Each day, as you go about your life, it's likely you'll make a guest appearance on at least 300 different CCTV screens.  Britain now has more security cameras than any other country, yet their impact on crime rates is negligible, while our fear of crime is still rising.  So have these screen saviours been a flop?  Jay Rayner of The Observer goes behind the cameras to meet the men who watch our every move.

I am walking through London Bridge Underground station when a public announcement brings me to a halt.  It starts politely - "Ladies and gentlemen ..."- before lurching into something a New York shrink might well call passive-aggressive: "Please be aware that, for your safety, this station is monitored with closed-circuit television.'"  You do not need to be a professor of linguistics to be intrigued by the circumlocutions of that one.  There's the stern tones of  "please be aware'"chased by the motherliness of "for your safety".  Finally, there's the blatant threat of the hardware.  This was clearly two messages in one.  What I was supposed to hear was: "This place is safe."  What the criminals thronging around me were supposed to hear was:  "Oi! Bad people: don't even think of doing anything dodgy in our station because we are watching you." And they are. 

I scan the ceiling and quickly find more than a dozen cameras, some obvious in their rectangular white housing with the Tube logo on the outside, others disguised behind black domes.  I should not be surprised to find them here.  There are more than 6,000 CCTV cameras across London's Tube network, which transport bosses say will rise to 12,000 over the next five years.  I step outside the station and look up at the "CCTV Zone", that space six feet above our heads, between ground and first floor, where the cameras seem to grow like so much mould on year-old jam.   Again they are everywhere: peering down at bank doorways and over cash machines; looking down the aisles of my local supermarket; tucked into the ceiling at the newsagent's.  There is a man near where I live who has one on the outside of his house.  Again, I shouldn't be surprised. 

Britain is CCTV nation.  We have more of them than anywhere else in the world.  How many more nobody can say.  It has been claimed, time and again, that there are four million cameras in Britain and that we are each of us likely to be caught on them 300 times a day, though even the academic who came up with those numbers admits he doesn't know for sure.

CCTV doesn't solve problems. It's the people who catch criminals, not the cameras.

Ask the Austrians whether they think CCTV is a good thing, and only 24 per cent of them will say yes.  Ask the British the same question and 90 per cent will give the thumbs up.  More than half of us are happy to have them in public toilets, as against just 1.5 per cent of the Austrians.  Two-thirds of us want them on our street.  We like to be watched.  We want to be watched.  Or at least you do.  Me, I'm not at all happy about it.  Conventional wisdom has it that if you're not up to anything bad you shouldn't have a problem with being on camera.  "In terms of providing people both with security and a sense of security, this is a good investment," Lord Falconer has said, on behalf of the government.

Surely, though, there are levels of naughtiness?  Yes, if I'm mugging old ladies or car jacking, I should be in fear of the law.  But what if this impeccably liberal Observer journalist wanted to sneak out and buy a copy of The Sun or Nuts magazine so I could look at pictures of girls in their pants without anyone knowing?  Or slack off to KFC to load up on the Colonel's fat-and-carb combo, as a little light relief from the prissy platefuls I have to swallow as a restaurant critic?  These aren't criminal acts, but they are things I might not wish anybody to know about.  And yet I probably couldn't get away with them today because somewhere there will be a camera watching me.  I suddenly feel like my private space has shrunk and that the Great British Public has allowed it to happen.  And I want to know why.

Croydon might be able to offer some answers at its peak, Croydon council operated a network of nearly 500 cameras, reputedly the largest single system in the country, though, as ever with CCTV, no one is entirely sure.  "We don't blow our own trumpet," says Norman Whalley, the council's systems officer, "But yes, it's pretty big."   When he came here 13 years ago there were just 30 cameras, but he has built it up gradually over the past decade at a cost of £7m.   Recently, National Car Parks took back the management of around 200 of those cameras, but Whalley still oversees 96 fixed and 145 so-called "pan, tilt and zoom" cameras, which can be directed from the security control room at the council offices here in the centre of Croydon.

