A CONTROVERSIAL scheme to put CCTV in all of Oxford’s taxis has been put on hold over privacy fears.
Yesterday was the start date for a programme of putting CCTV to record images and audio in the city’s taxis by 2015.
But Oxford City Council has put it on hold while the Information Commissioner’s Office investigates if recording people’s conversations is a breach of privacy.
Oxford West and Abingdon MP Nicola Blackwood has also told the council she is unhappy with the scheme.
Ms Blackwood, Conservative MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, has also written to the Information Commissioner’s Office seeking an update on that investigation.
Executive member for city development Colin Cook said: “I’m in favour of this scheme but we are waiting for a response from the Information Commissioner’s Office.
“We think the scheme complies with the ICO’s code of practice.”
Council spokesman Louisa Dean added: “We have had an inquiry from the Information Commissioner who wishes to better understand the scheme. We are happy to assist in those enquiries.”
Ms Blackwood said: “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.”
Comments
This was bound to happen, but once again the Council believes they are above the law. How much time and money has been wasted on this.
This was bound to happen, but once again the Council believes they are above the law. How much time and money has been wasted on this.
Brakes put on city taxi CCTV scheme.
Judging by the headlines today I think CCTV in taxi's is the least of the problems people are going to face with regards privacy.
Brakes put on city taxi CCTV scheme.
Judging by the headlines today I think CCTV in taxi's is the least of the problems people are going to face with regards privacy.
Don't be fooled; they'll be back. We pay these clerks many times their worth for makework nonsense like this. If three quarters of the paper shufflers in Oxford City Council could be sacked we could all relax-and the employees doing the real work of cleaning and maintenance could be paid a proper wage.
Don't be fooled; they'll be back. We pay these clerks many times their worth for makework nonsense like this. If three quarters of the paper shufflers in Oxford City Council could be sacked we could all relax-and the employees doing the real work of cleaning and maintenance could be paid a proper wage.
What are the drivers hiding? They've got to be hiding something for them to be against CCTV in their cabs.
Being a Taxi Driver of some 24 years and being a big player in getting CCTV systems installed in most of our Taxis over the years I have to say the Oxford Taxi Drivers are fools.
Like I said above are they hiding something? They could be hiding their working hours from the HMRC, they might be wanting to protect their investments of £70K in something that isn't theirs like the hackney plate, (which belongs to the City Council) who knows? Are they trying to play down something like, we don't need any extra Taxis on the Cities streets? Lets look at the CCTV and see if they are busy enough to deregualte, the City Council will do it in the very near future anyway.
All I know is, these systems cannot be opened by the driver, they can only be opened by a Police Officer or an appointed person at the Council or a CCTV operator in the control room.
Going against a CCTV system that is going to protect the driver and passengers is something only a fool would do.
What are the drivers hiding? They've got to be hiding something for them to be against CCTV in their cabs.
Being a Taxi Driver of some 24 years and being a big player in getting CCTV systems installed in most of our Taxis over the years I have to say the Oxford Taxi Drivers are fools.
Like I said above are they hiding something? They could be hiding their working hours from the HMRC, they might be wanting to protect their investments of £70K in something that isn't theirs like the hackney plate, (which belongs to the City Council) who knows? Are they trying to play down something like, we don't need any extra Taxis on the Cities streets? Lets look at the CCTV and see if they are busy enough to deregualte, the City Council will do it in the very near future anyway.
All I know is, these systems cannot be opened by the driver, they can only be opened by a Police Officer or an appointed person at the Council or a CCTV operator in the control room.
Going against a CCTV system that is going to protect the driver and passengers is something only a fool would do.
@Nidge41
its a democracy and you may call us fools but you've just made one hell of a fool out of yourself in your post!
