Agenda item - Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles (WAV's) - Consultation results

Agenda item

Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles (WAV's) - Consultation results

Minutes:

Following on from the Licensing Committee meeting held on 9th November 2015; whereby Members agreed to a further consultation being conducted in order to ascertain if there was an unmet demand for Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles (WAVs) within the district.  Members were asked to consider the results of the additional consultation undertaken by Worcestershire Regulatory Services (WRS) with regards to WAVs.

 

The Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, presented the report and in doing so reminded Members that following consideration of the initial consultation results, Members had expressed their concerns about the low number of licensed Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles (WAVs) within the district.  Licensing Committee Members had therefore agreed that a further consultation be conducted in order to ascertain if there was currently an unmet demand for WAVs as Hackney Carriages within the district or if this was the perception.

 

In late November 2015 licence holders were sent a copy of the questionnaire, as detailed at Appendix 1 to the report.  An additional questionnaire, as detailed at Appendix 2 to the report, was sent to all members of the Bromsgrove Engagement and Equalities Forum, all members of Bromsgrove and Redditch Network (BARN), the Worcestershire and Warwickshire Royal Voluntary Service and the Life After Stroke Centre.  A copy was also placed on the Council’s website, a press release was issued in order to draw attention to the consultation and social media channels were also utilised in order to raise awareness of the consultation.

 

The Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, drew Members’ attention to the responses received, as detailed at Appendices 3 and 4 to the report.

 

The Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, highlighted that only two responses had been returned from licence holders, as detailed at Appendix 3.  Neither of the respondents currently owned a hackney carriage vehicle capable of carrying a passenger who could remain seated in their wheelchair whilst travelling.  Neither respondent had identified any factors that would encourage them to purchase a WAV. 

 

The Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, further informed the Committee that there had been considerable opposition from the taxi trade as they did not consider that there was currently a demand for WAVs in the district.

 

Only seven competed surveys were received to the consultation survey sent out to the relevant organisations, as detailed in the preamble above.  A table of those responses was detailed at Appendix 4 to the report.  The majority (71%) of respondents strongly agreed that there were not enough WAVs in Bromsgrove.  Only one respondent agreed that they found WAVs difficult to access and preferred saloon style vehicles.  Six out of the seven who responded either used a wheelchair or cared for a person who did.  The vast majority of respondents said that they preferred to travel in a taxi whilst they remained seated in their wheelchair.  All of those who responded agreed that they pre-booked taxis that met their requirements. 

 

The Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, informed Members that passengers who wanted to remain seated in their wheelchair whilst travelling in a taxi would struggle to find a suitable vehicle on the taxi ranks in the district.

 

Councillor S.P. Shannon raised several questions with regard to the improved facilities for wheelchair users that would be provided at the new railway station.  He felt that there was some resistance to supply a suitable taxi service.  It was a slow change getting buses adapted, but this had now been achieved and had made it easier for wheelchair users to access the bus services provided.  With the facilities that would be made available at the new railway station there could be a potential increase in wheelchair users visiting Bromsgrove, which would potentially see an increased need in the number of WAVs needed within the district.  Councillor S. P. Shannon further asked if there was a quota requirement in other authorities for WAVs.

 

In response the Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, informed the Committee that Redditch Borough Council had adopted a policy that applications for additional licences for Hackney Carriages would only be granted to approved new vehicles with facilities for carrying a disabled person in a wheelchair within the vehicle.  All Hackney Carriage vehicles licensed by Coventry City Council must have access for wheelchairs.  Wyre Forest District Council only licenced new vehicles of a purpose built design for use as Hackney Carriages.  The vehicle must be designed and developed exclusively for use as a wheelchair accessible taxi. 

 

The Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, further informed the Committee that the perception within the taxi trade was that WAVs were expensive to purchase and maintain and that the taxi trade felt there was not a huge demand for WAVs in the district.  He felt that perhaps the taxi trade needed more information about the cost of purchasing and maintaining WAVs.  The low number of WAVs in the district was not good, hopefully the new railway station could make drivers realise there was a demand.  Licensing officers could look at incentives to encourage drivers to purchase WAVs.  He would reiterate that robust evidence would need to be documented if Members were minded to change the Council’s current policy.

 

Members continued with further questions and debate with regard to the Council having a duty to ensure that the demand for WAVs was met.  Some Members expressed their concerns in respect of amending the Council’s current policy and felt it would be unfair to demand that Hackney Carriage applications only be approved if the vehicle has access for wheelchairs; whilst other Members felt that the Council’s current policy should be changed.  Wyre Forest had been challenged legally regards their policy but had won the challenge.  There was a requirement to ensure equality and diversity and that everyone was treated equally, the responses received to the survey sent to relevant organisations had shown that 71% of respondents strongly agreed that there were not enough WAVs in Bromsgrove.

 

The Council’s Legal Advisor further reiterated the comments made earlier by the Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, robust evidence would be needed to support any policy changes. She would agree that perhaps the taxi trade needed more information about the costs of purchasing and maintaining WAVs. 

 

The Senior Licensing Practitioner, WRS, clarified that he had not been provided with any information from the agencies, as detailed in paragraph 3.10 in the report, as to the number of clients they had asked to respond to the survey.

 

Following further debate it was agreed that

 

RESOLVED:

(a)  that Licensing Officers, WRS, explore other options to potentially increase the number of Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles (WAVs) licensed as hackney carriages in the Bromsgrove district; and

(b)  that the findings be brought back to a future meeting of the Licensing Committee.

Supporting documents: