Thank you very much. So, good afternoon, members. We are at the licensing committee council chamber at south camps hall on Wednesday the 23rd of February two o'clock. Thank you for joining us. So, the first item of this committee is apologies for absence. So, Erin, can you advise us who has given their apologies. Thank you, chair. We've received apologies for absence from councillors Deborah Roberts, Alex Mallian and Claire Deltafield. Thank you very much. And we've just been joined by councillor Cohn, councillor Hunt and Cohn and Hunt. Thank you very much. Lovely. Welcome everyone. Thank you. So, can we start off with decorations of interest? Does anybody have a decoration of interest on matters on the agenda? Nope. Okay, thank you. So, minutes of the previous meeting starting at page one and continuing to page seven. Do you want me to go through page by page members or did you have anything to raise? Okay. I can't see anybody requesting any points. So, this records the minutes. This is the minutes of our meeting on Monday the 29th of November when we finalised the matters relating to the private hire and Hattney carriage licensing. So, thank you very much. If everybody's happy with that and has no amendments then I'll take that as approved. Is that okay by affirmation? Lovely. I can see councillor Hunt. Yeah, thank you, chair. I just wondered whether it ought to record the fact that there were subsequent discussions on the topics. This is a record of the meeting. So, I think we just stick with that. Thank you very much. It might be noted in the minutes of this meeting that that observation was made. Thank you councillor Hunt. That's fine. Right. So, moving on to item four. We're looking at the street trading policy. You will be aware members that this has gone round for consultation but I will be asking Rachel Jackson, our senior licensing officer to present the paper. Thank you, Rachel. Thank you very much. Thank you, chair. As you just mentioned, councillor, there have been a quite considerable review and scrutiny of this draft policy over the last few months. So, members are now asked to adopt the draft as a final policy. The policy has actually been welcomed in its format by the Trade and the National Caterers Association and as a whole has been very welcomed. Once approved, the policy will be kept under review and it will be brought back to this committee for revision as required and in any case, within three years. In addition, the fee structure as per schedule at Annex Free, Annex Theodorebeg pardon, will be kept under review and revised annually. Quite a short introduction. If there are no questions, chair, that does conclude my introduction. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms Jackson. Councillor Milms, you're with us as well as lead member for environmental and health and licensing. Is there anything you would like to say? Well, other than to thank Rachel for her work on this, since joining the council and to the licensing committee members that have given this a fair amount of scrutiny. I think the important thing for us to notice that this does represent quite a change. So, to do the universality of licensing across the district and that we're absolutely committed to make sure that we monitor this and if there are any anomalies that have arisen by this that we haven't anticipated, then we can bring that back to committee for adjustment accordingly. Otherwise, I commend it to the committee. Thank you very much, Councillor Milms. So, I'll kick off with a question, which was to do with the fact that because now everybody needs to seek permission, as it were, there are places such as village halls and this came up because one of the villages in my own area has a regular food truck, different food trucks visiting each week. So, I just wanted to clarify what would be the financial impact for a village hall committee who might have a different food truck every week coming along. So, perhaps Rachel, could you just explain how that would work? Of course, thank you, Chair. So, our new scheme will allow us a provision to make it more a fast track, much more streamlined process. So, any individual with an interest in the premises, we typically say public houses, which is a carpark, but of course, village halls, we should say, which are quite a lifeline to the local community, they will be required to apply for a consented premises, which is a very quick form to apply for. There's two fee structures for this. There'll be one standard process for consent, which will be £204 for initial application for a public house, for example, to be able to use the carpark for, as you say, the vendors who may come in once a week, twice a month, etc. So, that gives them the flexibility for anyone who holds a consented premises trade license to come and trade there. Village halls, we again recognise the financial implications for that. So, we have proposed a reduced fee of £74 for a charitable or not-for-profit premises. So, a village hall, for example, would apply for one-off licence and then there will be a liberty to entertain or allow to be hosted a variety of traders who have the consent in the council. Thank you, Mr Jackson, and a question from Councillor Hull. Thank you, Chairman. Chairman, I just want to ask Mr Jackson a question. Many of these straight traders who have been on private land, village hall and whatever, but not on the actual highways, how are we going to know where they are and what they are? I mean, do we now and going to put out a call to everybody or are we already aware of who these people are? How do we get to know about them? That's my concern. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Councillor Hull. I think they have to apply for a licence in order to trade in terms of health and safety, so they have to have a licence themselves anyway. So, let's ask Councillor Rachel Jackson if you can reply. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Councillor. Of course, what we have actually this afternoon, after the conclusion of this meeting, we have drafted a press release already. We have used the business newsletter as well. We will also be emailing all the public houses in the district we have got to notify them. Our key point there, Councillor Hull, is actually using our contacts with the traders already, the traders association, so Food Park and Food Revolution, and they've identified about 25, 30 potential premises, including pubs and village halls already. So, they're kind of already in liaison with them because of the kind of the discussions I've been having with them over the last few months. So, the trade are already actually aware, not through ourselves, but through our word of mouth, from our kind of our colleagues and our, of course, the Food Park, et cetera, business representatives. So, so tonight we'll have a press release tomorrow and for the next few days we'll be emailing the trade as well to our advisement of what's happening and obviously inviting them to apply. My idea will be the first launch of applications will be exactly from the consented premises, then exactly everybody will then know who they can go and trade with. So, that's the first port of call to approach and publicise with the trade in person. Thank you, Mr Jackson. I think the question was actually about the traders themselves perhaps, but, Councillor Howell, you wanted to come back? No, no, that's fine. Thank you very much indeed for your very comprehensive reply. Excellent. I just want to say that I would also suggest that you put this information out to the parish councils because if parish councils don't know then it's not worth knowing. Thank you very much. And I wanted to check that, thank you, that for people who, for traders who trade in labis, I can think of one in my own board, we would have contact with those traders through their licence to trade as a food vendor, wouldn't we? Absolutely, chair, that's correct. So, they're already kind of covered, they're already aware, and just to refer to Councillor Howell as well that we have been closely lazing with all the parishes as well who have been supporting with this. So, once the decision is made today, they'll be reminded, shall we say, of obviously, when the policy takes place, etc. So, everybody locally will be fully aware of the new regime. Thank you. Councillor Bataercher, it's Councillor Dr Bataercher. Left side. You need to hold it there for a while, Councillor Bataercher. Sorry, you're not registered. You need to hold it there and wait until it shows your name. Sorry Rachel, Councillor Bataercher is just having a struggle with her microphone. So, once we've got that sorted out. From Councillor Howell. Thank you. Is it all right? So, I do have a question on behalf of the community. Do we also have the full clarity on the community events, fundraising, coffee morning, down council, faith and fair, because a little bit of trade also happens, but they are not the commercial traders. So, do we have a full clarity on the policies on this community events, community fair? I mean, a kind of transaction of money or trade. It is not commercial trade, of course, but there is a transaction of money happens. So, do we have a full policy on it? So, did you catch that? Yes, thank you. Yes, thank you, Councillor. And thank you, Councillor. Yes, if you wish to refer to page 16 of the agenda, we have within the out-of-scope, which I hope will address any concerns you have there. So, it does actually give a caveat at the bottom of the bullet points. If you look at B out-of-scope on page 16, if you look at the bottom point of that, it says trading for charitable purposes, et cetera, et cetera, and there's a little asterisk below there. So, I think that will cover exactly what you're looking at. So, protection of the local community and attractive events will in effect be out-of-scope of the licensing regime. And also, bullet four refers to trading at a fair, fair, or similar one-day community event. So, that sort of covers some other things, doesn't it? That's correct. Thank you. And Councillor Wilson, you have a question. Yeah. Yes, thank you. I have a question. If, for example, a pub is a consented premises and wants to provide a food truck for its customers, but doesn't have room on the car park, would it be acceptable for that food truck to be on the highway, on the street? Yes, indeed, Councillor, but they would have to apply for a separate, that would be a standard consent. So, the ones you may see currently pitched up on the high street, the same would apply for them as well. So, there'll still be the two. There'll be standard consent. So, number one, the high street, you've got the food van there, that's one, and then the consented premises will be for where trading takes place exclusively in privately owned car parks, for example. So, yes, quite a limited reply for both schemes of consent. Thank you. So, just to come back on that, if a pub does not have its own car park, say, and the food operation can only happen on the road, they wouldn't have to apply for standard consent, would they? Because they haven't got anywhere to have it. They would only have to do it. Sorry, Karen. Oh, sorry, Chair. No, they would actually have to apply for standard consent because they are trading on the highway. Sorry to say again. So, because they are trading on the highway, if they're trading at number one on the high street outside the old king's head, then they would have to apply for a standard consent to trade on the highway. So, that would come under standard consent. That's correct, yes, Chair. Okay. Thank you. And Councillor Roberts online.  Thank you very much, Chairman. Sorry, Chairman. I was a little late getting in. My machine just didn't want to learn today. It crashed at the very end of council yesterday, and then it didn't want to start this morning, this wintertime. So, I hope that you've put my apologies. I'm still a bit better than bruised, so I'm doing it this way. Yeah, I like the report. I think it's very clear. Can I just have some a little bit of clarification about the revocations of the consent? Obviously, it seems that they can approach us and ask for that to be reconsidered. Is it going to be set up the same way as we do with ordinary licensing, three members? And is there any follow-up that they can, can they go to the magistrates court, or are we the final of the deciders? Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councillor Roberts. Yes, just to confirm, the terms of delegation for your committee will be amended slightly, so to include or to confirm again the street trading provisions. So, absolutely, same as the licensing panel, appeals panel, three members, and your decision is final. There is no grounds to appeal further. So, they can't appeal to the magistrates court? That's correct. That's it. Your decision is final. So, if we have a three-member panel, Ms Jackson, can we also invite into that panel the people who made representations and sort of thing as we go forward for a premises licence? Absolutely. I don't, yes, that will be the next kind of the process to confirm with our committee services, but to say this is absolutely intention that it will be saying very, very similar format to a licensing hearing subcommittee, or indeed a taxi appeal. That's very clear. Thank you, Chair. So, there'll be a right to a fair hearing. Thank you, Councillor Roberts. Thank you. Thank you, Rachel. That's lovely. Thank you. Okay, and that, I'm mindful we have some other questions, and I'll come to mine afterwards. So, Councillor Hunt. Oh, sorry, I didn't have you. If you'd like to take Councillor Harvey, I'm quite happy to take Councillor Harvey's question first. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councillor Hunter. I just wondered if Ms Jackson could clarify, I'm not sure whether this would be within the purview of this policy, but the policy before us does touch on public nuisance, particularly noise nuisance. So, the first question is in the case that I think it's quite common for these mobile food stores, for example, to have a generator. And in that case, should we not be, as for music reproduction, I think, specifying some kind of decibel level and distance from if there is a generator running? And secondly, I note that non-vehicle internal combustion engines aren't covered by the same pollution and emission regulations as road vehicles, but there is a piece of EU legislation, which I think is now adopted into UK law called the non-road mobile machinery regulations that they were affected from 2017 and cover sort of legal limits on emissions from static generators, et cetera. Because I'm aware that some of these mobile generators can be very poorly maintained, and that inner sort of urban setting would be quite dangerous to health, I would have thought. It's Jackson. Okay, thank you, Chair. But it always has been taken into account, but I think as we have from Brian Millins, he mentioned first of all, this is kind of a work in progress, a very much of a living policy. But I will say, Councillor, that obviously since the, I think it's 2010 when this policy first came into place, we're not really, apart from obviously proliferation of street trade venues we saw as a result of the pandemic, I'm not expecting a surge in the amount of traders in our district, so I'm expecting it to be the same, but obviously everybody to be subject to the licensing regime if that makes sense. So I'm not speaking to my colleagues in Environmental Health, I have not been made aware or they're not aware of any noise complaints resulting from the noise of generators or the emissions, but to say obviously if that is something we need to address in the future, I'm obviously more than happy to do so, but to say I'm not expecting it to be as a result of public nuisance because say communications with my colleagues in Environmental Health have not produced any intelligence to say we've had any such nuisance thus far, and of course looking at the hours of operation as well, slightly different to say pub nuisance, which could go on to say 11, 12 o'clock at night. A lot of these traders, these mobile units, food park and food revolution attended to finish about 9.30, it's a lot more family friendly hours should we say than the typical, we'd expect to be unreasonable hours of disturbance. Yes, thank you, and I realise it's a bit late in the day to introduce this, but I wonder if we could give that some consideration when this policy comes up for review had a next job, Chair. Thank you. Absolutely, thank you. Thank you, and I'll come back on my question, which relates to that later. Councillor Hunt. Thank you, Chair. Two things. One thing, on the subject of the food standards high-generating, it mentions that as evidence of that required application. I hope that's also required in the streamlined renewal process because it ought to be in order to be grounds for revocation presumably by some means if it should change during the course of the year or however long it goes for. But the other thing I wanted to do, I wanted to come back to this question about the pub that hasn't got a car park because it seems to me that that is a great disadvantage now compared with the one that does because a pub that has a car park could get consented premises and then can attract, ad hoc, any number of food vans which themselves merely need to have the consented trader, is it? The visiting trader kind of thing. That's great, yes. And that makes that arrangement very easy and quite a lot of pubs do do that. Now one that doesn't have its own land to put that on cannot do that and each of those vans that visits if I understand rightly will have to apply to trade at that spot which means that ad hoc, it's going to be burgers this week or this day and hot dogs tomorrow won't work. And I can see that's probably nothing we can do about now but is it possible maybe in a future version of these conditions to somehow enable a business in that situation to apply for consented premises, you know, consented use of a piece of road so that they could enjoy that, that style of visiting traders. Thank you. Thank you councillor. The issue with that though councillor is it is on the highway so it would be subject to the same regime as a standard consent. So the operator of the pub business, a restaurant for the pub business would not have the authority to control and access and manage who uses that part of the highway. That is the real distinct problem we have got, if that makes sense. You say there might be a disadvantage in a way, however it would just be for the trader then. If a trader's already trading there, obviously with our reduced fees and more attractive streamline process, we would hope they would still be encouraged to trade there outside the king's head on the choose the evening and then obviously move elsewhere within the district but unfortunately I don't see any route for allowing almost like a disabled parking outside a house for example. That's what I'm trying to visualise, almost like a reserve or parking spot for a food trader here. I don't envisage that being a possibility but of course I'm more than happy to explore that for future consideration. Okay, thank you. I understand that it's not easy. Could you also comment on my question about the food standard renewal? Well, absolutely. We're based within the environmental health team as well. So any kind of breaches of food hiding regulations will obviously be dealt with by my colleagues in environmental health which would naturally result in a, if need be, a revocation of the street trading consent. So the two very much go hand in hand. Thank you. Can I just come back on the point that Councillor Hunt made about again about premises without a car park because I can think of some situations where through custom and practice a trader has parked up on the highway. This actually is a verge in my image. It's technically highway but the parish has always approved them being there and highways have accepted that over time. So what would they have to do? Yep, they would apply because it's highway which includes the grass verge in the new regime which is perfectly subject to the standard consent.  Okay. Right. Thank you. Councillor Mills, you, oh sorry. Councillor Mills, did you want to come in at that point or I've got questions coming. Thank you chair. So one of the things that we've been aware of are for example the people that have organised north stones for food trucks have gone to a great extent to encourage their traders to use reusable plastics or recyclable containers. So they've got green bins able to be used and I think something similar has happened at Campbell. So whether we need to codify this for example or other aspects of the way that they operate as Geoff was saying is a question that we can come back to over time as this new policy develops and to see whether there's any useful such traditions. And I think again Steve Hunt's suggestions that there could be a possibility. I'm not quite sure in the same way that Rachel describes how we can do that. I mean once you're on to the public highway, you're on to the public highway. Yes, it may be a disadvantage if it hasn't got a car park, but that's the nature of the beast. So I think that might be more awkward. But certainly I think as you've seen with the workshops that we've had with yourselves as committee members, we're very open to developing this policy going forward. Thank you, councillor Mills and that's actually I'll come in now because that was the point I wanted to make and that was that it would be a shame if in this policy we lost some of the control that we've had previously. And I know when I have been advising local parishes I've said to them, you know of course this gives you the opportunity to say what you want in terms of where will they dispose of litter, where will they put their generator, which side of the building would you prefer it to be or you know and what are they going to do about provision of water or anything like that. So I'm just wondering is all of that embodied in an existing licence or is that something that would naturally come out of the application that they would make? So I think I'll give you an example particularly of pubs who are obviously typically provisioning water and power to these trucks that are operating on their premises as are some of the parishes and towns already. So that's certainly the case in Northstone. So these you know supply of utilities for example are out with our policy so they are Thank you Councillor Mills that's your misunderstanding and what I was asking I think is helpful to know but what I was asking was will that requirement to agree that with the parishes come out of the consent application and I was asking Rachel that because it's whether it's embodied in the application if you see what I mean. So so for the oh sorry Councillor Mills sorry do you want to speak or what do you like. So I was just going to say what would happen is as per the current regime the parish council would be notified of any such application so we received an application for a consenting premises that would provide details of where the trading needs to take place and then the parish council would have the 21 days in which to come back and make any observations. So that should address any consent. So that's when they get an opportunity to say That's correct yes but are the prompts for the trader to think about those things like where am I going to get rid of my litter and all that are those in the application they are not necessarily in the application but the part of the conditions as well which obviously they have to sign to say confirm they will comply with x conditions so it's very much within there as well. Okay thank you very much sorry Councillor Mills did you want to finish anything you wanted to say there okay okay so Councillor Cohn thank you. Thanks chair and I'll start by saying I'm very happy with the draft street trading policy that's been put in front of this I think it's very well set out. The questions I had I think have already been asked by Councillor Harvey they were kind of around admissions and idling vehicles and provision for you know your conditions I suppose not provision for traders you know operating in a green way if you like