Report by Head of Legal and Regulatory Support
Minutes:
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and
introductions were made. He outlined the
procedure that would be followed and before inviting Police Scotland to speak
in support of the Chief Constable’s complaint, the Committee agreed to the
circulation of a letter from the Licence Holder’s lawyers who represented him
in Court.
POLICE SCOTLAND
Sergeant MacNicol referred to a request from the Chief
Constable that, in terms of Paragraph 11(1) of Schedule 1 of the Act, the
Licensing Committee suspend Mr Gallacher’s
Licence. He advised that the Chief
Constable complained, in terms of Paragraph 11(2)(a) of Schedule 1 of the Act
that Mr Gallacher was no longer a fit and proper person to hold the licence. He confirmed that the Chief Constable was
also asking the Committee to order the immediate suspension of Mr Gallacher’s Licence, in terms of Paragraph 12(1) of
Schedule 1 of the Act, on the grounds that the carrying on of the activity to
which his licence relates would likely cause a serious threat to public order
or public safety. In support of the
Chief Constable’s request Sergeant MacNicol read out the details of an incident
which occurred on 31 October 2018. He
confirmed that as a result of this incident Mr Gallacher was charged with
Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and a report was sent to the Procurator
Fiscal. He confirmed that Mr Gallacher
pled guilty at Court on 19 June 2019 and that he was fined £135 and had his
licence endorsed with 3 penalty points.
LICENCE HOLDER
Mrs MacLeod spoke on behalf of Mr Gallacher. She advised that he was 69 years old and had
been married almost 50 years and had 2 daughters and 5 grandchildren. She advised that he was a retired postman and
that he had also been driving taxis since the mid-1970s. She referred to the day in question when the
incident happened and explained that Mr Gallacher had stopped on Hillfoot Street, Dunoon to allow a passenger to call into
her work premises to get money to pay for her fare. She explained that the street was very busy
at the time with traffic, pedestrians and children going to school. She advised that while Mr Gallacher was
negotiating to a car parking space he failed to notice the lollipop man who had
stepped off the pavement onto the road.
She referred to the letter circulated to the Committee and pointed out
that a video of CCTV footage was watched by the Court and that it had been
decided by the Court that what had happened was at the lower end of the scale
of careless driving. She said that Mr
Gallacher had made an unfortunate mistake which he had admitted to. She advised that he had provided a valuable
driving service to Dunoon since the mid-1970s and that he had an unblemished
record. She said that he had worked very hard for his family and his country
and she suggested that to suspend his Taxi Driver Licence would be a step too
far. She stated that the Court decided
that this was at the lower end of the scale of careless driving and that he had
been imposed with a small fine and only 3 penalty points. She said that his punishment at Court was
enough, given his long and unblemished record and she asked the Committee not
to suspend Mr Gallacher’s licence.
MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS
Councillor Kinniburgh sought and received confirmation
from Mr Gallacher that he was not speeding at the time of the incident. He said he was crawling to a parking
space. Mr Gallacher also confirmed that
later in the day, when he was on the taxi rank, the lollipop patrol man
approached him and that it was only at that point he was made aware that he had
not stopped for the patrol man. Mr
Gallacher explained that he apologised and that the patrol man had said that he
could see that Mr Gallacher was distracted at the time. Mr Gallacher said that this was the first
time he had made a mistake in his life.
He confirmed that he had not been aware of the patrol man at the time as
he was busy watching for children, cars and
vans at that time in the morning.
He also advised that he was normally super cautious on that street even
when the schools were off as it was such a busy street.
Councillor Kinniburgh asked Sgt MacNicol to confirm when
Police Scotland first became involved in this matter. Sgt MacNicol advised that the school crossing
patrol man had reported the incident to the Police. He confirmed that he had seen the CCTV
footage and though it was not the crime of the century, the lollipop man was on
the road and people had just come off the road onto the pavement. He said that the taxi had kept crawling along
and had disobeyed the sign to stop held by the school crossing patroller.
Councillor Kinniburgh sought and received confirmation
from Sgt MacNicol that the patrol man had come on to the street on the other side
of the road from the taxi and that he had returned to the pavement on that same
side, opposite to where the vehicle was.