Read the news script above again and again and you may just about realise that you now have 3 very prominent people/organisations against the scheme and consider it unlawful:
The court who consider it unlawful (southampton)
big brother watch
Information commission office
At least one MP (others will follow)
Keep sticking to your line of ''they have something to hide'' whereas we'll keep fighting for the rights of people like you to have privacy in our cabs!
@Nidge41
its a democracy and you may call us fools but you've just made one hell of a fool out of yourself in your post!
Read the news script above again and again and you may just about realise that you now have 3 very prominent people/organisations against the scheme and consider it unlawful:
The court who consider it unlawful (southampton)
big brother watch
Information commission office
At least one MP (others will follow)
Keep sticking to your line of ''they have something to hide'' whereas we'll keep fighting for the rights of people like you to have privacy in our cabs!
Like I said your hiding something if you don't want CCTV installed and I'll tell any cabbie the same.
If the Council insist on more options being added like a passenger and driver panic button you've just put £200-£300 on the bill. It's the law for the Council to protect the travelling public and drivers so in a nutshell your screwed.
Only a fool and those with something to hide would be against CCTV in Taxis.
I ignored the Southampton case case because they are being led like blind sheep to the slaughter like you lot in Oxoford.
Like I said your hiding something if you don't want CCTV installed and I'll tell any cabbie the same.
If the Council insist on more options being added like a passenger and driver panic button you've just put £200-£300 on the bill. It's the law for the Council to protect the travelling public and drivers so in a nutshell your screwed.
Only a fool and those with something to hide would be against CCTV in Taxis.
I ignored the Southampton case case because they are being led like blind sheep to the slaughter like you lot in Oxoford.
The protests are all about a small number of drivers hiding the criminal activities that take place in the back of their taxis, drug deals, moving vulnerable members of the public around, drug deals & the appaling driving standards of these so called professionals, if existing taxi drivers dont want a system that will protect their passengers then go get a job elswhere, then let some of the thousands of unemployed do the job, they would definately be more professional make a much better of it, than those in the trade at the moment.
@nidge41
a judge in southampton said they were unlawful. A JUDGE!
@excabman
Catch the bus!
@nidge41
a judge in southampton said they were unlawful. A JUDGE!
@excabman
Catch the bus!
No CCTV is unlawful as long as it's coverd by the Data Protection act which it is. Your onto a loser get used to it.
Maybe another thing your trying to hide are your vested interests in something you don't own like the Hackney plate which belongs to the City Council which are changing hands on the black market for in excess of £70K. This will be a thing of the past later this year when deregualtion hits you full on.
No CCTV is unlawful as long as it's coverd by the Data Protection act which it is. Your onto a loser get used to it.
Maybe another thing your trying to hide are your vested interests in something you don't own like the Hackney plate which belongs to the City Council which are changing hands on the black market for in excess of £70K. This will be a thing of the past later this year when deregualtion hits you full on.
I might add, the blind sheep won that case in southampton
DUH
I might add, the blind sheep won that case in southampton
DUH
The Council can make it a condition of your licence if they wanted to be really anal about it.
The Council can make it a condition of your licence if they wanted to be really anal about it.
Deregulation deregulation deregulation. The same old tune! Been hearing it for the past 18 years.
Come back to me when the boundary lines have been extended to Birmingham to the north and southampton to the south
Deregulation deregulation deregulation. The same old tune! Been hearing it for the past 18 years.
Come back to me when the boundary lines have been extended to Birmingham to the north and southampton to the south
"To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed, and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality."
Proudhon, 1851 (not nine minutes to seven!). He'd be very proud that we are still going strong no doubt.
There's a very annoying refrain that people who do not want to be surveilled everywhere they go have "something to hide". Wanting privacy is not the same as having something to hide. Despite all the checks and balances and all the promises, images from the TSA **** scanners in airports in the US made it very quickly onto the internets.
There are all sorts of reasons for wanting privacy that have nothing to do with anyone doing anything wrong. Having something to hide is not wrong either.