so but you know there's obviously bits throughout the report on noise and sort of being you know courteous to others and stuff around them so I think that sort of addresses that and as you say that there'll be conditions individually put on each sort of application which I think is what you're saying will cover that essentially in terms of you know making sure we haven't got engines running for hours on end and stuff like that. The other thing I was going to say is on the point of when someone has a successful application will the ward members be notified so we know that there's going to be X trader coming into one of our villages within in the parish and I know obviously it has to go through you know consultation and licensing and everything else but it might not be that those ward members are involved in that process so will they be informed on a successful application. Thanks very much. Thank you yes thank you chair and thank you councillor Ken. By all means we could notify either by way of the I'm not sure what it's called so the the members briefing or the bulletin we could perhaps put something in there to say licensing updates that's something to have raised before hopefully we could do that if not it might be just a method of just sending your courtesy email to confirm this application has been granted. I think an email would be so we don't have to touch for it. Thank you councillor. Yes councillor Wilson. Thank you. There are various types of consent in this paper would parish councils be informed of all of those consents for their approval or comments? Thank you councillor Wilson yes I'm just looking at your back my own notes and I should have really mentioned this to councillor Cohn's reply you said will you be made aware you actually will be aware as part of the actual initial application process a consultation process so you will receive a copy or details of each application councillor in your ward and I think councillor Wilson does that answer your apologies does that answer your question as well so yes so can parish councils will be notified of an application as yourself as ward or division council council laws will be notified of any application as well. So would that include um street trading? Yes absolutely any application we receive apart from where an individual if you think about an alcohol license with personal licence you won't be notified of that because that's really quite irrelevant quite frankly but where an application has been made for a standard consent so say a burger van for example has been asked to trade on one the high street you receive that application and where the rose and crown has applied for consenting premises you receive notification of that application as well for comment. Thank you so councillor Hunt did you want to come back? Yes thank you chair and I'm on page 21 where it's on grandfather rights chapter section 11 um I just want to clarify about how long those grandfather rights continue because it says that the trade will have the right to retain their pitches subject to basic safety rules but then clearly they they also have to apply with a sort of extra grace period um but does that grandfather right mean that their application will not be rejected for reasons such as commodity duplication or unit unsuitability what would be it says basic safety rules is that is am I reading that correctly that it means that some of those criteria would normally use will not be applied to them. No a policies councillor sorry sorry chair so uh no they'll say that they'll still have to make sure all the safety requirements of course are met and of course the the scenario could be that a valid representation is made to an application um however the office is kind of protection available to support the local businesses so if a business has been trading in an area that was previously not a consented area for say the last two years then there'd probably an expectation that their right to trade providing of course they can meet all the conditions and all the requirements are met that's where the protection is so a right to be able to continue trading there but of course not bypassing any of the the standards or requirements whatsoever if that makes sense. Can I come back on that? So if if there were two if there was not this thing called um what is it called commodity duplication so I suppose it's a situation I'm not saying it is but there were two hot dog stalls 20 meters apart and they'd both grandfathered would they both get to continue doing hot dogs or would we have to say to one of them there's too many hot dogs here? Exit well that's we're saying this may be taken to account that's sort of a critical point here because we're not saying for example we may have one trade on one day and the trade required interest in this as well they they're feeling and I think more for them think I'm saying are you saying that if we have a fish and chip ban on a Monday we can't have one and a Tuesday absolutely not we are not there to um if the market is there and people wish to you know select the certain cuisine then that's absolutely decorative um but what we didn't want to see is a saturation for example say four four hot dog rounds outside a hot dog shop for example is to provide that flexibility and variance but if we've currently got two traders there who are providing the service to the local community then there should be no reason why they do not continue subject to of course we can the requirements thank you miss Jackson and councillor hails thank you um so miss Jackson if I may um the planning service send councillors a planning update weekly so all of the outstanding applications and the ones that have been approved on my view and that seems to be a very worthwhile format I just wonder whether across the year that could be something perhaps done monthly if I don't know it doesn't necessarily be weekly but that might be the format that we you could potentially adopt so that all councillors are just notified of all um licenses being granted enough to be in their area they just have to drill down and find it and that's fine that gives a nice easy way um and it was the last point that you made Steve with regards to the four burger vans or hot dog vans and outside a hot dog shop um I can't remember the the the name of the policy but in if I recall Cambridge have a we can't have too many hairdressers in the same road but South Cams in planning terms did not and it's got a name for that policy commodity duplication I don't know right but I'm assuming then that we do have that in licensing comes on to page 19 page 19 did you want to explain that Richard thank you thank you chair if you say yes we may take that into account if for example we'll use North Star as an example of an ever-growing community should we say or a new building town if for example we would not really want to see there's two ways we can approach that in the planning policy for North Star a new development we could say restriction on and again I can't remember the the use the multi-use of an area but you say we wouldn't want to have possibly probably on one small row of street shops six fish and chip shops and outside the fish and chip shop two fish and chip vendors so this is trying to work with the policy and this is going forward it's actually something I will be working with with my colleagues in the project planning I forget the titles and apologies for that but within the planning development as well to make sure we do enhance the availability of services available to our residents as well so it's very much working with them so you will see in the coming years revisions coming to the policy with regard to the commodities perhaps only in certain areas almost a bit like a licensing out policy to have saturation of stress policies where the night time economy is at such a level to cause a disruption to the local community so I think council hails there's a there's so many options there to look at but right now talking to the trade and the trade representatives there doesn't appear to be a clash or a significant strain or stress so as to say this is alarming we need to stop but it just gives provision to say if it comes to it enough is enough we have sufficient at least commodities in place if that answers that question that's that's lovely thank you thank you councillor and the the initial part you said about notification of all licenses issue that is something I had raised previously and I'm more than happy to raise again because an previous authority worked for notifying the councillors of any applications that had been granted including temporary vet notices who was very welcomed and it's something I was trying to recreate here as well so if I'm able to do so I shall indeed okay and um when we get involved sometimes it's because there are complaints about particular premises or vendors or whatever and so I'm looking at 19 revocation of a consent and I know that there are conditions that would cause a revocation and then it says the matter will be referred to the licensing panel who may determine it necessary with regards to promote public safety and or prevent nuisance or annoyance to affect parties to look at it again what I'm concerned about is um when that happens usually people wait quite a long time through annoyance and disturbance and upset before they even report it as a concern because they wait to see if it's going to be just as bad next week and so by the time they actually summon up the confidence to contact us often it's been going on already for quite some time so I just want to be clear about the terms under which residents can raise their concerns that although the vendor might be in spirit complying with the conditions that they are it's not working so I'm just wondering what um so there's two the two cases where they where they're not complying with conditions but also where they might be but it turns out that that's really still causing quite a lot of disturbance I'm just wondering how do we handle that and how long does it take for people um to have to go through that misery before something can be brought to panel thank you chair it really would depend on the the nature of the the concern of course because oftentimes it is a lot more different for a resident who for example moves next door to a pub or a pub changes hands and all of a sudden the pub is very quiet we're operating in harmony and then obviously it's not quite so easy for a pub to work and move elsewhere nor is it easy for the resident to move elsewhere however with a mobile trader I think there's a lot more simple approaches that could be taken here so I would like to think that the any potential misery endured will be very short lived because by our own enforcement activity as well because of course this is something we'll be picking up on in the new year and just the general conversations we have you know with the traders should allay any concerns but my my wish or desire to any residents who are feeling they are under nuisance or concern about an operation of the premise of a trader should contact us right away and that will that will all follow suit with our new when we start publicising the new regime further so if a neighbour found that the street trader was causing a severe nuisance straight away you know the very first time they turned up and they complained then what would be would we have to observe for a while or would you contact trader or how you know if it came through to environmental health or to licensing what action you know obviously you determined on the time what sort of action would be taken yeah absolutely it would depend very much on say that the nature of the complaint and the allegation if it was relating to food safety then of course we'd look at you know probably an immediate revocation of that and there's any risk immediate risk to public safety and harm then of course immediate action needs to be taken a bit like a taxi driver where it's a public safety risk we can immediate revocation so a very swift referral to the licensing panel to determine that if however it was just you know what you had a radio on the radio on was too