Agenda item

The Licensing Committee received a report on the regulation of cosmetic piercing and skin-colouring businesses. The Environmental Health Manager reported that the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 enabled local authorities to charge reasonable fees for the registration of persons carrying out the business of skin piercing and the premises in which these activities took place.  The fee covered the initial inspection(s) associated with registration, checking training qualifications and competency of the operator, advising the business about the requirements of the byelaws and best practice, and associated administration.   Currently there were different registration charging structures across the legacy areas and approval was sought for the adoption of a common charging policy.

Members noted the following points:-

·       Benchmarking with neighbouring authorities showed similar disparities in charging structures.

·       There was no statutory requirement for public consultation when setting fees under the Act and it was for this Committee to agree these fees.  Fees should be set at a level to ensure full cost recovery whilst also being fair and providing value for money for the businesses. Councils were required, however, to take a reasonable and proportionate approach and should aim to set a fee level that was sufficient to cover the cost but not make a surplus.

·       Fees should be reviewed on an annual basis, taking into account of any increase in the Retail Price Index (RPI) and where appropriate, an increase would be applied to the fees to recover related increased costs to the Council.

·       Since there was a disparity across the Buckinghamshire district in terms of the adoption of the registration provisions in the Act and the adoption of byelaws for cosmetic piercing and semi-permanent skin-colouring, work was currently taking place to allow a further report to  be presented recommending the provisions of sections 14 – 17 of the Act being adopted, to ensure harmonisation of registration provisions and that byelaws for cosmetic piercing (piercing of the body including the ear), semi-permanent skin-colouring including micro pigmentation, semi-permanent make-up and temporary tattooing, electrolysis and acupuncture were made in accordance with the necessary procedures and for these to be confirmed by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and that once confirmed, that the related existing legacy byelaws would be revoked.

The following application fees had been proposed:-

During discussion the following points were made:-

·       Confirmation was given that the Council was unable to make a surplus. The fees proposed were consistent with neighbouring authorities.

·       It would be helpful to have an idea of the number of businesses who might apply for this registration to gain an idea of total income.  In response it was noted that for 2021 there were applications for 11 operators and 72 premises. The income for that year was approximately £12,000. It would be difficult to compare as it was not a standard year but the budget would be monitored to ensure income covered expenditure.

·       In terms of enforcement of registrations, this was usually in response to complaints, but a proactive approach would be looked at as part of the process of adopting byelaws and harmonising policies and processes across the legacy Council areas. Environmental Health Officers have a constant presence on the High Street as part of their day-to-day role and would identify, and give advice to, any new premises that had set up. Other existing businesses may also flag if a new premise did not have a registration.

·       A question was asked when legacy Councils had their last fee review. Chiltern and South Bucks District Councils may have reviewed their fees four years ago, but a written response would be given for clarity.

·       A Member commented that the fee structure should allow for resources for inspection. The public have a right to ensure that the premises were fit for purpose. The Environmental Health Manager gave assurance that every premises that applied for a registration was inspected and that was incorporated in the fee, for example to check on cleanliness and sterilisation arrangements and any reactive inspection was as a consequence of a complaint.

·       Clarification was given that skin lightening, if done at home or by a medical practitioner, would fall to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and was not part of these regulations. If in a salon, then inspections would be conducted by the local authority but would not be registered under the Act.

·       A question was asked about individual operators and checking the operator through surprise visits. The Environmental Health Manager reported that the inspection programme was risk based and Councils had been advised by the HSE as to which health and safety topics should take priority. The Environmental Health Officers would be monitoring any new premises as part of their daily role when visiting other premises in the High Street or if any concerns were raised by members of the public. Operators could be freelance however they could not be peripatetic and would need registered premises. It could be mobile e.g. a van that meets requirements (and which would have been inspected). A Member suggested that the Cabinet Member could look into this issue as there could be 5 freelancers operating in one building but only 3 of them might be licenced. It was an offence to operate without a registration. The Environmental Health Officer would take action against an operator if this happened to be the case.

·       Under this legislation, which operates through compliance with byelaws, the penalties for non-compliance tend to be lower (maximum £1000). A stronger enforcement approach, and for activities which aren’t covered by a registration, would be to use the Health and Safety at Work Act and action could be through the service of improvement notices or if there was an imminent risk of personal injury, prohibition notices could be served preventing an activity with immediate effect.

On a vote being taken the recommendation was proposed by Cllr Southworth and seconded by Cllr Green and:-

RESOLVED that the harmonised fees be approved for the registration of persons who undertake skin piercing and related activities and the premises where skin piecing and related activities take place with effect from 1^st July 2022.