
the
the
council,
obviously
it's
not
a
license.
It
doesn't
fall
within
the
licensing
committee,
but
I'm
happy
to
pass
it
on
to
to
the
relevant
executive
member
for
you,
those
comments.
Okay,
john
andrew.
N
N
Would
that
somehow
mean
we
would
fail
to
apply
the
policy
in
terms
of
the
capacity
for
driver
training
or
remedial
training
and
so
on?
We
are
allocating
two
half
days
per
month
at
the
moment,
we're
doing
them
in
the
last
week
of
each
month
and
we're
trying
to
11
or
12
drivers
each
time
so
you've
got
the
capacity
to
do
something
like
120
130
sessions
a
year.
I
would
very
much
hope
our
implementation
again.
N
This
might
depend
on
how
we
do
the
do
the
options
and
again
there'd
always
be
a
provision
for
remedial
training,
irrespective
of
which
option
we
provide
anyway.
All
we've
done
is
to
to
enhance
the
training
materials
really
in
preparation.
So
I
think
that's
the
reason
why
we
don't
have
the
time
scale
specifically
in
the
policy,
but
they
might
be
in
the
implementation.
N
Our
aim
would
be
as
soon
as
we
are
notified
that
someone
lets
us
know
rather
than
we
find
out
if
we
find
out
and
they
haven't.
Let
us
know
there's
a
separate
issue
around
not
disclosing
something,
as
as
john
has
mentioned
soon,
as
we
find
out
that
someone
has
disclosed.
N
So
it
might
be
maybe
eight
weeks
rather
than
four
weeks
in
terms
of
that,
but
that
that
would
be
something
I
think
we
could
clarify
in
an
implementation
over
a
written
response
following
today,
and
I
think
particularly
in
terms
of
that,
it's
the
same,
I
think-
and
that's
that's
where
and
I
don't
think
it's
subjective,
but
I
think
there
is
there's
very
definitely
a
point
here
that
we
we
are.
We
are
not
trying
to
punish
somebody
for
exceeding
the
point.
N
We
are
trying
to
make
sure
that
the
public
feel
safe
and
I
don't
think
the
public
field
would
feel
necessarily
safe
if
we
said
that
person's
got
nine
points
on
their
license
this
week
and
it's
going
to
drop
to
six
points
next
week
and
we're
going
to
take
their
license
away
for
this.
I
don't
think
the
public
would
feel
any
safer
around
that.
I
think
if
we've
got
that
sort
of
thing.
A
N
Yes,
just
to
come
on
to
that
I
mean
I
think,
but
currently
we
would
probably
only
suspend
a
driver
while
they're
waiting
for
training
if
the
training
is
linked
to
a
more
serious
motoring
offense
than
minor
motor
convictions,
I'm
trying
to
think
I
don't
think
we
would
suspend
a
driver's
license
to
do
that.
We
certainly
wouldn't
revoke
somebody
while
they're,
while
they're
waiting
the
training.
N
If
we've
offered
the
training
on
the
the
last
thursday
of
the
month
six
months
in
a
row
and
the
person
hasn't
individually
hasn't
turned
up
and
hasn't
attended
the
training.
I
think
we
would
have
another
issue
and
I
think
that's
where
the
policy
and
the
policy
wouldn't
mention,
wouldn't
go
into
the
detail,
then
about
sort
of
failing
to
follow
the
follow
the
process.
But
we
would
give
someone
a
reasonable
number
of
goes
to
it
to
attend
the
training.
N
We'd
also
want
to
make
sure
that
they
were
aware
of
the
benefits
to
them
of
attending
the
training
compared
to
the
alternative,
so
so
for
us,
but
I
think
particularly
there
that
that
sort
of
practical
implementation
would
follow,
then,
from
whatever,
whatever
policy
criterion
we
we
adopt
from
today
and
that
yeah
and
probably
wouldn't
again,
it's
not
in
the
other,
the
other
areas
of
the
supreme
policy,
about
exactly
how
we
would,
how
often
we
would
review
it
or
how
often
we
would
we
would
look
at
the
the
other
provision
would
be
more
to
do
to
do
with
that
sort
of
implementation
side
of
things.
N
But
we've
got
a
commitment
to
offer
at
least
one
training
session
every
month,
and
if
the
numbers
go
up,
we
will
offer
more
of
those
more
of
those
sessions
every
month.
At
the
moment,
we've
got
the
provision
to
to
train
12
people
every
month,
but
we
can
increase
that
very,
very
quickly,
probably
best
for
me
not
to
not
to
try
and
answer
the
passenger
transport
question.
