Agenda item

Consideration was given to the report of the Chief Officer Resources (SIRO CCTV), Head of Community Services and the Interim Chief Officer Commercial which was to present the Council’s draft Public Space CCTV Annual Monitoring Report 2020 covering the period 1 September 2019 – 31 December 2020.

The Chief Officer Resources spoke to the report and highlighted the main points contained therein, the Interim Chief Officer Commercial and the Head of Community Services would supplement and respond to questions where necessary.

A Member raised concerns with regards to proportionality, stating that there were no cameras in Nantyglo and he felt that cameras needed to be more equally distributed.  The 2020/21 revenue budget set aside for CCTV was £84,000 and he felt this was insufficient.  The Member also raised concerns in relation to confidentiality and Health & Safety issues with officers homeworking and dealing with CCTV enquiries.  The Member knew of other Members with similar concerns and proposed that a cross party group be established to review these issues in more detail and to increase the CCTV budget as he felt the current system was not fit for purpose. 

The Interim Chief Officer Commercial said that in relation to homeworking, under the current regulations Officers needed to work from home wherever possible.  Appropriate arrangements had been put in place and only those officers who had undertaken the relevant training were allowed to view the CCTV footage.  She assured Members that the arrangements put in place during the pandemic had followed the proper protocol.  In relation to evidence gathering and location of cameras, current locations were based upon police statistics, however, during recent Member engagement, Members had commented on wider look evidence to give a richer picture and as part of the Forward Work Programme for CCTV could look at how to bring in wider evidence gathering.  With regard to the CCTV budget the Officer acknowledged that previous budget setting processes had reduced the CCTV budget.

The Member asked for clarification regarding Officers operating the CCTV system from home.  The Interim Chief Officer Commercial clarified that the system was not located in an Officer’s home, the system was in a Council building with restricted access and only the appropriate Officers who had undertaken the relevant training had clearance to view the CCTV footage.  However, during the pandemic, there were some cases where Officers had to use laptops and on occasion may have to attend the Council building to download extra footage, this was all undertaken within current protocol arrangements.

The Member referred to damaged vehicles in his Ward and reiterated that all areas of the Borough should have coverage.  He felt it should be a monitored 24 hour system to help police catch offenders in the act.  The Interim Chief Officer Commercial said that the move to this system had been in partnership with police colleagues, this was a live recording system but not 24/7 monitoring.  Regarding the wider evidence base, work with Members could be undertaken to get that wider evidence base outside of the police crime statistics.

The Member reiterated his concerns and felt it was important that Members, Officers and external agencies get together to review the CCTV system to make it fit for purpose.

In response to a Member’s question regarding deployable cameras, the Head of Community Services said that four deployable cameras were purchased as part of the capital expenditure, two were currently deployed and two were available for deployment.  There were rules and regulations around the use of deployable cameras and these policies and processes were covered in the report.

The Member referred to Appendix J - Proposed Forward Work Programme 2021/22 and proposed that timelines should be included in the document so Members could scrutinise progress.  He felt this would help in the roll out of deployable cameras and ensure they were located in the areas of most need.  The Head of Community Services explained that the regulations around deployable cameras was a complex process, there were covert cameras and overt cameras each followed a different process, overt cameras needed to be visible and covert cameras did not, there was the further issue of technical placement, deployable cameras needed to have an energy supply and be in locations that allow Wi-Fi or other means of transmission.  As well as the regulatory processes that needed to be followed regarding hard evidence there may also be potential technical constraints where cameras could be deployed. 

The Interim Chief Officer Commercial said that in relation to the Member’s comments around timelines, work could be carried out to add key milestones via the Forward Work Programme for Members to monitor progress.

The Leader of the Labour Group commented that this was a service for all partners including the Police, Council and others, the reality was that the Police did not have funding for the service and due to reduced budgets and the SLA, the new system had been introduced in 2018.  He felt that the service could only improve and move forward if additional investment was made.  In a recent budget meeting the Member had requested an additional £300,000 be invested in the CCTV system to maintain and enhance the service which was not supported, and expressed his disappointment at the missed opportunity.

Another Member commented that the current arrangements were not adequate to combat anti-social behaviour and criminal damage, he and other colleagues had met with the Police Inspector for Blaenau Gwent and felt that the system was not fit for purpose.  He felt that moving towards a Cloud system should be considered so the Police could access the system remotely.  Alternatively, operate on a 24/7 monitored basis as other local authorities.

A Member said that when the new system was introduced in 2018 two cameras for the Rassau Ward had been promised and were still awaited.   The Member enquired if the deployable cameras were overt or covert.  The Head of Community Services explained that the four deployable cameras were overt, predominately used in town centres and needed to be visible with appropriate signage as per the regulations, covert cameras were predominately used by public health for fly tipping etc. in remote areas and were smaller and not visible to the public. 

The Officer would provide information regarding the number of covert cameras used by public health and other areas of the Council via the action sheet.

With regard to the CCTV system a Member said he had been made aware that some of the camera positions had blind spots, they recorded 24/7 but there was no access to live situations.  The Police were unable to fund additional cameras for town centres, however, they had indicated there may be the possibility of funding for a Cloud system so that the Police could have access to live images of incidents as they occurred.  He believed that other local authorities were already using the Cloud system with live situations and felt that additional money was needed to review and improve the service. 

The Interim Chief Officer Commercial thanked the Member for his comments and said that she would pursue the possibility of funding from the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) to see where they could invest and support some aspects of the service.  She offered to speak with Members outside of the meeting to progress this matter. 

Another Member referred to the equality of provision across the county borough and raised the issue of additional funding needed to improve the CCTV system going forward.

In response to a Member’s question regarding technical difficulties referred to in paragraphs 5.1.1 to 5.1.4 of the report, the Head of Community Services explained that cameras were checked every week to ensure they were receiving power and were recording.  Faults were reported immediately to the contractor for investigation and could include supplier power network failure or water ingress which could cause power drops.  The Officer felt that most of the technical challenges had been overcome, however, there were some ongoing issues such as connectivity of the network and the connectivity from the server in the Civic Centre to homeworking at the moment.  Connectivity and Wi-Fi transmission in certain areas and power drops would always be outside the control of the system.

It was noted that a Member of the Scrutiny Committee was also a member of the Crime and Police Panel and he would feedback any issues raised on this item to the Panel to be addressed and requested that he be invited to any meetings taking place in relation to this item.

The Leader of the Labour Group proposed that the Executive Committee investigate possibilities of extra funding in liaison with the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner and a paper be prepared to review the equality of provision across the borough.

The Service Manager Policy & Partnerships pointed out that in relation to the equality of provision any changes to the camera system had to be in line with the regulations set out in the Surveillance Commissioner’s Code of Practice.  Changes needed to be evidenced based and in line with due process based around the Surveillance Commissioner’s recommendations. 

The Leader of the Labour Group commented that this was an important issue for Members and most Members had agreed that the current CCTV system was not adequate and repeated his proposal that the Executive Committee investigate possibilities of extra funding in liaison with the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner and a paper be prepared, to include all the relevant legislation, to review the equality of provision. This proposal was seconded

The Committee AGREED to recommend, subject to the foregoing, that the report be accepted and endorse Option 2; namely that the Annual Monitoring Report (including its supporting appendices) be recommended for approval at Executive Committee, following which the report be published and sent to the Surveillance Camera Commissioner, and further recommend that the Executive Committee investigate the possibilities of extra funding for the system in liaison with the Office of Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) and a paper be brought back to the Scrutiny Committee to review the equality of provision across the County Borough.