For a chain, Gaucho is startlingly expensive, the final bill ending up pretty close to one from much more stylish, individual restaurants
Boris Johnson's deputy faces damaging new allegations that he misled the public by claiming to be a magistrate
More...
Most CCTV cameras are 'illegal', watchdog claims
Last updated at 14:22pm on 31.05.07Footage from millions of CCTV cameras across Britain could be useless as evidence in court because most operators are failing to abide by the law, a new watchdog has warned.
Defence lawyers could exploit technicalities to "drive a coach and horses" through prosecution cases, allowing criminals to escape justice simply because camera tapes are not stored securely or monitoring screens are visible to the public.
The warnings will fuel deepening concerns over explosion in use of CCTV cameras in recent years - and doubts over whether the millions of surveillance systems really make Britain a safer place, as is often claimed.
The UK has more cameras per head of population than anywhere else in the world with city residents now typically filmed up to 300 times a day.
Scroll down for more
Illegal and useless: Most footage obtained from cameras like these cannot be used as evidence
Latest versions include talking CCTV systems where operators can shout warnings at criminals and yobs, and flying police spy drones hovering above our cities.
But the head of the new CameraWatch advisory body claimed yesterday only a small minority of Britain's 4.2million surveillance cameras currently comply with the law.
Gordon Ferrie, a former senior police officer and head of security at the Royal Bank of Scotland who chairs the new group, said:
"Our research shows that up to 90 per cent of CCTV installations fail to comply with the Information Commissioner's UK CCTV code of practice, and many installations are operated illegally."
The failings have "profound implications", he added, not least for police and prosecutors trying to bring criminals to justice.
Mr Ferrie said defence lawyers "could drive a horse and cart" through most CCTV evidence presented in court, adding: "We do not want to get into a situation where every image is challenged in court.
"We are in favour of close circuit television. It's as good as having DNA. There is nothing better than actually seeing someone commit the crime.
"All we are asking is that the images that are taken are compliant with the Data Protection Act."
According to CameraWatch the most common error is failing to store camera tapes securely once they have been filmed, in breach of laws stating that imagery must be treated in the same way as confidential personal information.
Other frequent problems include wrongly sited monitoring screens which can be seen by members of the public - again breaching strict regulations - or failing to register a system under the Data Protection Act.
With millions of cameras now operated by private businesses or individuals, local authorities, housing associations and police forces, CameraWatch is calling for a major effort to improve standards to prevent major criminal trials collapsing.
Senior police officers in England have already expressed similar fears over the issue, although the matter has yet to be tested in a UK court.
CCTV is now seen by police as an indispensable crime-fighting tool, but there are signs of a growing backlash against the vast number of cameras now watching the UK population, including from the police themselves.
Last week Ian Readhead, Deputy Chief Constable of Hampshire, questioned why CCTV systems were being installed in low-crime areas such as rural villages at huge expense, adding:
'Are we really moving towards an Orwellian situation where cameras are at every street corner?
"I really don't think that's the kind of country that I want to live in."
The Home Office has spent hundreds of millions of pounds on CCTV systems over the past decade, and is shortly to publish a major review into how effective the technology is in fighting crime.
One highly embarrassing study commissioned by the department two years ago found that systems do little or nothing to cut crime levels.
Researchers examined 14 separate schemes in various settings across the UK but only one - covering a series of car parks - could be credited with cutting crime.
Street crime such as drunken violence was barely affected in most cases, and there was evidence that other crimes were simply moved to other areas not covered by cameras.
Reader views (2)
Here's a sample of the latest views published. You can click view all to read all views that readers have sent in.
The CCTV cameras which are commonly employed everywhere cannot SAVE the footage! They are only useful for monitoring purposes and as such are pratically useless.
One or two digital stills cameas in an area would capture clear images of the camera scene, but it will take some time for the penny to drop with council and transport officials who buy hardware at the taxpayer's expense without bothering to check whether it has any practical value.
If you can't capture clear quality images then there is no point in installing a CCTV system.
- Anon, London
If they spent more money on fewer cameras in crime rich areas those cameras could provide better imagery so that we could actually see the faces of the criminals and not just that they are a bloke in jeans with a dark jacket on and a fuzzy head.
- Isabel, Woking, England
16°c
