I find that Nanny's latest surveillance plan, to install CCTV in all pubs, clubs, restaurants and off-licences, fills me with abject horror.
The police are telling those who run pubs and restaurants etc that they will not support their licensing applications, unless they agree to install CCTV. The police also want to be able to requisition any CCTV footage, as and when they deem it necessary.
This latest manifestation of "1984" is being applied in the London boroughs of Islington and Richmond. Other forces are trying it on too, eg Essex Police asks that every licensed premises in the county open beyond 11pm should have CCTV cameras that take head shots of customers coming into the building.
Precisely why do the police need to have records of innocent people's comings and goings to restaurants and clubs?
What controls will be exercised over the surveillance tapes by the owners of the clubs, and indeed the police (if they requisition them)?
Why do law abiding, and trouble free, establishments need these devices?
David Smith, the deputy Information Commissioner, is not at all happy:
"Hardwiring surveillance into pubs raises serious privacy concerns.
Installing surveillance in pubs to combat specific problems of rowdiness and bad behaviour may be lawful, but blanket measures where there is no history of criminal activity is likely to breach data protection requirements. "
What use is a grainy, poor quality, picture in preventing a crime occurring?
Wouldn't there be less crime if there were more real police officers on the beat?
This is a nasty and dangerous plan, which should be opposed at all levels.
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
I followed this story on a national newspaper's website and frankly, I was saddened by the number of sheep that used the government's mantra of; "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear." I have nothing to hide but, that does not mean I want to be watched every minute of the day by Nanny and her stormtroopers.
ReplyDeleteEventually, Nanny will fit all newborns with a chip, similar to the ones fitted to pets, the main difference will be that these will be read remotely by sensors all over the country.....The University of Reading, here in Berkshire, has a professor that has developed such a system and has had "Implants" fitted in his arm so that his "system" can monitor his movements on campus......I wonder if Nanny is helping fund this research.
Fear of crime has always been Nanny's preferred rationale for the abolition of personal privacy and the institution of omnipresent survelliance. Obviously any decent society must attempt to find some reasonable balance in ensuring both privacy and public safety. But Nanny does not preside over a decent society and no longer even pays lip service to the right of privacy. What's more, since crime serves Nanny's purposes by ratching up the fear factor, Nanny's commitment to combatting crime (real crime, not planting a flower bed on a traffic circle without state permission) must be called into question. Perhaps that's why we see so many articles about ordinary citizens being badgered by law enforcement, while the feral "youf" run wild in the streets.
ReplyDeleteThe first step to cameras everywhere. Orwell was right, soon the telescreen in your own home - after all there might be childern being exposed to drinking or smoking,or putting salt on their food nanny must know so she can step in and 'help you to help yourself.'
ReplyDeleteAfter all, if you are living the model citizens life, as laid down by Nanny, then you will have nothing to fear at all.
If CCTV footage is the difference between convicting a criminal and the criminal going free it isn't a bad thing. The police don't have the resources to watch cameras every hour of every day, and are only going to watch them if they suspect that something unlawful has happened. However, I think there should be a regulator set up to ensure that CCTV isn't used inappropriately, and which will handle complaints made by people who have been harassed using CCTV.
ReplyDeleteDoubleplus goodthought, senior
ReplyDeleteDamn, that means the end to dinner dates and quiet drinks with my special friends!!!
ReplyDeleteSenior said...
ReplyDeleteIf CCTV footage is the difference between convicting a criminal and the criminal going free it isn't a bad thing. ...
Ah, the spoor of irony as a source of apoplexy in the passing stranger.
... Tugs yesterdays boxer shorts from arse-crack and sashays over to Seniorville for a doubleplus readcheck. ...
Fnarr fnarr:
ReplyDeletehttp://seniorspeaks.blogspot.com/2009/01/stop-moaning-about-weather.html
Senior me ol' fruitbat's willy warmer, I take it all back (whatever it was). You're not juggling with the balls of irony, you're a neo-classical semi-unreconstructed para-realist. Or something.
... Puts on yesterdays jeans and goes around to poke Grandma with a stick in case there was a frost last night!
;-) (Aaaargh! Did I just use a really cheap emoticon? It'll be txt spk nxt).
p.s., I still think that every public cctv camera should, by law, have to be wired in through the Home Secretary's left ear and out through her right ear.
Senior, and if one hundred innocent people are hanged to ensure that one murderer is also hanged that would be to the public good as well eh?
ReplyDeleteNow smile for the cameras you produce your ID card for your government approved unit of drink at the bar, after all it is all for your own good.
It looks like the comments have been infultrated by one of the sheep I mentioned above.
ReplyDeletePlease report to your nearest surgury for the insertion of your micro-chip. Resistance is futile....Obey obey.
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about
ReplyDeleteHmmm, isn't that what the Rabbis said to the Jews when the Nazis asked them to wear stars on their sleeves?
That Brazilian Chap in London a few years ago didn't seem to have much to hide either until he was wrongly identified.
ReplyDeleteHowever when Senior says ...
"If CCTV footage is the difference between convicting a criminal and the criminal going free it isn't a bad thing."
I have to begin to think in terms of him (or her) writing with incredibly understated irony. It gets better ...
"The police don't have the resources to watch cameras every hour of every day, and are only going to watch them if they suspect that something unlawful has happened."
Yes of course. Absolutely. Mind you Nanny will soon have about 4 million people she could employ to watch monitors rather than daytime TV or indeed the night time stuff. The millions might be grateful for the change.
"However, I think there should be a regulator set up to ensure that CCTV isn't used inappropriately, and which will handle complaints made by people who have been harassed using CCTV."
Brilliant! Another million employed and lawyers troughing on the Legal Aid conveyor belt.
I assume you are not covered by CCTV as you type, Senior? Must be difficult to hit the right keys when you are convulsed with laughter at the screed on the screen.
Do you write opinion pieces for the BBC?
Grant