He talks enthusiastically about the various systems used.  Those that are close by broadcast on microwaves straight into the control room.  Others come in on the equivalent of broadband.  Some of the cameras are the council's own.  Others belong to Transport for London and are used for traffic monitoring, or enforcement of bus lanes, but they can all be watched here.  The police have access to them, too.  Next to us, Paul, who has worked here for 19 years and his colleague Vince, who has done it for three, flick between screens: traffic rumbling through the suburbs, or mothers pushing toddlers in buggies.  Beside us is a wall of video tapes, six feet high and the same across.  Whalley says they hold everything for 31 days. 


Nevertheless, is it really possible to catch everything that's happening, sat in front of the monitors hour after hour?  "You don't focus on the same image all day," Paul says. "You're flicking with your eyes all the time. After a while it becomes intuition. What draws your attention is someone's walking pattern."   Whalley agrees:  "If a man is walking too close to a girl it might be a pickpocket," he says, and the others nod.  "You notice things other people don't,"says Vince.  "People just lead their lives going from A to B.  They don't see what happens in between."

They talk about the crimes they have seen and the way they can tell the police exactly what's going on, if a fight breaks out on a Saturday night, so they know how many officers to send over.  It helps them deploy resources.  Paul isn't there to interfere with what people are doing, he says.  He's looking after them.  Sometimes in the early hours on a weekend he'll see a group of young women, clearly drunk, on their way home.  Often one will peel off to go home alone.  "I stay with her," Paul says. "Following her on each camera as she passes by it, just making sure she's OK,"

Norman takes me to the new control room, and lets me operate a camera.  These are powerful pieces of kit, as they should be at over £4,000 each.  The pictures are in colour and are almost of broadcast quality.  "Each camera has the ability to identify someone of 1.5m in height at a distance of 150m," he says, proudly.  We use one to close in on the menu outside a cafe.  The camera is more than 100m away from the sign but I can still tell that lasagne and chips costs £3.90.  Now I pick up a woman walking down the street towards the lens.  Simply because I can, I begin to follow her, using the joy stick to pan down.

I don't admit it to Norman, but there is something deeply intoxicating about being able to do this; to sit here so many miles away, moving a camera to watch in detail as someone goes oblivious about their day.  It feels somehow as if I am not just controlling the camera, but controlling the woman, too.  Norman rests his hand on my shoulder and says, "I think you should stop that."  I shove the camera away from the woman so it looks back up the street.  I think about Paul, looking out for those lone women on their way home, an electronic version of the angels in Wim Wenders's Wings of Desire.  And I wonder whether the problem is not with CCTV or the way it is used but with the way that I, with my tendency to paranoia, imagine it might be, which is a different thing entirely.

And then I remember Sally Anne Bowman.  Sally Anne, a promising model, was sexually assaulted and knifed to death last September, a short distance form her home in South Croydon.  There was CCTV footage of her that evening: she was seen at Lloyds Bar in Croydon.  She was seen leaving a club at about 1am.  She was seen coming back into Croydon by taxi, where she was picked up by her ex-boyfriend who drove her home.  All of this was captured on CCTV.  After that, the pictures stopped.  Sally Anne was killed on a quiet street where there were no cameras.  Police are still hunting for her killer.

Though the cameras failed to help in the case of Sally Anne, CCTV is still seen as a Very Good Thing and, to understand why, we have to go back 13 years to the murder of Jamie Bulger. "When the abduction happened and we got those incredibly grainy images of Bulger being led away," says Peter Fry of the CCTV User Group, "the cameras became a major player in a horrific event."  For a week, those pictures came into our homes and we came to understand that, through these images, the police had been able to establish that the toddler's abductors were children.  Clive Norris, Professor of Sociology at Sheffield University, has undertaken detailed research into the use of CCTV in Britain."  A moral panic about rising crime rates and what could be done about it accompanied the Bulger case," he says. But those pictures also held promise."

