Riots in the UK: why are we not shouting about the value of CCTV?

Yes, I know that I’ve said this more than a few times already but, hey, my wife continually calls me stubborn so I’ll say it yet again: why on Earth do people in CCTV not tell the public what wonderful things they are doing with the technology at their disposal?

Why are we not blanketing the media just now with comment and opinion as to how wonderful CCTV really is?

Look at all the images – and a lot of them are of extremely good quality – that have been plastered all over the newspapers and our TV screens of late following the riots?

Why have we not witnessed headlines telling the public that we would really be struggling to identify these offenders if we didn’t have CCTV?

Without CCTV how would we track the rioters?

Here’s another question for you? If there was no CCTV in the areas where the rioting and looting took place, how would we ever track these people down? From TV pictures (if TV crews were there)? Eye witnesses (if anyone hung around long enough for fear of their own safety)? Or the police (who, by the way, had a hard enough job trying to keep themselves safe while avoiding missiles from the sky)?

We are all disgusted at the scenes that came into our living rooms, and by the subsequent stories and pictures of such behaviour in what is supposed to be a privileged and civilised country.

What comes out of all this from a CCTV point of view, though? Images are used by the courts. 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. It is a throughput and, before we know it, the use of CCTV will have been put to bed for these purposes. In the not-too-distant future, we will then be back to the norm and have more headlines concerning CCTV ‘overkill’, the rise of the Surveillance Society, the Big Brother ‘threat’, the misuse of CCTV and its snooping capabilities.

In short, we’ll be back to Square One. Importantly, we will have missed the opportunity to extol the virtues of CCTV.

Visit to the local authority: lessons learned

There’s a criticism in all of this, and it’s a big criticism. Just before I come to that, though, let me tell you the story about a local authority I visited recently – just before the riots, in fact, and not a million miles away from where some of the troubles occurred.

During my conversation with the manager there, it was put to me that CameraWatch is perhaps a bit feared by ‘CCTV people’. They are suspicious of us. They are nervous. The word ‘Watch’ apparently has some people very worried.

Now that was very interesting to me, and something that we at CameraWatch had never thought of. It’s good feedback.

In some cases, CCTV people see CameraWatch in the same light as Big Brother Watch (and anyone who has shared a platform with Big Brother Watch can testify that they are not always the most popular organisation among CCTV people).

So, in short, it appears that the ‘Watch’ element of CameraWatch has, in some cases, seen us placed in the same pigeonhole as Big Brother Watch.

CameraWatch: we’re not a threat

After my conversation with the manager in question, that person’s attitude towards CameraWatch was totally changed because they now know that CameraWatch is not a threat. That CameraWatch is here to support good practice and compliant CCTV. That CameraWatch is all about supporting CCTV systems to be fully lawful.

That individual now knows that CameraWatch wants all CCTV systems to be fully compliant – and thus reduce any suspicion harboured by the public and a lot of the media in relation to the misuse of CCTV.

All CameraWatch does is facilitate the way towards making CCTV systems do what they are supposed to do – no more, no less – and remove any possible questions around legality and impropriety.

Education and awareness followed by the practical points that should already be carried out by CCTV managers and operators is essentially what we’re all about.

The end of the meeting resulted in the removal of any fear factor that the manager had over CameraWatch. We are working closely with this end user, and we’re very pleased with their extremely positive attitude.

Oh, and once they are fully compliant they don’t need to worry about Big Brother Watch because, actually, Big Brother Watch is fully supportive of CCTV as a tool, but what they cannot ignore is the misuse of CCTV.

It’s very easy to sort out: we organise a situation whereby all CCTV systems in the UK are operated and managed correctly. In turn, that leaves Big Brother Watch with no ammunition. We would be delighted with such a state of affairs.

Actually, so would Big Brother Watch: they will simply move on to other points of discussion and leave CCTV alone.

That all sounds pretty straightforward, doesn’t it? Actually, it really is pretty straightforward. It will not be attained overnight, but it most certainly is achievable with the support of all involved in CCTV.

Criticism… of those involved with CCTV

Back to my criticism… This lies fairly and squarely at the door of those involved with CCTV but who do not promote its huge benefits.

I don’t mean to potential customers or sales forces. I mean: ‘Let’s get in the faces of those influential with the media’… and the legislators… and the moneymen.

Let’s get the good news stories out there. Let’s tell people that this identification process followed across the last week or so wouldn’t have happened without CCTV, or that the prosecutions couldn’t have happened without CCTV. And that the old lady wandering around in the town’s streets or the shopping centre was kept safe and well because of CCTV.

Have a think about the amount of coverage the English riots have had in the media. All types of media. Not just in this country but all around the world. This was – and still is – a ‘mega story’, even more so given that the Olympics take place here in less than a year’s time.

What are we doing about the positive message of CCTV? From what I’ve seen so far, I think the phrase to use is: ‘Diddly squat’.

