Agenda item

To report on the recommendations of the Performance Monitoring Panel on work undertaken by the Effectiveness of CCTV in South Holland Task Group (report of the Effectiveness of CCTV in South Holland Task Group enclosed).

Consideration was given to the interim report of the Effectiveness of CCTV in South Holland Task Group containing recommendations which had been approved by the Performance Monitoring Panel.

The Performance Monitoring Panel had agreed to re-convene the Effectiveness of CCTV in South Holland Task Group on 6 November 2012, and it had commenced its work on 21 November 2012.  The scope of the review was to examine the effectiveness of the Council’s CCTV service and prospects for future provision.

The Task Group had not yet concluded its work, but given recent developments regarding a possible countywide CCTV system, had produced an interim report for consideration.  This interim report had been considered by the Performance Monitoring Panel on 29 January 2013, and was attached at Appendix A.

The Chairman of the Task Group presented the recommendations and clarified that this was an interim report.  The Task Group agreed that the current system provided a valuable service that was good value for money, however, could cost more if it was allowed to lapse.  There were issues around the recruitment of volunteers; parish councils (who felt that they had contributed to the system but had little input); and the inability to contact officers at South Holland District Council.  However, it was felt that these issues could be resolved and the system improved.

The Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Localism and Big Society confirmed that there was a real possibility that both Holbeach and Long Sutton parish councils would withdraw from the CCTV scheme at the end of March.  He also stated that funding for interim CCTV contracts could come from the Community Development Reserves which included monies for a new capital scheme for CCTV, however, this would reduce the amount available in the capital scheme for a new system in the future.

The Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Strategic Finance and Democratic Services reported that correspondence from the newly elected Police Crime Commissioner had advised that work on the efficiency of CCTV in the area was being undertaken, that the current arrangements contained inefficiencies and that until these were resolved, more investment could not be contemplated.

A discussion by all parties involved with CCTV ensued and the following observations were made:

·        Inspector Jim Tyner, representing Lincolnshire Police, stated that although it was difficult to produce data to confirm the benefits of CCTV to the Police, he did believe that it worked and that it was helpful to the Police in their work.  He commented that, if it was advertised that there was no CCTV in an area, this would have a negative impact and he was therefore concerned if parishes withdrew from the scheme.  He fully supported the work undertaken by volunteers who operated the CCTV equipment, although there were retention problems.  Alongside the current recruitment process for street pastors, the Police were hoping to recruit prayer pastors to provide logistical and spiritual support, and hoped that this resource could also be used to monitor CCTV.

·        Harry Drury, representing Local Business Organisations, commented that concern around the future of CCTV in the area was high on the agenda for local businesses.  Retailers had concerns if the CCTV system was to be switched off, and Holbeach Business Forum was disappointed to hear that provision for CCTV was not to be included within the parish council’s budget.  He suggested that the Chamber of Commerce should lead a campaign to encourage volunteers to monitor the CCTV cameras.   

·        LadeyAdey, representing Lincolnshire Community and Voluntary Service, advised that her organisation could work with the Chamber of Commerce to assist with volunteers to monitor the CCTV cameras.

·        Councillor Reg Boot, representing Parish Councillors, commented that the parish councils should give their decision to not fund CCTV more consideration.

·        The Deputy Leader of the Council and the Portfolio Holder for Localism and Big Society commented that local businesses should consider contributing monies to a scheme to provide CCTV as this responsibility should not fall only to the Council.  Harry Drury responded that there should be some input by local businesses.  Some had their own CCTV systems which could possibly feed into the current system, however, the legalities concerning this would have to be explored.

The Deputy Leader of the Council and the Portfolio Holder for Localism and Big Society advised that he was happy to support recommendations 2 and 3 within the Task Group’s Interim Report, however, there were concerns regarding the first recommendation to secure a further yearly contract with Grimston Technical Services.  A final decision regarding the future of CCTV could not be made until a report on a countywide scheme had been received.  A final decision would have to be made by the end of the financial year, (31 March 2013).  Grimston Technical Services would be advised that the Council would continue with them as providers of CCTV in the area until the end of March at which point the Authority should be able to advise of future timescales for CCTV provision.  

The Leader commented that he was encouraged by the level of support for CCTV that had been voiced during the discussion, and that all parties involved should work together to take CCTV provision forward, as detailed within the discussion.  Parish Councils also needed to be encouraged to be part of the future of CCTV, and ward members could use their influence to assist in this.  The Leader requested that all parties be written to, to encourage closer participation to jointly provide successful CCTV provision.

DECISION:

a)     That the following recommendations of the Task Group be approved:

·        That an annual or biannual meeting be arranged with all partners involved to discuss requirements; and

·        That CCTV be re-evaluated in 3 to 12 months time when new broadband technology was available.

b)     That the following recommendation of the Task Group not be approved:

• That Officers secure a further yearly contract with Grimston Technical Services

c)      That Grimston Technical Services be advised that South Holland District Council wished to retain its services until the end of March 2013 after which point a further discussion take place to discuss future timescales for the implementation of a countywide CCTV scheme; and

d)     That a letter be sent to all parties who provided and used CCTV, to encourage closer working in the provision and administration of CCTV in the South Holland area.

(Other options considered:

• To approve the Task Group’s Interim Report and all of its recommendations; or
• Do nothing

Reasons for decision:

• Given recent developments regarding a possible countywide CCTV system, the Task Group had produced an interim report for the Cabinet’s consideration.)

(Ladey Adey (South Lincolnshire Community Voluntary Services) and Jim Tyner (Lincolnshire Police) left the meeting at 7.35 p.m. following discussion of the above item.)