The counter-argument is those who want to do the surveillance are suspicious of everyone. I don't want such people in charge of my world.
"To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed, and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality."
Proudhon, 1851 (not nine minutes to seven!). He'd be very proud that we are still going strong no doubt.
There's a very annoying refrain that people who do not want to be surveilled everywhere they go have "something to hide". Wanting privacy is not the same as having something to hide. Despite all the checks and balances and all the promises, images from the TSA **** scanners in airports in the US made it very quickly onto the internets.
There are all sorts of reasons for wanting privacy that have nothing to do with anyone doing anything wrong. Having something to hide is not wrong either.
The counter-argument is those who want to do the surveillance are suspicious of everyone. I don't want such people in charge of my world.
@jockox3
Bravo!
@jockox3
Bravo!
Nidge what is wrong with you. All we are, are a bunch of hard working people trying to earn a living. You obviously have something against us, and come across as a very bitter and sad individual, and not at all clever as you think you are being. P.S. what has CCTV got to do with deregulation?
Nidge what is wrong with you. All we are, are a bunch of hard working people trying to earn a living. You obviously have something against us, and come across as a very bitter and sad individual, and not at all clever as you think you are being. P.S. what has CCTV got to do with deregulation?
OK so this isn't going ahead but how can us taxi passengers deal with frequent racism and homophobic behaviour from some taxi drivers? When it happens it's normally one person's word against another. Is it OK for me to record conversations in the taxi myself and would that be admissible as evidence anyway? It's a real worry. Obviously the frequent speeding and mobile phone use by some drivers can be dealt with other ways. Also if I was a taxi driver would it be within the rules if I were to offer taxi rides to polling stations on the condition that the fare vote for a particular candidate?
OK so this isn't going ahead but how can us taxi passengers deal with frequent racism and homophobic behaviour from some taxi drivers? When it happens it's normally one person's word against another. Is it OK for me to record conversations in the taxi myself and would that be admissible as evidence anyway? It's a real worry. Obviously the frequent speeding and mobile phone use by some drivers can be dealt with other ways. Also if I was a taxi driver would it be within the rules if I were to offer taxi rides to polling stations on the condition that the fare vote for a particular candidate?
Not sure where that last bit comes from Geoff. It's well covered in election law. No, is the answer.
Not sure where that last bit comes from Geoff. It's well covered in election law. No, is the answer.
jockox3 wrote…
Not sure where that last bit comes from Geoff. It's well covered in election law. No, is the answer.
It is probably a dig at The Pakistani Taxi Drivers who are also councillors, and deputy Lord Mayor this year I think. Personally I would prefer not to have CCTV the state that I get into Taxis in, but the people above slagging off cabbies I do not understand, who else is going to take you home after a few bottles of The Grape, and to be honest I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home.
jockox3 wrote…
Not sure where that last bit comes from Geoff. It's well covered in election law. No, is the answer.
It is probably a dig at The Pakistani Taxi Drivers who are also councillors, and deputy Lord Mayor this year I think. Personally I would prefer not to have CCTV the state that I get into Taxis in, but the people above slagging off cabbies I do not understand, who else is going to take you home after a few bottles of The Grape, and to be honest I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home.
Well, one does tend to give lifts to people who have canvassed as yours and said they need help getting there. Of course these are gratis and not chargeable. I remember when I last stood we had a minibus run by a taxi-driving friend of the other ward councillor - it probably backfired. We tried to provide a service to halls of residence who notoriously don't come out and vote. All it did probably was to increase the Tory vote!
Well, one does tend to give lifts to people who have canvassed as yours and said they need help getting there. Of course these are gratis and not chargeable. I remember when I last stood we had a minibus run by a taxi-driving friend of the other ward councillor - it probably backfired. We tried to provide a service to halls of residence who notoriously don't come out and vote. All it did probably was to increase the Tory vote!