Up to that point, CCTV was rare in Britain.  A few cameras were introduced in the Fifties to watch traffic and, by the early Nineties, a couple of local authorities, led by entrepreneurial local politicians, had introduced small schemes.  Now, officials within the Crime Prevention Unit of the Home Office began looking at what CCTV could do for them.  In 1994 a set of guidelines called CCTV Looking Out For You was published by Michael Howard's Home Office.

On the back cover it announced a city challenge competition, offering a fund of £2m for new CCTV projects which had to be matched with local money. "We were completely overwhelmed with applications," says Philip Edwards, a former Dixons executive who had been seconded to the Home Office and who co-wrote the guidelines.  So there were more competitions and each one was over-subscribed.  Between 1994 and 1997 £45m of government funds was pledged to CCTV, all of which had to be matched locally.  Since then, New Labour has spent another £170m.

"This is one of the reasons CCTV grew so strongly here as against in other European countries," says Norris. "It was centrally funded."  The other reason was a complete lack of regulation.  In places like Germany or Scandinavia a right to privacy is written into the constitution.  Here, the only legislation that affected CCTV was a relaxation of the planning laws.  Among other things the legislation was designed to make it easier to put up mobile-phone masts to help the networks spread.  As a result, the CCTV cameras spread, too.  "The planning laws also resulted in the death of town centres," says Norris.  "And out-of-town shopping centres became the icon of the age."  Town centres wanted to look as shiny and secure as the out-of-town shopping centres to attract the retailers back.  A thrilling CCTV system seemed to be the best way to make that impression.  It was Norris who, in 1998, came up with the estimates of how many cameras there then were in Britain - more than 4 million - and how many times each of us might be caught on them - 300.  "It's interesting to see those numbers repeated in the media, because they can be described only as guestimates," he says.

Surveillance obsessed?  

February 2003
Geoffrey Peck receives over £7,000 in compensation from his local council because they gave the media CCTV images of him taken on a night he wandered along Brentwood High Street, in a depressed state, and attempted suicide.  The council wanted to publicise the value of CCTV.  Mr Peck argued successfully that his privacy had been infringed.

November 2005
Wayne Rooney is caught at a club, allegedly kissing a woman who isn't his girlfriend.  The images end up in The Sun.

September 2005
Two thieves are caught on CCTV digging up nine Leylandii trees in Leicestershire, a year after they were planted, to replace others stolen.

 

In the Nineties, before heading up the CCTV User Group, Peter Fry was director of operations for Hart District Council in Northamptonshire.  "We had a lower-than-average crime rate but our local councillors were still very keen on having CCTV."  The story was repeated across the country.  It didn't matter whether it actually did reduce crime - they wanted it anyway.  In 1996, after Thomas Hamilton killed 16 children in Dunblane, Philip Edwards at the Home Office received countless requests for CCTV to be installed in schools.  When he asked why, they said it would stop another Dunblane happening.  "I told them it wouldn't.  All it would have done at Dunblane was let you watch it happen.  CCTV doesn't solve problems.  It's the people who catch criminals, not the cameras."

The statistics on crime bear this out.  It is true that since 1995 overall crime rates have been dropping in the UK.  But a major survey of 14 CCTV schemes published last year showed their impact on local crime rates was either negligible or that crime rates actually went up.  At the same time fear of crime has also gone up.  Meanwhile, clear-up rates - the number of crimes that the police solve - have gone down.

Of course, only a fool would argue that CCTV can have no impact on crime.  We all saw the images after the London bombings of 7 July.  Rarely does a week go by without an aspect of some grisly outrage or other being picked up on cameras.  As Norris puts it, "If you ask leading policemen whether they would rather have CCTV than not, they will always say yes."