N
Passenger
transport
is
not
covered
by
the
policing
and
crime
crime
act
not
covered
by
the
by
the
powers
that
the
secretary
of
state
transport
has
got
there.
I
don't
know
nicole,
if
there's
any
provision
there
for
the
for
the
traffic
commission,
I
would
imagine
some
of
the
vehicles
that
rooms
for
the
drivers
are
subject
to
the
powers
of
the
traffic
commission.
I
just
I
just
wouldn't
know
in
terms
of
the
detail.
That
might
be
something
that
we
follow
up
with
the
executive
member
for
that
for
that
area
of
the
council.
A
C
Yeah
just
to
just
help
clarify
as
well
and
and
reassure
members
if
there
was
a
delay
to
delivering
the
training
for
a
particular
driver
who
had
been
asked
to
attend
training
through
no
fault
of
their
own.
They
were
unable
to
attend
because
the
capacity
was
full,
etc.
Then
there'd
be
no
action
taken
against
the
driver
in
those
circumstances.
Clearly,
that's
beyond
the
driver's
control.
C
I
think
the
example
that
andrew
was
given
was
somebody
that
didn't
attend
and
didn't
have
good
reason
why
they
hadn't
attended
sessions.
But
if,
for
any
reason,
I
think
andrew's
explained
that
the
capacity
is
then
it
appears
to
be
sufficient
capacity.
But
if
there
was
a
capacity
issue
and
that
led
to
an
undue
delay,
that
was
was
not
the
fault
of
the
driver,
then
no
action
would
be
taken
against
driving
those
circumstances.
A
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
council
hutchinson.
Next,
please.
D
Oh
yeah,
thank
you.
Chair
started
off
with
one
question,
but
I've
got
quite
a
few
now
as
the
conversations
sort
of
gone
along
and
first
I
guess
comments
with
regards
to
councillor
martin
and
the
subcommittee.
I
think
that's
a
good
idea
should
the
proposal
go
forward.
I
like
the
idea
of
the
subcommittee
idea,
but
also,
I
think
the
council
vehicles
that
counselor
buckley
and
councillor
downs
have
suggested.
D
Does
the
bit
sound
a
bit
like
the
council
is
saying,
do
as
I
say
not
as
I
do,
and
I
think
certainly
that
needs
to
be
passed
on
to
the
exec
board
member
with
regards
to
questions
so
I'm
correcting
assuming
or
that
the
other
west,
yorkshire
authorities
and
york
have
adopted
the
criterion.
N
D
Okay,
do
we
have
any
feedback
or
results
from
those
authorities
that
has
impacted
on
either
lowering
the
complaints
or
increasing
driver
safety,
and
also
has
there
been
an
increase
in
logistics
and
resource
from
those
authorities
to
be
able
to
manage
the
the
new
implementation
and
should
it
be
implemented
within
leeds?
N
Okay,
I
am
aware
that
some
of
the
neighbouring
authorities
have
revoked
people
for
achieving
more
than
seven
points.
I'm
not
aware
that
they've
revoked
someone
for
seven
points,
I'm
aware
that
they
revoke
people
for
multiple
minor
motor
convictions
at
a
higher
point
threshold,
but
not
disqualification.
N
The
numbers,
I
think,
are
more
complicated
because
it's
compounded
by
people
not
reporting
the
points
which
is
again,
which
is
a
a
breach
of
the
licensing
condition,
so
they
might
give
that
additional
treatment
and
not
see
that
as
a
single
issue.
They
might
see
that
as
a
dishonesty
issue,
I'm
not
aware
that
any
of
those
decisions
have
then
been
appealed
and
overturned
in
magistrates
court.
N
In
terms
of
the
implementation
of
that
I
haven't
heard
from
the
other
authorities,
but
both
wakefield
and
kirklees
are
about
to
start
reviewing
their
whole
driver
suitability
policy,
which
then
includes
the
minor
motor
convictions
in
the
in
the
table
a
so
they
will.
They
will
start
in
either
their
september
or
october,
licensing
or
licensing
regulatory
committee
to
set
out
the
impact
of
those
those
policies
unlikely.
Those
those
authorities
don't
provide
an
annual
licensing
report.
N
So
it's
something
where
we
might
see
for
the
first
time
the
detailed
breakdown
of
the
the
impact
of
the
suitability
policy
on
their
case
work,
but
I've
not
heard
I
mean
this
is
this
is
anecdotal.