Looks like you're accusing me of prejudice there. I said it because I've observed something which made me consider the possibility that it might be happening. Thanks for pointing out the taxi driver/candidate connection. Let's hope it's not happening.
"I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home"
So you think that it's OK for other people to be subjected to comments like "I won't pick up single lone black men because they don't pay" or "I have nothing against gays but they stink"?
Looks like you're accusing me of prejudice there. I said it because I've observed something which made me consider the possibility that it might be happening. Thanks for pointing out the taxi driver/candidate connection. Let's hope it's not happening.
"I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home"
So you think that it's OK for other people to be subjected to comments like "I won't pick up single lone black men because they don't pay" or "I have nothing against gays but they stink"?
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
I don't think buses and taxis are comparable personally. There is much more scope for disorder on a bus full of people than a taxi. And there is much more scope for unwarranted snooping (don't tell me it will never happen - the TSA said that about their scanners and the government said that about the use of RIPA - if it's available the sort of people that get attracted to surveillance jobs will ensure it happens) in a taxi than in a bus.
I do/would accept CCTV. But recorded conversations? That's stepping over a privacy line and is not warranted in my opinion.
I don't think buses and taxis are comparable personally. There is much more scope for disorder on a bus full of people than a taxi. And there is much more scope for unwarranted snooping (don't tell me it will never happen - the TSA said that about their scanners and the government said that about the use of RIPA - if it's available the sort of people that get attracted to surveillance jobs will ensure it happens) in a taxi than in a bus.
I do/would accept CCTV. But recorded conversations? That's stepping over a privacy line and is not warranted in my opinion.
Recorded conversations don't have to be mandatory, you can have still images, rolling immages and a continual recording system when the meter is operated.
Recorded conversations don't have to be mandatory, you can have still images, rolling immages and a continual recording system when the meter is operated.
They are in this proposal though aren't they? In fact the system is supposed to be automated in such a way that the drivers don't have control of it from the minute they get in the cab at the beginning of their shift to the end of their shift. It is the conversation bit that is the subject of the legal challenge in Soton is it not and that is the main point of controversy in Oxford's scheme.
They are in this proposal though aren't they? In fact the system is supposed to be automated in such a way that the drivers don't have control of it from the minute they get in the cab at the beginning of their shift to the end of their shift. It is the conversation bit that is the subject of the legal challenge in Soton is it not and that is the main point of controversy in Oxford's scheme.
...and recording a conversation in a taxi yourself?
...and recording a conversation in a taxi yourself?
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Looks like you're accusing me of prejudice there. I said it because I've observed something which made me consider the possibility that it might be happening. Thanks for pointing out the taxi driver/candidate connection. Let's hope it's not happening.
"I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home"
So you think that it's OK for other people to be subjected to comments like "I won't pick up single lone black men because they don't pay" or "I have nothing against gays but they stink"?
Geoff if I drove a cab I wouldn't pick up a certain group of people that decide to do a Linford Christie rather than pay, these people are trying to earn a living not giving free rides, maybe if taxis were like buses and took the money first then everybody would get a chance, and you knew exactly what you were writing no need to accuse you of prejjy.
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Looks like you're accusing me of prejudice there. I said it because I've observed something which made me consider the possibility that it might be happening. Thanks for pointing out the taxi driver/candidate connection. Let's hope it's not happening.
"I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home"
So you think that it's OK for other people to be subjected to comments like "I won't pick up single lone black men because they don't pay" or "I have nothing against gays but they stink"?
Geoff if I drove a cab I wouldn't pick up a certain group of people that decide to do a Linford Christie rather than pay, these people are trying to earn a living not giving free rides, maybe if taxis were like buses and took the money first then everybody would get a chance, and you knew exactly what you were writing no need to accuse you of prejjy.
That's not at issue though is it. It's rather muddying the waters. The local agents of the state want to record everything said in a cab. With no choice on the part of either the driver or the passenger. And for it to be accessed by people you don't know on grounds we cannot predict. All we know is that when we give them such powers, they tend to get used, and abused.
