To provide an update to Councillors on progress with the new CCTV system (report of the Executive Director Place enclosed)
Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Place, which provided an update to councillors on progress with the new CCTV system, as requested at the last meeting of the Panel on 16 September 2015. At this meeting, councillors had considered whether it would be appropriate to reconvene the Effectiveness of CCTV Task Group as there were concerns over the delay in implementing the scheme, why some Parish Councils had decided not to have the cameras, and why CCTV data was still not available.
The report provided information on the current position of how many cameras were installed, which towns and villages were included in the scheme, and issues around signal strength and lines of sight between locations and how these were being resolved.
Consideration was given to the report and the following issues were raised:
· Would records be kept of information obtained from CCTV coverage, such as details of arrests? This type of information should be fed back to the Authority.
o The Executive Director Place commented that the Authority would communicate this information better in the future and ensure that it was recorded and the information shared.
· It was apparent that there had been issues with the wireless connection between the control centre in Boston and some of the towns to be covered by CCTV. The possibility that this would prove problematic had been raised early in the process.
· There were issues with the wireless connection to Crowland. Alternative wireless solutions were being looked at.
· Long Sutton and Sutton Bridge had withdrawn from the scheme because of a number of issues.
o The Executive Director Place advised that a resolution to problems in particular areas was being worked on. Once these were overcome, an attempt would be made to promote the system again to Long Sutton and Sutton Bridge.
· While connection issues were being resolved and cameras could not be monitored, was the Authority paying the monitoring centre in Boston?
o The Executive Director Place confirmed that they were not being paid.
· The monitoring centre in Boston was currently monitoring for four Authorities. Was there an optimum number of Authorities that could be effectively viewed?
o The Executive Director Place replied that the Authority was satisfied that the South Holland cameras could be monitored as expected.
· There appeared to have been a number of concerns with one contract in particular - were there any performance issues arising from this?
o The Executive Director Place commented that the initial mistake had been in the survey of the delivery solution, and that the contractor was bearing the cost of this.
· Was the Authority getting value for money? Was CCTV being used effectively?
o The Executive Director Place responded that CCTV did provide a deterrent, that there was a live feed between the town and the control centre, and that the Police used evidence gained from CCTV in prosecutions.
It was agreed that progress on issues encountered relating to the new CCTV system be reported to the Panel in due course, and that a decision on whether to resurrect the CCTV Task Group be delayed until this information was received.
a) That the report of the Executive Director Place be noted;
b) That, as mentioned earlier in these minutes, it be noted that feedback from the Police on how CCTV was assisting them would be expected by the Panel when requested.
c) That progress on issues encountered relating to the new CCTV system be reported to the Panel in due course, and that a decision on whether to resurrect the CCTV Task Group be delayed until this information was received.