Technology that protects not intrudes

This issue was covered by the Oxford Mail on 9th June. Read more here…

Britain has a love-hate relationship with CCTV. It is widely acknowledged that we are one of the most surveilled populations in the world, yet many of us are so comfortable with the concept that we stick a camera on our front door. 

There are different ends of the spectrum of course but for most people I think there is an expectation of a level of CCTV in busy public places and a general feeling that it is not used for nefarious purposes. 

The pace of technological change however does call for a renewed public debate about how CCTV is used. Policing in the UK has always been by consent and that principle is more important than ever as police forces work to rebuild confidence. The need for broad consent applies just as much to the use of technology as it does to physical policing. 

In Thames Valley I am working to build a CCTV partnership between the police and local authorities (that currently own most of the systems). The intention is to develop an approach that is more resilient, in many senses. Financially more sustainable; using reliable, common equipment and improving how it is monitored and used to support criminal investigations. 

There remains important questions that need a wider public debate, such as the use of facial recognition. Many people I talk to are comfortable with the principle of using AI and facial recognition on historic footage, as part of a criminal investigation. Using technology to search for a suspect in a crowd and track their journey to the scene of the crime could be vital in a prosecution. 

At the other end of the spectrum would be the wholesale monitoring and tracking of us all in public places and the police recording it all that data. A real Big Brother scenario which I would personally object strongly to. 

As always the challenge sits somewhere in the middle. 

Using AI to “watch” live footage and spot, not individuals but events. Spotting a flash or a group of people running and bringing the scene to the attention of a human operator to make a judgement on whether something serious is happening or if a pigeon simply flew in front of a camera!

Using facial recognition live to spot individuals of concern. If the the suspect is a wanted terrorist at a public event our attitude may be very different to looking out for someone with no previous convictions. 

There is a fine line to be found to ensure the type of technology deployed and the way it is used to ensure the public support the important use of CCTV to reassure, deter and detect crime. I believe it is a subject that needs wider public debate not just discussion by professionals.