I've
not
heard
from
those
authorities
that
they're
having
trouble
reaching
licensing
decisions
online,
remotely
convictions
below
a
disqualification
level,
but
they
were
starting
from
a
different
threshold.
N
N
N
In
terms
of
that,
so
at
the
moment,
I
don't
think
that
is
a
large,
a
large
number
counsellor,
but
in
terms
of
the
capacity
to
provide
the
training,
we
will
specifically
earmark
at
least
one
training
session
every
month.
We
don't
want
to
be
any
excuse
for
us,
not
training
promptly,
but
in
terms
of
the
the
drop
in
driver
numbers
following
cobit
or
the
loss
of
earnings
and
so
on.
We
are
very
aware
that
we
need
to
enhance
our
drawing
and
train
provision.
N
D
So
yeah,
that's
a
few
more
for
me.
You
can
see
touched
on
the
training,
the
training
provider.
Are
they
an
accredited
training
provider
for
this
and
is
there
a
cost
associated
to
either
council
or
the
driver.
N
Yeah
the
train,
the
training
currently
is
in-house.
If
it's
an
issue
that
requires
not
some
not
something
like
an
advanced
motoring
test
and
again
it
we
have
the
option
of
requiring
people
to
do
an
advanced
driving
test.
That's
external,
the
classroom,
training
is
internal
and
we've
got
at
the
moment.
We've
got
one
officer
that
provides
that,
but
we've
got
a
pool
of
other
officers.
It
may
well
be
enforcement
officers,
particularly
who
would
provide
that
additional
driving
training.
N
They
are
appropriately
certified
qualified
that
that
be
they'd
have
at
least
licensing
certification
from
the
institute
licensing
or
the
or
the
national
associate
licensing
enforcement
officers,
and
we
would
meet.
We
would
meet
that
those
standards
and
it
fits
fits
with
the
driving
standards,
element
of
nvq
or
city
and
guilds
in
terms
of
some
of
the
some
of
the
some
of
the
other
provisions
as
well.
So
I'm
confident
that
our
provision
meets
recognizable
standards
well
costs.
At
the
moment
the
cost
is
60
pounds
per
session.
N
D
The
cost
to
the
driver
yeah,
I
just
have
two
more
efforts:
okay,
which
is
regarding
page
43,
which
I
think
are
the
results
for
the
of
the
people
who
support
the
change,
and
I'm
correct
that
there's
34
people
who
support
the
change
66
did
not.
Is
that
so
34
of
people
just
want
or
66
want
it
to
remain.
How
it
is
is
that
how
that
interprets
just
a
yes
or
no
yeah?
D
N
D
And
I
guess
I
was
sort
of
referring
more
to
that
on
the
base
that
counselor
book
you
mentioned
earlier
regarding
the
consultation
and
the
and
the
worth
around
that
I
guess,
but
no,
no,
no
more
of
a
point
than
than
just
that.
I
guess
that
that's
all!
I
have
thanks
chad.
A
D
Thank
you,
sir.
I
was
hoping
you
could
give
us
some
information
about
how
reliable
minor
emotional
convictions
are
as
a
predictor
of
risk.
If
somebody
has
a
low
stack
of
mind,
motoring
convictions,
are
they
likely
to
be
involved
in
a
serious
accident
or
are
they
less
are
they?
Is
there
no
correlation
at
all?
Is
there
any
work
done
on
the
reliability
of
these.
N
We
haven't
undertaken
any
specific
work
around
the
correlation
between
driving,
behavior
level
of
points,
accidents
and
so
on.
I
think
we've
relied
on
national
evidence
and
the
evidence
from
the
department
of
transport
and
the
evidence
that
goes
to
the
the
safer
roads
group
in
leeds
that
talks
about
moving
towards
a
zero
accident
city
and
the
the
link
between
accruing
points
and
speed,
particularly
around
that
and
again
the
points
that
we've
made
before
around
that
we
want.
We
want
to
see
taxing
private
hard
drives
professional
drivers,
they
drive
a
disproportionate
number
of
miles.
N
They
often
drive
two
three
four
times
as
many
miles
as
the
general
motorist
does
their
passengers
don't
have
that
control
over
whether
whether
how
the
drivers
drive
where
they,
where
they,
where
they
take
them
in
to
that
you
know
to
that
level.
So
no
we
haven't,
we
haven't
carried
out
in
that
way.
I
did
think
we
had
for
each
of
the
working
group.
Meetings
are
representative
from
the
safer
roads
group
and
we
have
certainly
contributed
towards
the
safer
roads
strategy.
