It has been muted that HD CCTV is at the heart of the reason that new regulation on privacy has been introduced across England and Wales yesterday. The fact that HD CCTV is capable of producing images far superior to that which has been achievable by analogue cameras previously has got some members of the public concerned over civil liberties and their privacy in general.
It is true that HD CCTV can now be purchased on line by anyone who feels they are capable of installing it. There has been a huge rise in domestic systems and its true again that some cameras are positioned in such a way that they do intrude into others premises. However the new regulation covers local authorities and government organizations only, industry and private domestic installations are unaffected. Add to this the fact that the CCTV commissioner has no powers of enforcement or powers of investigation and it seems that this legislation is just a meaningless piece of paper.
Do we need HD CCTV to protect the public?
Also do the new regulations supercede the data protection act as the legislation seems very similar with regard to the CCTV aspect? No one has really come forward to the industry to consult or explain.
The new code of practice for the use of surveillance cameras in England and Wales that has been introduced by the Home Office and state that CCTV cameras should be used to protect and support people, not to spy on them.
The code also states that: “The purpose … will be to ensure that individuals and wider communities have confidence that surveillance cameras are deployed to protect and support them, rather than spy on them.
“The Government considers that wherever overt surveillance in public places is in pursuit of a legitimate aim and meets a pressing need, any such surveillance should be characterised as surveillance by consent.”
It seems a sensible approach but is it overkill?
There are more than 1.85 million CCTV cameras are in operation across the UK and few are complying with current regulation. No one has ever stepped forward to enforce the data protection act or even champion it.
Of course most CCTV cameras are operated by private companies, businesses and individuals and the rush to install HD CCTV equipment has perhaps prompted the move to introduce the new regulation.
With regard to publicly operated systems it is estimated that some 51,600 CCTV cameras are operated by local authorities, while 2,107 schools have a further 47,806 cameras. In addition over 100,000 cameras are used on transport systems to help protect the travelling public, most who are questioned welcome this protection and few complain each year about the “big brother issue”.
So what do civil liberty campaigners say? well they seem to complain that the code does not go far enough.
Emma Carr, from civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, said “CCTV remains a vital issue”.
“We’re getting an increasing amount of phone calls and letters from people who are concerned about their neighbours putting up CCTV cameras in their gardens, which cover their own private areas and sometimes look into their houses,”.
“And then there’s also the technological development in terms of CCTV. Facial recognition and HD CCTV cameras. These are all available online to pretty much anybody.”
|This is of course true but many want more rather than less cameras especially now HD CCTV can provide conclusive proof of identity where previously analogue cameras failed.
So will the regulation make any difference? The answer we feel is a resounding NO.