Meeting Details

Prior to the start of the meeting, the Chair of the Committee wished to place on record that the thoughts of the Committee were with the Colchester licensed driver who had recently been injured.

RESOLVED that: the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 2 October 2024 be confirmed as a correct record. 

Mustafa Irshad, Secretary of the Colchester Hackney Carriage Association, attended the meeting and addressed the Committee pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rules 5 (1), to raise a number of concerns. He wished to draw the attention of the Committee to the lack of taxi marshals on the High Street taxi rank. A local night club on the High Street was required to provide marshals as part of a licence condition, however, since the ownership of this venue had changed, the marshal provision had not been satisfactory. This issue had been raised with Paul Donaghy, Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager which had initially led to some improvements, however, over the past weeks marshals had been absent. The Committee was advised that marshals were necessary to manage the queue for taxis late at night as customers would potentially get frustrated with the queuing system which could lead to incidences of violence. Urgent action was necessary to address this issue. Was it possible to arrange for closed circuit television cameras (CCTV) to be installed to cover this rank? Additionally, it had been noted that the High Street taxi rank was to be closed from 6.00pm on Saturday until 1.00pm on Sunday as part of the Remembrance Day service, was it possible to amend these closure times to allow the taxi trade to work during this period?

The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager confirmed that he had been aware of the issue with taxi marshals on the High Street and had arranged a meeting with the manager of the night club in question to discuss this. It was not possible to wholly rely on marshals provided by a venue as door staff were likely to be called away to deal with other issues, however Officers would continue working with local partners to try to find an appropriate solution for the provision of marshals, particularly at busy times of the year.

In respect of the request which had been made for CCTV coverage, the Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager advised that the rank was already covered by CCTV as part of the general CCTV coverage of the town centre, and this would be directed as necessary for the promotion of public safety. He would, however, highlight the concerns which had been raised with staff who monitored the CCTV to ask that they be aware of potential issues at the rank.

With regard to the request which had been made relating to Remembrance Day, the closure of the High Street was related to security implications which were the responsibility of Essex Police and other partners, and if it was felt necessary to seal an area early to carry out the necessary security sweeps, then it was unlikely that the current arrangements would be subject to change.

A Committee member considered that some of the problems in and around the High Street area were predominantly anti-social behaviour (ASB), and it was becoming increasingly difficult for Councillors and members of the public to understand which public service areas were responsible for dealing with this, was it possible to provide further guidance in this area in the future? The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager advised the Committee that at any point that ASB became criminal in nature then it was the responsibility of Essex Police. Officers spent a lot of time trying to assist combat ASB issues in the town, however, resources were very limited and low level ASB was difficult to deal with.

The Chair reminded members of the public who were present to email the Licensing Team direct with any queries they may have, as this was the best way to ensure that answers were provided speedily. 

The Committee considered a report requesting that it approve, for the purposes of public consultation, an amendment to the Council's Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy.

Paul Donaghy, Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager, attended the meeting to present the report and assist the Committee with its enquiries.

The Committee heard that the Officer’s report related to Colchester City Council (the Council)’s current Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Licensing Policy (the Policy), and specifically the engine emission standards which it required for licensed vehicles. The Committee was asked to consider consulting publicly on proposed amendments to the Policy, prior to the submission of the revised Policy to Full Council. The proposed amendment was the temporary suspension of the requirement for all licensed vehicles to meet the standards of Eurocap 4 for petrol vehicles, and Eurocap 6 for diesel vehicles, although the Committee was assured that this requirement would be retained in future Policies. The reason for this proposed amendment was to allow the current licensed vehicle fleet, which contained a substantial number of vehicles which were in breach of the current requirement, to continue to provide a service to Colchester residents, while having a defined period to ensure that vehicles were brought up to the emission standards which were required. The alternative was for the Committee to decline to propose, for the purposes of consultation, that the Policy be amended and to apply the Policy immediately, together with appropriate enforcement.

The Committee was advised that if the current Policy was to be enforced, a large number of licensed vehicles would be removed from operation immediately. A sample suggested that this number could be between 120 and 150 vehicles. However, in order to address this situation it was suggested that the start date for enforcement of the emission standards contained within the Policy be 1 January 2026, after which all vehicles would be required to meet the standards set out. The Committee was asked to confirm whether it wished all vehicles to be compliant from this date, or whether the standards would be applied when an application for a new or renewed vehicle was made.