N
That's
just
you
know
that
that's
just
been
consulted
consulted
upon
this
year.
We
do
know
that
the
nationally
the
the
view
from
the
department
of
transport,
the
view
from
the
institute
of
licensing
and
elsewhere
is
that
repeated
infractions,
repeated
endorsements,
do
indicate
that
someone
either
cannot
or
will
not
adjust
their
behavior
in
terms
of
how
they
drive
and
if
they
drive
more
miles,
then
we
need
to
beware,
I
think,
in
terms
of
their
in
terms
of
their
driving
behavior.
N
D
N
I
think
the
summary
is
that
the
department
of
transport
has
endorsed
a
threshold
at
seven
points
saying
we
should
not
issue.
We
must
have
regard
to
the
recommendation.
We
should
not
issue
a
license
to
someone
who's
got
seven
or
more
points
and
that
we
should
review
the
license
of
someone.
Who's
got
seven
points.
What
we've
been
discussing
for
the
last
two
years
or
so
is
the
the
the
the
specifics
of
that.
But
to
some
degree,
though,
we
are
recipients
of
that
national
research
and
and
regulation,
rather
than
conducting
ourselves.
H
Thanks
chair
just
to
clarify
it's
the
institute
of
license
and
guidance
that
has
determined
that
the
the
the
seven
point
trigger
is
the
minor
motor
and
offenses,
which
are
multiple,
is
a
sign.
The
dft
has
not.
It
has
not
mentioned.
Seven
points
has
been
a
trigger,
but
obviously
the
two
sit
together.
There's
part
of
the
iol
guidance
that
the
dft
has
brought
into
their
statutory
guidance
and
in
both
cases,
all
of
that
guidance
was
was
drafted
and
and
agreed
with
all
stakeholders
involved
in
this
profession.
D
H
Change,
I
think
I
think
we
can
be-
or
members
of
the
committee
can
be
assured-
that
there
is.
There
must
be
evidence
that
has
looked
into
this.
Otherwise,
the
dft
would
not
have
been
able
to
include
standards
in
relation
to
the
number
of
minor
motrin
offenses.
H
If
there
was
not
that
correlation
with
risk-
and
it
is
the
risk
that
the
the
evidence
and
risks
associated
with
that
evidence
that
has
led
to
the
need
for
the
guidance
to
come
from
the
department
for
transport.
So,
as
andrew
said,
the
council
hasn't
done
its
own
evidence-based
yeah
project,
but
we
don't
need
to
because
clearly
the
department
for
transport
has
used
all
the
evidence
available.
A
More
questions,
counseling
with,
is
that
okay,
yeah
okay,
who
we've
got
next
counselor,
please.
G
Okay,
thank
you
chair.
Can
I
just
start
by
commending
my
fellow
members
of
the
committee
just
for
the
quality
of
the
questions
that
have
been
asked.
I
think
we've
raised
a
number
of
really
good
points
so
far
and
actually
councillor
rillingworth
has
sort
of
taking
my
question
away
from
me
and
probably
reading
my
notes
around
around
the
evidence
for
this.
I
I
know
that
councillor
martin,
at
the
start
of
the
meeting,
picked
up
a
round
around
safety
and
what
is
the
evidence
for
this
now?
G
The
response
came
that
the
perception
of
the
public
around
safety
was
was
the
key
issue
here
in
the
evidence
base,
and
I
would
say
that
I
don't
think
there's
anybody
in
this
room
who
doesn't
but
the
safety
of
the
public
as
their
top
priority.
G
Therefore,
I'd
probably
repeat
what
counselor
buckley
said
with
regards
to
is:
is
it
a
solution
seeking
a
problem,
so
I
I
just.
I
just
think
the
you
know
the
evidence
around
around
kind
of
whether
or
not
is
this
going
to
make
our
roads
safer?
Is
this
going
to
make
the
the
experience
of
the
traveling
public
safer?
G
Is
it
going
to
ensure
that
our
drivers
remain
safe,
while
they're
doing
while
they're
doing
a
vital
and
important
job
so
yeah
about
my
question,
just
circling
back
my
question
is
kind
of
is:
is
there
any
evidence
that
this
is
a
necessary
change
to
licensing
in
the
city.
A
There's
two:
I
think
I
think
this
quote
from
the
dft
and
then
I'll
let
andrew
go
in.
I
think
it's
a
pertinent
question.
It
needs
clarity
before
we
move
forward
so.
