Body Worn Cameras – Citizens’ Panel January 2016 Report

Policy, Strategy & Communications Consultation & Intelligence team

Body Worn Cameras – Citizens’ Panel January 2016 report

www.bristol.gov.uk/budget

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 0

Body Worn Cameras – Citizens’ Panel January 2016 report

January 2016

The January 2016 Citizens Panel questionnaire was sent to 2014 Citizens’ Panel members. In total 772 people responded, a 38% response.

Executive summary

41% of Citizens’ Panel respondents never use taxi ranks in the city centre. 29% use them once or twice a year. 20% use them every few months. 3% use them monthly, 6% use them once or twice a month, and 2% use them once or twice a week. No one uses them most days, whilst only 1 respondent used them daily.

62% of Citizens’ Panel respondents use city centre taxi ranks at night time. 51% use them in the evening, 19% use them in the afternoon, whilst 12% use them in the morning.

44% of Citizens’ Panel respondents have experienced anti-social behaviour at the city centre’s taxi rank. 36% have experienced a dispute over taxi fare. 34% have experienced aggressive behaviour. 25% have experienced verbal abuse. 18% have experienced a refusal to allow them to access the taxi. 5% have experienced racial abuse, 4% sexist or sexually motivated abuse, and 3% have experienced a physical attack.

59% of Citizens’ Panel respondents agree that the use of body won video cameras would make them feel safer at the city’s taxi ranks. 32% neither agreed nor disagreed. 9% disagreed.

92% of Citizens’ Panel respondents agreed that Body Worn Video cameras will help gather evidence. 90% agreed that they would help identify criminals. 84% agreed that they will increase the likelihood of conviction. 63% agreed that they will reduce complaints against taxi marshals. 68% agreed that they will reduce assaults against taxi marshals. 70% agreed that they will reduce crime and antisocial behaviour at taxi ranks.

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 1

How often do you use taxi ranks in the city centre?

Response Response

Percent Total

1 Daily 0.13% 1

2 Most days 0.00% 0

3 Once or twice a week 2.11% 16

4 Once or twice a month 5.93% 45

5 Monthly 2.64% 20

6 Every few months 19.76% 150

7 Once or twice a year 28.85% 219

8 Never 40.58% 308

62% of Citizens’ Panel respondents use city centre taxi ranks at night time. 51% use them in the evening, 19% use them in the afternoon, whilst 12% use them in the morning.

What time of day do you use taxi ranks in the city centre? Tick any that apply.

Response Response

Percent Total

1 Morning 11.60% 53

2 Afternoon 19.26% 88

3 Evening 50.55% 231

4 Night time 62.36% 285

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 2

Have you ever experienced any of the following incidents, either from the driver or another citizen, at any of the city centre’s taxi ranks? Tick any that apply.

Response Response

Percent Total

A refusal to allow you to access the 1 17.62% 37 taxi

2 A dispute over taxi fare 35.71% 75

3 Verbal abuse 24.76% 52

4 Racial abuse 5.24% 11

5 Sexist or sexually motivated abuse 3.81% 8

6 Aggressive behaviour 33.81% 71

7 Anti-social behaviour 43.81% 92

8 A physical attack 3.33% 7

9 Other (please specify): 23.33% 49

Other

I have a small dog and many of the taxis won't let me take her even on my knee. They are often rude. I understand dogs can't be indoors in the Islamic religion. None Islamic drivers take her, but I often get passed by at Temple mead taxi cue by 9 drivers before one will pick me up. I've had to buy a car and drive to London rather than get a cab from the station. refusal was when with a dog Some prat walking into the road and my taxi driver gaining diabetes from the sheer rage drunk and disorderly people Going the long way round Poor driving NA Young people are often quoted extreme prices to travel. One example was £60 to Fishponds. Many of the blue city cabs do not use their meters late at night and charge exploitative amounts. being barely spoken to by the driver and an unfriendly attitude is quite unnerving and not pleasant None