It was proposed to have a 6 week consultation, as the Policy had been agreed by Full Council and the vehicle age restrictions, including vehicle emission standards, had been the subject of another recent consultation in January 2024. The Council would contact members of the taxi the trade directly and advise them of the steps they needed to take to ensure that vehicles were compliant. The Committee was advised that the Council’s Policy currently set emission limits for its licensed vehicles with the intention of improving air quality over time and these limits would remain pending a full review as part of the wider review of the current Policy to ensure that the Policy reflected the current science and targets on emissions and air quality. The Council’s vehicle testing regime would continue and therefore it was anticipated that the proposed temporary change will have no detrimental impact.

The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager noted that a number of detailed questions had been submitted by a member of the Committee just before the meeting. It had not been possible for him to answer these questions in the time available with the accuracy that was required, and it was therefore proposed that written answers would be provided after the meeting. The Councillor who had submitted questions confirmed that he was happy with this proposal.

The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager confirmed that, if approved, the consultation period would start as soon as possible prior to the results being re-presented to the Committee at its meeting scheduled for January 2025. This would allow the Committee time to consider the responses prior to making any recommendation it wished to Full Council in February 2025.

In discussion, the Committee sought to understand the implications of different dates for the enforcement of emission standards contained in the Policy, would proprietors have until 1 January 2026 to renew their licence, or would they have until 1 January 2027 to be fully complaint? The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager confirmed that the final proposed implementation date was a matter for the Committee to determine. If the current proposed Policy change was implemented by Full Council, then proprietors would have approximately 10 months to bring their vehicles up to standard, however, the Committee may consider that vehicles which were renewed in 2025 should be allowed to continue being in operation for the duration of the licence, with full compliance being achieved by 1 January 2027. However the Committee chose to amend the Policy, it was inevitable that some proprietors would end up with vehicles licensed for a longer period of time than others. Depending on the date that their licence had been issued, but this was unavoidable when choosing a single date for Policy implementation. The other option before the Committee was to opt not to suggest suspending the current Policy requirements, in which case enforcement action would need to be taken against non-compliant vehicles.

Turning to the recent amendment of the Policy which had been implemented to remove age restrictions on licensed vehicles, the Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager explained that this had been introduced to assist the taxi trade, however, despite the change in age limits for licensed vehicles, emission standard requirements in the Policy had remained the same. The non-compliance of a large number of vehicles with the Policy requirements had been picked up by Officers carrying out a review of the Policy.

A Committee member considered that these issues arose from time and needed to be addressed. He considered that the advice that Officers offered to the Committee when issues did arise allowed the Committee to be as flexible as possible while still achieving its eventual goal, which was to improve standards. Although it was not the role of the Committee to act as a trade union for the taxi trade, nonetheless it was important to ensure as far as possible that the trade thrived as a key part of Colchester’s transport infrastructure. He suggested that the proprietors of non-compliant vehicles be asked to individually contact the Council in writing to say what their proposals were for getting to compliance by the date of 1 January 2026 as part of the consultation, which would be fair and provide 13 months grace. Obtaining a suitable vehicle would cost money, but if Officers were able to assist proprietors to organise themselves, this would avoid 120 to 150 vehicles being removed form service. The requirement to provide compliant vehicles was not unfair as this had been a requirement for a long time and the taxi trade was aware of it.

Mustafa Irshad, Secretary of the Colchester Hackney Carriage Association, was present at the meeting and the Committee sought his views on the proposal. Mr Irshad confirmed that he was very supportive of the suggestion which had been made by The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager and would ensure that the drivers he represented were aware of the consultation.

The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager confirmed to the Committee that the proposed consultation would not be limited to the trade, but would be a public consultation, and it would therefore not be appropriate to ask about proprietors proposals to obtain a compliant vehicle as part of this. It would, however, be useful to obtain an understanding of how many proprietors had been spoken to by Officers and who were aware of the requirements. Officers would also email every proprietor and driver to re-highlight the emissions standards and the dates for compliance which had been agreed, and explain they needed to check their vehicles were suitably compliant by the determined date, or they would be removed from operation.