H
Thanks
chair
yeah,
just
to
just
to
help
members
of
the
committee
you've
heard
about
the
dft
guidance
and
you've
heard
how
it's
brought
standards
in
not
just
for
minor
murder
and
convictions,
but
other
issues
in
relation
to
drivers
and
vehicles,
but
just
in
relation
to
modern
convictions.
It
might
be
helpful
if
I
just
quote
from
that
guidance,
so
you
can
see
exactly
what
they
found.
H
H
While
a
licensed
driver
demonstrates
that
the
licensee
may
not
take
their
professional
responsibilities
seriously,
it
is
accepted
that
they
can
can
be
committed
unintentionally,
and
that
is
but
there's
very
clear
reference
in
that
quote
that
when
they
say
it
may
indicate
that
shows
that
there
is
evidence
to
indicate
that
if
you,
if
you
continue
to
get
points
on
your
license,
it's
an
indication
and
it's
evidence
which
indicates
that
your
driving
standards
are
or
not
are
not
to
the
standard
that
they
should
be.
And
so
that's,
where
the
multiple
convictions
comes
from.
G
So,
just
just
come
back
on
that
and
the
the
when
we
were
discussing
earlier
around
the.
Why
would
a
council
not
follow
the
guidance
it
was
the
the
the
point
was
that
kind
of
there
had
to
be
kind
of
objective
evidence
now
my
question
would
be
is:
is
it
not
the
case
in
the
reverse?
Do
we
not
need
objective
evidence
that
this
is
causing
you
know,
actual
safety
issues
to
the
public.
A
H
Chair,
just
from
that
latter
point,
the
the
department
for
transport
has
got
that
evidence
and
they've
used
that
to
formulate
their
strategy
guidance.
So
they've
got
the
starting
point
and
the
compelling
reason
not
to
go
with
that
starting
point
and
agree
with
their
position
is
the
objective
evidence
that
we
would
need
they
they've.
You
know
they
they're
in.
H
They
are
the
department
of
transport,
so
they
will
have
a
wealth
of
evidence
that
has
led
them
to
pass
this
strategy
guidance.
So
it's
the
statutory
guidance
is
the
default
position
unless
there's
a
reason
to
to
depart
from
that.
It's
not
the
other
way
around.
A
I
think
it's
a
fair
point,
though,
isn't
it
that
you
know
that
the
evidence
should
have
been
appended
a
part
of
the
appendix
to
to
the
guidance
to
prove
it,
otherwise
we're
all
sort
of
going
in
the
dark.
But
I
take
the
point
from
legal
andrew
I'm
going
to
allow
you
to
come
in
first
before
I
like
answer
folly,.
A
N
Want
to
turn
to
an
area
to
answer
your
question,
one
of
the
one
of
the
areas
that
again
it
may
have.
The
point
may
have
may
have
slipped
somewhere
at
the
moment.
The
council's
policy
at
the
moment
is
to
accept
an
application
from
someone
who,
as
long
as
they're,
not
disqualified,
they
can
have
11
points
on
their
license.
N
I
would
I
would
say,
in
terms
of
the
five
other
west,
yorkshire
and
york
authorities,
those
authorities
are
refusing
applications
or
refusing
to
grant
those
applications.
At
the
moment
those
drivers
can
apply
to
leads
and
we
can
have
the
people
who
are
not
seen
as
being
safe
and
suitable
in
those
authorities
applying
to
working
leads
to
look
there.
N
So
there
is
a
practical
day-to-day
effect,
then
of
the
people
who
are
applying
to
working
leads
that
by
possibly
applying
to
working
leads
be
like
these,
because
they
have
already
been
refused
by
neighboring
authorities.
That
goes
very
much
against
what
we've
been
trying
to
do
with
the
authorities
that
we
border
to
try
and
adopt
where
we
can
similar
policies,
starting
with
drivers
moving
on
to
enforcement,
but
also
touching
on
vehicles
where
we
can
as
well
to
deal
with
that.
So
there's
a
there's,
a
there's,
a
clear
element.
N
N
So
there's
a
very
practical
element
there
I
think
in
terms
of
the
risk
or
the
or
the
evidence
out
of
that,
there's
two
issues:
isn't
there
there's
the
the
probability,
and
we
are
talking
about
a
very
small
number
of
drivers
with
a
poor
driving
record,
as
evidenced
by
the
number
of
points
we
do
know
in
leads
we,
you
know
we
have
headline
news
items
when
we
have
fatal
accidents
in
terms
of
that,
and
then
we
have
a
higher
number
of
severe
and
serious
injury
accidents.
