Taxi Driver Online

usual stuff nothing new here

P'boro cctv consult story

A consultation found that over 75% of respondents were against the proposals.

Peterborough City Council has recommended that CCTV cameras be installed in all hackney carriage and private hire vehicles in the city.

The council has encouraged the use of CCTV in licences vehicles since July 2022 but did not make it mandatory at that time.

A consultation has since been carried out, between November 2023 and February 2024, as to whether the council should make the use of CCTV in vehicles mandatary, following guidance from The Department for Transport, on the protection of passengers.


Following consultations online, via petitions, email, social media and a meeting of the Hackney Carriage (HC) and Private Hire (PH) federations, a total of 678 people came out against the proposals and just 139 in favour.

Out of 453 responses to the online survey, 261 said that they thought other measures should be taken, these were listed to be more of a police presence in response to incidents, drivers improving their behaviour when driving, drivers wearing their badges and undertaking more regular checks and training.

Hackney Carriage (HC) and Private Hire (PH) federations responded by stating that there preferred option was if CCTV was brought in as a discretionary scheme rather than mandatory. Drivers could then sign up for this is they wish, and the council can regulate.

The federations also stated that the council is likely to lose trade if the proposal is passed as well as raising concerns about whether the council would be providing funding for the instillation of cameras.

If the council was to accept the recommendation of its Housing and Communities Team and implement mandatory CCTV in vehicles, drivers would be required to registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office and pay a data protection fee.

The cameras would be both internal and external facing and would include an SOS panic button drivers could press in an incident and the footage would be automatically uploaded to the cloud.

An app would allow drivers to review, retrieve, and/or request historic footage and the drivers would have ultimate responsibility for how personal data is collected and processed and can determine in what circumstances the images should be disclosed.

A phased in approach would see drivers having to comply no sooner than 12 months and no later than 18 months.

The decision about whether to implement CCTV in hackney carriage and private hire vehicles will be made by the city council’s Licensing Committee on Thursday (6pm).

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Years before B&H adopted mandatory CCTV I would say 99% of the taxi/PH trade opposed it.

If we had a survey of the taxi/PH trade today I would say 100% would support it.

_________________
IDFIMH

around here where cctv isn't a licensing requirement, we've found those drivers that have it have been able to contend allegations of impropriety and confirm racial abuse.

I'm not sure if it should be a mandatory requirement, but it is a 100% decent protection for drivers.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Allowed, not mandatory in Glasgow -

https://citizen.glascc1-prd.gosshosted. ... -Hire-Cars

Peterborough MP 'disappointed' as council votes to mandate use of CCTV in all city taxis despite objections of drivers

Peterborough MP Andrew Pakes has expressed his disappointment after councillors voted to force taxi drivers in the city to install CCTV in their vehicles.

The decision was passed following a lengthy meeting of the city’s Licencing Committee on Thursday night (September 12).

The motion passed after a vote which saw six councillors vote in favour, three against and two abstain.

The outcome means that all hackney carriage and private hire vehicles licenced by the council must now install CCTV cameras, which must remain on at all times when drivers are either taking paid fairs or waiting at a rank. These cameras must cover both the driver and the passenger(s) and the instillation, and upkeep costs must be covered by the drivers themselves.

The scheme will be phased in with drivers having to comply with CCTV instillation to meet the obligations of their licence in no sooner than 12 months and no later than 18 months.

In passing the motion, a number of councillors said that they were following guidance from the Department of Transport that, in the interests of passenger safety, council’s should mandate the use of CCTV except if there are exceptional local circumstances.

Mr Pakes has, however, spoken out against the decision. He said: “I am disappointed that the Licensing Committee has agreed the flawed scheme presented to them.

“Public safety is critical but this is the wrong scheme, one that neither addresses the added costs to drivers, most of whom are small businesses, nor the issue of taxis serving the city from other places who still won't have CCTV.

“I hope that the council will urgently work with taxis drivers in the city to seek a workable compromise that promotes safety and drivers in this difficult business environment."

Mr Pakes had previously published a letter of support for taxi drivers in the city, who overwhelmingly objected to the proposals at the consultation stage.