All that aside, one thing is certain:  we, its subjects, genuinely do like some of what those cameras pick up.  In 2001 an enterprising video producer released Caught in the Act!, a compilation of people shagging in doorways, as recorded by CCTV cameras.  It sold very nicely, thank you.  Likewise TV shows full of footage of drivers doing stupid things on the roads get huge audiences and then came the phenomenon that is Big Brother.  Indeed, CCTV may be one of the first pieces of technology to have directly influenced fashion: after all, what better way is there to hide your identity from the cameras than inside a hoodie?

To see the future of CCTV we need to go to Spitalfields in east London, where the Shoreditch Trust, a local regeneration agency, is piloting a new initiative: CCTV for the masses.  Instead of the images only being seen by the likes of Norman Whalley and his team, local residents will be able to watch them, too, on a broadband connection.  For all its hip associations, the area is actually the second most deprived in London.  The Shoreditch Trust, set up under the government's New Deal for Communities programme, works with residents to improve everything from education and housing to opportunities for businesses.

One of the problems is that, because of low incomes, few households have access to technology.  Hence the Digital Bridge, a cheap broadband connection offering everything from video on demand to email to, yes, CCTV images of the local community.  The hardware and all the services will cost around £3.50 a week.

The cameras are part of a channel called Safe and Sound.  In the pilot there will be 11 cameras.  Eventually there will be up to 400 across the area.  "The demand for this comes directly from the residents," says Dan Hodges of the Shoreditch Trust.  "Crime is falling but fear of crime is rising and the moment we suggested we could do this the response was really positive.  It surprised us."  In the middle of the screen is a shot of a local high street.  At the bottom are other images which the viewer can bring up.  But here's the thing: they will not be able to zoom in using the cameras.  They will not be able to tilt and pan.  They can only look at what they're given and that's not very much.  "There have to be safeguards," Hodges says.  "People won't be able to watch each other's homes.  There are clear civil liberties issues involved."

Later, I go for a walk around the area with Michael Pyner, chief executive of the Shoreditch Trust.  He wants me to understand what this patch of the city looks like; that it's really not just warehouse apartments and design consultancies.  "This is an opportunity for people to empower themselves,"  he says of the CCTV project.  "We've had accusations that it's Big Brother, but it's not.  It's Little Brother.  Everyone gets to look."  Except that, because of the restrictions, it won't actually help solve crime.  "No, but it may help solve the fear of crime.   Look, it may not work.   In two years' time people may still be scared.   At which point we'll say this wasn't the solution."  Now, though, local residents are very keen.

There are more than 6,000 CCTV cameras across London's tube network, which transport bosses say will rise to 12,000 over the next five years

Afterwards I return to Haberdasher Street, one of the roads which will be part of the scheme .  It seems to me a CCTV camera is only a substitute for being able to stand in that location watching what's going on for yourself.  Thus, Christopher Isherwood style, I will be a camera.  I want to see what is so intriguing about this street, what exactly will make it so damned watchable.  I stand there for half an hour.  It all seems pretty innocent.

Then I realise there is something suspicious here: it is a large, dark man in a black jacket.  He has a notebook in his hands and he is staring up and down the street.  That man is me.  Other than that Haberdasher Street is now empty.  No people, let alone any crimes.  It's time to go home.

© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006.

Share with LinkedIn Share with Twitter Share with Facebook Share with Facebook
Download PDF version Download PDF version

In case you missed it

Physical security and the cloud: why one can’t work without the other
Physical security and the cloud: why one can’t work without the other

