Slashdot Mirror


Cameras in UK for Toll Enforcement

cosyne writes "Saw this story on BBC News about charging people £5 per day to drive in central London. The interesting part: they plan to use surveillance cameras to snap liscence plates and compare to a database of people who paid. That's the same as stopping terrorism, right?" We mentioned this issue in an earlier story. It's an interesting challenge: the UK authorities have a problem (too much traffic in London) which is not susceptible to the usual solution (too many ways into London, can't put tolls on all of them) and so they're looking for new solutions - except most of the possible solutions are privacy-invasive in one way or another.

13 of 572 comments (clear)

  1. Once again... by The+Good+Reverend · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is having information that you present (your license plate number) recorded an "invasion of privacy"?

    1. Re:Once again... by madenosine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      it is if they can tell anybody where you were at any time of day

  2. Seems like a bad idea by Dirtside · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well just on first gloss, this seems like a bad idea. The idea, apparently, is that traffic is so bad in central London that they want to discourage people from driving in, and encourage them to use public transportation instead -- which kind of makes sense. One problem is that, like all other regressive taxes, this "fee" is essentially meaningless to those with enough money. Of course, this is £1300 a year if you drive into London 5 days a week, every week -- think about the holy hell that would get raised if you decided to charge a fee of $2500 a year to drive to Manhattan Island! (Personally, I'm against any scheme in which a citizen of a nation is charged money by the government to travel to or across particular public lands. They're public lands! Public!)

    Then there's the issue of privacy -- the government randomly recording peoples' presence and location to see if they've paid this tax. Yeah, that's a nasty one. If you provide public transportation which is cheaper than driving, people will use it, you don't need to essentially force them to do so by charging an arm and a leg.

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    1. Re:Seems like a bad idea by Andy_R · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I already use a flexitime solution, and am never held up by congestion when I drive into London (I am often held up by by roadworks and bad traffic light timing, but tolls won't alter that) but I will still be charged if the tolls go ahead, as they cover the entire business day.

      --
      A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
  3. If you're out in public by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then it's not exactly an invasion of privacy.

    A traffic warden looking at your car number plate on the street isn't invading your privacy and neither is this. It's just the scale and organisation behind this that makes it scary, not the action being performed.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  4. Less of the terrorism nonsense by mccalli · · Score: 5, Insightful
    That's the same as stopping terrorism, right?

    No, it isn't. Please bear in mind that the UK has sadly been having to deal with terrorism, and attacks on its soil, for rather longer than the US. Anti-terrorist measure are a well understood thing in London, and the public certainly doesn't get to see all of it.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  5. New tube tickets by Builder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you think this is bad, wait for the new tube tickets. At present to access the underground (Subway, Metro, call it what you will), you put a cardboard ticket in a slot. The magnetic stripe is read and the ticket is spat out. You remove your ticket, the gate opens and off you go.

    With the new system you merely wave a card near a reader on the machine. London Underground are currently claiming that you shouldn't even need to take the ticket out of your bag. Ok, I've worked in buildings with card controlled access like this in the past, and I'm not sure this will actually work, but that is another rant.

    Once these are accepted, all Joe Privacy invader needs to do is hook up these readers at entrances to stores, restuarants, etc.

    The cameras have nothing on this!

  6. Why not the other way round? by sluggie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Instead of spending money on this system why not giving free access to the public transport system to everyone who shows a valid ticket from a park&ride facility outside the city...

    I'm sure People would like the idea of a free ride thru the city instead of spending money for fuel and wasting time in traffic jams...

  7. Forget about privacy invasion... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Before the tinfoil-hat brigade start ranting (oops, they already are) consider this:
    If you own a car, you have no privacy.

    The government already has all your personal details on record. Your address, date and city of birth, type of car (or cars) you own, approximate mileage you do in a year (although that bit's optional, but it's a good idea because it stops people tampering with the speedometer), and much more besides. It's all legally required for owning a car. Even if you own one, but don't keep it registered, you must register it as out of use and keep it off the road.

    Just to recap, if you own a car, the government already knows about it. They're not really that interested in you though.

  8. Re:What we need by Cally · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ....but that (LCD gizmo to make the plate invisble to cameras) would be tax evasion, which is criminal, and rightly so. Why is this suggestion moderated up? Hey, Microsoft charge $250 for XP - if only I had some heavy mates, then we could smash our way into the warehouse and steal as many copies as we want, 'eh?

    Sometimes I despair of Slashdotters.

    --
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
  9. Which would be illegal... by MosesJones · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This sounds nice but would result in your car being illegal and therefore subject to a fine much greater than the £5 you are trying to avoid.

    A simpler answer in a city which has the oldest underground system would be... to use public transport. As someone who uses it every day it amazes me that people don't go totally postal waiting in queues all the time in their cars.

    Example: Saturday night going from St. James' to Charing Cross, we got out of the cab at the end of the Mall (which is not pronounced Maul) and walked the rest as it would have taken three times as long in the cab.

    London is not a city designed for cars, and personally I'm all in favour of scaming the stupid who insist on driving.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
  10. Not The Government by JimPooley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As far as I understand it, this plan is NOT the work of the UK Government, instead this highly controversial scheme has been put forward by the Mayor of London.

    Read about this Congestion Charging scheme here.
    In fact, there is a challenge to this scheme being mounted in the High Court today (Monday).

    The reason there are so many cameras in London, is because of all the terrorists who have kept trying to blow bits of it up over the years. Terrorists, largely funded by US Citizens, who have in the past come close to destroying parts of London's financial centre.

    Personally, I think you have to be an idiot to want to drive into London, and I'm all in favour of this scheme, but I would like to see the charge doubled for people driving SUVs...

    --

    "Information wants to be paid"
  11. Re:What's the problem? by jeremyp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can't significantly improve the car supporting infrastructure of London without some major structural work i.e. knocking down large numbers of buildings to make way for new roads. If you do that, the volume of traffic will increase until you are back where you started.

    The public transport system in London is probably the most widely used in the UK because for many people, driving in London is a nightmare they'd rather not think about. If it became easier, everybody would jump straight back in the cars and hit town, particularly as the public transport system is mostly in a poor state of repair.

    While I think there are serious problems with the proposed scheme, the answer is definitely not "build more roads"

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe