To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted from Councillors Chris Bowring and Shahid Younis.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 19 October 2022.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 19 October 2022 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive any declarations of interest

There were no declarations of interest.

To answer any public questions

A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for members of the public to ask questions submitted under notice.

The Council welcomes questions from members of the public about the work of this committee.

Subject to meeting certain timescales, questions can relate to general issues concerned with the work of the Committee or an item which is on the Agenda for this meeting.  For full details of the procedure for submitting questions please contact the Democratic Services Section on the numbers given below or go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/publicquestions

There were no public questions.

To answer any member questions

There were no Member questions.

To receive and consider the Fees and Charges for Licensable Activity 2023/24.

Ed Shaylor, Head of Enforcement and Safety presented the Fees and Charges for Licensable Activity 2023/24 report which was set out in agenda pages 11-28.

The report contained answers to questions raised at the previous meeting.  In particular, the report gave more detail on discretionary fees, which the Council had the power to set - statutory fees were set by central government.

The recommendation was to increase the fees by approximately 10%, by increasing the hourly rate from £59 to £65.  Officers had estimated how many hours it took to process an application and manage the licensing regime, this hourly rate was used to calculate the cost of a licence. The detail was in Appendix A.

The Committee had previously asked for a breakdown on the Service’s budget costs, this was included in Appendix B and it included salary, non-salary costs and central re-charges.  It was pointed out that Trading Standards was a service which Wokingham outsourced from the PPP and had to be paid for, and this was included in the non-salary costs.

Appendix C included a breakdown of the hourly rate calculation, and Appendix D included examples of cost calculations.  Appendix E included a benchmarking exercise.

During the discussion of the item the following comments and queries were raised:

·           Councillor Dennis asked for more information in relation to the fees for metal recycling and dog fouling. He also asked for more information about the deficit;

·           Ed Shaylor explained that:

Ø  Dog fouling was under the Dog Warden Services (even though this was technically a penalty).  The question of why this had increased by 7% when everything else had increased by nearly 10% had been raised prior to the meeting.  He proposed that this fee be increased to the default £100;

Ø  The Scrap Metal – change of site manager had reduced because the current fee was an anomaly, not in line with the hourly rate.  The proposed fee, although lower, was not significantly lower and it would bring the fee in line with the hourly rate;

Ø  One of the reasons for the deficit was that the statutory fees did not go up very often.  For example, the alcohol fee had not been increased since 2005 and these applications, which were many, were processed at a loss.  It would not be fair to make discretionary fees applicants subsidise statutory licences.

·           In relation to market trading, Councillor Dennis asked if it was the Parish Council that held the licence or the trader;

·           Keiran Hinchcliffe, Service Manager for Licensing and Processing explained that there was a mix of arrangements.  A Parish Council could have a trading licence, manage the pitches to traders, and pay the licence to the local authority.  But there were also independent traders that held their own licences;

·           Councillor Smith noted that 38% of the income was from discretionary fees and 62% was from statutory fees.  He asked if there was any loss of business as a result of pubs closing;

·           Keiran Hinchcliffe was of the opinion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

To receive and consider a report containing information about the licensing of gambling.

Keiran Hinchcliffe presented the Licensing of Gambling report which was set out in agenda pages 29-33.  The report had been requested at the last meeting of the Committee, with the purpose of finding ways to protect vulnerable people.

The LGA had produced a helpful handbook for councillors outlining gambling regulations (Appendix A) and a document titled: Tackling gambling related harm a whole council approach (Appendix B).

Research suggested that gambling premises were more common in deprived areas.  In Wokingham, there were five licenced betting gambling premises and 17 licences for gambling machines.  This meant that there was one betting shop per 35.000 population, putting Wokingham towards the lower end of the national scale.

Best practice pointed out by the LGA referred to the Statement of Policy for Gambling and the local authority’s powers in relation to compliance and enforcement.

Members noted that although in Wokingham there was one betting shop per 35.000, the location of betting shops may be more concentrated in certain areas.  Woodley for example had two betting shops, and there were areas of deprivation in Woodley.

Councillor Kerr was interested to know if betting premises were taking advantage of the current cost of living crisis to set up premises in areas of the borough that were least affluent.

