back to article Gov consults on new CCTV/ANPR Code of Conduct

The coalition government, as part of its plans to "roll back the over-intrusive powers of the State", has announced that it will remove supervision of CCTV from the remit of the Information Commissioner and establish a new Surveillance Camera Commissioner. The government also intends to publish a new code of conduct for use of …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. taxman

    So not another Quango then

    Aren't these the boys who announced a cut back in the number of public bodies? Only now.......

    1. Danny 14 Silver badge
      Go

      well

      some of the boys needed a holiday whilst their old desks were fitted with converted department plates.

  2. Miek
    FAIL

    a tit is required

    "The public consultation document, available here (Word doc) " -- ah a word document, the mark of a web-professional

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      No, 'Don't understand this one.

      Is this sarcasm or confusion? Is there a problem with it being a MS Word document? It could have been a *.txt, .pdf of .docx, I suppose?

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    IIRC...

    Capture and use of CCTV images is only legal if there are prominent notices displayed stating the purpose, responsible owner and contact details for same. Many a time I have seen CCTV setups without such signs and wondered if any image captured could be legally used as evidence.

    Still, perhaps a job for a boy to check all these things in future.

    1. david wilson

      Re: IIRC

      >>"Many a time I have seen CCTV setups without such signs and wondered if any image captured could be legally used as evidence."

      I guess it might depend on whether someone could actually prove that there hadn't been signs up at the time images were taken, which could be difficult if significant time had passed, and the lack of signage had been noticed and rectified.

      It seems that illegally-collected/held information isn't automatically inadmissible in UK courts anyway, so it may also depend on the particular usage.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Boffin

        Re: IIRC

        Interesting - so I should set up my own CCTV pointing at the unsigned CCTV setup to have a record of when theirs was recording without proper signage. Who's watching the watchers!?

    2. Gideon 1

      Re: IIRC...

      Not all CCTV uses come under the Data Protection Act and have to follow the code of practice including putting up signs.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Alert

    Protection of Freedoms Bill - PUBLIC READING STAGE

    For those interested, the Protection of Freedoms Bill is currently undergoing a pilot version of the proposed Public Reading Stage:-

    http://publicreadingstage.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/

    You can submit comments on the Bill as it currently stands, before it gets it's second reading in the Commons and enters the committee stage.

    For CCTV, you probably want to look at Part 2: Regulation of surveillance.

    THE DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS IS 7TH MARCH!

  5. druck Silver badge
    Black Helicopters

    Correction

    "ANPR, being mainly a police technology referencing central databases, is much further down the road - might be seen by many as almost a de facto safeguard against excessive state intrusion."

    Surely it's the de facto standard for excessive state intrusion?

  6. Nebulo
    Unhappy

    At the risk of making an obvious point

    Despite the oft-proved fact that CCTV is of no use whatever in making us "safer" in any way, a pound to a penny says we don't actually expect *any* reduction *at all* in the number of cameras shoved in our innocent faces, ever. Do we? Really?

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021