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 3

Homophobic abuse Queue jumping Once I was refused access to a taxi because I 'appeared drunk'. I have a vestibular disorder that sometimes causes me to stagger and I felt that the marshal had no understanding of either physical or congintive impairments that can cause people to have difficulties with their gait or with communication. None Lack of assistance for mobility-impaired companion to get into the cab A long time ago, a driver was acting strangely, he had been hit on the head by another driver. He started to drive as we were getting in. He was arguing on the phone... We contacted the council and it went to court. none of these rudeness none of the above , but some drivers lask social skills About my disability. No problems experienced. general beligerence shown by most drivers Disability Hate Crime none apply Was refused fares on a few occasions at busy times when the driver was cleary trying to get good long distance fare. They say "where are you going" and when it's relatively local they say "sorry I'm booked" then start asking other people!! Our daughter and friends were attacked some time ago The dispute is always over the amount of fare registered on the clock from starting out from the rank, My daughter was abducted by a taxi driver None of the above Disregard for other drivers and 'rules of the road'. Get a bike - who needs taxis? I would only use in an emergency as it's to violent and uncomfortable there I cant say i can this as i very rarely get a taxi once came from London with my very I'll son and the taxi refuse to take my up to BRI because of the distance (too short of a distance)I was so desperate I told him I would pay a full fare but he still refuses A refusal to take my friend in a taxi because he was far too drunk (the taxi driver was in the right) none Que jumping! Bristol taxis very expensive in comparison to W-S-M I would not use them - I have witnessed really poor driving and bad attitude between themselves one more than one occasion and often wonder where the police are at such times - and frankly how they passed a test in the first place - and where? Lack of driving skills ie. too harsh on brakes They do tent to be pushy if you are trying to pick up a relative in your own car at the bus station No Bad driving Some of the drivers should not be allowed on the road The quality of taxi driving and their misuse of the road The fare is always more than expected One or two taxi journeys at excessive speed, certainly over the speed limit!

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 4

57% of Citizens’ Panel respondents felt that the level of visibility at the ranks is important in making Bristol’s city centre taxi ranks a safe place to visit. 56% felt that greater access to and from the taxi ranks would make them safer. 51% felt that the number of taxi marshals would make taxi ranks safer, compared with 44% who felt that about the number of police officers. 44% felt that the visibility of body worn video cameras or other surveillance equipment would make them safer. 42% felt that the use of body worn video cameras or other surveillance equipment would make them safer.

Which of the following are important to you in making Bristol’s city centre taxi ranks a safe place to visit? Tick any that apply.

Response Response

Percent Total

1 The number of taxi marshals 51.19% 323

2 The number of police officers 43.74% 276

The level of visibility at the ranks 3 56.89% 359 e.g. more lighting

Greater access to and from the taxi 4 ranks e.g. more organised queuing 56.10% 354

or greater pavement space

The use of body worn video 5 cameras or other surveillance 41.52% 262

equipment

The visibility of body worn video 6 cameras or other surveillance 44.22% 279

equipment

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 5

59% of Citizens’ Panel respondents agree that the use of body won video cameras would make them feel safer at the city’s taxi ranks. 32% neither agreed nor disagreed. 9% disagreed. If body worn video cameras were introduced, to what extent do you agree or disagree that their use would make you feel safer at the city’s taxi ranks?

Response Response

Percent Total

1 Strongly agree 21.32% 152

2 Agree 38.01% 271

3 Neither agree nor disagree 31.56% 225

4 Disagree 7.43% 53

5 Strongly disagree 1.68% 12

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 6

26. If body worn video cameras were introduced, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Tick any that apply.

Neither Strongly Slightly Slightly Strongly Response agree nor agree agree disagree disagree Total disagree

Body Worn Video cameras will 59.7% 32.4% 5.7% 1.1% 1.1% 725 help gather evidence (433) (235) (41) (8) (8)

Body Worn Video cameras will 52.2% 38.3% 6.5% 1.9% 1.1% 724 help identify criminals (378) (277) (47) (14) (8)

Body Worn Video cameras will 46.2% 38.1% 12.6% 1.5% 1.5% increase the likelihood of 716 (331) (273) (90) (11) (11) conviction

Body Worn Video cameras will 30.2% 33.2% 28.6% 5.6% 2.4% reduce complaints against taxi 716 (216) (238) (205) (40) (17) marshals

Body Worn Video cameras will 31.1% 37.1% 24.0% 6.1% 1.7% reduce assaults against taxi 720 (224) (267) (173) (44) (12) marshals

Body Worn Video cameras will 31.0% 39.4% 20.5% 6.6% 2.5% reduce crime and antisocial 716 (222) (282) (147) (47) (18) behaviour at taxi ranks

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 7

30% of Citizens’ Panel respondents would be less likely to support the use of the cameras if they could be turned on and off at the discretion of the taxi marshal. 21% would be more likely, while 48% would be neither more nor less likely. If the cameras could be turned on and off at the discretion of the taxi marshal using them to prevent unnecessary intrusion, would you be more or less likely to support their use?

