Pickles Goes After Council Parking CCTV

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles effectively declared war today on councils that use CCTV to catch parking offenses.

Click here to view Figure 1.

In an attempt to breathe new life into the UK’s ailing high streets, Pickles has identified councils’ use of cameras for on-street parking enforcement as one of the reasons that town centre shopping continues to decrease. The use of so-called “camera cars” — mobile parking enforcement vehicles with surveillance cameras attached — has been on the increase since legislation changes in 2004 introduced under the Labour Government.

In a statement issued this morning, Pickles said:

Excessive parking charges and unfair parking fines push up the cost of living, and undermine local high streets and shopping parades. We want to rein in over-zealous parking enforcement, so it focuses on supporting high streets and motorists, not raising money. Parking spy cars are just one example of this and a step too far. Public confidence is strengthened in CCTV if it is used to tackle crime, not to raise money for council coffers.

Parking fine increases

This stance is likely to play well for Pickles, positioning him and the Conservatives as defending liberty and motorists’ rights to park illegally. Since 1997, the Department for Communities and Local Government reports that revenue from local authority parking has risen from GB pound 608 million (to GB pound 1.3bn — a massive increase, although significantly reduced when you take inflation into account at more than 54 per cent).

Pickles told the BBC this morning that the law could be changed “before Easter” to ban the use of fixed cameras and “camera cars” for parking offenses. These cameras have been used to issue 10 million fines, worth GB pound 301m, in the past five years according to Conservative Party figures.

Civil liberties group Big Brother Watch has unsurprisingly backed the Communities Secretary’s position, saying that they “wholeheartedly support” the Government plan and that the biggest issue is that “the public are never, ever told that this is part of the deal when they accept greater CCTV surveillance.” The group continues to ask if the public would be as willing to accept more surveillance cameras if they had the full facts about what they are being used for.

This is a position in line with the Government’s CCTV Code of Practice which was published and enforced earlier this year; a document which attempts to enshrine the principle of “surveillance by consent.”

The Government’s suggestion is that only visible traffic wardens will be allowed to film vehicles.

Concerns

Writing as an observer of the security industry and of issues around video surveillance, this seems to be a huge step backwards. At a time when council budgets are under immense pressure — thanks in no small part to cuts from Central Government — local authorities have been under intense pressure to find additional revenue streams.

The law does not allow traffic fines to be used to raise revenue, but only to ensure that traffic is kept flowing efficiently. Tony Ball, of the Local Government Association, was clear when he said that he does not believe that these cameras are being used simply to raise revenue. He told the BBC:

Camera cars have been instrumental in keeping children from being hurt or killed on the way to school, and CCTV plays an important role elsewhere in monitoring traffic flow and keeping cars moving.

But at a time when video surveillance is being used more and more by businesses to improve shopping experiences, for instance, and hence further justifying its cost, should councils actually be allowed to use cameras for revenue raising? As much as it irritates a motorist to receive a parking fine, could it be argued that the revenue raised from these activities also helps fund the use and maintenance of surveillance cameras that are intended solely for keeping the public safe?

Related post:

• Surveillance Camera Code of Practice: FAQs