Agenda and minutes

The Democratic Services explained the procedure.

There were none.

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officeror a member of his staff before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

There were none.

There was none.

The Chair drew attention to the procedure to be followed for the hearing of the application.

The Committee is asked to consider passing the following resolution:

“that having been satisfied that the public interest would be better served by not disclosing relevant information, in accordance with the provisions of Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business and the reporting of the meeting be prevented under Section 100A(5A) because of the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, as amended.   

RESOLVED that, the Sub-Committee having been satisfied that the public interest would be better served by not disclosing relevant information, in accordance with the provisions of section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business, because of the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined by paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as amended.

The Sub-Committee considered the report, which sought determination of an application by Mr FV for the grant of a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s licence.

Mr FV was present and confirmed that he had read the procedure for the meeting.

The Senior Public Protection Officer presented the report and stated that as part of the application process a Disclosure and Barring Service check had been undertaken, which had revealed a previous conviction. He circulated the Disclosure and Barring Service certificate and a personal statement from Mr FV. He also circulated a reference for Mr FV. The applicant, the Public Protection Team Leader and the Senior Public Protection Officer withdrew from the meeting while Members took some time to consider these documents.

After the meeting had reconvened, Mr FV put his case and explained the circumstances of the conviction. He said that it had been a very silly mistake, but it had happened ten years ago and he had matured and now had family responsibilities. He explained why he wanted the licence.  He was questioned by Members, and then made a closing statement. 

Following an adjournment it was

RESOLVED that Mr FV be granted a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s licence subject to the standard terms and conditions.

Reasons

Members have had to determine an application for a combined Hackney Carriage/ Private Hire Driver’s Licence. In doing so they took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and the Council’s Policy.

In making a determination Members took account of the applicant’s oral representations, his statement, and reference and balanced these against the information provided by the Disclosure and Barring Service.

Members noted that Mr F V’s conviction was for a serious motoring offence however the offence took place nearly 10 years ago; it appeared from the nature of the sentence imposed to be at the lower end of the scale of seriousness and seemed to be an isolated incident. Members further noted that the offence fell outside of the 5 year period specified in the Council’s Policy.

Members felt the applicant presented himself as a responsible citizen who gave them reason to believe that he had learnt his lesson.

Members found Mr F V to be a fit and proper person.