That's not at issue though is it. It's rather muddying the waters. The local agents of the state want to record everything said in a cab. With no choice on the part of either the driver or the passenger. And for it to be accessed by people you don't know on grounds we cannot predict. All we know is that when we give them such powers, they tend to get used, and abused.
I saw a sign in a car park in Reading saying that "overt and covert" audio surveillance was being carried out to provide security and to protect persons and property. It reminded me of this issue of the taxis in Oxford, and so I put the two together in a government e-petition. Please take the time to look at it, and if you agree with it, please sign it and let others know about it. You can find it at: http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/petition
s/31860
I saw a sign in a car park in Reading saying that "overt and covert" audio surveillance was being carried out to provide security and to protect persons and property. It reminded me of this issue of the taxis in Oxford, and so I put the two together in a government e-petition. Please take the time to look at it, and if you agree with it, please sign it and let others know about it. You can find it at: http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/petition
s/31860
Nidge41 wrote…
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
First of all where is your licensing area we need to know that before you can comment more. And why do you think that after paying £30,000 myself for a TX4, paying all my fees, paying for my insurance including SDP, paying for my station permit with NO subsidy (unlike the buses) the council think that they have the right to spy on my girls when we go out as a family, and be able to acess the private conversation between myself and my wife. Do you agree with that? Two simple questions for you there.
Nidge41 wrote…
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
First of all where is your licensing area we need to know that before you can comment more. And why do you think that after paying £30,000 myself for a TX4, paying all my fees, paying for my insurance including SDP, paying for my station permit with NO subsidy (unlike the buses) the council think that they have the right to spy on my girls when we go out as a family, and be able to acess the private conversation between myself and my wife. Do you agree with that? Two simple questions for you there.
Sorry, didn't realise it wouldn't provide the link. Go to the Government e petitions website (you can just Google it), search for "audio surveillance" and it will come up. Thanks.
Sorry, didn't realise it wouldn't provide the link. Go to the Government e petitions website (you can just Google it), search for "audio surveillance" and it will come up. Thanks.
L0RD PETER McVEY OX2 6EG wrote…
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Looks like you're accusing me of prejudice there. I said it because I've observed something which made me consider the possibility that it might be happening. Thanks for pointing out the taxi driver/candidate connection. Let's hope it's not happening.
"I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home"
So you think that it's OK for other people to be subjected to comments like "I won't pick up single lone black men because they don't pay" or "I have nothing against gays but they stink"?
You agree with judging the risk based on skin colour? Really?
L0RD PETER McVEY OX2 6EG wrote…
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Looks like you're accusing me of prejudice there. I said it because I've observed something which made me consider the possibility that it might be happening. Thanks for pointing out the taxi driver/candidate connection. Let's hope it's not happening.
"I couldn't care less what they say or do as long as they get me home"
So you think that it's OK for other people to be subjected to comments like "I won't pick up single lone black men because they don't pay" or "I have nothing against gays but they stink"?
You agree with judging the risk based on skin colour? Really?
Sorry, 3 things - skin colour (black), lone and male. You think it's OK to not take fares from lone black men because you think they might do a "Linford Christie" on you?
Sorry, 3 things - skin colour (black), lone and male. You think it's OK to not take fares from lone black men because you think they might do a "Linford Christie" on you?
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Nidge41 wrote…
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
nidge41 said it can be controlled by the meter, so for a non-metered, 'private' journey, it won't be on. you cabbies just can't see that it is for your own protection, as well as the protection of your passengers. i agree with nidge41 that you all may have something to hide. i would also say that voice recording is not needed to identify anyone who attacks you. incidentally, it is your passengers who pay for all your licences, permits etc, and without us, you have no business at all. no one will access anything without just cause, so your private journeys would be just that.