In discussion, the Committee noted that buying a new vehicle would represent a significant financial commitment during the current cost of living crisis, and perhaps the proposed timings for the enforcement of emissions standards should be re-considered, with potentially a period of 12 months following the approval of the Policy amendment by Full Council during which vehicles were able to be renewed.

A Committee member expressed his disappointment that the current emission standards had been in place in the Policy since 2019, and almost 6 years later the Council had found out that a substantial number of vehicles had failed to comply with this requirement. Was it possible to issue fines for non-compliance or require the proprietors of non-compliant vehicles to enter into a carbon-offsetting arrangement? Should licence holders be provided with an additional period of more than 11 months to comply with the policy on top of the 4 to 6 years they had already had to become compliant? When considering the amount of vehicles affected there would be an environmental impact, most of the taxis operated in the city centre which contained the highest levels of air pollution and the Committee needed to consider the impact on public health very seriously.

The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager considered that any concerns which the public had could regarding the proposals could be addressed via the public consultation. He did not believe that the relatively small number of taxi vehicles in the High Street were responsible for the poor air quality common to many city centre, considering that busses, lorries and other vehicles which used the area would generate more emissions that the taxis there. He was unable to comment on actions taken by previous Licensing Managers at the Council before he had taken up his post, however, the Council’s Policy had been published and was on the website, and it was the requirement of every operator to ensure that they were complying with the Policy when they renewed each year. Officers spend a significant portion of time advising and guiding proprietors who were ultimately responsible for their own business. The Councils Licensing Team was small and would no longer be able to provide detailed advice to applicants about the Council’s Policy requirements when the Policy was readily available to all. The Policy did provide the power to Officers to immediately remove a large number of vehicles from the road, however, Officers did not want to take this step without seeking the opinion of the Committee prior to undertaking a public consultation and seeking the subsequent potential approval of the Policy, as amended, by Full Council. It was confirmed to the Committee that licensing legislation did not permit the issuing of fines for breaches of Policy, or the requirement to enter into a carbon offsetting scheme.

The Committee again discussed the suggestion of requiring every proprietor to indicate to Officers how they would ensure that their vehicle was compliant by the appointed date. The Licensing, Community Safety and Safeguarding Manager confirmed to the Committee that he would ensure that every proprietor of a non-compliant vehicle would be contacted to confirm that they were required to ensure compliance by the designated date, however, considered that there was limited value in seeking a written plan from proprietors as to how they would become compliant. Ultimately, the only route to Policy compliance would be to replace vehicles as necessary, and if this did not happen by the deadline date then the vehicles would simply be taken off the road. The Committee requested further details of non-compliant vehicles be provided to it at the next meeting.

Drawing the debate to a close a Committee member noted that it was important to take steps to reduce air pollution where possible, however, licenced proprietors also needed to be able to work to support their families and Colchester residents. The start of the proposed consultation period was supported, and it was suggested that all vehicles were required to be fully Policy compliant by 1 January 2027, which was a fair time to allow sufficient time for the necessary vehicle changes to be made. It was clarified that the suspension of the policy requirements would only apply to vehicles which were currently licensed, and any vehicle presented for licensing as either a new or replacement vehicle would need to comply with the full requirements of the Policy.

RESOLVED that:

- The following proposed amendment to Colchester City Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy be the subject of a period of consultation lasting 6 weeks:

“The requirements contained within section 6.3 of the Council’s Hackney carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy relating to vehicle emission standards be suspended for all vehicles which are currently licensed. Any vehicle which is presented for licencing after 1 January 2027 must comply with the following emissions standards:

- Euro 6 for diesel vehicles / Euro 4 for petrol

Any vehicle which is presented for licencing as a new or permanent replacement vehicle at any time must comply with the following emissions standards:

- Euro 6 for diesel vehicles / Euro 4 for petrol” 

The Committee considered a report requesting that it approve its draft work programme for the current municipal year.

In discussion, the Committee wondered whether the issue of closed circuit television cameras (CCTV) in licensed vehicles could be added to the work programme. The Chair confirmed that this issue would be dealt with as part of the wider ongoing Taxi and Private Hire Licensing Policy review, and the view of the taxi trade would be sought as part of this review.

RESOLVED that: the contents of the work programme be noted.