Oxford City Council’s controversial move to install CCTV cameras in every Oxford taxi have been put on hold.
The programme of installing cameras, which record both images and audio, was due to begin on April 1st, but has been paused while the Information Commissioner’s Office investigates privacy concerns.
Council spokesperson Lousia Dean said, “We have had an inquiry from the Information Commissioner who wishes to better understand the scheme. We are happy to assist in those inquiries.”
Taxi drivers were previously told that they needed to install the £460 devices by 2015 or face having their licenses revoked. The CCTV cameras and microphones activate once the ignition in the car is turned on, and remain recording for 30 minutes after the engine is turned off. The council says the recording equipment is necessary to protect drivers and passengers, as well as to deal with any disputes over fares.
However, there has been strong opposition to the proposal since it was announced. A protest was held on 21st March, while over 250 drivers have signed a petition against the scheme.
Nick Pickles, director of the group Big Brother Watch who have led the campaign against the policy, said, ‘It is clear that recording the conversations of every taxi journey was an unacceptable intrusion into people’s privacy, so we welcome the news the council has suspended its policy.
‘However, the only acceptable outcome will be if the Council abandons the plans and we remain ready to take legal action to ensure Oxford does not become one of the most spied upon places in Europe.’
He added, “This policy is not only a huge intrusion on privacy, but sends a terrible message to the wider country and indeed the world about Oxford as a city. Do the council expect senior businessmen or visiting academics, let alone tourists and local people, to put up with their conversations in taxis being recorded?”
Oxford West and Abingdon MP Nicola Blackwood agreed, commenting, “It does seem the city council has crossed the line. It is an invasion of privacy and undermining of civil liberties that neither passengers nor taxi drivers themselves have welcomed.
‘The ICO stated to me that recording conversations between passengers is highly intrusive and unlikely to be justified. CCTV plays an important role in combating crime but that has to be balanced with privacy concerns and used within common sense limits.”
Taxi Driver Arif Khan also voiced serious concerns about the decision, telling Cherwell, “I oppose the scheme for two reasons: the first and most important being that our customers simply don’t want it. When people are traveling in a taxi they’re often talking about confidential things. Whether they’re discussing important business plans with a colleague or on the phone to their partner, a lot of the time they don’t want to be overheard.
‘The truth is not a single customer of mine has said they’re happy with it. From a taxi driver’s perspective, this move could seriously affect our trade and our living, and the council is disregarding that.’
Khan continued, “On a personal note, I use my car both at work and at home. I don’t want to be recorded when I’m spending my time away from work with my family; it’s a huge invasion of personal privacy and the council are really crossing a line.
‘I’m not against CCTV in general, but video and audio equipment in a small vehicle is ridiculous. Oxford isn’t a big city with a staggering crime rate, and it doesn’t need this kind of invasion.”
A statement from the council assured that “The risk of intrusion into private conversations has to be balanced against the interests of public safety, both of passengers and drivers. The footage won’t be routinely viewed but will be stored on the CCTV hard-drive for a period of 28 days.”
It continued, “There are laws in places that require the viewing of such images to be necessary and proportionate, and therefore must relate to a specific complaint or incident. The Officers are not permitted to view any images that do not relate to the actual matter being investigated.”
The council concluded by stating that the encryption of recordings, and the ability to access them solely “in the event of a police investigation or investigation into a complaint against a driver”, were “added safeguards.”
Students seem largely in agreement with the suspension of the proposals, with Lincoln student Cameron Cook describing them as a “terrible idea”.
He added, “I don’t want the council to see who I bring back from Wahoo on a Wednesday night.’
