Newbury CCTV's a goer! Options

[Iommi]

I have heard a rumour that the Police love the new CCTV system and it is up and running and everything. If, so well done, albeit, about time to!

[Cognosco]

I have heard a rumour that the Police love the new CCTV system and it is up and running and everything. If, so well done, albeit, about time to!

Yes indeed about time!

Still no details on the original questions though?

How many camera's are working? What area's are covered?

How does it compare to the old system?

For all we know they could only have a few camera's working and that is all they are going to have?

I believe the statement says the camera's are working?

How soon we will be given the information to make a calculated decision if the system is comparable to the old system?

[Biker1]

Yes indeed about time!

Still no details on the original questions though?

How many camera's are working? What area's are covered?

How does it compare to the old system?

For all we know they could only have a few camera's working and that is all they are going to have?

I believe the statement says the camera's are working?

How soon we will be given the information to make a calculated decision if the system is comparable to the old system?

AND, is the control centre linked in to the Shopwatch radio?

[Iommi]

Yes, amongst the back slapping, there are some details that haven't been mentioned.

[Richard Garvie]

Hate to poop the party, but a few questions from me:

LABOUR HIT OUT AT MISLEADING PRESS STATEMENT REGARDING CCTV

Newbury Labour Party today seek to clarify some of the points surrounding the current status of CCTV cameras in West Berkshire and the operational capabilities of the network. First of all, may I congratulate the council for continuing to move forward with their programme to get the CCTV network back into some kind of operational capability. May I also state again that the Labour Party in West Berkshire FULLY support the Council in upgrading the network and looking to achieve best value for the tax payer. Whether these goals have been fully realised or not is another matter.

Today, the council have released a press release stating that "All of the cameras are operating and recording successfully, and 18 of the 21 cameras in Newbury are being monitored live 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at the new control room in Windsor". There are 40 cameras in West Berkshire as a whole, yet the council have only chosen to reveal the status of the 21 cameras in Newbury. They claim that all 21 are recording and "operating" successfully, but that isn't quite true as I will come onto in a moment.

On the 9th January 2011, I once again requested access to the following documentation surrounding the relocation of the CCTV Control Room:

* Project brief
* Plan to move control room
* Any variances that took place
* Any problems that have occurred as a result of the above

Previous to this further request for information, I had previously been told by the Chief Executive of the Council on the 7th January that this information would be made available to me, only for the officers in question to withold it for over a month. On the 8th February, I finally recieved some of the information in the form of a single Excel Spreadsheet. If this is this is the only documentation that exists relating to this project, then let there be no doubt as to why we currently find ourselves in this situation. This document is available online at:

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=22197

Under the heading "Transfer and Testing Period", the comments entry suggests that the "testing" phase was originally planned to last until the 10th January. We have already established through press comments and previous council statements that the testing phase was running late and that "all works would be completed by the 10th January, around a week later than planned". So what is correct? This spreadsheet on the council website, or the press statements and emails sent at the end of December / start of January?

Camera upgrade to dome cameras: Work was expected to be completed by the 10th January, yet is still ongoing. The cause of this has been the severe weather, yet we only lost two weeks due to snow. We are currently four weeks late, and the work is still ongoing and this is partly due to rusting of the cameras causing work to take longer than expected. Were the existing cameras not inspected before the project commenced? If not, why not?

AI software installation commences: "The timetable for this work slipped due to software having to be reconfigured due to incorrect presentation of BT circuits". Was the presentation of circuits not checked prior to the work commencing? If not, why not?

Testing of Cameras 'linked' to Windsor Control Room: Apparently "Video confirmed and some persistent telemetry issues". What is causing the telementry issues?

Communications about Shopsafe and Pubwatch reconnection with Windsor Control Room: "This has slipped due to cabling and severe weather issues." Was due to commence week of 17th January, yet the reason given for nothappening is "severe weather". Can someone advise what this "severe weather" was please?

Co Channel to be instructed to connect Radio System to Windsor Control Room: Once again "This has slipped due to cabling and severe weather issues." Can somebody please advise of said bad weather?

Apparently the "Testing of Cameras 'linked' to Windsor Control Room" is supposed to be ongoing at this stage (despite media comments at the beginning of January claiming everything was expected to be working by 10th January). Which statement is correct?