So
we
do.
N
We
do
know
the
the
impact
there
of
looking
at
a
small
number
of
drivers
with
potentially
a
high
high
accrual
of
offenses
and
again,
I'd
reiterate
speeding,
particularly
if
you
have
an
accident,
while
you're
speeding,
you're
more
likely
to
have
a
more
severe
or
fatal
accident
as
well
so
so
for
us,
particularly.
I
think
I
just
wanted
to
introduce
that
element.
We
clearly
have
a
difference
in
policy
and
implementation
between
leeds
and
all
of
the
other
neighboring
authorities
at
the
moment.
N
So
I
don't
agree
it's
a
solution
in
in
search
of
a
problem.
At
the
moment,
we've
got
a
big
difference
between
leads
and
the
other
authorities
in
terms
of
that
at
the
moment
that
that's
one
of
the
areas
that
we
want
to
address
by
looking
at
the
options
today,
councilor.
A
G
Yeah,
I
suppose
I've
got
sort
of
two
comments
followed
by
two
questions.
I
think
just
in
terms
of
kind
of
the
evidence
base
it
would.
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
if,
if
we
could
be
provided
with
evidence
for
scenarios
like
this
in
the
future
yeah
I've
got
to
I've
got
to
agree
with
councillor
downs
when
it
comes
to.
If
the
dft
is
providing
guidance,
the
dfd
should
be
providing
legislation.
G
G
And
secondly,
I
you
know
just
following
on
from
councillor
martin's
suggestion
around
having
having
a
subcommittee
as
sort
of
the
ultimate
arbiter
around
decision
making,
which
I
think
you
know
I
would
hope
that
would
add
in
an
element
of
reassurance
for
the
trade.
G
So
it's
not
just
officers
making
a
decision
and
just
for
clarity
on
the
or
the
legal
legal
background
of
that
it
does
that.
That
decision
does
sit
with
this
committee
to
to
go
ahead
with
that.
G
H
Thanks
chad,
just
on
the
decision
as
to
whether
licensing
committee
want
to
be
say
for
for
a
pilot
temporary
period
to
to
have
control
over
that
decision
making.
Yes,
that
is
a
decision
of
this
licensing
committee.
It's
not
something!
You
need
to
recommend
to
executive
board,
because
the
delegation
initially
came
from
this
licensing
committee
to
officers.
A
G
N
Yeah,
I
guess
the
the
the
concerns
around
public
safety
might
indicate
a
pattern
of
behavior
that
suggests
that
someone
has
driving
in
a
way
that
suggests
that
they've
lost
the
ability
to
judge
their
judge,
their
speed
just
their
behavior,
whether
there
would
be
very
strong
confidence
that
if
they
were
to
carry
on
without
training
in
the
first
incident
and
then
and
then
obviously
subsequently
for
for
revocation
without
that
intervention,
that
they
would
be
putting
people
at
risk
by
by
driving
and
that
that
would
be
around
the
the
evidence
of
the
specific
cases
whether
they
committed
a
large
number
of
offences
in
a
very
short
time,
suggesting
that
they
might
be
going.
N
You
know
going
through
some
problem,
that's
causing
causing
them
to
drive
erratically
or
dangerously.
I
think
the
other,
the
other
areas
that
I
would
give
thought
to
then
about
bear
in
mind.
These
are
minor
motion.
We're
not
talking
about
accidents,
we're
not
talking
about
injuries,
we're
talking
about
accruing
point
through
repeated,
speeding
or
or
or
going
through
traffic
lights.
I
think
a
further
fact
that
will
be
around
someone
whose
behavior
is
is
dishonest
in
sort
of
covering
up
that
behavior
as
well.
N
So
if
they
they
fail
to
report
the
points,
that's
not
the
same
as
someone
who
disclosed
that
they've
a
speed
not.
N
Side
available
a
rule
of
thumb
there
would
be
have
we
got
a
concern
about
that
person
carrying
on
driving
or
is
there
or
is
that
just
something
that
we
can?
We
can
actually
bring
them
back
into
compliance
in
line
with
the
regulator's
code
through
the
additional
training
and
the
warning
that
we're.
You
know
we're
aware
that
they've
that
their
their
driving's
fallen
below
that
level.
So
it's
that
is
that
concern
for
future
behavior.
So
that's
the
public
safety
aspect.
M
Thank
you,
chair
I'll,
be
fairly
brief.
Actually,
this
business
just
going
back
to
the
business
of
a
compelling
reason
not
to
comply
with
the
statutory
guidance.