Response Response

Percent Total

1 More likely 21.50% 155

2 Neither more nor less likely 48.40% 349

3 Less likely 30.10% 217

56% of Citizens’ Panel respondents are neither more nor less likely to support the use of the cameras if the footage were automatically deleted after 30 days. 31% would be more likely, whilst 14% would be less likely. If the footage captured by a Body Worn Video camera would be automatically deleted after 30 days would you be more or less likely to support their use?

Response Response

Percent Total

1 More likely 30.63% 219

2 Neither more nor less likely 55.80% 399

3 Less likely 13.57% 97

Do you have any comments or suggestions regarding the use of Body Worn Cameras by taxi marshals at taxi ranks?

• A police officers presence would be better to deter trouble • records available to complainants too • this is a great idea which will be for me personally good sing to start using taxi and not calling friend • Home Office research paper number 78, from memory, pointed out that CCTV in all its forms is LESS effective at reducing crime and disorder than increased street lighting. Given the excellent street lighting on the centre, the chances of body mounted CCTV reducing crime and disorder are negligent. • Keep a month video log, the cameras being collected from one location where they are turned on and off to (the driver not able to do so) at the start/end of a shift. Maybe then can we see such horrific crimes as £15 from park street to stokes croft exposed. • It seems like quite an aggressive thing to wear but i guess there must be a need for it if there are lots of complaints.

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 8

• none • To be honest I'd rather the money was spent on discouraging people from drinking - and more control over licensing of drinking establishment and police tackling drunk and disorderly people - these are the main reasons for problems at taxi ranks. • Seems very big brother - being watched. Slightly unsettling • I am not sure if they might cause more aggravation. • Good idea • they should be on all the time also record sound and kept for ever • A body worn camera can be selective about what is recorded • I don't know the issues that might go with this measure and would like to see the outcome of a pilot scheme unless one has already been performed. • It's a good idea. • Cctv seems to work in other cities? With police hub in the centre for fast response.taxi Marshalls are good but they need training and police near by to assist if necessary • Already enough of a police state just get doorstaff types to act as marshals who can handle themselves • Sad that they're necessary. Reducing drunkenness would open up the City Centre to more people in the evenings. Currently it is a no go area for sober people. • This is a rediculous Idea. people intoxicated are generally fine. There are reasons why people act how they may when intoxicated, a lot of reasons relate to their mental state. Someone intoxicated may not act like that normally and they shouldnt be punished for anything negative that may happen in one night. Marshalls should be aware and have proper training to deal with this and pressure put on people on the affects of alcohol, rather than secretly filming people. Do not turn into Big Brother. Start at the source. • If they could turn them on and off at will I could see evidence of there own misgivings not recorded but they would sure as hell record the responce's they would receive for it and people being convicted for responding to abuse. • Excellent idea, I might start going out in Bristol more. • They cannot be used selectively - this would not change anything. • Have more taxi ranks to get the drunks away from the centre more quickly. They are less likely to abuse anyone if they don't hang around in a queue. If there are more areas to access taxis neither the drivers ir the drunks will have to queue. • I think they should be discreet • I imagine alcohol is the main issue here. I only use taxis from BTM, so don't really see relevance. I doubt they'd be any help re sexual harassment or sexual violence • Aren't there enough cameras around the city centre anyway?! • I would be concerned of the personal safety of the taxi marshalls - whether the rays from the cameras would be harmfull to health being as they are close to the internal organs - has this been researched much?? • Law abiding citizens have nothing to fear • in my opinion any surveillance is an abuse on private life. • they should be of rugged construction as they may well the target of attack, they're use should be clearly indicated by signage & publicity. • A good idea. Taxi ranks in the centre can be quite intimidating at night. • Think it is a good idea, especially on Friday/Saturday nights when there are lots of drunk people about. • I think it is a good idea, and if people are respectful and behave themselves at taxi ranks, they wouldn't need cameras in the first place. Given there are all these disappointing issues reported, I think the marshals should wear them for their own safety. • Good ideal • why not have better CCTV covering the ranks instead of body worn cameras that might provoke drunken people

