Having read your article on the CCTV debacle in Holbeach I am amazed at the unprofessional approach to this “dads only system”
- What consultation took place between the police and the council? You cannot expect the organisation that has to follow up investigations not to have a say in such a system.
- The installation of a system that relies on incidents in the past to be followed up to be a viable deterrent plus more investigation to be carried out by police.
- Who at the present views the CCTV footage? Is it as I expect carried out by an outside agency and then information forwarded to the council?
- Have you looked at the rules of operation of the system, they should be available for the public to see. Does the council operate outside of the national guidelines set down for CCTV systems?
- If this system was agreed by council did they install the required notices giving details of a CCTV system being in operation?
- In summing up, security was needed for the parks and cemeteries and it should be the CCTV system that provides security cover if manpower was not available.
The provision of this system seems to have been carried out without any consultation of other agencies and as such information obtained illegally by the system would not be accepted by the courts, so why have a system?
It took Peterborough (same principle but on a larger scale) some two years to become operational.
Name and address supplied