M
M
That
is
our
compelling
reason,
because
we
are
very
very
good
at
this
and
we
have
the
confidence
to
say
it
comment
number
one
chair:
that
is
the
word
guidance
we've
had
guidance
given
to
us
for
the
last
two
or
three
years.
Now.
Oh,
it's
guidance.
You
must
do
this
because
it's
guidance
we
need
to
be
careful.
I
think
we
do
need
evidence,
as
council's
opposites
have
said
actual
printed
evidence,
not
just
oh
well,
it
must
have
been
done
or
we
assume
it
has
been
done.
M
It
needs
to
be
written
down
and
andrew
mentioned
that
the
training
takes
six
hours
and
he
didn't
mean
to
say
this,
but
he
kind
of
suggested
that,
therefore
it's
good,
because
it
takes
six
hours,
and
I
would
just
say
that
not
all
things
that
take
six
hours
are
good,
like
full
council
meetings.
M
For
example,
final
comment
share
a
serious
comment
really
that
counselor
downs
made
in
in
passing.
But
do
we
think
these
proposals
will
increase
the
number
of
drivers
or
do
we
think
it
might
have
the
opposite
effect?
M
A
H
Just
in
relation
to
statutory
guidance
that
does
have
that
does
have
more
of
an
obligation
on
the
part
of
the
committee
than
other
guidance,
which
is
good
practice
guidance.
But
when
the
statutory
guidance
that
is,
we
do
have
a
an
obligation
to
give
that
greater
to
to
to
give
that
greater
weight.
A
Thank
you,
nicole
andrew.
So
there
was
four
ques.
I
think
we've
covered
guidance,
but
there
was
another
three
questions
that
council
brooklyn,
I'm
so
sorry.
I
forgot
your
first
question
but
third
is
about
training
and
four
is
about
numbers.
N
Yes,
I
didn't,
I
didn't
assume
that
six
hours
was
necessarily
three
times
better
than
I
think
you
said,
two
hours
wasted,
which
maybe
maybe
think
about
that
the
length
of
time
the
training
takes
it.
I
think
what
I
meant
to
say
is
not
lip
service,
it's
something
that
we
take
very
seriously.
It's
something
we've
already
been
providing
to
drivers
who
who's
about
whom
we
get
complaints,
or
they
get
other
things
that
maybe
aren't
aren't
just
the
same
as
endorsements.
N
So
we
do
take
it
very
seriously.
I
am
very
confident
in
the
taxi
and
private
hire
licensing
team's
ability
to
provide
a
stronger
licensing
services.
The
council
wants,
in
terms
of
that
I'd
work
with
the
with
the
chair
and
work
with
other
officers,
to
make
sure
that
we
can
provide
clear,
clear
and
compelling
reasons
of
justification
for
what
we've
done
around
that
I'd
reiterate
our
point.
That
leads
to
odds
with
the
majority
of
other
authorities
on
the
on
the
drivers
with
minor
motoring
convictions,
and
it
may
be
the
council's.
N
A
N
The
numbers
of
drivers
have
definitely
fallen
over
the
last
two
years.
At
the
moment,
we
are
training
around
50
drivers
per
month.
We
think
we
will
have
caught
up
with
the
drivers
who
have
left
the
trade
by
christmas
at
the
same
time
providing
additional
remedial
training
to
to
drivers.
Who've
that
we've
had
complaints
about
or
fallen
fallen
short.
I
guess
the
f.
The
focus
of
taxing
private
higher
licensing
is
that
we
only
license
people
who
are
fit
and
proper
and
safe
and
suitable,
and
that
should
be
our
primary
focus.
N
We've
heard
for
several
years
that
there
are
too
many
drivers
in
leeds
and
they
can't
all
earn,
and
now
we've
heard
that
there
are
too
few.
I
think
our
focus
specifically
is:
we've
got
around
600
drivers
who
are
currently
licensed,
but
who,
at
the
moment,
are
choosing
to
not
work
as
taxi
in
private
hire,
and
I
do
hope
that
those
drivers
either
either
decide
in
terms
of
whether
they
are
going
to
work
as
taxing
private
hire
or
they're,
going
to
combine
it
with
other
with
other
work.
N
A
No
okay?
So
we'll
turn
to
the
recommendations
then,
and
the
committee
is
asked
to
note
the
outcome
of
the
consultation
note,
the
supporting
information,
which
provides
broader
context
to
the
implementation
of
the
criteria
relating
to
minor
motor
and
convictions
and
consider
the
options
set
out
in
paragraph
38
of
this
report
and
make
a
recommendation
to
the
executive
board.