loud switch off the radio don't have that for example and then that may address the problem so there's there's two there's two different approaches there depending on the severity of the issue but obviously I'm receipt of the complaint or an allegation we would first of all make contact with obviously once we've got the information from the the complaint speak to the the stall holder of the vendor and assess what the problem is are there any steps we can do to mitigate the circumstances if not obviously but like a revocation of a premises license if it's a west case scenario you want to support the trade and we want to make sure that the trade obviously work in support of the local community because we do realise that over the last two years in particular uh they have been providing a valuable resource to our local community so I would hope it's not as horrific as it possibly you know maybe it's sounding today but you know it's very west case scenario but obviously residents need to be assured that if anybody isn't compliant or is causing a public nuisance we're the licensing authority will address that certainly. Thank you and the last thing I wanted to check about was do the conditions um cover things like storage of gas bottles and things in safe locations yes it's all about the safety at the end of the day yes thank you councillor hails did you want to come back if I may um because I've learned the phrase commodity duplication now which is now all about like traders um it's just a under page 19 under the general section Rachel yes um I just got a query it sounds to me like some of the sentences of working against each other but that could be my interpretation and it says that within the proposed pitch location there are already traders or businesses offering the same service or providing the same principle food commodity during the hours of the consent is applied for this is to ensure a diverse offering of services um subject to grandfather rights so I'm assuming if you had four sausage vans all the grandfather rights they carry on um competition issues will not be a consideration so those kind of in my head go against each other those two sentences one you're not the competition isn't going to be a consideration but there could be four vans there because they've got grandfather rights or you're trying to offer a diverse service of different food products so that will be my only question on that one there so it was a danger that I learned two new words okay well we would yes so thank you so we there's very much looking for just providing the services that are available for the trade at the end of the day for me to go and say uh we're not having free fish and chip vendors outside on this street in the in in three days who might say that if the business is making money from that and they provide a valuable valuable trade for themselves and earning a livelihood then obviously and that is satisfying the the local needs because obviously if people didn't want them the the traders wouldn't be there then that's a kind of suggestion there so we wouldn't be arguing or mandating that we can't have two or three but when we get to two or three outside fixed premises so we've got three fish and chip shops in a row and outside that we've got a fish and chip van selling just standard fish and chip products then that may be a put into question however we're not we're not able to challenge the kind of um if someone came back and said oh I've got this is not unfair competition that is not something we can entertain so thank you so can't so my understanding is it I think part of the problem with this is it's a very long sentence if you like because the if you the thought process starts on page line two of the grounds for representation refusal or vocation under item eight on page 18 so basically it says the council it's like national planning policy framework it's you know presumption in favour of planning it says the council will normally grant a street trading consent unless one or more of the criteria below are identified and then there's a caveat there and then it says unless there's commodity duplication with the exception of grandfather rights so it's just that it's almost like that's a whole thought goes through the policy but you sort of lose the bit at the beginning however read correctly is helpful so thank you very much are there any other questions yes Councillor Wilson go ahead thank you um I was just wondering would the presence of a a score in the vicinity have a bearing on whether an application is allowed at this stage Councillor Wilson no unless there are obviously grounds for concern about unhealthy lifestyles that I think that's what you're probably raising to and the junk food etc which something I alluded to earlier about the project working with the planning team in regard to north stone development is that as a I'm not sure what the terminology is a healthy town so there could be in the future options to look at what other steps we need to put within our policy and other particular zones or areas that we would not wish to see trading take place but again this is all for kind of our policies is going forward it certainly is an option to look at thank you and I'm sure we have considered that in well in planning terms when change of use has been proposed in the suitability of the location for that change of use but that's for fixed purposes okay members I think we're pretty much there I cannot see any further questions so in that case members thank you very much Ms Jackson for all the work that's gone into this and for doing a very thorough consultation with the parish councils that's been really helpful so I'll turn our attention to the recommendation on page nine of our agenda which is that the licensing committee approved the street trading policy to take effect from the first of March 2022 um can I ask for a seconder thank you councillor Wilson will second that so members can I take a vote on that please great lovely super thank you very much Ms Jackson that's really helpful and thank you very very comprehensive report so with that um I'll call the licensing committee to close at 1449 thank you very much indeed and could you


Hello, I am Dr. Guru Prasad. I am a Pediatric Intensiveist at Malthi Manipal Hospital. I am Dr. Sushma, Consultant-Pediatrician at Malthi Manipal Hospital. We as a team provide pediatric intensive care services in a 4-bed unit at Malthi Manipal Hospital which is fully equipped with multi-channel monitoring for continuous cardiorespiratory monitoring, ventilators and other equipment that is necessary to take care of sick little children. Children admitted in the PICU are very sick children who need continuous monitoring and care. We have well-trained nurses and pediatric doctors in the unit for continuous care of the child. We commonly handle severe pneumonia, severe dengue, convulsions, trauma and other severe illnesses. We understand the importance of the role of the parents during the healing process and believe in having the parents stay with the child during ICU stay. We also provide effective allied services to intensive care like emergency services, transport and sedation which is for a short time for painful procedures in children. We believe in providing services which are effective and sensitive to the needs of the child and the family.


Hi everyone and welcome back to another episode of our Pokemon vgc 2019 battle series I hope you're all well. Thank you so much for tuning in and just a big Thank you to each and every one of you for all the comments on yesterday's video all the kind words about our new Little arrival thea into mine in tashes lives has been like just lovely to read through them And thank you so much you guys are literally the best and life is good and again. She's just napping now So I will get her on at some point. So Do keep an eye out as well today Later on on my Twitter if I've got time to stream this evening I definitely will but it will depend on what's going on So hopefully you guys understand if not this week we will get back into it next week But as I said yesterday, we're kicking off with this team on the channel this week So we did play a couple of weeks ago a little bit of a break because of things going on But we're gonna finish it up this week And I am super ready to get into a new team next week So if there are cause and things that you would like to see played that we haven't really featured too much of yet on The channel and you really got a burning desire to see them played then let me know down below in the comments section I will make sure to feature them next week We had some great comments and suggestions yesterday, but do keep them coming guys just to recap the team We've got the tap of finney the medic grass the Veltel we've got the hit on top now over the incineroar the ground on and the thunderous Which has got the Z move as always the team is down in the description below You can try it out take it away have a look at it and tweak it even if you'd like to change a few things for your own taste And if you do just let me know how you get on with it because it's a core I really do have a lot of love for and if you have a lot of success with it I would love to hear about it, but Getting on to today's episode. I guess we better just jump straight into it and music is on everything looks fine So looking forward to it, but yeah, as I say, I'm ready to kind of move into a new team Better get the right screen on so we can see area and it's dropped a little bit Hasn't it so we need to climb back up I'm a little bit sad because I felt like we had a nice bit of momentum going into The first week when we played this team and I really feel like this could push on to 1800s, but we'll see how we get on for the rest of the week We've got route as our first opponent, so I'll jump straight over into Right route is running a team of it looks great actually it's got the mega more while there Which is gonna be the mega of the team or you presume it would be then there the Kyle got the Tapulele the bronze on the jump love and the ground on now jump love is something I actually tested myself with this team before I came up with this this version that we're running now It does get chlorophyll it is base 110 speed So it's pretty fast and especially under the Sun. It's gonna be out speeding most things It's got access to sleep powder as well. So you have to be very aware of that Till it doesn't get till when actually it gets on core it gets rage powder It gets lots of different moves and one of the moves I was testing out on jump love And if you guys would like to see that variant of the team at the end of the week I am happy to play that but that was sad to strength and it was incredibly good Especially with the focus that's a lot fun to play around with and okay What are we gonna do? We've got trick room here on my opponent's side of the field We need to try and and utilize the Veltal to stop that bronze on for sure Let's see I think I might Change things up a little bit here because we could bring thunderous It's good for the taunt the fast horn especially because the things that we want to taunt are gonna be on the Flying or levitating the bronze on the jump love. So I think I'll bring that I do want to bring Do we want to bring him on top? I'm not too sure. I'm gonna bring type of finny Evelton and groudon and then we should be and we'll get into this first one today So as always guys if you do enjoy this sort of content Please remember to drop a like on the video do subscribe to the channel and keep those comments coming one of the things I forgot to ask about yesterday We had the IC over the weekend and I didn't ask I would love to hear how you all got on if you played in the IC over The weekend how you finished or teams you use then how much fun you had in general and of course you all That you have competed in this all gonna get a nice tasty tapu finny for your troubles as well and a big shout out as well I need to someone messaged me on Twitter and said there was a shiny tapu finny event in Japan So the guy we played yesterday. I was a bit skeptical on the shiny tapu