Sheffield taxi drivers plan street protest over CCTV cameras

Sheffield Council has also been threatened with legal action over the new policy, announced on February 5, which licensing bosses claim will improve both driver and passenger safety.

The Yorkshire Post reported last month that drivers would be angry if the scheme was imposed, and yesterday the chairman of the city’s taxi trade federation branded the idea “madness”.

Hafeas Rehman, who represents Sheffield’s hackney carriage drivers, has already threatened the council with judicial review proceedings, a move which is now backed by the GMB union.

Plans for compulsory CCTV cameras in other cities have caused controversy, with Oxford Council withdrawing a similar ruling and Southampton Council being forced to revise its policy.

Mr Rehman said installing CCTV in Sheffield’s 2,000 taxis and private hire vehicles would cost individual drivers £500 each, a cost which was not sustainable in the current financial climate.

He added: “Just a week before making this announcement, the council’s licensing committee refused drivers permission to increase the fares we charge by a few pence.

“As a group, taxi drivers in Sheffield have worked hard with the council and police on crime prevention and safeguarding children issues and then we get this kind of slap in the face.”

In a report recommending the move, Sheffield Council’s head of licensing, Steve Lonnia, referred back to a case in which a taxi driver lost an eye when he was attacked by a passenger last summer.

CCTV has also been justified by some supporters who cite the case of Sheffield driver Zahoor Mahmood who was jailed last August after being convicted of sexually assaulting two female passengers.

But Mr Rehman claimed these were isolated cases. He said forcing drivers to use CCTV “sent out the wrong message” and added: “It is ridiculous. Are they trying to suggest that all drivers are potential sex offenders?

“In the case of the driver who lost an eye, the attack happened outside the car, so CCTV inside the taxi would not have helped.”

Peter Davies, the regional officer for the GMB said he had written to Mr Lonnia requesting an “urgent meeting” to discuss the plan and said advice was being sought from lawyers on a legal challenge.

He added: ““We cannot accept that anyone will benefit from a policy that forces drivers to comply. The likelihood is that we’ll end up with a minimum set of standards at a maximum cost to drivers.

“GMB encourages the use of CCTV but the council are forcing a policy through that will result in a £500 system without any consultation with the drivers.

“This council seems to be approaching this with a ‘we know best and you’ll do as you are told’ attitude. Well maybe they don’t and maybe we won’t.”

Coun John Robson, chairman of the city’s licensing committee, said: “In 2007 there was a trial run of CCTV in taxis. Before the trial one in seven fares resulted in incidents such as verbal abuse, threats of violence, non-payment, taxi damage and more.

“During the trial that reduced to less than one in 100. Last year we had the most appalling incident of a driver who was attacked by a fare and unfortunately he lost the sight in one eye, losing his job and his income.

“He has spoken out and said that CCTV should be mandatory. A licensed driver has also been sent to prison for eight years for the false imprisonment and sexual assault of two women passengers.

“The policy allowing CCTV has been discretionary for a few years but, in the light of these particular incidents, we have decided in principle that this should now be mandatory.

“The safety of both drivers and passengers is our main concern.”