A
Now
I've
got
a
list
of
I've,
been
keeping
track
of
what
people
have
said
and
where
people
seem
to
be
and,
and
the
licensing
subcommittee
seems
to
me
to
be
councillor
martin's
proposal,
although
I
must
say
the
council
is
that
we've
been
able
to
discuss
it
because
council
cooper
has
done
some
work
on
this
for
over
the
past
year
or
so.
So,
thank
you
for
doing
that.
Doing
that
work,
councillor
wilson,
downs,
hutchinson
farley
have
all
commented
on
subcommittees.
A
So
that
leads
me
to
think
leads
me
to
consider
and
it's
for
me
to
make
to
move
a
suggestion
which
would
then
need
to
be
seconded,
and
then
we
could
vote
on
it
if
it
was
voted
on
if
it
was
brought.
If
it
wasn't
accepted
by
the
committee,
then
of
course
it
would
need
to
have
a
different
proposal
which
would
vote
on
so
going
from
that
we've
had
so
many
councillors
mention
license
and
subcommittees
to
me
that
to
me
that
would
indicate
option
b
with
a
licensing
subcommittee.
A
So,
having
said
that,
the
proposal
that
I
will
move,
which
I
will
need
a
second
or
two-
perhaps
council-
martin,
given
that
you
you
were
the
one
who
rose
first
raised.
The
idea
of
licensing
subcommittees,
would
be
to
move
the
following
to
recommend
to
exec
board
the
following,
which
is
which
is
b
on
the
list
where
I've
got.
I've
got
that
sorry,
this
one
in
relation
to
option
b.
Well,
so
I'll
just
read
there
shouldn't
I,
the
proposed
criterion
is
amended.
A
Having
regard
to
the
consultation
responses,
setting
out
what
was
amen,
what
the
amended
criterion
should
be
see,
paragraph
39
below
which
andrew
is
has
got
off
onto
options
here.
So
the
proposal
is
that.
However,
I
will
resolve
that
the
for
a
pilot
period
of
12
months,
any
licenses
subject
to
potential
revocation
relating
to
minor
motoring
offenses,
be
referred
to
the
licensing
committee
or
one
of
its
subcommittees
for
determination.
A
A
F
Sorry,
I
will
second
it
subject
to
it's
the
decision
of
the
licensing
committee
where,
after
the
12
month,
ends
whether
we
continue
with
that
process,
yeah
yeah
or
make
it
permanent.
If,
if
there's
the
evidence,.
A
A
Yeah
well,
I've
had
a
recommendation
from
from
legal
that
we
could
actually
vote
on
b
first
and
then
vote
on
b
with
the
caveat
of
the
subcommittee
second,
but
I
I
would
actually.
I
would
actually
suggest
that
we
vote
on
b
with
the
subcommittee
first
yeah
and
then
we
can
vote
on
on
b
on
b
afterwards.
A
No,
no,
I
I
okay,
I
think,
we'll
vote
on
a
single
vote
on
b.
I'm
sorry
we're
doing
it
on
the
fly
here.
Aren't
we
with
with
legal
and
it
can
get
a
little
bit
sticky.
I
am
going
to
suggest
option
b
with
the
caveat
that
we've
already
we've
already
proposed,
as
proposed
by
me
and
seconded
by
councillor.
Martin.
Okay,
is
there
anything
you
want
to
add
counselors,
that's
what
we're
going
to
vote
on
now.
A
H
Yeah,
there's
no
reason
why
that
motion
can't
be
done
as
one.
The
only
reason
we
were
suggesting
separately
is
in
case
a
member
wanted
to
vote
in
favor
of
option
b,
but
didn't
want
to
vote
for
the
subcommittee
depending
on,
but
there's
no
problem,
that's
the
motion
that's
been
put,
so
you
would
be
voting
to
approve
both
of
those.
At
the
same
time,.
A
M
Just
to
be
clear
when
it
comes
to
the
vote,
we'd
like
it
minuted,
which
way
we
vote
please,
yes,.
A
Okay,
so
we
shall
move
on
to
agenda
item
number
nine
date
and
time
of
the
next
committee
meeting,
which
is
tuesday,
the
6th
of
september
22
at
10
a.m,
in
the
civic
hall,
and
that
does
conclude
our
business
for
today
and
thank
you
all
for
your
attendance
and,
I
must
say,
very
thorough
contributions
from
both
members
and
officers
as
well.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
that.