Human beings have a long-standing relationship with privacy and security. For centuries, we’ve locked our doors, held close our most precious possessions, and been wary of the threats posed by thieves. As time has gone on, our relationship with security has become more complicated as we’ve now got much more to be protective of. As technological advancements in security have got smarter and stronger, so have those looking to compromise it. Cybersecurity Cybersecurity, however, is still incredibly new to humans when we look at the long relationship that we have with security in general. As much as we understand the basics, such as keeping our passwords secure and storing data in safe places, our understanding of cybersecurity as a whole is complicated and so is our understanding of the threats that it protects against. However, the relationship between physical security and cybersecurity is often interlinked. Business leaders may find themselves weighing up the different risks to the physical security of their business. As a result, they implement CCTV into the office space, and alarms are placed on doors to help repel intruders. Importance of cybersecurity But what happens when the data that is collected from such security devices is also at risk of being stolen, and you don’t have to break through the front door of an office to get it? The answer is that your physical security can lose its power to keep your business safe if your cybersecurity is weak. As a result, cybersecurity is incredibly important to empower your physical security. We’ve seen the risks posed by cybersecurity hacks in recent news. Video security company Verkada recently suffered a security breach as malicious attackers obtained access to the contents of many of its live camera feeds, and a recent report by the UK government says two in five UK firms experienced cyberattacks in 2020. Cloud computing – The solution Cloud stores information in data centres located anywhere in the world, and is maintained by a third party Cloud computing offers a solution. The cloud stores your information in data centres located anywhere in the world and is maintained by a third party, such as Claranet. As the data sits on hosted servers, it’s easily accessible while not being at risk of being stolen through your physical device. Here’s why cloud computing can help to ensure that your physical security and the data it holds aren’t compromised. Cloud anxiety It’s completely normal to speculate whether your data is safe when it’s stored within a cloud infrastructure. As we are effectively outsourcing our security by storing our important files on servers we have no control over - and, in some cases, limited understanding of - it’s natural to worry about how vulnerable this is to cyber-attacks. The reality is, the data that you save on the cloud is likely to be a lot safer than that which you store on your device. Cyber hackers can try and trick you into clicking on links that deploy malware or pose as a help desk trying to fix your machine. As a result, they can access your device and if this is where you’re storing important security data, then it is vulnerable. Cloud service providers Cloud service providers offer security that is a lot stronger than the software in the personal computer Cloud service providers offer security that is a lot stronger than the software that is likely in place on your personal computer. Hyperscalers such as Microsoft and Amazon Web Service (AWS) are able to hire countless more security experts than any individual company - save the corporate behemoth - could afford. These major platform owners have culpability for thousands of customers on their cloud and are constantly working to enhance the security of their platforms. The security provided by cloud service providers such as Claranet is an extension of these capabilities. Cloud resistance Cloud servers are located in remote locations that workers don’t have access to. They are also encrypted, which is the process of converting information or data into code to prevent unauthorised access. Additionally, cloud infrastructure providers like ourselves look to regularly update your security to protect against viruses and malware, leaving you free to get on with your work without any niggling worries about your data being at risk from hackers. Data centres Cloud providers provide sophisticated security measures and solutions in the form of firewalls and AI Additionally, cloud providers are also able to provide sophisticated security measures and solutions in the form of firewalls and artificial intelligence, as well as data redundancy, where the same piece of data is held within several separate data centres. This is effectively super-strong backup and recovery, meaning that if a server goes down, you can access your files from a backup server. Empowering physical security with cybersecurity By storing the data gathered by your physical security in the cloud, you're not just significantly reducing the risk of cyber-attacks, but also protecting it from physical threats such as damage in the event of a fire or flood. Rather than viewing your physical and cybersecurity as two different entities, treat them as part of one system: if one is compromised, the other is also at risk. They should work in tandem to keep your whole organisation secure.

Video surveillance is getting smarter and more connected
Video surveillance is getting smarter and more connected