finny But he obviously there has been an event over there. So that's how they got it. There's no hacking there So I'm just a little bit too skeptical and that's just my knowledge of the shiny events over there Not being a thing But we are gonna see the groudon the jump love come out as a lead for my opponent So and now we can't taunt the jump love here for sure Maybe one of the things we want to do though is just go for a protect with thunderous Because then imagine the jump love out of everything here probably Wants to protect will probably see the groudon go for an attack try to remove that thunderous from the field to get rid of that Priority taunt and I'm just gonna icy wind at this point just to try and slot everything down a little bit and Being a grass and flying type jump love is four times a week to the ice type attack So it's gonna take a lot of damage there We're gonna just say sleep powder fire out and a fire punch and it is into that thunderous So we do get a free icy wind off here into my opponent to have a finny on form hitting with both attacks here So that's good. Do some nice damage to both targets. Now, you know, we have to worry about a potential Fire punch coming out from the ground on here. So that's something we have to be a little bit aware of So we could bring in our own ground on It's not a bad shout and we could just go for another icy wind here I would expect we'll probably see another fire punch come out from the ground on into our thunderous to try and Remove it maybe a sleep powder as well Whether or not my opponent's really that worried about the taunt because they just went straight for that sleep powder Maybe there's a mental herb on there. So that's something you've got to think about and consider as well because most of the time If you haven't got the mental herb, you're kind of going to be worried about the prankster taunt Especially to shut the jump left down not allowed to really do very much So we'll get our own ground on in give ourselves a little bit more room for our type of thing to operate and just disrupt There's either feel we're just slowing things down a little bit with these icy winds And you know after Jump love's gonna be in a really tight spot if it takes another one because it will go down to a following one after that I'm gonna see the ground on my opponent's side switch out bronze on hit the field now Which is an interesting one and but as long as we've got our terrain on the field. We're not too worried I see when not on point there And The thing that we have to worry about this next turn of course is the tapulele switching in And then the jump left putting a ground on to sleep, but does my opponent have The Kyogre on the back that's what I would I would imagine you've got Kyogre you've got ground on so I don't imagine Tapulele coming to this this matchup the problem is if we go for an eruption and The Kyogre comes in not really doing very much And we've got a tap of finny out on the field Which is not something that we really want to have out on the field at this point I am gonna click into our option because we do want to try and get rid of this bronze on but because It's likely the Kyogre comes in I need a switch in for the ground on out so tap of finny's like the best thing in that situation and I'm gonna bring you Velto on to the field because If I was just gonna be able to pressure the bonds on let's get snarl to pressure the The Kyogre as well if it does come on to the field, which I'd imagine is likely what's gonna happen now So we'll see anyway We do get our misty seed activated. So that's good for us Rage powder. Okay.  So that's that's nice for us The misty terrain coming in Really big for us. Yeah, we do see that Kyogre now hit the field There's no trick room up on the field now and you've got to imagine both these primals are probably gonna be a little bit slower and Then are your beltel so we are gonna see the car that actually activated the rain First is that because that sounds already up or is the ground on actually gonna be slower. Let's see Let's see. Let's see. There's a primordial C. Yeah, so that's good So we're not threatened by a fire punch from the ground on so we don't really care about that and We'll bring in type of finny and we will start snarling Without a beltel and I think we're gonna have Pretty a pretty easy route now to kind of close this game up We just need to get rid Kyogre and then the ground on being slower potentially than I brought on But if I'll still should be able to close this one up itself. I feel at this point We do get the snarl off into the Kyle there Stomping tantrum into a type of finny And There's actually really respectful damage doesn't it there and the origin pulse coming out hits both targets I'm not gonna really worry our beltel too much And I think Do we what do we do we just heal pulse? Oh No, nature's madness into the Kyogre here. We'll just go for another snarl as well And this one should be quite quick one. I look back at yesterday's episode. It was crazy It was like I couldn't believe it's like over 40 minute episode. It was mad. I was like when did that happen? I think it was because the excitement of actually being back recording again after such a little break and such Disruption in our lives that I was like just a little bit getting carried away and thinking I'm just loving this Let's just keep this carrying on forever So we do see a thunder come out from the Kyogre the ground on does protect We do survive that because of the the minus two drop with the snarls there We are gonna be able to get this nature's madness up into the Kyogre and put it in a nice place to get picked up and Couple of turns from maybe two more snarls and the ground on Now in a prime position to get nature madness as well. I'm just gonna spam snarl There's no reason not to here We're not in any danger of getting taken out at this point unless we see critical hit origin pulse onto our beltel But maybe even then we take that I think at this point with the missy seed boost that we've got there The missy terrain has Subsided for now But I don't feel like we need it for the rest of this match and the thing what we need to just consider at the minute is keeping This rain up because the ground on it's only way to really hit the beltel is Is with that fire punch and that's the only threatening thing that my opponent's got from that side of the field the Kyogre's muted minus three now Rest of his blades gonna come out To be finished should take this Yeah Origin pulse will this take finny down. I would say probably does No, wow Finney finny doing doing all the work. Okay, now evil talk and probably clean swan up itself. Um What we'll do we'll just switch into ground on and we will file play the opposing ground on That should be enough to pick up the knockout there and then the Kyogre's kind of locked into ice beam if anything and Veltel should be able to close this one up and we might be able to squeak a four-nil to kick us off today Which is gonna be very good very entertaining game though And they're nice to see something like jump love being utilized by a player and you know Ruby's got a really high rating as well. So he's been doing obviously very well with this team and So It's kind of nice to see I think the more I would have maybe caused us a few more problems But we haven't seen the inclusion of that in this game. So Um Be nice. It's one of those teams where you think I'd love a best of three against this team just to see How my opponent kind of react they bring them all out Which they're likely to and see how we can get on against that So thunder and the Sun does avoid and we're gonna be able to wrap this one up now with an earth part from our ground On and we will just follow this up with a foul play as well for my Veltel But this should be a nice way for us to kick off today and I keep thinking I've got like I go saying yesterday my brain feels a bit mush at the minute And I feel like I've probably said this a million times, but suggestions for next week guys I'm gonna put a poll up on the channel today So keep an eye out for that for ideas calls and things that you'd like to see played next week because like I said in yesterday's episode I'm really open now to just have a little bit of fun with the ultra series and Even though we can have a lot of fun with it There's still a lot of serious calls that we haven't really touched upon yet that we could have We could feature in things like that But I think it's a nice time to kind of start delving into a few more fun and maybe me me quirky Ideas that I've probably been sitting on to play a little bit more serious stuff on the channel with recently I'll jump over to our scores screen So you can see what our rating is and I better choose some music Maxi and Archie we never have this one do we so we'll pick this one and we'll see how we get on But yes, do let me know in the comments about your IC run how you got on in that I'd love to hear especially because I didn't play in it So it feels nice to just have some feedback from you guys if you did play it and see how you got on But we've got an X upon at the episode so I'll hop straight over into And then there's gonna be an x-ray team for our next one today We've got the Zernius got the Rayquaza. We've got type of finny in Cynarol, Lander's and stack attacker So pretty standard looking x-ray team Maybe the stack attack is the one thing that we don't see in there too commonly But still something that can do a lot of work. This is a great a great matchup format across We still got to be careful around the Zernius for sure I'm just gonna double-check because I'm not like oh fair with this type of finny We do have hairs on it. No, we don't have hairs on it. We don't have haze so I need to be a little bit careful around that. I mean thunderous is decent here really threatens Landerous for sure Metagross is just incredible in this matchup I think I'm gonna go on Metagross hit my top and I'll lead from VGC. Oh, where we going VGC 12 2012 I think it's popular back then it might have even been before that maybe 2009. Who knows? I'm sure my age now. Okay. We do probably want Grow out on and maybe tap of finny as well for the light screen support. I Do really like thunderous here Thunderous is probably Maybe a better one to bring. I'm gonna bring thunderous here actually and just leave tap of finny on the sidelines I want I Say I want I want a way for us to hit tap of finny super hard And we can do that with thunderous with busy move especially they you know We can do a lot of damage to it. So I think just having that there It's a nice switching as well if the landers is out in the field. Um Because they're not bringing the belt up for this match You've helped us gonna struggle a lot in this matchup. We've got the white screen. What's going on? Here we go.   We have to worry about the requires that if it's got a power off course It will will threaten our a good old metacross But you know, I hit my top putting a lot of pressure on to the stack attack here We could we could surely go for a close combat into that But then we got to worry about the requires are throwing out one of these dragon ascents as well Which could be a little bit problematic for us Kind of just want to stomp and tantrum into the stack attack here. I'm really honest The only thing that really like we could see lander is coming Definitely could I'm gonna switch out Him on top and I think take this opportunity to get to get thunderous onto the field Yeah, it requires the minus one at the minute Dragon ascents not gonna do too much to us. So we'll be able to take that with thunderous. I Think the worst case scenario is gonna be the requires are having maybe overheat or They're definitely options that it could it could go for and threaten our metacross We're gonna see the the requires a mega evolve here. So it's gonna burst out into mega requires a Probably one of the strongest strict default Pokemon. We've gotten this format. There's a Delta stream We all love to see and see what Here after we mega evolve course with a lovely metacross I'm still a bit undecided on metacross. I love it so much, but there's a part of me That's like just not not massively convinced by it. I'm gonna see it stomping will be double powered next turn So we've got that going for us in the dragon descent Which is gonna be fired out from this ray into a thunderous like I say minus one.  Like I say the stomping tantrum is gonna do a bit more damages next turn So I don't really want thunderous to go down here. And I don't really want to switch I'm on top into dragon descent either I'm just gonna protect thunderous.  I think we probably get the kill. Maybe maybe who knows who knows Rick was gonna withdraw So we could have got a turn off with a thunderous here. I'm just gonna switch in. It is gonna try and get the intimidate Onto our make a metacross. I wonder if we see trick. Be very interesting thunderous just protecting here We don't want to take a rock slide either. That's the other thing We do get this there's the sugar double power stomping. I'll be interested to see what the damage is like minus one Man weak stone edge into thunderous. Okay, so that's yeah, that's fine I Do want to what I do want ice punch into the lander is here for sure And we don't want to stick around for a stone edge But I don't want to take a z move either. That's the that's the other thing. I'm just gonna protect metacross I'm gonna switch into him on top here And just preserve thunderous for later on so at least we know three of my opponents for Pokemon I would imagine the zernius is the last one for sure But getting topping and intimidated we're not threatened by dragging us in either we've got a pretty nice Option to go for a cross combat into the second second next turn But I imagine we probably force the stack attack out if it does stick around which it is gonna He owes we just protect with metacross this turn gonna see the lander is now fire off that z move It's gonna be into the metacross trying to remove that from the field, but minus one behind the protect It's not gonna be doing too much. So we're gonna be in decent shape We've also got wide guard kind of helping us out going into this next turn and protect us from an earthquake And it you know the one thing that I would say that we're gonna probably see this next turn Is gonna be earthquake Stack switch out into the requiser for sure So yeah, there we go. There's the z move There's a star on edge. Yep into top, but we're able to take that because we resist it like a champ Yeah, the thing is though The request that comes in Delta stream gets activated. We wide guard for sure. Yeah, that's nice But we're not in the best of position going into the next turn because we really want to intimidate that Requires a note one of the things we could potentially do is Go for the hmm. I Just don't metacross taking too much damage. That's the thing like I'm gonna ice punch Delinerous, I think probably go for Could I just go for the thunderous switching and then go close combat and just get some damage onto the stack It's like if it stays in but it's gonna be the requiser will break a potential sastra if it does switch out I'd imagine that's what we're gonna see So there's a metacross going out. It's just to kind of cover the earthquake here And we reset that intimidate drop as well. There's a stack of going out for the ray. The worst thing is kind of really want to have Intimidate onto the requiser There's the earthquake hit my top will be able to take it. Yeah, and this is all about just breaking that I think that the problem is now that thunderous is definitely in dragon ascent range from the poison ray quasi Which is a little bit awkward. Okay, we'll bring We'll take We'll protect thunderous. We'll bring do I want to bring metacross in that's the problem It's just taking an earthquake, which is not really ideal Are we better off sacking him on top as well? Is that the other thing? I don't really think so because I think we need the Intimidate support I'll switch him on top out. I think I think metacross can take an earthquake minus one earthquake It's not gonna be ideal, but we'll be able to take it for sure We might see the land rest which out you never know Michael for rock slide, maybe We'll just protect the under a star six stream speeds and It's quick Not ideal not ideal at all That's gonna be Okay, we I mean we take that a little bit better than what I thought we would and we can definitely get Groudon in now An ice punch the land rest or we let ice punch the requiser I like to punch the lander us Bring ground on in and hope we see the requiser either protect or go for an extreme speed into the thunderous If you see a dragon ascent into metacross might this might be a little bit too much I just want to remove the Delta stream get rid of the land rest It's putting a lot of pressure on everything on our side of the field right now And it kind of makes me think the belt old Finney would have been really useful here Yeah, but we haven't got them so we can't think about that right now We're gonna think about keep our mind on that on the game. So we are gonna see stream speed into the metacross Thankfully, we are able to take that we should be able to remove the land rest from the field now Problem is here if the zernius comes in because it is gonna be able to get boosted up It's not gonna be ideal and we don't have any speed control on our side of the field. Yeah The problem I think There's an And if it gets boosted up metacross is in no position I love you have a lot thunderous out in the field to stop that to stop the okay Got a precipice blades I think and Do we get him on top back in? It's not really gonna do too much though That's the thing like the zernius gets boosted up here We can't really deal with the requiser because it's just gonna Yeah, it's just gonna extreme speed the metacross because it has to cover that slot and really has to I'm just gonna iron head I think we're protecting we run out of time and faffing around too much. It's not good. Oh I hear this. Yeah. Okay the requiser. This is why the iron head would have been the better call here You just I if we just a fraction quicker Okay This is fine But the problem is we probably take the stack it down unless precipice blades misses Which is the one time you wanted to miss is now? Any other option there was switching ground on out to him on top and then we got the fake out iron head this time Maybe there's a way maybe there's a way for us to do this I don't know kind of mine can metacross take minus one extreme speed Don't know from this range an iron head surely not gonna take down the zernius though But we'll try and get we'll get ground on out of here we'll get him on top in we'll try and get Intimidate on to that and we'll try and go for an iron head into the zernius and hope my opponent goes for an extreme speed Into the metacross and not a dragon ascent like at this point I would just banking I would bank on Dragona sending into that metacross just to make sure I get rid of it None of the protect the last turn I wouldn't be faffing around with extreme speed I would just do it and geomancy. So that's what I totally expect to see my opponent go for here. Oh It's gonna go for it It is actually enough to get it so I mean And there's a geo which we can't do anything about And I think that's one of the things about having the finny with light screen You know we've got if you got his on there like we kind of played all season It makes it a lot easier of a choice to bring in this matchup because you think the Rayquaza's probably got sword stands If it's not bandage, which I kind of think this one is and It's gonna be able to do anything here. I really don't think it is I mean the only thing we could potentially do is Bring thunderous in say that the zernius is gonna protect this turn around the fake out Bring ground on in snipe the Rayquaza with hidden power ice and Then try it and then try and work down. It's all banking on that zernius protecting here. It really is And if I was my opponent, I probably wouldn't protect here. I'd probably just attack Because I'm not really too threatened right now, but we'll see we'll see Now no protect. Oh Even minus one extreme sweet takes us down. That's just crazy Okay Maybe we've got wide guard. We've got wide guard. This is not really gonna help us too much Is it gonna need some big precipice blades damage done and we can't deal with the Rayquaza at the same time? Well, that's a little bit sad, but I think this is the thing with Metagross is it's like in hindsight on paper It looks amazing, but like when you're actually in a game versus something like Rayquaza, which just hits you so hard It makes it so difficult And We'll not reveal we'll not reveal it yet. We'll try and get a fake out into the zernius and a precipice blades This is why you protect though a hundred percent But we've not really got a way to deal with the Rayquaza either I mean it's locked into extreme speed. Yeah, that's the protect Yeah and Yeah, and I think just the constant damage I mean like banded Rayquaza, which this is it just does so much damage and this like it's so difficult to get around and Maybe we have to go precipice blades and we have to go wide guard because we're definitely gonna see I mean they might read through this and I think like it's just it's not able to take the hits like you needed to and To be honest as well to get the guarantee one hit kill and just your standard 4 HP zernius You need meteor mash and you need a lot of investment as well, which takes away any sort of room for and Defensive investment there, so I think it really does limit you. There's a dozen games if you didn't get a precipice blades off Does it need like crit crit crit? I mean, yeah, it's it's easy to take three so Now we protect now we go close combat Because the moonblasts are coming out My opponent can be really cheeky and go for a moonblast into the him on top now and just extreme speed the ground on Going into the top Moonblast yeah, we're gonna get a hit the close combat off. Just yeah, I mean Moonblast there's no way we get around the moonblast now. That's the thing Get it over protect for sure, but then extreme speed just takes us down Let's just forfeit gracefully and let's go help in hand come on top Let's do it, but this is what I mean about met across. It's just I Feel like it's so close to being there and being the the Pokemon that we wanted to against this call But I think just requires I've been so powerful and then you got variants with the earth power and things like that Which could really even better just makes it so difficult to get around and you're not really able to go toe-to-toe With the boosted zernius, which you kind of want your steel type to be able to do and I think that's a big drawback For a way like stack attack it does that Reasonably well, you've still got a player around zernius carefully with stack attacker But stack attack has built to do that a lot better than metagross and you've got speed control there Which does help that out which metagross doesn't Substitute metagross is an interesting one. Maybe you could try that by the end of the week for sure But very good game to my opponent. I hope you've enjoyed today's episode of the old guys It's been really a lot of fun playing just over the 30 minute mark So keeping it back to time and we'll be back with more more eval don action tomorrow, so do stay tuned for that Thank you once again. I look forward to reading your comments about I see about teams You'd like to see next week and make sure you do check out that poll But have a great day and I will catch you all for the next one. So until then take care and bye bye


We're breaking a new ground with the Moodle 4.0 release, and we're getting wide input from our community because that's key to its success. Our community is one of Moodle's greatest strengths, and we have to work together to find and fix the biggest issues with user experience that you might be having. We're looking for 4.0 to get a wow from our users. So whether you've been using Moodle for 10 years already or just 10 minutes, you'll feel empowered to take advantage of the very deep features that Moodle already has and to do even more amazing things with them.


