Your forum username:
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up


    Welcome to Sky User - The Unofficial Support Forum for everything Sky! - Proudly helping over 65k members.


    Advertisement

    Results 1 to 5 of 5
    Like Tree1Likes
    • 1 Post By lettice

    Revealed: UK councils shrug at privacy worries, strap on body cams

    This is a discussion on Revealed: UK councils shrug at privacy worries, strap on body cams within the Everyday Life forums, part of the Community channel category; https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/0...use_body_cams/ Of 227 snooping local authorities, only a third cared how it might affect the public More than half of ...

    1. #1
      Scubbie's Avatar
      Scubbie is offline Sky User Moderator
      Exchange: 02392
      Broadband ISP: Sky Fibre Unlimited
      Router: Sky Q Hub ER110
      Sky TV: Sky+HD box
      Join Date
      Mar 2010
      Location
      Near Portsmouth
      Posts
      28,070
      Thanks
      828
      Thanked 2,207 Times in 2,076 Posts

      Revealed: UK councils shrug at privacy worries, strap on body cams

      https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/0...use_body_cams/
      Of 227 snooping local authorities, only a third cared how it might affect the public

      More than half of the UK’s local authorities have used body-worn cameras, with only a third of them having considered the privacy impact on the public, according to best practice.

      The rush to use body-worn video (BWV) by local authorities is not being scrutinised closely enough, according to civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, which found that 227 local government authorities have used the technology.

      Research released today, resulting from answers from 412 (98 per cent) of them, reveals local authorities across the UK have purchased 3,760 cameras, spending almost £1.8m of taxpayers’ cash to do so.

      Considering council’s historical abuse of RIPA powers, Big Brother Watch warned that “councils have a poor track record of using heavy-handed surveillance tactics and are often lackadaisical with their approach to protecting personal data. Scrutiny of new capabilities should be a number one priority.”

      Despite best privacy law practice being to complete a Privacy Impact Assessment before engaging in such an activity, almost two-thirds of those authorities, 150, were not confident of whether they had even completed a PIA to establish whether the surveillance was in compliance with the law.

      Councils’ move into the body-cam world sees them following the police in London and Manchester, of which Mayor of London Sadiq Khan said: “This technology is already helping drive down complaints against officers and making them more accountable, as well as helping to gather better evidence for swifter justice.”

      At the moment, councils have no statutory obligation – under either the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice [PDF] or the Information Commissioner’s CCTV Code of Practice [PDF] – to complete a PIA, which Big Brother Watch recommended.

      This would potentially prevent situations such as has occurred with over a fifth of local authorities, who have held footage for longer than 31 days, which is the guidance for police forces.

      The report states:
      We understand that deploying body-worn cameras in order to protect staff from verbal or physical abuse may have validity; no member of staff should feel unsafe at work. But the decision by some councils to equip staff with the cameras in order to film people dropping litter, walking dogs, parking or to monitor people’s recycling, in order to use the ‘evidence’ to issue a fine, we would argue is a disproportionate use of an intrusive surveillance capability and a potential breach of the privacy of law-abiding citizens.
      Big Brother Watch’s chief executive, Renate Samson, said: “Despite repeated warnings about misuse of surveillance powers, we have found that once again councils are choosing to use powerful law enforcement tools with little consideration of privacy. Using body-worn cameras to protect people’s safety is one thing,” Samson added, “but widespread filming of people’s behaviour in order to issue fines is simply not proportionate.”

      The organisation has recommended that a well-publicised public consultation take place before body-worn cameras are considered by councils, and that a trial should take place before body-worn cameras are used on a permanent basis.

      Additionally, Big Brother Watch said that non-evidential footage should be deleted after 31 days, and that local authorities should publish easily understandable statistics about how body-worn cameras are being used.


    2. Advertisement
    3. #2
      lettice's Avatar
      lettice is offline Sky User Member
      Exchange: 0.4 mile away and cabinet 350 yards
      Broadband ISP: Sky Fibre Max
      Router: ER110UK Sky Q hub
      Sky TV: SkyQ2tb + minis
      Join Date
      Jun 2011
      Location
      England
      Posts
      2,034
      Thanks
      12
      Thanked 191 Times in 182 Posts

      Re: Revealed: UK councils shrug at privacy worries, strap on body cams

      So are we going to see our binmen wearing these.
      I saw an awful bit of road rage the other week when I was walking down a road, some driver swearing at the bin men as he wanted to get by. Pratt!
      The binmen were very calm and just ignored his actions. He even went to the lorry and was banging it with his fist.
      I was hoping they were would throw him into the dustbin lorry
      Scubbie likes this.

