In July the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) served an Enforcement Notice against Southampton City Council over its requirement that all licensed taxi cars must record both audio and visual from within its vehicles on all journeys. The Enforcement Notice was issued by the ICO using powers conferred on the Information Commissioner under the Data Protection Act 1998.
The City Council’s policy requires that all taxis and private hire vehicles which it licenses are fitted with audio and visual recording equipment and that this is recording at all times regardless of the purpose for which the vehicle is being used. For example, a private hire taxi driver will likely use the car to transport their family or friends in the way that most people will use their vehicles (e.g. taking their children to school or extra-curricular activities, going to visit family, going for family day trips etc.) Even in such situations the Council’s policy mandates that the vehicle is recording visual images and audio. The private telephone conversations of the driver and his passengers will be recorded as will private conversations between passengers and conversations between the driver and his family. All the recordings will be stored by the Council.
Such a policy is, to any reasonable person, an extreme interference with a person’s right to a private and family life. It affords no private space to the driver or their passengers. The driver is unable to switch the equipment off when using the vehicle for personal use or to afford passengers privacy when making or receiving private telephone calls.
The Information Commissioner’s decision that Southampton City Council should stop the practice seemed to be a sensible one. Certainly in my view the compulsory recording of both visual images and audio in vehicles regardless of the type of journey being made is a step too far. It is with regret that the City Council has decided to appeal the decision to the First-Tier Tribunal (Information Rights).
The Council contends that it takes steps to protect privacy by ensuring that the data is encrypted and assuring everyone that the recordings are only looked at when a complaint is made to the City Council or the police. In support of its policy the City Council cited a number of allegations of sexual assault made against a licensed driver in a licensed vehicle where the allegations could not be taken forward due to a lack of evidence. The City Council intends to use this evidence as well as other examples where the cameras were in use in support of its appeal.
There is no doubt that the constant video and audio recording of the inside of taxis and private hire vehicles will produced evidence that can cast light on allegations of criminality and also complaints against drivers. That, it would appear, is not in dispute. It seems to me that the City Council are entirely missing the point. The processing of data (which includes the actual recording and not just the storing and/or watching) must be fair. While the existence of the recordings could be useful in the investigation of a complaint or an alleged criminal offence one must consider the fairness to record even the private journeys of drivers while they are not on duty. That at least should be considered as an unfair processing of personal data even if you accept the invasion of privacy involved in recording all journeys made while a driver is on duty.
There are some arguments in favour of requiring all journeys regardless of purpose to be recorded. For example, it would ensure that drivers cannot “forget” to turn the equipment on when they begin driving officially and it ensures that drivers cannot switch the equipment off or delete recordings in order to evade prosecution for an offence. However, these considerations do not appear to me to be sufficient justification for a blanket policy such as the one instigated by the Council.
The City Council is entitled to appeal the enforcement notice, but I hope that they see sense and abandon the appeal. In the event that the City Council decide to continue with the appeal I hope that the Tribunal will reject it and uphold the Commissioner’s enforcement notice. The City Council really has gone too far with this policy.
Links
Enforcement Notice (pdf)
Council takes ICO to Information Rights Tribunal over cameras in taxis (Local Government Lawyer)
prout de jure 