The global pandemic has triggered considerable innovation and change in the video surveillance sector. Last year, organisations around the globe embraced video surveillance technologies to manage social distancing, monitor occupancy levels in internal and external settings, and enhance their return-to-work processes. Forced to reimagine nearly every facet of their operations for a new post-COVID reality, companies were quick to seize on the possibilities offered by today’s next-generation video surveillance systems. Whether that was utilising motion sensing technologies to automatically close doors or switch on lighting in near-deserted office facilities. Or checking if people were wearing masks and adhering to distancing rules. Or keeping a watchful eye on streets and public spaces during mandated curfew hours. Beyond surveillance and monitoring use cases, organisations also took advantage of a raft of new Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications to undertake a range of tasks. Everything from automating their building management and optimising warehouse operations, to increasing manufacturing output and undertaking predictive maintenance. Behind the scenes, three key trends all contributed to the growing ubiquity of video surveillance observed in a variety of government, healthcare, corporate, retail, and industry settings. Video surveillance takes to the Cloud Last year the shift to digital working led organisations to rapidly embrace cloud-enabled services, including cloud-hosted Video Surveillance As A Service (VSaaS) solutions that provide tremendous economies of scale and flexibility. Alongside significant cost savings, these solutions make it easier for organisations to enhance their disaster recovery and manage their video surveillance estate in new and highly effective ways. Surveillance cameras with audio recording were used more than 200% by customers between 2016 and 2020For example, in addition to enabling remote access and maintenance, today’s cloud-powered systems eliminate any need to invest in local storage technologies that all too often fail to keep pace with an organisation’s growing data storage requirements. Indeed, data from our worldwide customer base survey reveals how in 2020 an impressive 63% of organisations had abandoned using any on-premises storage option and were instead only storing all their video surveillance recordings and data in the Cloud. A deeper review of the global stats shows that the average cloud recording retention period for this stored data was 28.2 days, with organisations in Asia topping the global average at 38 days – 33% higher than was observed in any other region. Improvements in bandwidth and scalability engendered by the Cloud have also helped boost the growing utilisation of audio recordings in addition to visual image capture. Indeed, our research found the number of surveillance cameras with an audio recording facility used by customers jumped more than 200% between 2016 and 2020. Making sense of Big Data The enhanced ease of connectivity and scalable bandwidth made possible by the Cloud is stimulating more companies to connect a lot more video surveillance cameras to their networks. The top motivation for doing so is to generate live metrics and data that can be utilised to deliver enhanced business insights and operational intelligence. In recent years, a rich choice of video analytics solutions have been developed for a variety of industry verticals. The range of functionalities on offer is impressive and covers a variety of applications. Everything from making it easy to classify and track objects and behaviour patterns in real-time, to undertaking anomaly detection, or generating predictions based on past and present events/activities. Data collected via today’s cloud connected cameras can now also be used to feed deep learning training and AI analytics, utilising the unparalleled virtualised processing capacity of the Cloud to convert Big Data into usable information quickly. By integrating this information with data from other enterprise data capture systems, organisations are now able to gain a 360-degree view of their operations – in almost real-time. IT is now in the driving seat No longer the sole preserve of on-site security staff, the wider application and business use of video surveillance means that IT is increasingly taking the lead role where the management and control of these systems are concerned. IT is asked to integrate video surveillance into key enterprise platforms to generate the data that business leaders need Aside from the fact that IT has a vested interest in addressing the cybersecurity implications that come with attaching a growing range of IoT devices to the enterprise network, they’re also increasingly being asked to integrate video surveillance into key enterprise platforms to generate the data that business leaders need. As organisations expand their integration of video with other business applications, such as point of sale, access control, process control and manufacturing systems, this trend is only set to accelerate. Looking to the future Right now, the video surveillance industry is at a key tipping point, as video systems become increasingly strategic for enabling the enterprise to boost productivity, stay compliant, and fulfil its obligations to protect employees and customers. As the technology’s contribution to enhanced data-driven decision-making and problem solving continues to increase, expect the adoption of IP connected video cameras to burgeon as organisations look to capture more data from their day-to-day business operations.

How has Brexit affected the security industry?
How has Brexit affected the security industry?

When the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, a world of uncertainty unfolded for those doing business in the UK and the EU. The referendum was passed in July 2016. Including subsequent delays, the separation was completed after four years in January 2020, with a transition period ending December 2020. Even with the deadlines past, there are still pockets of uncertainty stemming from the separation. We asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: How has Brexit affected the security industry?