Councillors occasionally get asked for CCTV to be installed in areas where there is antisocial behaviour, fly tipping etc. CCTV is not always the silver bullet it might appear. It works well for example where the identity of the culprit is known, but otherwise the pictures are often of little use. It is a very time-intensive job to go through hours of footage, and the police rarely have the resources to do so when a positive outcome seems unlikely. They do not have a great deterrent effect either, as miscreants either just avoid them and go somewhere else or increasingly know that such cameras do not always yield results.
However, the Council does have several temporary CCTV cameras that can be targeted at a particularly difficult location for a short time, and some good outcomes have been seen. This happened on Pirbright Road a couple of years ago, after an attack took place. The Council has adopted a new CCTV strategy – you can see the Committee paper at (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee, 12/02/2025 19:30, pages 57-92. The use of CCTV must be lawful and justifiable. For example, if a request is received for CCTV to be used to tackle fly-tipping, the Council would expect to see evidence it is a persistent issue in that location and a range of measures such as letters to local residents, signage and monitoring have already been undertaken but were unsuccessful in resolving the issue.
When councillors get a request for CCTV, they must pass it one to the Council’s Joint Control Centre, who will assess the request including talking to the police. If it is thought CCTV might be effective it will usually be deployed within one or two months of the request being received. In most cases the cameras will initially be in place for a two-month period before a decision is taken to keep them up for longer. Deployable cameras are rarely in place for more than six months.
Cllr Malcolm Grimston, West Hill ward
June 2025
