Taxi Driver Online

New opposition to CCTV plans





Oxford West MP Nicola Blackwood has written to Oxford City Council urging them to suspend their scheme to install CCTV cameras in all new taxis from April 1st.

She has also written to Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) seeking an update on their investigation into Oxford City Council’s decision.

In November 2011, Southampton Crown Court ruled that the recording of passengers’ conversations by Southampton Council was not necessary.

She said: “It does seem to me that the City Council has crossed the line with this policy, it is an invasion of privacy and undermining of civil liberties that neither passengers nor taxi drivers themselves have welcomed. The ICO has stated to me that recording conversations between taxi passengers is highly intrusive and unlikely to be justified.

"CCTV plays an important role in combating crime and anti-social behaviour but that has to be balanced with privacy concerns and used within common sense limits. I would need to see some very convincing evidence of a significant crime and anti-social behaviour problems in taxis that needs to be tackled by this specific measure in order to be convinced that it can be justified, and that it is in compliance with existing Data Protection legislation.

"The City of Oxford Licensed Taxi Cab Association has now raised serious concerns about the practical operation of these regulations and whilst the ICO’s investigation into this matter is ongoing and I think it would be sensible for the City Council to wait for the ICO’s formal response before implementing such a costly and invasive policy.”

Oxford City Council says the cameras will make things safer for both drivers and passengers.

In a statement, the council said: "There are laws in places (Data Protection, Human Rights, CCTV Code of Practice) that require the viewing of such images to be necessary and proportionate, and therefore must relate to a specific complaint, incident or investigation. The officers are not permitted to view any images that do not relate to the actual matter being investigated. The risk of intrusion into private conversations has to be balanced against the interests of public safety, both of passengers and drivers."

The council said that as long as clear notices were displayed in vehicles, informing passengers that video and audio recording may be taking place, the risk of intrusion was acceptable compared to the public safety benefits.

It also said the level of privacy that could reasonably be expected in a licensed vehicle was far lower than that expected in the privacy of someone's home or own car.

The CCTV footage won’t be routinely viewed but will be stored on a hard-drive for 28 days. If an incident is reported, the council said footage from the system may be requested but only footage relevant to the incident will be required.

source: http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2012-0 ... ctv-plans/

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

Could there be another reason why they don't want cameras in there vehicles,
Like if they the (PH) pick up illegally it will be caught on camera and the conversation
Like can you take me to, yes jump in

Good point Skippy, and the meter showing £4 and asking for £7.

The sign drivers do not need cameras....

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

Most certainly.

This has nothing to do with human rights and people peeping on others, and everything to do with something to hide.

_________________
IDFIMH

I don't understand why people expect privacy in a vehicle being driven by somebody else unless of course it has privacy compartment like that in limos and some purpose built hcs

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

I'm 50/50 with it, I can see the benefits of it, but I can also see the downside as well, I also think the council should fund it for existing licences if it's going to happen, after all we all know when a suspect gets in they are going to want to watch the show and earwig.

We are often reminded councils dont fund CCTV in shops which is a point of sorts.

However, as you point out, there's been instances where footage has appeared on the internet.

If its going to be fitted it therefore needs rules.

CC

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

There is something very ironic about Taxi drivers being at the for of Civil Liberties.....I wonder how many of those "protected" plate holders would back the Civil Liberty of a free market!!!

Something to hide from HMRC?

So a person going for a night out leaves their house and goes to a town or city, if they go by bus or train their movements will be monitored via CCTV.

There movements in virtually all town and city centres are under the eyes of council run CCTV.

They go into a pub, which will have doormen, who in turn will be connected via radio to a local pubwatch scheme, most busy pubs also have CCTV.

If they go to a cab rank to get a cab home, the cab rank will almost certainly either be monitored via CCTV or have rank marshalls (also on the pubwatch scheme) or perhaps have a plastic policeman nearby.

Whats the issue with the taxi ride home having CCTV again?

CC

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

IMHO the vast majority that are opposed to CCTV are so on the grounds of having to pay for it, all other arguments are simply a smoke screen. These same ppl would more than likely happily drive about all day with no insurance if it wasn't mandatory!

Which is again ironic, because like Bus companies, our insurance would become MUCH cheaper if all cabs had CCTV. Not only for no fault accidents but the insurance killer whiplash, CCTV can easily be used to access such claimants.

It is so so ironic that the people who need protecting the most.................do not need it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, one other thought.................would it also pick up on cam the illegal unlicensed family friend/brother running the cab and they wont want that will they

_________________
if you cannot be yourself, then who can you be.

All those that you mention may not have the ability to record sound. Perhaps it is the recording of conversations that is the problem?

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!