I've always had a passion for computing and Prague College seemed like the perfect place to further my studies and the lecturers and students when I visited the open day were all very friendly. It feels great to be at a small private institution in the heart of Prague. It's a lovely school, great facilities and the lecturers are very approachable and friendly. My program includes general information about IT including from programming and with 3D modeling and game development and networking as well. The favorite part of the program for me is programming and web development. The study here was absolutely flexible and that's why this was the most important reason for me I came here. We study everything from networking in Cisco, 3D design in 3DS Max and programming in languages such as C++, Java and JavaScript.


As we learned in the first chapter, computers use binary digits, numbers, at the hardware level. If all we have is numbers, how do we represent characters, letters, and symbols in numeric form? We use encoding. Remember in grade school when you had a simple code for passing secret messages where A became 1, B became 2, C became 3, and so on? That's the idea. We set up a numeric correspondence for each character. The grade school approach is the right concept, but it's too simplistic for our needs. One standard encoding for characters that includes upper and lowercase numerals and punctuation marks is ASCII, the American Standard Code for Information Interchange. It uses one byte per character, which limits it to 256 different encodings. In ASCII, the capital A is encoded as 65, lowercase A is 97, an exclamation point has the numeric value 33, and the numeral 5 has the value 53. ASCII is great, but 256 numbers aren't enough to encode languages other than English, and definitely not enough to encode all of the Korean syllabary or the Japanese and Chinese characters. You need at least two bytes for those. In the past, each country came up with its own standard for encoding, and it was pretty much of a mess. Computer manufacturers and computer scientists got together to develop a single encoding to handle all the world's languages, Unicode. That is the system that Java uses for encoding characters as numeric values.


Thank you for the introduction. Good morning. So this talk is about the exact round complexity of secure three-party computation. And this is a joint work with my advisor, Arpita Patra. So let me begin with the exact question that our paper addresses. So we consider this specific setting of three-party with honest majority. And we investigate its exact round complexity over a range of security notions, namely guaranteed output delivery, fairness, security with unanimous abort, and finally, security with selective abort. So some of these results were partially known. And our goal was to fill in the gaps and complete the picture for two popular network settings. The first network model is the minimal model of point-to-point private and secure channels. And the next one additionally assumes a broadcast channel. So we complete this picture by means of two lower bounds and three upper bounds. And while our upper bounds are specific to the case of three parties, our lower bounds are generic, and they extend for honest majority setting. So like we saw in the previous talk, but let us just quickly recap what the problem of multi-party computation or MPC is. So we have n mutually distrusting parties out of which t may be corrupt. And the goal is that they want to compute some combined function of their private inputs. And MPC gives them a means to do so with the guarantee that nothing beyond the output of the function will be revealed. So in a nutshell, it can be thought of as MPC emulates the effect of having a trusted third party to whom all these parties can simply submit their inputs and get the output in return. So MPC has been studied for a range of security notions which are classified based on the degree of robustness of the protocol. So the strongest one is that of guaranteed output delivery or GOD in short. So this is the ideal case in which, no matter what the adversary does, he cannot prevent the honest parties from getting the output. So here in your system, even if some parties are corrupt, at the end, everyone is guaranteed to get the output. Now a slightly weaker notion is that of fairness in which though everyone is not guaranteed to get the output, but it is fair in the sense that if the adversary gets the output, then all the parties get the output. So basically, this is an all or a non-kind of situation in which either everyone gets the output or nobody gets the output. Next, an even further weaker notion is that of security with unanimous abort. Now these kind of protocols may be unfair. That is, it's possible that the adversary gets the output, but the honest parties don't. But still, the adversary cannot keep the honest parties on different pages. So what I mean is that the adversary gets the output, but there are only two possible cases. That is, either all the honest parties get the output or all of them abort, but there is a sense of an agreement or unanimity amongst the honest parties. And finally, we come to the weakest security notion that is security with selective abort. Now in this case, the adversary can selectively deprive some of the honest parties of the output. For example here, the adversary who gets the output, he may select that only say the first two honest parties should get the output, while the other two don't. So now the honest parties amongst themselves are not in agreement. Now here, the notions are listed from the strongest to the weakest order, and therefore the implications follow top to bottom. What this means is that guaranteed output delivery would imply fairness, which implies unanimous abort, and which finally implies selective abort. Now we consider these notions for our special setting of three parties with one malicious corruption. Now there are a number of reasons why this particular setting of honest majority is interesting to study, but I'll be listing a few of them now. The first and foremost reason is that it has been found that the most likely scenarios for MPC in practice, they seem to involve only a small number of parties. For instance, even the first large scale deployment of MPC, which was the Danish sugar beet auction, that was designed for the three party setting. And again, some decent technologies such as ShareMind and a few papers on secure machine learning, they all involve protocols having small number of parties. The next reason is that having an honest majority allows us to study these strong security goals of guaranteed output delivery and fairness, which are otherwise known to be impossible, as shown by the famous result of Cleave. The third reason is that there is a lot of evidence in the literature to show that having a single corruption can be exploited and taken advantage of to circumvent known lower bounds. For example, there is this famous lower bound of three rounds for fair MPC with t greater than one. And this was circumvented by the two round four party protocol of Isha and others, which achieves guaranteed output delivery by leveraging the fact that they have a single corrupt party. Also in the context of verifiable secret sharing, it's known to be possible in one round, only in the case of a single corruption, but otherwise it's known to be impossible for a generality. Another reason is that this setting allows us to construct protocols from weak assumptions, like there are some three party protocols based on garbled circuits, which are built just from one way functions or one way permutations, and they are completely, they shun these publicly primitive such as oblivious transfer, and this would not be possible, say in the two party case or in the dishonest majority case. And these kinds of constructions, they turn out to be using only lightweight operations. For instance, some of the garbled circuit constructions, they are able to avoid the use of the techniques of cutting choose. And finally, having an honest majority gives us a promise of a better round guarantee as substantiated by this lower bound in the plain model, which is four for the case of dishonest majority, but it's only two for the case of honest majority. So these are some of the reasons why this particular setting is interesting, and with this background, I now move on to present our results in more detail. So like I mentioned, we have two sets of results, one for the setting of without broadcast, and the other that assumes the presence of broadcast. Now, in the setting of without broadcast, these are the things which were already known. First, like two is known to be the lower bound for any meaningful notion of security of MPC, which includes security with selective abort. And for this, we already had a tight upper bound, which is the protocol of Isha and others. Now, for the other extreme of guaranteed output delivery, it is known to be impossible no matter how many rounds are given in the absence of broadcast. So therefore, the question of round complexity in the case of God without broadcast does not seem relevant because it's known to be impossible. Now, our goal was to complete this remaining picture, and we do so by means of one lower bound and one upper bound. So our first lower bound shows that three rounds are necessary to get unanimous abort without broadcast. So what this means is that given two rounds, the best notion of security that you can get is only security with selective abort. And therefore, it implies the optimality of this protocol of Isha and others in terms of the security that they achieve in two rounds. Next, we have an upper bound, which is a three-round fair protocol without broadcast. Now, since fairness is a stronger notion than unanimous abort, a lower bound of unanimous abort would translate to a lower bound for fairness. This actually, as you can see, is making our upper bound of the three-round fair protocol tight. And again, for the same reason, since fairness is a stronger notion, an upper bound for fairness can also be considered to be an upper bound for unanimous abort. So now, with this, the picture on the left side has been completed. And we move on to the setting of with broadcast. Now here, the known results are simply the ones which were translated for the security with selective abort from the without broadcast setting. Now, in the case of unanimous abort with broadcast, we had some surprising and interesting results. It turned out that two rounds are actually sufficient to get unanimous abort with broadcast. Now, what this means is that broadcast has actually helped to improve this round complexity of unanimous abort protocols from three to two. However, this did not seem to be the case for fair protocols, because we have a second lower bound which proves that three rounds are still necessary to get fairness, even if you're given a broadcast channel. So this means that broadcast does not really help to improve the round complexity of fair protocols. And this lower bound of ours actually nicely complements the known lower bound of three rounds, which is known for fair protocols with t greater than 1 and any general n. So what our lower bound shows is that for the case of t equal to 1 and n equal to 3 also, this lower bound of three rounds is necessary to get fairness. And finally, we have a third upper bound, which is a three round protocol achieving guaranteed output delivery in the presence of broadcast. Now, again, since guaranteed output delivery is a stronger notion than fairness, the lower bound of fairness would translate to a lower bound for guaranteed output delivery, making our upper bound for GOD tight. And finally, to fill in the last piece of this puzzle, which is the upper bound for the fair protocol with broadcast, it's actually, in fact, implied by two of our existing constructions. Both are construction for the fair protocol without broadcast, as well as our construction for the GOD protocol with broadcast. Both of them actually can be considered to be an upper bound for the fair protocol with broadcast. So this completely settles the question of the exact round complexity in this particular setting. Now, as I mentioned, the good news is that these lower bounds are generic, and they can be extended for any n where your n lies in between 2t and 3t. And our upper bounds, though they are specific to the three-party case, but still, on the bright side, they are built only from one-way functions or one-way permutations. And technique-wise, gavel circuits underlie all our upper bound constructions. Now, let me give you a high-level overview of the approach that we use in our lower bound results. So as I mentioned, we have two lower bounds that we show that three rounds are necessary, first for unanimous abort without broadcast, and next for fairness with broadcast. Now, the general approach that we use in both of our lower bounds is as follows. First, we pick a special three-party function, and the proof is by contradiction. So we assume that a two-round protocol exists that is either secure with unanimous abort or fair, respectively. The next step is that we define a sequence of hybrids involving different adversarial strategies. And the idea is that within a hybrid, we use our assumption that the protocol must be correct and secure in order to derive some inferences. And across the hybrids, we compare the views of the parties to build up these inferences and finally come to a contradiction. So in our lower bounds, the contradiction that we come to is that any two-round, such a two-round secure protocol must be, in fact, violating privacy, showing that three rounds must be necessary. Now following this template, let me explain to you the overview for the lower bound for fairness with broadcast. So the special three-party function that we pick is the following. Here, the inputs of the parties are nothing but single bits, and the output is the logical AND of party p2 and p3's input. So the proof is again by contradiction. You assume that a two-round fair protocol exists with broadcast. So now we move on to see the strategies. So consider one such execution of two rounds, called sigma1, in which your party p1 is corrupt. Now his strategy is very simple to describe. He behaves honestly in the first round, and he simply remains silent in the second round. Now with this strategy, since he has behaved honestly in the first round, he would be receiving all the desired communication, both from p2 and p3, in both round one and round two. And by correctness of the protocol, this would mean that he is able to compute the output. Now recall that our assumption is that the protocol is fair. And since a corrupt p1 is able to compute the output, it must be the case that an honest p2 is also able to compute the output, since it's supposed to be fair. So the inference that we derive from here is that an honest p2 is able to compute the output, even without the round two message from p1. So building on this, we move on to the next strategy in which p2 is corrupt. So the intuition is that since p2 does not need the round two message from p1 to compute the output, as per what we inferred before, he can actually afford to misbehave towards p1, right from the first round. So this is what his strategy is, is that p2 behaves honestly only to p3 in the first round, but he does not communicate to p1. And his strategy in the second round is that he simply remains silent. So again to just repeat p2 strategy in sigma two is to behave honestly only towards p3 in the first round, and to simply not communicate to p1 at all and remain silent in the second round. So now the claim that we make is that the view of a corrupt p2 in sigma two actually subsumes the view of an honest p2 in sigma one. Now to give an intuition of why this holds, let's analyze the view of p2 in sigma one. So it comprises of the round one messages from p1 and p3, and round two message only from p3. Now this is something which even a corrupt p2 gets in sigma two. He also gets round one messages from p1 and p3, and round two message from p3. And note that we can rule out the possibility of this round two message from p3 to p2 as being influenced by p2's misbehavior in the first round. And why we can do so is that even if we assume that p1 was say to report this misbehavior in the first round to p3 in the second round, he could do it only during the second round by which time the honest p3 would have already sent the round two message at the beginning of the second round. So all in all we can conclude that whatever an honest p2 sees in sigma one, all that communication, even a corrupt p2 is seeing in sigma two. And by the conclusion we made earlier, it must be true that p2 is able to compute the output. Now again by fairness, since a corrupt p2 is able to compute the output, it must be the case that an honest p3 is also able to compute the output. Now we make a crucial claim. We say that it's not only the case that p3 is able to compute the output at the end of the protocol, but in fact he should be able to compute the output at the end of round one itself. Now to give just an idea of how it works, it's more formal in the paper. So like if you analyze the nature of this function, you can notice that it depends only on inputs of p2 and p3. So as per the strategy of p2 and sigma two, the only thing that he has communicated is in the round one communication to p3, and maybe the broadcast communication in round one. So both these things are available to p3 at the end of the first round itself. The only additional thing that p3 is getting in the second round is communication from p1, but that communication from p1 could not possibly hold any information about p2's input x2 because p2 has effectively never interacted with p1 throughout the protocol. So whatever information p3 needs related to the input of p2, all that should be available to him at the end of round one itself and enabling him to compute the output. And with this we move on to the final strategy in which p3 is corrupt, and in general, in any MPC protocol, if a party is able to compute the output at the end of round one itself, then it's susceptible to something called the residual function attack in which the party can locally plug in inputs of his choice and get multiple evaluations of the function while the inputs of the honest parties remains fixed. So in this particular example, we can imagine that p3 participates as per his input being zero, and as per the ideal functionality of and, when x3 is zero, he should not be learning anything about x2. But as we concluded earlier, that he is able to compute the output at the end of round one itself, that is nothing stopping akara p3 from locally plugging in his input as one and allowing him to learn x2. So finally, this is a violation of privacy because p3 was able to learn x2 even when his input was zero. And now before concluding, I would just like to give an overview of some of the challenges that we face in our upper bounds and the techniques that we use to handle them. So in our first upper bound, which is the three-round fair protocol without broadcast, the main challenge was that since we don't have a broadcast channel, the adversary can behave in many ways to cause the honest parties to be in a state of conflict and confusion at the end of the second round. So in particular, we were dealing with scenarios of the following kind in which a party p1 is supposed to distribute some common information to both the remaining parties. Now to do so in the absence of broadcast, we make both the remaining parties that is p2 and p3 exchange this information in the second round to cross verify. Now suppose an honest party finds any inconsistency during this cross verification, then he simply does not know whom to blame because for example here, if p2 is honest and during the cross checking, if he finds that the messages don't match, he doesn't know that is p3 bad or is it the case that p1 has not distributed this information consistently. So for this, we introduce a new mechanism which actually rewards honesty of parties with something which we call a certificate. So in this context, p1 would actually be given a certificate for behaving honestly and distributing the information consistently to the remaining two parties. This certificate serves a dual purpose. First, it's used to unlock the output and second, this can also be used as a proof by p1 to convince the other honest party p2 that he is not the reason of confusion and that he has indeed distributed the information consistently. So for this reward mechanism, we formalized it as a primitive which we called authenticated conditional disclosure of secrets and we realized it using privacy free gavel circuits. Next for our two round protocol of unanimous abort with broadcast, we identified that the round to private communication is actually a soft spot for the adversary to attack and disrupt the unanimity amongst the honest parties. So this is quite natural because if a corrupt party misbehaves only to one of the honest parties in the second round, then there is simply no time left to inform the other honest party and bring him or her to the same page. So for this, we break down the round to private communication into two parts. One is the private communication in the first round because if a party misbehaves in this step, then there is a scope for him to be detected early and this can be informed to the other parties in round two. And finally, the second part is the broadcast communication in the second round. So here if a corrupt party misbehaves, then he will be publicly detected by all the honest parties and they would continue to be in agreement. So in particular, we introduced this two part release mechanism to transfer the encoded inputs of the gavel circuit in our protocol for unanimous support. And finally, for our upper bound with guaranteed output delivery, here our main concern was that since we want robustness, we could not afford any kind of conflict or confusion at the end of the second round. So for this, we designed a two round building block having this property of strong identifiability, which means that an honest party either gets the output or identifies the corrupt at the end of the second round and this would help everyone get the output no matter what. Now finally, there's a common challenge that we face in all our upper bounds. So our upper bounds deal with multiple executions and whenever you have a protocol with multiple executions, a common concern is that of input consistency, that is you need to make sure that the corrupt party uses the same input in all the executions. So in fact, we had to deal with two kinds of input consistency issues. One was that within an execution, we needed to make sure that a party uses the same input across Gabel circuits in the same execution. For this, we used a variant of one of the existing mechanisms of proof of cheating, which is very popular in the literature of Gabel circuits. And the next kind was to enforce input consistency across executions. So for this, we introduced a new trick, which is specially for the three party case. And here, we are able to enforce the corrupt party to use the same input with absolutely no additional overhead over our protocol. So with this, I conclude my presentation and thank you for listening.