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 9

• The effectiveness depends on whether the use of camera is well publicised so that people are warned that they may be filmed. • Drunk people won't be deterred from being unruly though, unless the taxi marshalls are built like club bouncers. • Can't see it relevant to my experience of using taxis • no • It has to work both ways as both parties can be just as wrong • I have never felt unsafe at a taxi rank but I only use the one at Temple Meads where there are plenty of people about • They are a must for the protection of staff and public. • Should help prevent problems but half the time aren't people to drunk to notice the body camera's • A very good idea and nobody should have any issues with this unless they are the ones causing issues • Most of the aggression I have witnessed comes from drunk (and aggressive) people and I don't think they would be deterred by their actions being recorded. Often their violence is witnessed by others present and this isn't enough to stop them. Though I think it would better help evidence of they commit a crime. • I feel uneasy about increased surveillance generally, but on the other hand I abhor the amount of violence you get in the city centre on a "drinking" night, so I'm torn on this one. • No problem with the concept • Camera should be accessible by both parties to a complaint. Footage should not be controlled by the marshals but held by an independent body. • I am for the idea IF it is clearly displayed what kind of surveillance is happening. I hope it helps stop people abusing taxi drivers and other staff. • I may be concerned that these could be abused by particular marshals if they had an agenda , perhaps against a specific member of the public they may have a grievance with. • just a sensible idea. • There needs to be a set of published guidelines for their use and there should be regular checks on use and possible misuse. The results of these checks should be available to the public. • They cannot be turned off by the taxi marshal, as that - in my eyes - would create trust issues between the taxi marshals and the public. • I think the footage captured should be automatically deleted after 1 hour unless it will potentially be needed as evidence. • Unless recording format is agreed with police, Crown Prosecution Service and Courts, the cameras will be useless for evidence purposes, but may still be a useful deterrent • Body cameras is a source of information should Taxi Drivers or Marshalls were attacked!None of us should have to put up with abuse when all we are trying to do is our job. • I approve of all Surveillance cameras as they identify crimes and criminals and would help to protect the innocent and I don't understand why some people are against them unless they have something to hide. • If it will help reduce crime, it can only be a good thing • If they could be turned off, Marshals would be unlikely to record own misbehaviour. Any permissible evidence should be kept until court case, not deleted after thirty days. • have the same training in using cameras as the police do • The level of surveillance we are already under is rather high and intrusive. For the most part I have seen racism from white taxi drivers to other drivers. From what I have witnessed it is the Taxi drivers themselves that need to be investigated and not the passengers. • Good idea - do it.

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 10

• Feels very intrusif however might be efficient for security but at the cost of privacy. • cameras are a good idea, also tighter inspection of drivers and their licences etc as the standard of driving and knowledge of Bristol appears to be very poor • I support body-cams for taxi marshals, not just for their own safety, but to monitor their own behaviour towards the public. I did not like being shouted at by a marshal because my disabled friend showed reluctance to hoof along to the next cab in line, which was five cars away. I know it speeds things up if passengers can be directed to cabs waiting down the line, but some people need the cab to come to them, not the other way about. • I think it is a good idea, Taxi Marshals need to be protected as well. A drunk and disorderly member of the public would be a dreadful experience adn I would like to feel that as a tax payer we had supported Taxi Marshal. • Happy for them to be used to increase safety for marshalls • I am not sure that I am qualified to speak about this because I am now 62 and don't like being out too late • I have no problem with camera's, however I am not convinced that that will solve the problems. From my own experience I think we need to look at the taxi drivers,( especially those who's English isn't good) as there is a percentage of them who once you are in the taxi will not take the shortest route and hike the cost up. • they are good for the trade and the general public if they are doing nothing wrong where is the problem • More necessary at night when there are more drunks • I'd be concerned that the marshalls may 'delete' any incriminating footage. If they could control what they do or don't film then I don't neccessarily agree that it's fair to the citizens. • I don't really have a problem with the use of these cameras. If it would make the marshals job safer, then by all means, it should be used. I don't think it would be an intrusion of my privacy as my behaviour would never need to be used against me. It's a pity that some people's behaviour warrants the use of these cameras, but if the technology is there, then it should be put to good use, to make each taxi ride experience safe. • Sometimes things happen that can take longer to be known as significant. Videos shouldn't be deleted for a longer period. • In feel this would make travel by taxi safer • I would sooner crawl home than use a Temple meads taxi. The abuse I have experienced there is very bad. And they all back each other up. I(f cameras were worn, they would switch them off if they were in danger of being exposed. And the police should check licences more often.h • If they would make the marshals themselves feel safer, then that is a strong argument for them. • I think in the main it would a good thing and give some people a feeling of safety , but on weekends more police presents is the answer • We'd have to be confident that footage was deleted after xx time (unless needed for evidence but then also deleted after a further xx time). There will be suspicion that footage will be abused or exploited. • Didnt know marshalls existed! • If people have nothing to hide, then there's no reason to oppose them, but I didn't say that I support them strongly, as I don't know what evidence we have that they help. • Would need to be active all the time except for comfort breaks which would need to be logged by the taxi marshals • • I feel that any incidents that were captured on the the cameras would need to kept for longer than 30 days in case of a historic complaint

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 11

• I am not a user of taxi's within Bristol. I'm unsure of the value of cameras in reducing incidents - i feel if someone is in the frame of mind to assault someone or cause damage they will do it if the camera is there or not. However, if the footage can be used to increase conviction rates and thus reduces the number of assaults then I am fully supportive of the idea. There is too much crap about people not wanting to be filmed, if it (one way or another) increases safety then they should be adopted. • I support their use • I think after the initial settling in period and people moaning, it would be a great asset and people would just get used to it as a way of life • keep the mashalls safe is important • Brilliant idea. However I feel that when an individual/group is drunk they dont care if your male or female, young or old, wearing a camera or not they can still be confrontational and violent. • Good idea • You would need to keep data for longer than 30 days • If your in a public place one more camera watching you is no problem. All recordings however must be available for anyone to view. • all body worn camera's should be on at all times • There should be information displayed about it so customers will be aware and it could act itself as repellent for some people. Marshals should be trained to use such equipment in way that indeed let them gain any evidence of misconduct etc. • I'm genuinely surprised this is an issue. I have never had a problem in Bristol before. As a citizen, I'm not worried about being filmed, but I am more concerned that such an extreme tactic is deemed necessary. Is it really that bad? Summary statistics at the beginning of this survey would have been useful. • I think its a good idea. I think it provides everyone with a sense of clarity should there be an incident • I think it is a good idea, convicting troublemakers/proving bad behaviour is very difficult so I support the use of body camera's, but if there is no trouble then the films should be deleted after a reasonable period. • How sad we live with this worry when getting a taxi. Filming people on a night out after drinking is intrusive. I am glad I don't go out much. My experience of an abusive taxi man left me fearful and with little trust. I can't stand taxi's • Good idea • If you are behaving there is no need to complain about their use • Move taxi rank out of centre • The widespread use of cameras is a sad reflection of modern times made necessary by events and perceived lack of conventional policing • Sad that's it come to that really. • Needs to be advertised at taxi ranks and made obvious they are in use. Person's under the influence who are aggressive won't refrain if they don't know they're being filmed, so will be pointless. If they are aware, there is at least a chance they my alter there future actions. • They are a good idea. Having the ability to turn them off defeats the object of having them. • If introduce they should store all cctv for at least one year • I think they can be a useful way of diffusing a situation. The positive action of switching on a body worn camera signals that everything both parties say will be heard and there will be video evidence of anything that happens. I really support their introduction • They must be discrete to avoid anti-social people trying to remove them to destroy evidence. • I think if anyone are against bodycams maybe they are the trouble makers • Does if infringe The Data Protection Act 1998 ?

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 12

• What about Privacy laws of filming? • There is enough cctv around without adding more • I can only hope that the taxi marshals don't abuse their position of trust, power and authority... • They must be a deterrent against anti social behaviour-most of which is alcohol fuelled - and would keep taxi drivers safe. • Prohibit any one from using a taxi if they are drunk- I realise that this would be provocative and that drunk people shouldn't be encouraged to drive and therefore can only get home that way; but why should we tolerate such behaviour? There is no self respect or respect for others when people are drunk. People making an exhibition of themselves, using up police time and no wonder the taxi drivers need Marshalls. Education in school needs to flag up such behaviour. What a state we have come to. We the elderly feel barred from the city centre areas at night; the young have created a no go area for us in our own city. • it is a useful deterrent. • it helps to protect the innocent and intimidate wrongdoers to desist in their anti-social behaviour • If it protects the marshals, makes people feel safer and can used as evidence to punish anti-social behavior then great. Although, I'm assuming that most of the anti-social behavior is from people who are worse the wear for alcohol and therefore am not sure that they would notice a camera being worn. • We live in a complex age were the word of a citizen has has been hacked to smithereens by the lawyers, people believe TV, however - even when there is video evidence of a serious incident the CPS do 'fuck all' and the case seldom goes to court... on these rare occasions the trials are so long and sentences so light, they are pointless (they do employ the judiciary for long periods)... RANT • I have never seen a taxi marshal on the taxi rank Cabot / Sainsburys Local not surprised there is normally 6 + taxis parked up instead of 4 perhaps this will improve! • Always wary of more surveillance. • I think if they are going to be used they should be on all the time. It could add to tension if the Marshall was to announce that he was going to turn the camera on in the event that a person did not behave properly. If they have them leave them on. • Full-time with stored info for at least 24 months. • They should not be able to be turned on and off. Any video evidence needs the full context not selective capture by the operative. • seems like a good idea • it's just one more step of the invasion of public privacy, all public areas are already heavily monitored by cct camera's • this is a symptom. need to address the problem. drunken behavior from youths and poor public transport • I have absolutely no issue with body worn cameras or cctv, or the storage of the footage. I believe they can only help keep a community safer • Good item with seemingly no bad effects. • People don't like to be filmed, if you are it's nice to be filmed by a government approved official who's had the highest form of screening which in my thoughts would be police officers, other wise there will be trust issues especially if they can turn them off • footage will should be kept for atleast 3-6 months • I think they are a great idea to support and protect public and camera wearers. Think they should be kept on at all times. If turned off say for privacy reasons, things could get worse and evidence might not be available. Not sure deleting footage after 30 days would work. People could log complaints after this period. • Use a wider angle lens and be taught to concentrate on close figures, not those 50/100 meters away.