Following consultations online, via petitions, email, social media and a meeting of the Hackney Carriage (HC) and Private Hire (PH) federations, a total of 678 people came out against the proposals and just 139 in favour.

In his letter, written in May, Mr Pakes said: “The cost of living crisis and rising business costs mean that we need to be sensitive to the pressures drivers are facing.

“The proposals raise significant concerns about the privacy of drivers and passengers, the cost of equipment, cost of instillation and subsequent use.”

In total there are 1797 drivers registered in Peterborough and 113 operators, excluding drivers registered with other authorities including in Lincolnshire, South Kesteven and even Wolverhampton.

Representative from the Peterborough Private Hire Association and Hackney Federation, who spoke passionately against the proposals at the meeting, warned that passing such a decision would see Peterborough lose control of its taxi services.

This would be due to drivers from out of the city, and not required to sign up the the CCTV scheme, being able to undercut the prices of local drivers as well as fill their place if local drivers were forced out of business due to the rising costs. Fears were also raised that drivers would choose not to be licenced by the Peterborough City Council but instead a neighbouring authority but continue to operate in the city.

Drivers have also warned of inevitable fare rises following the decision.

Mr Ali Haider, representative of the trade federations, who spoke at the meeting, also said: “A significant 88% of our members oppose the idea.

"Taxis in Peterborough are among the safest in the country, our drivers and companies use some of the safest systems available to ensure drivers know who they are picking up, users know key information about their driver and tracking is available. Enhanced DBS and licence checks are also regularly carried out.

“One of the biggest concerns is privacy; installing cameras would be intrusive for both drivers and passengers.

“Installing CCTV is also expensive. It is estimated that the industry would face an additional cost of £1.25m if CCTV is mandatory.

"Many of us operate on tight budgets and this would only add to the financial burden. Many drivers are already struggling with the costs of fuel, insurance and vehicle maintenance.

“To many part-time drivers or drivers operating on tight margins, this could force them to leave the profession altogether and reduce the availability of vehicles in the city.

“If drivers and operators have to pay more, fare increases will become inevitable, which isn’t fair to anyone.

“CCTV is not a solution to the problems we face. 240 of us believe that it will not solve the problems we face such as verbal abuse or theft. Recording incidents after the fact doesn’t prevent them from happening in the first place.

“We believe in solutions such as better training for drivers, safeguarding passengers and front screen identification for taxis.”

A majority of the 11 councillors present voted to pass the motion, however, along with the condition that drivers and operators signed up to the scheme would have the ability to advertise the fact they are signed up to the scheme, a form of validation not available to drivers not licenced by the authority.

The committee also resolved to lobby central government to legislate and restrict cross border trade in the taxi industry.

The meeting was streamed live on Peterborough City Council’s Youtube channel.

_________________
IDFIMH

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

So the MP is in favour of other councils indirectly dictating what his council does?

_________________
IDFIMH

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

How? its deleted every so often on a revolving loop and the driver has no access to it

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

So no street CCTV then?

No shop or council office CCTV then?

I wonder if that MP has ever chatted with officials from a council with mandatory CCTV, or drivers that operate under that condition?

I suspect not, he is just typically playing to an audience. But at least he has found the most suitable occupation for his talents.

_________________
IDFIMH

difficult to disagree with you tbh

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Its the vehicle numbers that count

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

A little perspective

The hackneys (must be WAV) are all licensed PCC but the rest of the fleet are a mixture with some SKDC vehicles operating hackney in stamford or the Deepings and PH in Peterborough a few similarly fenland or south holland licensed vehicles but the rest are either PCC licensed or Huntingdonshire licensed as standards and costs are lower there and it borders peterborough

20 years ago Non PCC licensed vehicles were probably on 10 to 15 percent of the fleet now it is closer to 30 percent and none of the neighbouring areas mandate CCTV so I think some of the councillors probably realise there could be a large slump in licensing revenues attached to this

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

how many licensed vehicles n the berg there edders?

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I'm sure Stuart can answer this more accurately because he has the sprewadsheets on his PC IIRC but there used to be approx 150 hackneys and around 1000 to 1500 PH in total but that figure may be a bit lower these days

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector