ALL THINGS LICENSING
Article by Mike Smith, Senior Specialist for Licensing and Community Safety at Guildford Borough Council and Vice-Chair of the Institute of Licensing South East Region.
Please note that this article represents my own views which are not presented as the views of the Institute of Licensing or Guildford BC.
May has arrived and despite many of us still digesting the updated Best Practice Guidance, the taxi and private hire world doesn’t appear to be allowing us much respite with further consultation on the VAT treatment of PHVs which is discussed elsewhere in this issue, as well as local elections in many council areas.
Increase in SEND transport costs
May is also an interesting time as councils close their books for the past financial year in the previous month and are then able to look back at their previous year’s spending. I was made aware of an article recently about the increasing cost to councils of Special Educational Needs (SEND) Transport, which has reportedly increased from £727m in 2019 to £1.4bn in 2024.
This cost is resulting not just from an increase in the number of children requiring transport, with the average council now transporting 1,300 children, up from 911 in 2019, but also the average cost per pupil increasing to £8,299 up from £6,280.
Special educational needs and disabilities can affect a child or young person’s ability to learn through their:
• behaviour or ability to socialise, e.g. they struggle to make friends
• reading and writing, e.g. they have dyslexia • ability to understand things
• concentration levels, e.g. they have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
• physical ability
SEND children are often entitled to assistance with transport to school from the local authority. Naturally it is vital that all children who need to get to school are able to do so, and the taxi and PHV sector plays an important role in SEND transport provision, however the increase in costs has lead to calls from some councils for increased funding to cover increased costs, or the system to be reformed.
66 Restricted SEND driver licences
Following the pandemic, where there was a well documented national shortage of licensed drivers together with an increase in demand for school transport which created considerable pressure on providers in this area. In order to negate this concern, an argument emerged from many IoL forums that a specific provision of a ‘school run’ only licence would be beneficial and allow divers wanting to work in this sector to be licensed more efficiently and encourage operators to recruit to fill these contracts.
There are some concerns that a ‘restricted’ licence would mean lower standards. This is not necessarily the case. Councils still have a paramount obligation to ensure that only a ‘fit and proper’ person is granted a driver’s licence. As such, applicants would still be required to complete an enhanced DBS, medical to the same standard as other ‘traditional’ licensed drivers, the difference being in the remainder of the training or knowledge testing required by the authority for a restricted licence.
As such, some councils have gone down the route of offering a ‘restricted’ or ‘school run’ only licence with tailored knowledge testing and/or training relevant to this role. The restriction is imposed by way of a licence condition under Section 51(2) of the 1976 Act which allows the council to attach to a private hire driver licence such conditions as it may consider reasonably necessary consistent with driving only on such a contract.
This is another example of collaboration through the IoL between councils, members of the trade and legal advisors, where the trade has raised issues and councils have reacted in a positive and collaborative manner - something that the IoL will continue to promote.
PHTM EXPO
Of course I couldn’t talk about the month of May and not mention the PHTM EXPO in Milton Keynes. I am immensely looking forward to
attending and
representing the Institute of Licensing (IoL) on our stand and would invite readers to come along for a chat with me about licensing matters and with any suggestions for licensing related articles in future editions of PHTM!
In order to save time explaining repeatedly on the stand, I wanted to reiterate that the IoL is a professional body that represents anyone with an interest in
MAY 2024 PHTM
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80