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Nidge41 wrote…
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
nidge41 said it can be controlled by the meter, so for a non-metered, 'private' journey, it won't be on. you cabbies just can't see that it is for your own protection, as well as the protection of your passengers. i agree with nidge41 that you all may have something to hide. i would also say that voice recording is not needed to identify anyone who attacks you. incidentally, it is your passengers who pay for all your licences, permits etc, and without us, you have no business at all. no one will access anything without just cause, so your private journeys would be just that.
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
The reason I asked was that I do not belive him. I can't remember any cabbies in any Licensing area clamouring for CCTV, in fact in Southampton the council were taken to court and the court ruled CCTV illegal. Nidge has not replied so we can take it that his posts were all made up.
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
The reason I asked was that I do not belive him. I can't remember any cabbies in any Licensing area clamouring for CCTV, in fact in Southampton the council were taken to court and the court ruled CCTV illegal. Nidge has not replied so we can take it that his posts were all made up.
davyboy wrote…
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Nidge41 wrote…
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
Daveyboy the CCTV system can be operated in many ways. But the only one that the council will have, operates with the ignition and stays on for 30 minutes after it is turned off, that is intrusion into a vehicle being driven privately by the owner with SDP insurance. Would you like cameras on your children in the back of your car?
davyboy wrote…
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Nidge41 wrote…
@Apu
I'm not against anyone but, when it comes to having some kit inatalled that makes the job safer to the driver and customer I can't understand why any driver would be against it. One has to ask the question, what are the drivers hiding? There are hundreds if not thousands of Taxi Drivers in the UK who would go through hoops for a CCTV system to ensure their and the passengers safety.
Drivers in my manor were climbing over themselves to get the CCTV installed when it got the go ahead by the Council some 5 years ago. "We had nothing to hide so it was embraced by all drivers".
When Oxford City Council de-regualate they will make it a condition of licence to have CCTV installed. Councils have to protect the travelling public and by having CCTV installed in Buses and Taxis they are going in the right direction.
Daveyboy the CCTV system can be operated in many ways. But the only one that the council will have, operates with the ignition and stays on for 30 minutes after it is turned off, that is intrusion into a vehicle being driven privately by the owner with SDP insurance. Would you like cameras on your children in the back of your car?
I'm here Apu and no my posts weren't made up. I've been a big supporter of CCTV in Taxis ever since I got stabbed with a syringe full of a junkies blood.
I'm here Apu and no my posts weren't made up. I've been a big supporter of CCTV in Taxis ever since I got stabbed with a syringe full of a junkies blood.
Nidge41 wrote…
I'm here Apu and no my posts weren't made up. I've been a big supporter of CCTV in Taxis ever since I got stabbed with a syringe full of a junkies blood.
So, it doesn't sound like that's something that would have been enhanced by having voice recording. It's not like someone trying to diddle you out of a fare is going to sit nicely, tell the microphone his name and address, and then leap out and leg it. Get rid of the voice recording and I for one, whilst still not entirely happy, would accept the scheme as a middle ground (though it would be good also to be able to turn it off entirely whilst using the vehicle for private use).
Nidge41 wrote…
I'm here Apu and no my posts weren't made up. I've been a big supporter of CCTV in Taxis ever since I got stabbed with a syringe full of a junkies blood.
So, it doesn't sound like that's something that would have been enhanced by having voice recording. It's not like someone trying to diddle you out of a fare is going to sit nicely, tell the microphone his name and address, and then leap out and leg it. Get rid of the voice recording and I for one, whilst still not entirely happy, would accept the scheme as a middle ground (though it would be good also to be able to turn it off entirely whilst using the vehicle for private use).
OK then here goes, this is what CCTV can do for the Taxi Drivers,
http://www.thisisnot
tingham.co.uk/Cab-s-
CCTV-snares-driver-s
-racist-attacker/sto
ry-12187774-detail/s
tory.html
http://news.bbc.co.u
k/1/hi/england/notti
nghamshire/4638910.s
tm
http://www.chad.co.u
k/news/local/cctv-ca
meras-plan-for-taxis
-1-685841
Do you want anymore proof Apu?
