Transport for London (TfL) has come under fire for refusing to disclose crucial information regarding the cost and extent of criminal damage inflicted upon Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) cameras, prompting a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner. The decision by TfL to withhold this information has raised concerns about transparency and accountability.
The controversy stems from Vandals who identify themselves as “blade runners” and have taken credit for sabotaging ULEZ cameras. These acts of vandalism have been ongoing since the ULEZ scheme was expanded into greater London in the summer of 2023. In addition to cameras, ULEZ vans have also been targeted, leading to a significant disruption in the enforcement of anti-pollution measures.
Attempts to investigate the cost of these attacks on ULEZ cameras were met with resistance by TfL. The agency cited concerns that sharing such information would “encourage” further criminal activities. TfL argued that revealing details about the sabotage would be of interest to individuals looking to disrupt the network for notoriety.
However, the Campaign for Freedom of Information (CFOI) challenged TfL’s position, asserting that their argument was “highly questionable.” The CFOI argued that the public has a right to know the extent of the damage and the cost to taxpayers associated with repairing the cameras.
Maurice Frankel, director of CFOI, noted that similar arguments could be applied to statistics about various types of violent attacks, such as hate crimes. Frankel stressed the importance of a public interest test and highlighted the public’s strong interest in understanding the scope and financial impact of these attacks.
Two Conservative assembly members, Peter Fortune and Keith Prince, also expressed concerns about transparency and accountability in Mayor Sadiq Khan’s administration. They called into question Mayor Khan’s commitment to transparency, particularly regarding the ULEZ expansion into outer London.
In response to the controversy, TfL condemned the vandalism but assured the public that it would not impede the operation of the ULEZ across London. The agency maintained that its extensive camera network was sufficient to support the effective implementation of the scheme.
TfL has not commented on the formal complaint filed with the Information Commissioner regarding the refusal to disclose information about the ULEZ camera sabotage. The issue remains a point of contention, as concerns persist about the need for transparency and public awareness regarding these incidents and their associated costs.
