Sign in / up

back to article Surveillance by consent: Commissioner launches CCTV strategy for England and Wales

“There is a gap between what exists and what should exist,” according to the UK's commissioner responsible for ensuring that surveillance cameras are protecting members of the public, rather than spying on them. Tony Porter, who sees that public authorities follow the government's rules on operating surveillance cameras, on …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *
  1. Peter Prof Fox

    Can I have that in plain English

    “surveillance is there to protect them, and not spy on them.”

    How does that work?

    5 0 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Can I have that in plain English

      “surveillance is there to protect them, and not spy on them.”

      Ah yes, the mantra of GCHQ and the NSA

      5 0 Reply
    2. Filippo Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Can I have that in plain English

      It doesn't.

      4 0 Reply
  2. Alister

    ...My position is that anything regarding surveillance has to be shouted from the rooftops.

    I'M WATCHING YOU, SUNSHINE!

    2 0 Reply
  3. dervheid

    Not for us Jocks (or the Norn Irish)

    England & Wales only...

    2 0 Reply
  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    We should really start installing CCTV in every home in the country.

    After all, if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide.

    2 0 Reply
  5. MrXavia

    I have no problem with CCTV in public, if its there to keep the public safe.. Footage should be used as confidentially as would anything you tell your doctor..

    I have CCTV at home, it is mine, it is there for security... So far i've not had anyone come to my house and get upset that there are cameras covering my gardens....

    1 0 Reply
    1. Woodnag
      Reply Icon

      CCTV to keep the public safe? Er, not really.

      CCTV records what's going on, but hardly prevents it happening.

      4 0 Reply
  6. Woodnag

    The SC code is meaningless

    Per summary item 9, the highest leverage that any 'rules' will have is to orgs "under a statutory duty to have regard to the SC Code". Have a regard to. Whoopie-do.

    1 0 Reply
  7. Cynic_999

    Imagine that ...

    Next time you walk through any town, try to imagine that in place of every CCTV camera there is a watchtower atop which stands a man in a black uniform and peaked cap, using binoculars to look down at the citizens, writing in a notebook and occasionally talking to his overlords via a field telephone.

    Would that make you feel safe? Or nervous?

    There is absolutely no difference in intent or purpose.

    8 0 Reply
  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Fifteen years too fucking late for consent, don't you think?

    3 0 Reply
  9. Badger Murphy

    Where's that horse?

    This all seems a lot like someone just noticed that the barn door had been left open for years, and then decided he should probably go looking for where the horse went ASAP.

    0 0 Reply
    1. Alister
      Reply Icon

      Re: Where's that horse?

      Yeah, the horse has bolted, been found in another county, taken to a new stables, met a nice mare, sired a few foals, died, and got made into glue and 40 Tesco's burgers.

      0 0 Reply
  10. You aint sin me, roit
    Black Helicopters

    "adequate surveillance posture"

    Posture... as in "Bend over and brace yourself"

    0 0 Reply

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like