OK then here goes, this is what CCTV can do for the Taxi Drivers,
http://www.thisisnot
tingham.co.uk/Cab-s-
CCTV-snares-driver-s
-racist-attacker/sto
ry-12187774-detail/s
tory.html
http://news.bbc.co.u
k/1/hi/england/notti
nghamshire/4638910.s
tm
http://www.chad.co.u
k/news/local/cctv-ca
meras-plan-for-taxis
-1-685841
Do you want anymore proof Apu?
Nidge41 what can the cctv to for you jocker,we don't what it so get over it..take the bus we don't want your money...
Nidge41 what can the cctv to for you jocker,we don't what it so get over it..take the bus we don't want your money...
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
You are completely out of order here by suggesting that because someone hasn't replied they must be lying.
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
You are completely out of order here by suggesting that because someone hasn't replied they must be lying.
Our MP has got it right:
Ms Blackwood said: “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."
Colin Cook will not be getting my vote next month.
Our MP has got it right:
Ms Blackwood said: “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."
Colin Cook will not be getting my vote next month.
Ozzy please get a grip. Come on what have you got to hide?
Ozzy please get a grip. Come on what have you got to hide?
The question isn't "what have you got to hide?" it's "What business is it of yours?"
If you want this in your business I will not give you my business. End of.
The question isn't "what have you got to hide?" it's "What business is it of yours?"
If you want this in your business I will not give you my business. End of.
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
If the council wants CCTV in a taxi then they can provide a car with all the acceptable benefits and if the drivers are required to install in cars that are also used as private transport then it's should be up to the driver. It's his own risk and ask the driver if he has a CCTV, if he does not then don't go in simple why make a fuse let the people choose
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
Geoff I asked for his licensing area so what he says can be verified, he has never commented on this story previously has not answered the question so I make my own conclusion.
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Apu Nahasapeemapetilon wrote…
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Doesn't like being spied on himself but wants to find out where you are licensed?
Geoff I asked for his licensing area so what he says can be verified, he has never commented on this story previously has not answered the question so I make my own conclusion.
Also Geoff the only taxi driver stabbed with a syringe was in Australia
Also Geoff the only taxi driver stabbed with a syringe was in Australia
Oh right, you have knowledge of all events in taxis right across the globe do you? Including the unreported ones and the ones that were as well known?
Oh right, you have knowledge of all events in taxis right across the globe do you? Including the unreported ones and the ones that were as well known?
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Oh right, you have knowledge of all events in taxis right across the globe do you? Including the unreported ones and the ones that were as well known?
well geoff I try to keep up by reading all of the trade mags, and have do for years and a cabbie being stabbed by a junky with a syringe full of blood would make headlines and not only in the trade papers. All I want to know is nidges licensing area so that we can see if it is true about all his fellow cabbies (i am actually now doubting that he even is a cabby) begging for CCTV. I have stated that I am an Oxford City Licenced Hackney driver, what is the problem with Nidge giving that information. There are too many people that do not like us and want to interfere in our trade for what ever reason and I think that you and nidge are one of them as you have not responded to one question posted by me and other Oxford cabdrivers. So here is a simple one for you. Would you like a camera spying on your daughters in your own car and your private conversation with your wife recorded? And after answering that easy one, how about this Why do the council insist on this system and not one that works on the meter, so that private journeys with my wife and children, are just that, private?