Let’s get the proverbial fingers out, and get them to grip pens, pencils, keyboards, tablets, etc… and let’s get that message out there on the good that CCTV does.

Now, at this point I can tell you’re reading this and waiting for the sting in the tail…I can sense it. Well, it will come as absolutely no surprise to you when I say that the positives would be so much easier to shout about when we have removed the risk of criticism.

When we’ve started taking seriously the legal requirements of using CCTV. When we stop saying there’s no budget, and that no-one is bothering about the niceties.

That we are too busy using the CCTV system to worry about the ‘back office stuff’. Yes, I’ve heard it all. Every day, in fact, but you know I haven’t yet had someone I have visited turn round at the end and say that it was overkill, too high maintenance, jobs for the boys or all about red tape, etc after I had explained it all to them.

End users have all seen how doing things correctly and legally is about good business. About reducing any risk. About being confident of keeping staff and public safe. Yes, it really is that simple.

Surveillance and the 2012 Olympic Games

Oh, and having mentioned the 2012 Olympic Games, let me tell you that I had the great pleasure (at the start of the month) to be part of the organisation of the test event for rowing at Eton/Dorney Lake – the World Junior Rowing Championships – which will be the venue for the 2012 Olympic Regatta.

How many medals could Team GB pick up there? Let’s just say that I’m very, very optimistic.

I also had a meeting in London recently with someone very close to the security arrangements for different locations of the Games, and it worries me considerably about the compliance – or rather the lack of it – in relation to the CCTV systems (of which, I’m sure you can imagine, there will be more than a few).

With the clock ticking, let’s look at the CCTV systems and let’s have them checked for compliance by experts in that field.

How can I possibly have said what I have said in this article and then simply sit back and hope that the security for the greatest sporting event on the planet might be OK?

The CCTV systems MUST be good. They MUST be fit for purpose. Above all they MUST be legal and compliant. CameraWatch looks forward to hearing about them.

From the headline of this article, I do have to say that with all the coverage in the media about the use of CCTV, the law of averages would suggest that at least one smart lawyer is going to pop his head above the parapet and challenge the compliance of the CCTV system that produced the CCTV image evidence.

It could be any small detail such as the time and date setting, the training of the operators, the procedures, the signs – any of a huge range of issues.

This isn’t all directed at Public Space CCTV. No. Not at all. Public Space CCTV is in a minority when you consider all of the CCTV in operation across this country.

The big companies, the mega wealthy corporations, the businesses that we all assume know better… In fact anyone who uses CCTV to capture images of members of the public who might then be identified from those images are involved in this.

Stop ignoring the legal requirements

Let us all change our attitude. Let’s stop ignoring the legal requirements. Let’s find out what is needed to be done instead of running away from it and living with the risk.

Let’s find out if there is a problem and, if that’s the case, let’s collectively determine to fix it.

You cannot fix a problem, though, until you know what the problem really is.

As for the positive stories on CCTV, well… CameraWatch is doing its bit. It’s over to you now.

Prove me wrong. Please.

Paul Mackie is CEO of CameraWatch

Mackie boasts a 30-plus year background in IT working with both international blue chip companies and also national Government, during which time he dealt with compliance and legalisation of industry software

Further information on CameraWatch

CameraWatch is a group aimed at promoting awareness and compliance of the Data Protection Act for camera surveillance in both the private and public sectors.

The organisation has the support of the industry regulator, namely the Information Commissioner’s Office.

A need has been identified for a central information point for the industry. CameraWatch is an independent, not-for-profit, self-funding advisory body* that supports the understanding of CCTV and compliance with current policy and legislation, removing risks relating to data protection and other legal non-compliance.

CameraWatch represents the interests of members through liaison with legislative, prosecution and Government organisations throughout the UK and the EU.

In consultation with the Information Commissioner’s Office, the organisation facilitates the implementation of the ICO’s CCTV Code of Practice and builds up and disseminates Best Practice guidelines designed to support compliance in the use of CCTV systems, their operation and procedures and (where appropriate) prosecutions using CCTV evidence.

CameraWatch offers support tailored to meet the needs of specific organisations, as well as the general public. To these ends, the organisation undertakes R&D project work and market research.

Promotion of data-sharing forums

CameraWatch also promotes regular meetings/seminars and data-sharing forums with the police and law enforcement agencies, the ICO and other security working groups, suppliers/manufacturers and installers and CCTV applications users from all affected sectors (such as retail, transport, finance, insurance, property management and construction, the licensed trade, industry consultants, the security industry, the legal profession, local authorities and other related bodies).

CameraWatch’s activities are currently funded by industry sponsorship and membership fees. The organisation celebrated its Fifth Anniversary in March this year.

*CameraWatch is a company limited by guarantee and recognised by HMRC as a not-for-profit organisation

Access more detail on the CameraWatch website (a dedicated link is provided at the foot of this page)