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 13

• Those should be on at all time while on duty and the evidence should be kept for at least 90 days. • Drunk people are always going to be difficult to handle, cameras or not. • Drunken behavior is usualy the most common cause of aggression , i do wonder if video cameras will just fuel the aggression but will certainly help in convictions and i think is a must . • This should not be encouraged. This is being promoted by people who are likely to make a profit from selling these kinds of equipment. Street cameras near taxi ranks should be more than enough for any sort of public safety device. This will have a bearing on vulnerable public who may be subject to secret recordings that may be for private use. • The use of video capture socially ie, cycle helmet cams / dashcams and their use to support rightful prosecution of offenders, surely proves the value of their universal use by the authorities. • I think it's a shame the issues are still ongoing & anything that can be done to improve the situation is worth trying. As a female I often queuing alone as friends live in different areas/directions I do feel quite vulnerable & the prescence of marshals is reassuring. However my preferred option would be to get the night bus which also had marshals on it. But my local night bus was stopped when additional services were added to Gloucester rd buses. My buses are 50 & 51 & the night bus was possibly N5. Since that was cut I gave to come home earlier as taxis expensive & queue full of hyped up drunks. I have mentioned this issue to local councillors & George Ferguson & First but nothing has changed. I know consultation is about taxi queue but I'd prefer not to use it if possible & now have no alternative after 11.40pm. • Total agree for their safety and to deter assualt • the fewer official cameras in public spaces the better • No • I never use taxis so this whole section is not relevant to me. However if there is a problem at taxi ranks then body worn video cameras will probably be helpful. If anyone is not causing a nuisance they should not have a problem with their use. • Anything that makes it safer for everyone is a good thing. • I don't feel as though I know enough about them to comment • Evidence collected would have to go both ways - used to prove offences against marshals and by marshals against members of the public. So if cameras are to be used they have to always be 'on' and the evidence accessible by complainants and those who have complaints made against. • I see no reason not to implement them. • Could just cause more antagonistic behaviour, I'm assuming that problems mainly occur due to late night drinking and busy weekends. • The body worn cameras, when introduced should be turned on and worn at all times and not if and when they want to wear or turn them on • I don't think they are necessary. And an invasion of privacy. Also the fact that they can be turned on and off, means they are at the discretion of the wearer, so I don't trust that method. • No • No. • I think some people will feel it is a little big brotherish and fuelled by drink, it may lead to more aggression - people don't like to be filmed especially if they are under influence • If they are to wear body cams then the footage should be available for at a least two months. Additionally, the cameras should be used all the time, in order to prevent only bits and pieces of incidents from being recorded and used as evidence, either by the marshall or the customer. • Don't know enough as I never use a taxi in the areas under discussion • I think they are a good idea,

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 14

• No • While there may be an initial deterrent effect, high levels of CCTV in urban areas has not diminished anti-social behaviour or crime as individuals either forget/ignore their presence or believe they are unmonitored/not working. I can understand why body worn cameras might be attractive but they feel like an invasion of privacy and could be a target for vandalism/assault. It would be better to organise queuing better using physical filters, polite signs, increase lighting, and increase police or PCSO presence at night. • I never used taxi in Bristol • careful that the marshals don't use it to victimise the public. it should protect the taxi marshals as well as the public. • It wont improve anything cos people who are causing the trouble are too full of drink to care! • Look at systemic causes of problem rather than sticking plaster • Used properly they could prove useful in certain circumstances, especially during the day. But at night, especially later into the evening when a fair bit of drinking has occurred, their main user is likely evidentiary, rather than prophylactic, as the inebriated rarely think or act rationally. • Brilliant idea. Keep the footage. And fine abusers of drugs or alcohol when they are abusive. NO EXCUSES • This part of the survey is incredibly poorly formulated and is surprisingly leading in it's questioning. The is clear and inherent bias, and this will shine through in the results of the survey. • I don't mind cameras being used all day switching on and off at various times makes no difference to me if anything I would like them on all day I would feel safer personally that way • If they keep us safe we should use them but the marshals shouldn't be able to turn them on/off. • As i do not use Taxi"s ,i do not have the right for an opinion • I think such things are unnecessary frankly - and who would pay for this - I see every day in the centre of town homeless rough sleepers I think the council would do better to address that • Cameras should be on as soon a customer enter the taxi • If evidence is deleted, we could fail to deal with serial offenders. • It is a good idea to help with convictons, but most problems are due to people being drunk. The cameras won't protect the marshalls. • Maybe the local bars excessively pushing cheap alcohol should be made to act more responsibly and start looking at ways to reduce aggressive behaviour. I'm not sure a camera will make much of a difference. • not sure how the footage would be used for conviction if it is deleted within 30 days • Although I dislike the idea of a surveillance society, cameras have been proven to decrease antisocial behaviour. As a woman I hate waiting in line surrounded by drunk aggressive twats and would like to feel safer. • Anything to make using taxis in Bristol safe • I never used taxi • Anything that reduces violent crime is to be applauded • Should be more protection • I think they are an asset • To be worn only by male taxi marshals • If worn they should be left on at all times no one should be exempt • Its like big brother watching you. It may prevent crime, abuse towards customers, CCTV cameras in city centre, motorways • I have not had any problem at taxi ranks I use, but think the questions are more relevant to people who use taxis more at evenings and night

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 15

• I work with security throughout the UK with students. Our security use 'a Solo Protect device to audio events, also alert the main head office of an incident with great success • It will clarify and make transparent the problems that happen and be a clear record of the nature of the incident how it occurred, why it occurred and how best to avoid it happening again. How much training do Taxi marshals have to complete and what is their main purpose? -* To protect taxi drivers.* To protect public. *To protect both parties. • I hadn't realised they were to be used by marshals (my ignorance) • Think it's a good idea • To save marshals and passengers from attacks there have been complaints taxi drivers have been attacked by public also drivers have been accused of attacking female passengers • it sounds like a good idea but personally I never use city centre taxis so find it difficult to comment • I had no idea that the council employed taxi marshals. A campaign against the social problem of young people becoming so drunk might be a better bet. I feel strongly that this measure is intrusive on our liberties and the more controlled people feel the more they will display chaotic behaviour and fail to exercise self control • I think they are a good idea and should be introduced • Good idea • Should be worn at all times and 'on' at all times. It should also not be deleted and prosecutions should result from this • A very good idea • They may act as a deterrent to violence suggest a 'trial run' • I have never seen a taxi marshal • has it come to this? • What ever happened to having a police force? • Doesn't Bristol have enough cameras? • As long as they are used for their rightful purpose • There is a fine line with privacy if the marshal's were to use them to intimidate or for their own benefit then it will cause eruptions • People don't their faces on camera but to the police if someone is being rude and antisocial behaviour it will be easier to identify the person or people on camera. • I have answered some questions on this subject, but suspect that was a mistake as I have no experience of the problem • Good idea but other items in 24 will also help • All technology is open to abuse. Use of this should be carefully monitored • Stupid idea • Yes do so • Allowing taxi marshals to turn off cameras at their own discretion opens up to accusations of cameras being turned off to benefit taxi marshals and prevents entire sequences of events being recorded • The use of a body worn video camera should only be used if it cannot be edited by the user or anyone, otherwise it will not be an honest recording. • Times should also be on body worn cameras that cannot be tampered with • As a non user of taxis I have not attempted to answer Q's 22 to 29 • Seems an unnecessary expense • Who is paying for this? If crime and anti-social behaviour was under control we wouldn't be living in a 'big brother is watching you state' • Surely only necessary evening and night times especially weekends • Good idea • I do not know enough about the subject to comment • Give them a trial period

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 16

• I picked my daughter up at Temple Meads, it was pure madness, deals were being done by some taxi drivers, they were not just picking up passengers, it was scary. • If they stop people from being attack, I think they would be a big help. People would be much safer • Essential tool for ensuring our marshals health and safety • The safety of the person wearing the camera - are they more open to personal attacks? • Why not use CTCV and get rid of the marshals, it would save money • They wouldn't be needed if there were more policemen around the city • Considering the amount of CCTV cameras in the centre of town and the rest of Bristol this seems another huge tax payer expense • I support their use • Use of such cameras (except for police officers) is yet another intrusion in personal privacy by individuals who may or may not be qualified to record behaviour • I think it's an excellent idea to catch abusive people • All footage should be kept for minimum of 6 mths. Regulation at all times by independent to reduce deletion of footage • They shouldn't be allowed to turn cameras on and off at will, footage should be kept for longer than 30 days • We expect taxi marshals to deal with anti-social elements. The should be provided with all suitable equipment. This includes cameras • I didn't realise there were problems at taxi ranks • If it keeps me and others safe they are a good thing • May be a hindrance rather than help - could be a target for 'yobs' to hit and encourage anti-social behaviour, putting user in more danger. Better use a high elevation good camera to be manned at peak times on screen with other sites coverage • Bristol city taxis are very poor and I try not to use them - at the bus station • The city centre is a dangerous place - even if convictions happen the prisons are full. They will be on the streets again too soon. • It is good for safety and will help identify criminals and it reduces the greedy taxi drivers • They should record expressions and movements of the marshall as well as language

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 17

Demographics of respondents

Age

Under 25 year olds are underrepresented in the response, with 2% of respondents being in that group, compared to 19% of the population as a whole.

Response Response Percent Total

1 16-19 0.00% 0

2 20-24 2.11% 16

3 25-34 13.03% 99

4 35-44 17.50% 133

5 45-54 18.16% 138

6 55-64 20.26% 154

7 65-74 18.95% 144

8 75+ 10.00% 76

Gender

Females are slightly overrepresented in the response, with 54% of respondents being in that group, compared to 50% of the population as a whole.

Response Response

Percent Total

1 male 46.20% 353

2 female 53.80% 411

Transgender

Response Response Percent Total

1 Yes 0.31% 2

2 No 91.25% 584

3 Prefer not to say 8.44% 54

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 18

Ethnicity

White British are overrepresented in the response, with 89% of respondents being in that group, compared to 78% of the population as a whole.

BME are underrepresented, with 6% of respondents being in that group, compared to 16% of the population as a whole. Response Response

Percent Total

1 white british 88.58% 659

2 white irish 0.40% 3

3 white polish 0.94% 7

4 white gypsy/traveller 0.13% 1

5 other white 4.30% 32

6 BME 5.65% 42

Religion

Response Response

Percent Total

1 Christian 51.21% 380

2 Muslim 0.94% 7

3 Hindu 0.13% 1

4 Sikh 0.13% 1

5 Jewish 0.40% 3

6 Buddhist 0.00% 0

7 Other 2.16% 16

8 None 40.03% 297

9 Prefer not to say 4.99% 37

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 19

Disabled

Response Response

Percent Total

yes

1 18.01% 139

No 2 81.99% 633

Sexuality

Response Response

Percent Total

1 Lesbian, gay, bisexual 4.85% 36

2 Heterosexual 89.10% 662

3 Prefer not to say 6.06% 45

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 20

Ward

Response Percent Response Total

1 Ashley 4.40% 32

2 Avonmouth 2.88% 21

3 Bedminster 2.88% 21

4 Bishopston 3.98% 29

5 Bishopsworth 2.61% 19

6 Brislington East 2.61% 19

7 Brislington West 2.47% 18

8 Cabot 2.20% 16

9 Clifton 2.61% 19

10 Clifton East 2.88% 21

11 Cotham 3.30% 24

12 Easton 3.30% 24

13 Eastville 2.75% 20

14 Filwood 1.65% 12

15 Frome Vale 3.16% 23

16 Hartcliffe 2.20% 16

17 Henbury 2.75% 20

18 Hengrove 3.30% 24

19 Henleaze 3.43% 25

20 Hillfields 3.43% 25

21 Horfield 1.37% 10

22 Kingsweston 2.61% 19

23 Knowle 3.30% 24

24 Lawrence hill 2.06% 15

25 Lockleaze 2.75% 20

26 Redland 2.47% 18

27 St George East 2.88% 21

28 St George West 2.88% 21

29 Southmead 1.79% 13

30 Southville 2.75% 20

31 Stockwood 3.02% 22

32 Stoke Bishop 3.71% 27

33 Westbury on Trym 4.12% 30

34 Whitchurch Park 2.75% 20

35 Windmill Hill 2.75% 20

Produced by Consultation and Intelligence Team. Email [email protected] Performance, Information and Intelligence Service (Policy, Strategy and Communications) 21