Keiran Hinchcliffe clarified that the law and legislation around gambling was in favour of permitting the opening of gambling premises, so the powers of local authorities were limited to compliance and enforcement.  Outside of Licensing, the LGA referred to the roles of Planning and Public Health in this matter.

Councillor Burgess was of the opinion that it was time to review the Statement of Gambling Policy as this had not been reviewed for a long time.  She understood the limitations of powers, but suggested that a statement should be included in the revised policy, stating that the local authority expected premises to follow best practices, not just the minimum requirements.  She also added that premises should be encouraged to certify with GamCare.

Councillor Smith express concern about online gambling and wondered if the local authority could prevent online gambling in its public computers, for example in libraries. 

It was explained that online gambling was outside of the remit of the local authority’s policy, online gambling was regulated directly by the Gambling Commission.  However, Councillor Kerr agreed to investigate the situation in relation to libraries.

Councillor Soane asked if taxis were precluded from advertising gambling in their vehicles.   Keiran Hinchcliffe informed that gambling advertising was currently permitted, however the draft policy was under consultation and he encouraged councillors to express their views through the consultation.

In response to a question, Officers stated that it was not known if the five betting premises in the borough were certified with GamCare.

Councillor Kerr noted that the Committee had not yet received a report outlining how the policy was being enforced, and this might be of interest.

Keiran Hinchcliffe informed that compliance checks in gambling premises had not been undertaken for some time.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

To receive and consider the Review of Statement of Licensing Policy report.

Keiran Hinchcliffe presented the Review of Statement of Licensing Policy report which was set out in agenda pages 35- 40.

The policy had five main purposes, as stated in the report contained in the agenda.  The Council was required to consult publicly and publish a Statement of Licensing Policy every five years.

The revised Statement of Licensing Policy had been drafted following a review of current best practices available.  Innovations included:

·           Women’s safety in the night time economy, referencing Ask for Angela campaign;

·           Pre-application advice;

·           An appendix with examples of model conditions.

Ed Shaylor explained that it would be desirable to start the consultation on this policy soon after the conclusion of the taxi policy consultation.  He pointed out the possible timescales and asked Members to be mindful of the pre-election period which was due to start in March. 

Councillor Kerr asked the following questions about the consultation process:

·           How long it was going to run for?

·           Who would be consulted?

·           Which specific groups would be consulted?

Officers stated that there were statutory consultees, but the consultation could be widened to specific groups, a direction from Members was welcome.  The usual minimum of six weeks for a consultation would be used, but it could be more if deemed necessary.  The usual platforms would be used to advertise the consultation.

In response to a comment, Keiran Hinchcliffe confirmed that the Fire Authority was involved in the consultation. They had looked at capacities in nightclubs in the town centre, but mainly used their own legislation in relation to fire safety.

Councillor Soane wondered how effective the ask for Angela initiative was and asked if Councillor Kerr had ever used it.  She responded that she had not used it, but she believed it was a good campaign.  There was, in her opinion, more work that needed to be done in relation to women’s safety.

In response to a question, Ed Shaylor explained that the work to be undertaken to adopt the policy was cost neutral to the Council.

There was a debate about whether a picture of Henley was appropriate or if a picture from another part of the borough should be used.  It was explained that a picture of Henley had been used because the Henley Regatta and Henley Festival were, both, events that created a lot of activity for the Licensing Service.  There was no consensus on this.

With regards to the effectiveness of the Ask for Angela campaign, Officers explained that this was being reviewed by the Metro newspaper.  It was recognised that training was needed so that staff can help if necessary.

Councillor Smith observed that in recent years pub landlords were less likely to intervene to stop people from becoming too inebriated.  He also noted the increase in multiple drinks offers.  He asked if there was any guidance for landlords in the policy.

Officers explained that the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) had to be present or contactable during the opening hours of the premises.  The regulations in relation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

To receive and consider the Decisions Tracker and Forward Programme report.

The actions on the decision tracker had now been completed or added to the Forward Programme.

Members were invited to take part in the Taxis Liaison Group as part of the consultation on the taxi policy.

The following items were added to the Forward Programme:

20 March 2023

Audit of compliance and enforcement

22 June 20232

Statement of the Licensing Policy

18 October 2023

Review of the cost of running licensable activities for 2024/25