Geoff Roberts wrote…
Oh right, you have knowledge of all events in taxis right across the globe do you? Including the unreported ones and the ones that were as well known?
well geoff I try to keep up by reading all of the trade mags, and have do for years and a cabbie being stabbed by a junky with a syringe full of blood would make headlines and not only in the trade papers. All I want to know is nidges licensing area so that we can see if it is true about all his fellow cabbies (i am actually now doubting that he even is a cabby) begging for CCTV. I have stated that I am an Oxford City Licenced Hackney driver, what is the problem with Nidge giving that information. There are too many people that do not like us and want to interfere in our trade for what ever reason and I think that you and nidge are one of them as you have not responded to one question posted by me and other Oxford cabdrivers. So here is a simple one for you. Would you like a camera spying on your daughters in your own car and your private conversation with your wife recorded? And after answering that easy one, how about this Why do the council insist on this system and not one that works on the meter, so that private journeys with my wife and children, are just that, private?
Geoff and Nidge I am just going out for my night shift now will finish about 5 in the morning I will look for your answers when I wake up tomorrow but I expect nothing because you are both liars. I will take home drunks wealthy people and carry junkys on my shift but I dont need cctv because this is a safe place to work, i might be called a pakkki but that is better than being robbed and these people always pay anyway. If you are so concerned about my safety why not come and sit on a rank and tell people not to abuse us?
Geoff and Nidge I am just going out for my night shift now will finish about 5 in the morning I will look for your answers when I wake up tomorrow but I expect nothing because you are both liars. I will take home drunks wealthy people and carry junkys on my shift but I dont need cctv because this is a safe place to work, i might be called a pakkki but that is better than being robbed and these people always pay anyway. If you are so concerned about my safety why not come and sit on a rank and tell people not to abuse us?
get over it,it not going to happen...
get over it,it not going to happen...
Maybe they've just gone on their Easter break!
If you feel safer with cctv and maybe you don't trust the driver, well that's simple, catch the bus!
If this stupid and ill thought out plan is imposed by the regime in the palaces of Sadam at St Aldates then, you still have the choice to que for the bus on Friday and Saturday nights.
Maybe they've just gone on their Easter break!
If you feel safer with cctv and maybe you don't trust the driver, well that's simple, catch the bus!
If this stupid and ill thought out plan is imposed by the regime in the palaces of Sadam at St Aldates then, you still have the choice to que for the bus on Friday and Saturday nights.
Good it looks like we all agree. NO CCTV
Good it looks like we all agree. NO CCTV
Off to work then, happy hunting all, busy I hope bank holiday, and no CCTV needed.
Off to work then, happy hunting all, busy I hope bank holiday, and no CCTV needed.
bus companies have cctv/audio recording, it protects both sides from time wasting accusation, taxi licensing/city council are time/money wasting wimps. Seamus (26 yrs as a taxi driver)
bus companies have cctv/audio recording, it protects both sides from time wasting accusation, taxi licensing/city council are time/money wasting wimps. Seamus (26 yrs as a taxi driver)
Anyone voting for a Labour councillor next month will be voting for Big Brother in Oxford.
Anyone voting for a Labour councillor next month will be voting for Big Brother in Oxford.
@oxtaxpayer
don't know what you mean exactly.
we will analyse the situation and see. However, voting conservative is an option in the future.
We will support those who truly support and stand up for the rights of cabbies (its our livelihood at the end of the day) As Nicola Blackwood MP has done.
@oxtaxpayer
don't know what you mean exactly.
we will analyse the situation and see. However, voting conservative is an option in the future.
We will support those who truly support and stand up for the rights of cabbies (its our livelihood at the end of the day) As Nicola Blackwood MP has done.
@oxtaxpayer
don't know what you mean exactly.
we will analyse the situation and see. However, voting conservative is an option in the future.
We will support those who truly support and stand up for the rights of cabbies (its our livelihood at the end of the day) As Nicola Blackwood MP has done.
@oxtaxpayer
don't know what you mean exactly.
we will analyse the situation and see. However, voting conservative is an option in the future.
We will support those who truly support and stand up for the rights of cabbies (its our livelihood at the end of the day) As Nicola Blackwood MP has done.