|
|
CCTV CAMERAS
Page
1 | 2 | 3
Millions of
motorists are likely to incur parking fines without
realising it after being caught on CCTV. Local councils
are to have the power to use remote cameras to enforce
parking laws, then send tickets by post. The move comes
alongside other changes that will allow parking
attendants to issue tickets as soon as they say they have
seen a car illegally parked, without having to put them
on the motorist's windscreen.
Under the new plans, town hall staff in control rooms
will monitor CCTV cameras trained on high streets to
issue tickets the second a car parks on a yellow line or
overstays at a parking meter. Under some circumstances,
motorists can wait on single yellow lines to let
passengers out or unload goods but this has not stopped
CCTV operators in London, where councils have been
allowed to use cameras for some time, issuing tickets
anyway.
Caroline Sheppard, the chief adjudicator or the National
Parking Adjudication Service, said drivers should be
allowed a few minutes grace to find change for a parking
meter. There will be no obligation on anyone issuing a
ticket remotely to follow this guidance, however. Paul
Watters, the AA's head of Roads and Transport Policy,
said, "CCTV cameras can be used to enforce parking
restrictions which will make it appear easy to enforce
parking bans and dole out tickets but a CCTV camera
cannot spot a blue badge, note down a tax disc number or
always spot loading or unloading." (Source: Daily Telegraph, Feb/08)
According to
a Home Office report, more than eight out of ten CCTV
cameras do not provide satisfactory images for the
police. The National CCTV Strategy report, written by the
Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers,
revealed that the majority of cameras are not positioned
in places where they can combat terrorism or serious
crime and that some cameras originally installed to fight
crime are now being used to monitor bus lanes. Many
cameras in public places such as shopping centres are
designed to "monitor crowds, slips, trips and
falls" rather than detect crime.
A Home Office spokesman said, "CCTV has proven its
effectiveness time and again in tackling crime and
disorder. It also plays a vital role in the fight against
terrorism and helps communities feel safer. The strategy
recognises that for CCTV to continue to be effective it
must have both the support of the public and take account
of rapidly changing technology. It highlights the need
for improved public accountability, a centralised
database of schemes, national training standards for
users and a stronger role for the Information
Commissioner." (Source: Daily Mail, Oct/07)
A new
national advisory body for the industry, CameraWatch,
which has the backing of the police and the Information
Commissioner’s Office, claimed that the vast
majority of CCTV is used incorrectly and could
potentially be inadmissable in court. The
organisation’s chairman, Gordon Ferrie, the
international head of security for RBS and a former
director of the fraud squad in Strathclyde, said that the
dangers were pressing given the growth in the industry.
He said, “Our research shows that up to 90% of CCTV
installations fail to comply with the Information
Commissioner’s UK CCTV code of practice, and many
installations are operated illegally. That has profound
implications for the reputation of the CCTV and camera
surveillance industry and all concerned with it.”
The proliferation of CCTV by councils, housing
associations, businesses, private individuals and police
mobile units means that there is estimated to be one
camera for every fourteen people. The Home Office has
committed £63 million to installing systems.
Mr Ferrie, who said that he had used CCTV footage as a
police officer to convict murderers, gave warning that
legal counsel “could drive a horse and cart”
through most CCTV evidence. That, he said, was not in
anybody’s best interests. He said, “We do not
want to get into a situation where every image is
challenged in court.” CameraWatch, a
non-profit-making independent body, maintains that most
CCTV cameras in public areas breach the Data Protection
Act and, in some cases, the Human Rights Act. The Data
Protection Act is breached in several common ways.
The most frequent is the failure to keep camera tapes
secure. Under the Act, human images should be treated as
confidential information in the same way as names,
addresses and phone numbers. The arrival of digital
cameras poses yet more problems; for the images can be
transferred across open internet connections rather than
remaining on a closed loop. Viewing monitors are often
wrongly sited in public areas, so other people can see
who is being filmed, and a number of the 3,500 CCTV
systems are not registered under the Data Protection Act,
as is required.
Additionally, cameras are frequently used for another
purpose than the one for which they were registered and
the necessary clear signage is regularly missing. CCTV
evidence is now regarded as vital a tool as DNA in the
fight against crime. Dozens of convictions are made on
evidence from cameras. A spokeswoman for the Director of
Public Prosecutions said, “If it is part of the
evidence then it will be for the defendant to challenge
if they felt that in some way the CCTV did not comply
with the law.” (Source: Times Online, May/07)
<<< Prev
|
|
|