Councillor Kinniburgh asked for Mr Gallacher’s
version of events. Mrs MacLeod explained
that it was a busy time of the morning with school children, vans and
cars. She said that Mr Gallacher had been
distracted by his passenger not having her fare that that he had been
distracted looking for a parking space and it was at this point when he was
looking for a space that he did not see the patrol man step off the road. She confirmed that Mr Gallacher was dropping
his passenger off at her place of work.
Councillor Kinniburgh asked if Mr Gallacher was crawling
to let the road clear. Mrs MacLeod
advised that he was crawling trying to get to a parking place and that he had
not noticed the patrol man on the road.
She said that Mr Gallacher was aware of pedestrians and vehicles etc but
did not see the patrol man.
Councillor Blair sought and received confirmation from Mr
Gallacher that he had previously received 3 penalty points on his licence for
speeding in 2011.
Councillor Blair asked Sgt MacNicol if 3 points on a
licence was the minimum that could go on a licence. Sgt MacNicol confirmed that 3 penalty points
was the minimum and that there was scope to increase that.
Councillor Kinniburgh asked Sgt MacNicol if it was still
the view of Police Scotland that Mr Gallacher’s Taxi
Driver’s Licence should be suspended.
Sgt MacNicol confirmed this to be the case.
Councillor Kinniburgh referred to the incident being described
as being at the lower end of careless driving.
Sgt MacNicol advised that these were the words used by the defence
lawyers. He pointed out that at the end
of the day it was not speed that was the issue, but the fact that Mr Gallacher
had disobeyed the sign to stop when the lollipop man was in the middle of the
road.
Councillor Kinniburgh sought and received confirmation
from Mr Gallacher that the parking space was beyond the patrol man. Mr Gallacher said that Hillfoot
Street was only one way at the time.
Councillor Moffat questioned why the Committee had only
received the one letter from Police Scotland which advised of the incident
before the case had come to Court. She
indicated her surprise that a follow up letter had not been received advising
on the outcome of the Court case. She
questioned whether or not you would expect more than 3 penalty points if you
were found guilty of careless driving.
Sgt MacNicol advised that the minimum was 3 points and a fine of £100
and that you could get a ticket at the side of the road for that. He advised that Police Scotland’s view was
the facts of the case had not changed regardless of the Court result. He said that the act had still happened and
that had not changed. He confirmed that
he knew what had happened back in December when this issue was first brought to
the Committee’s attention.
Mrs MacLeod said that she could not speak for Police
procedure and she did not know why a follow up letter from Police Scotland
advising on the outcome of the Court case had not been sent. She said that the facts of what happened were
not in dispute but her contention was that Mr Gallacher was not a serious
threat to public order or public safety.
She said that he was a responsible taxi driver and had been so for a
very long time and that he had not been in any trouble before apart from a
minor speeding incident in 2011. She
asked that his Licence not be suspended.
Councillor Currie asked Mrs MacLeod if she would agree
with him that this Committee was not a Court of Law and that the Committee were
not deciding whether or not Mr Gallacher was in the wrong. He said that the Committee were here to judge
whether or not he was a fit and proper person to drive a taxi. Mrs MacLeod agreed with Councillor
Currie. She said that the Court matter
was behind us and that Mr Gallacher had been driving taxis safely for many
years and that there was no threat to public order.
Councillor Kinniburgh sought and received confirmation
from Mrs MacLeod that initially Mr Gallacher had pled not guilty and that after
discussions had changed his plea to guilty.
She advised that the CCTV film was watched by the Sheriff who decided
that the act was at the lower end of the careless driving scale and that he had
imposed a small fine and points on Mr Gallacher.
SUMMING UP
Police Scotland
Sgt MacNicol reiterated the fact that Mr Gallacher had
basically not stopped as required on the instruction of the lollipop man who
was on the street to assist people to cross the road. He said that the vehicle slowly progressed
towards the man and continued to do so once the people had crossed the
road. He advised that it was slightly
concerning that the mitigating issues were that it was busy and Mr Gallacher
had been distracted. He said that Mr
Gallacher should have stopped especially if it was busy with lots of people
about and he was distracted by his passenger.
He said that the safe thing to do would have been to stop as he was
required to do.
Licence Holder
Mrs MacLeod confirmed that Mr Gallacher had pled guilty
and had admitted his mistake. She said
that 3 points was a small fine. She advised
that she had already described his length of service as a taxi driver and said
that he was an asset to the community and that this was someone who was
supplementing his pension with taxi driving.
She advised that he did not pose a serious threat to public safety or
order. She said that he regretted what
had happened and she asked the Committee not to suspend his licence.
When asked, both parties confirmed that they had received
a fair hearing.
DEBATE
Councillor Redman advised that he was someone who held a
strong belief in law and order. He
referred to the 3 penalty points and £135 fine and the suggestion that perhaps
this incident was at the lower end of the scale when it came to traffic violations. He questioned whether the Committee would be
willing to strip a man of his livelihood in addition to the Court
decision. He commented that Mr Gallacher
was not taking anything out of the system and that he had always paid into the
system and that otherwise he was a safe driver.
He advised that morally it would be hard for him to support taking Mr Gallacher’s Licence away.
Councillor Blair referred to the street outside Dunoon
Primary School at the other end of the day.
He suggested that other aspects of traffic management needed to be
raised with Roads Officers to see if a risk assessment of traffic management
could be carried out. He advised that he
could understand how Mr Gallacher could have made a mistake and acknowledged
that he had paid for that mistake. He
suggested that in future Mr Gallacher would be mindful the next time he seen a
lollipop man. He advised that he thought
it would be quite reasonable in this case for the Committee not to take Mr Gallacher’s Licence away.
Councillor Kinniburgh advised that from what had been
said today he was surprised that the school crossing patrol officer had not
raised the issue with Mr Gallacher at the time of the incident. He said that the Patrol Officer had the
responsibility of seeing people safely across the road so maybe he wanted to
continue with that and wait until later to address the incident. Councillor Kinniburgh advised that he took a
different view from his colleagues. He
said that he thought this was an incident that Mr Gallacher regretted. He noted what was said about the road being
busy at the time and advised that it was his view that when a road is busy and
when there are children crossing the road and you are aware of them crossing
the road then you should stop until the road is clear of everyone. He confirmed that it was his view that Mr Gallacher’s Licence should be suspended.
Motion
To agree to suspend Mr Gallacher’s
Taxi Driver’s Licence as he was no longer a fit and proper person to be the
holder of that Licence.
Moved by Councillor David Kinniburgh, seconded by
Councillor Sandy Taylor
Amendment
To agree not to suspend Mr Gallacher’s
Taxi Driver’s licence.
Moved by Councillor Alastair Redman, seconded by
Councillor Robin Currie
Councillor Currie explained why he was supporting the
Amendment. He advised that Mr Gallacher
had accepted his guilt and that he had been to Court and accepted the fine and
paid the price. He advised that it was
his opinion that Mr Gallacher was remorseful and for these reasons he did not
think this meant Mr Gallacher was not a fit and proper person to drive a taxi.
Councillor Taylor explained why he supported the
Motion. He advised that as a taxi driver,
Mr Gallacher was a professional that had to drive to a higher standard and that
he was trusted with members of the public.
He said that the conflicting demands of passengers and obstacles on the
road were the stuff of life for a taxi driver.
He advised that Mr Gallacher sought to ignore a duly authorised person
and that he put that person at risk. He
confirmed that for these reasons he considered Mr Gallacher not to be a fit and
proper person to hold a Taxi Driver’s Licence.
Councillor Redman in support of his Amendment, said that
this Committee was not a Court of Law and that the Committee were being asked
to assess Mr Gallacher’s fitness to hold a
badge. He commented that 3 points and
£135 fine was close to a minimum which, he said, told you what you needed to
know. He confirmed that he thought it
would be unreasonable to strip a person of his livelihood for this.
Councillor Kinniburgh advised that he slightly disagreed
with Councillor Currie’s comment that Mr Gallacher had accepted his guilt. He pointed out that Mr Gallacher had not pled
guilty in the first place. He advised
that the Procurator Fiscal was unwilling to accept a plea of not guilty.
Motion 2 Amendment 7
On a show of hands vote the Amendment was carried by 7
votes to 2 and the Committee ruled accordingly.
DECISION
The Committee agreed not to suspend Mr Gallacher’s Taxi Driver’s licence.
(Reference: Report by Head of Legal and Regulatory Support, submitted)