    4. #3
      Scubbie's Avatar
      Scubbie is offline Sky User Moderator
      Exchange: 02392
      Broadband ISP: Sky Fibre Unlimited
      Router: Sky Q Hub ER110
      Sky TV: Sky+HD box
      Join Date
      Mar 2010
      Location
      Near Portsmouth
      Posts
      28,070
      Thanks
      828
      Thanked 2,207 Times in 2,076 Posts

      Re: Revealed: UK councils shrug at privacy worries, strap on body cams

      It's easy enough for bin lorries to have dash cams fitted in the cab. I believe that many will also now have a camera mounted around the back in order to prevent someone from getting trapped in the compactor.

      I can understand various people needing to wear a body cam in the course of their work now. As the article states though, it needs to be clear that these cameras are for protection not law enforcement (i.e. we know you left you bin on the footpath as we have video evidence).

      Traffic Wardens have been using still cameras to confirm when someone has parked illegally for several years now. Ok some have faked the evidence and been caught for it, but many others have used this to show that they weren't making things up and indeed someone was parked wrongly.

      Photographic evidence can work both ways though.

      There have been many cases where someone has been prosecuted for parking illegally but the person who was done has managed to gather evidence to show that it wasn't illegal. I have taken such a photo to show that we had a Blue Badge on display and was therefore not parked illegally in Portsmouth on one occasion. It was late at night and hard to see much. The fine was waved.

      Sky Fibre Unlimited Pro: Connected at 80,000 kbps / 20,000 kbps
      Previous ADSL2+ Speed 19999 kbps 1153 kbps, Line Attenuation 17.5 db 6.9 db, Noise Margin 7.5 dB 8.7 dB
      Speedtest: 17.15MB/s 0.97Mb/s Ping 31 ms

    5. #4
      lettice's Avatar
      lettice is offline Sky User Member
      Exchange: 0.4 mile away and cabinet 350 yards
      Broadband ISP: Sky Fibre Max
      Router: ER110UK Sky Q hub
      Sky TV: SkyQ2tb + minis
      Join Date
      Jun 2011
      Location
      England
      Posts
      2,034
      Thanks
      12
      Thanked 191 Times in 182 Posts

      Re: Revealed: UK councils shrug at privacy worries, strap on body cams

      Not seen a traffic warden for years except in London, thought they had gone most places.
      Always wondered why anyone would be so foolish to do that job, unless they just like to get abuse. Would love to see their 360 score at the end of the year from satisfied customers.
      That would be a prime case job for carrying a camera.
      LOL!

    6. #5
      Scubbie's Avatar
      Scubbie is offline Sky User Moderator
      Exchange: 02392
      Broadband ISP: Sky Fibre Unlimited
      Router: Sky Q Hub ER110
      Sky TV: Sky+HD box
      Join Date
      Mar 2010
      Location
      Near Portsmouth
      Posts
      28,070
      Thanks
      828
      Thanked 2,207 Times in 2,076 Posts

      Re: Revealed: UK councils shrug at privacy worries, strap on body cams

      They do exist, apparently. I've seen one or two locally from time to time treading the local streets.

      Sky Fibre Unlimited Pro: Connected at 80,000 kbps / 20,000 kbps
      Previous ADSL2+ Speed 19999 kbps 1153 kbps, Line Attenuation 17.5 db 6.9 db, Noise Margin 7.5 dB 8.7 dB
      Speedtest: 17.15MB/s 0.97Mb/s Ping 31 ms

     

     

    Tags for this Thread

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •  
    SkyUser - Copyright © 2006-2017. SatDish and NewsreadeR | SkyUser is in no way affiliated with Sky Broadband / BSkyB
    RIPA NOTICE: NO CONSENT IS GIVEN FOR INTERCEPTION OF PAGE TRANSMISSION