Brighton is a dynamic and forward-looking city with a strong digital business sector. That’s why the city council’s licensing panel granted Uber a taxi licence in November 2015. On the panel we wanted to be able to give young people and tourists the opportunity to use the Uber app, and expand consumer choice in terms of taxis in the city.

Two and a half years later, we have taken the decision not to renew Uber’s licence as we believe the company is not “fit and proper” for two reasons – its 2016 data breach that affected 57 million users and drivers, which it covered up for more than a year; and the fact it uses drivers not licensed in Brighton and Hove, contravening its licence.

Uber’s UK company accepts that the data breach was a serious mistake on the part of the American parent group, from which it has sought to distance itself. But in our view, it is a multinational business with a corporate culture that extends across national borders. The incident reflects extremely badly on Uber as a whole, and in our opinion renders it unfit to hold a licence. Trustworthiness and integrity in holding and dealing with sensitive personal data should be a key characteristic of an operator offering these services.

At the original licence application, Uber gave a firm commitment to adhere to the standards set out in Brighton’s “blue book” of taxi regulations, and only to use drivers licensed in Brighton and Hove. It was a critical factor in the decision to grant the licence. In 2016 that undertaking was repeated.

At that stage Uber had not yet launched in the city. When it did start operating, in October 2016, a large number of out-of-town Uber drivers, mainly those licensed by Transport for London, entered and operated in the city. This was a totally unexpected and unwelcome consequence of granting Uber the licence, as the standards we insist on in Brighton do not apply to drivers and vehicles licensed elsewhere.

An important example is the presence of CCTV in taxis licensed in Brighton and Hove. This is a vital tool for the protection of customers, and also drivers, and has provided crucial evidence in the investigation of complaints. It is not standard in other licensed areas.

In response to the above concerns, Uber has blocked the app for drivers not licensed in the south-east. Initially, we welcomed this. But it has become apparent that while TfL-registered drivers are now absent from Brighton and Hove, there continues to be a large number of drivers not licensed locally who are operating in the city. For example, many drivers are applying to Lewes – which is also in east Sussex, but with different regulatory standards to Brighton – and Uber allows them to operate in Brighton. Despite the council having repeatedly expressed concerns to Uber that its app reduces the council’s ability to perform its regulatory functions, Uber has not addressed this issue to our satisfaction.

We believe that large numbers of drivers operating in our city do not meet the blue-book standards, as a result of Uber operating here. This puts the safety of residents and visitors, many of whom are very vulnerable, at potential risk. Uber has breached the spirit of its written commitment only to use drivers licensed by Brighton and Hove council, and has therefore misled the council on this issue.

Since the decision was made, I’ve received just three emails criticising us, but I’ve had many emails of thanks and support. The decision was made openly and carefully, and it’s one that I, and the rest of the panel, stand by.

• Jackie O’Quinn is a Labour councillor in Brighton, where she chairs the licensing committee