Some generic questions arising from this document:

What is the status of the Newbury Control Room? Despite equipment having been ripped out already, a discussion has yet to take place surrounding decommisioning. If this is true, why was equipment allowed to be removed before the decommissioning discussion took place?

What is the estimated completion date for this project?

Why has the original project brief not been supplied?

Why have the actual documentation requested not been provided in full?

Has a radio sytem been ordered to connect the new control room with ShopSafe / PubWatch?

If telementry is still not operating correctly, how can the council claim that the cameras are operating successfully?

Out of the 40 cameras in the district, how many are fully operational (how many have telementry)?

SUMMARY

We dispute claims from West Berkshire Council that all 21 cameras in Newbury are operating successfully. We do give full support to the officers in achieving a network that is fully operational, but we cannot support the continuing release of factually misleading statements and disguising of the full facts. What we need is a full, independent investigation into this matter that looks into the conduct of the officers who have project managed this move on behalf of the council, the conduct of Cllr Anthony Stansfield and the role he has played in the release of information to the media that wasn't factually correct and the cause of the problems that have resulted in this project being delayed. The Labour Party also call for the full release of all documentation relating to the transfer of the CCTV Control Room, not just a cobbled together spreadsheet that can be accessed on the council website.

Richard Garvie
Newbury Labour Party
07593 278690

Additional Press Quote:

"Once again the council have released a statement to the media that does not give the full facts of the situation. I was promised information from the chief executive of the council, and despite waiting over a month, the officers in question have provided me with a spreadsheet that I could have put together in twenty minutes. It's about time we had a full and independent investigation on this matter, and that action is taken against thse who appear to have tried to conceal the facts of what has happened".

[user23]

Ah, that's where he's been.

Writing a massive essay.

[Iommi]

Oh no...please don't say the official press release I alluded to was ambiguous, incomplete and misleading!!!

[Berkshirelad]

I believe the statement says the camera's are working?

Did the statement then go on to say what it was that belonged to a camera that was working?

Or did the originator mean cameras?

[JeffG]

That's the sort of thing I get abuse hurled at me for saying.

[Cognosco]

Did the statement then go on to say what it was that belonged to a camera that was working?

Or did the originator mean cameras?

The telemetry is not working on the camera.

Not all of the cameras are working.

[Cognosco]

Oh no...please don't say the official press release I alluded to was ambiguous, incomplete and misleading!!!

This is WBC Iommi why do you sound shocked?

Are we ever going to get a full explanation of what the the comparison is between the old system and the new system?
How are taxpayers going to know if the expense of the new system was worth paying?
Are the council responsible to the taxpayer or not? How can we have any confidence in the council over anything they do again?

A full and independent investigation must be called immediately nothing else will now suffice.

[Iommi]

This is WBC Iommi why do you sound shocked?

[Iommi]

The big question...yet to be answered clearly is: do Windsor operators have remote control of the cameras and do they have radio communication with Newbury police and other pubwatch/shopsafe stakeholders?

If no then we are being bullsh*tted by both the council and, in a way, the police.

[Richard Garvie]

The cameras are not "fully operational".

[Iommi]

So the council and the police are closing ranks and 'playing' with semantics?

[dannyboy]

The cameras are not "fully operational".

Come on - in what way?

[Iommi]

Subversion! ...looks like a job for dannyboy and user!

[dannyboy]

Subversion! ...looks like a job for dannyboy and user!

RG most likely means that there are still 19 cameras not yet connected - so he is right
but the council mean the cameras that are connected up are fully operational - so they are right too.

classic filibustering from both sides.

I wonder if they swap scripts?

[Darren]

Your CCTV, is it a goer? Know what I mean? Know what I mean? Nudge nudge. Nudge nudge. Know what I mean? Say no more...know what I mean?

[Iommi]

RG most likely means that there are still 19 cameras not yet connected - so he is right but the council mean the cameras that are connected up are fully operational - so they are right too.

Or he could mean that the cameras are not operable, that is to say, Windsor might not have control over the cameras yet. For me, that is a key component of the CCTV system.

[dannyboy]

Or he could mean that the cameras are not operable, that is to say, Windsor might not have control over the cameras yet. For me, that is a key component of the CCTV system.

Why not go & chuck a brick through one of Strada's windows ( other Italian eateries are avaliable ) and see if the market place camera follows you around?

[Iommi]

Why not go & chuck a brick through one of Strada's windows ( other Italian eateries are avaliable ) and see if the market place camera follows you around?

Because I don't want to break the law.

[dannyboy]

Because I don't want to break the law.

Spoil sport.

[Iommi]

Yeah, I'm squeamish like that!

[Richard Garvie]

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=22197

Have a look at the CCTV transfer project document on the right hand column. Telementry is still not working (not all cameras visible at Windsor can be controlled), not all cameras can be seen at Windsor and some cameras are yet to be replaced. So when Keith Ullyat said all 40 cameras were working, recording and digital a few weeks ago, it wasn't true.

[Simon Kirby]

I rather think Cllr Stansfield is reported today in the NWN as saying that the whole thing is fully operational - that quote is from memory, but I believe that was the substance of it, no equivocation, fully operational.

Ed: "The West Berkshire executive member for community safety, Anthony Stansfeld (Con, Kintbury), said he was delighted to see the new system fully operational in Newbury."

[Biker1]

Again I ask - Is the CCTV and the new control room linked in to the Shopwatch radio as it was before?

[Iommi]

I rather think Cllr Stansfield is reported today in the NWN as saying that the whole thing is fully operational - that quote is from memory, but I believe that was the substance of it, no equivocation, fully operational.

Ed: "The West Berkshire executive member for community safety, Anthony Stansfeld (Con, Kintbury), said he was delighted to see the new system fully operational in Newbury."

It would suggest then, that Cllr Stansfeld is tabling an untruth (again). As far as I have been made aware, the system isn't fully operational.

[Richard Garvie]

This is what I find unbelievable. They put out a media statement claiming the cameras are "operating successfully", yet at the same time they publish information confirming that they still have problems controlling the cameras they can see from Windsor, that some of the cameras can still not be seen and that some cameras have yet to be replaced.

I don't know how to describe it. Arrogance? It must be, for themto try something this elaborate and not get caught, they really must believe that they are invinsible.

[Iommi]

Or simply not used to be putting under such scrutiny? Or incompetent? Or both?

[Cognosco]

This is what I find unbelievable. They put out a media statement claiming the cameras are "operating successfully", yet at the same time they publish information confirming that they still have problems controlling the cameras they can see from Windsor, that some of the cameras can still not be seen and that some cameras have yet to be replaced.

I don't know how to describe it. Arrogance? It must be, for themto try something this elaborate and not get caught, they really must believe that they are invinsible.

So much for transparency then? So much for the Freedom Of Information Act? These obviously do not apply to WBC then?

Even with something as simple as a press statement they are unable to give out correct information.
Economic with the truth is an understatement if this is the case?

Surely there must be an independent investigation how can there not be?

The questions that need answering are:


Are there the same amount of cameras on the new system as the old system?

Is the coverage of the new system the same as the old system?

Are all the cameras installed able to be operated ( fully able to have full telemetry operating) by the operators at Windsor?

Are the cameras data able to be fully recorded by Windsor?

Are the operators at Windsor able to make full contact (radio) with the police, pubwatch, and all other parties that were able to be in full contact with the old system?

Until these questions are answered in full then the taxpayers have the right to have no confidence in the WBC?

[Richard Garvie]

I think confidence was lost in the council a long time ago.

[Simon Kirby]

Richard, have you thought about reporting Cllr Stansfeld to the Standards Committee. I'm by no means saying he's guilty of anything, but if there's an allegation that he's misled the public and brought WBC into disrepute then the Standards Committee is the way to hold him to account, and of course the proper forum for him to defend his conduct.

And have you made an official complaint agianst WBC, because I guess if there has been mismanagement that again is the appropriate way to hold them to account, and if that fails then there's the Ombusman, but I'd be interested to know if there's been a first-stage complaint yet.

[dannyboy]

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=22197

Have a look at the CCTV transfer project document on the right hand column. Telementry is still not working (not all cameras visible at Windsor can be controlled), not all cameras can be seen at Windsor and some cameras are yet to be replaced. So when Keith Ullyat said all 40 cameras were working, recording and digital a few weeks ago, it wasn't true.

All it states re telementry [sic] is 'some persistent telemetry issues'. Instead of assuming this means it ain't working full stop, why not do your self a favour & find out what these issues actually are?

If I were to do as you do & read as much as I want into single sentences I could say that the line 'Discussions with Newbury Town Council to take place in relation decommissioning the former Control Room' means it isn't decommissioned & therefore is still working in some capacity.

[Richard Garvie]

All it states re telementry [sic] is 'some persistent telemetry issues'. Instead of assuming this means it ain't working full stop, why not do your self a favour & find out what these issues actually are?

If I were to do as you do & read as much as I want into single sentences I could say that the line 'Discussions with Newbury Town Council to take place in relation decommissioning the former Control Room' means it isn't decommissioned & therefore is still working in some capacity.

What it does mean is that the cameras are not "fully operational". Asfor decommissioning, why have they ripped out some / all of the equipment before having the decommissioning meeting??? There's another question for Cllr Stansfiekd and the officers involved.

Simon, I'm hoping a lot of the concerns I have raised will be addressed by the Chief Executive by close of business Friday. If not, complaints will now be raised.

[dannyboy]

What it does mean is that the cameras are not "fully operational". Asfor decommissioning, why have they ripped out some / all of the equipment before having the decommissioning meeting??? There's another question for Cllr Stansfiekd and the officers involved.

no it does not.

[Iommi]

no it does not.

I think it does and it seems the council are being disingenuous with their language.

[dannyboy]

I think it does and it seems the council are trying to be 'clever' with their language.

No cleverer with it than RG likes to be interpreting it.

It could mean anything & given the space left for comments in the spreadsheet, being sucinct is a pre-requisite.

Still, once RG has the top BID job.....

[Iommi]

No cleverer with it than RG likes to be interpreting it. It could mean anything.....

And that is the point I'm getting to. I think RG should step up his pressure. It is clear to me that the council are trying to throw cold water on this issue, but meanwhile; I don't think this CCTV system is yet up and working, fulfilling all its rolls that it did when it was 'upgraded'.

[dannyboy]

And that is the point I'm getting to. I think RG should step up his pressure. It is clear to me that the council are trying to throw cold water on this issue, but meanwhile; I don't think this CCTV system is yet up and work fulfilling all it's rolls that it did when it was changed.

but two cute smart alecs don't make for a productive exchange do they?

[Iommi]

but two cute smart alecs don't make for a productive exchange do they?

One is being paid out of our taxes to be (un)smart and one is attempting to curry favour. RG can do what he likes for the moment, but I am concerned that people in the council might be getting away with shoddy and deceitful performance.

[NWNREADER]

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=22197

Have a look at the CCTV transfer project document on the right hand column. Telementry is still not working (not all cameras visible at Windsor can be controlled), not all cameras can be seen at Windsor and some cameras are yet to be replaced. So when Keith Ullyat said all 40 cameras were working, recording and digital a few weeks ago, it wasn't true.

If the quote attributed to Keith Ullyat is accurate then it does seem he was incorrect. But he works entirely on information he is given to present, he does not research the details himself. If Keith said it, that was what he was told to say.

As for the spreadsheet, is it a live document? If so, when was it last updated?
if the published version is just a snapshot then what it says today, tomorrow or next week may not change even if the situation does.

[Iommi]

If the quote attributed to Keith Ullyat is accurate then it does seem he was incorrect. But he works entirely on information he is given to present, he does not research the details himself. If Keith said it, that was what he was told to say.

If so, is there any point for someone like Keith Ullyat to be in the position he is?

[dannyboy]

One is being paid out of our taxes to be (un)smart and one is attempting to curry favour. RG can do what he likes for the moment, but I am concerned that people in the council might be getting away with shoddy and deceitful performance.

And so it has been & will be forever.

The CCTV issue is a storm in a teacup, mountains out of molehills.

What WBC should have done is buried the 'news' in a deluge of fact & information. My guess is that there isn't the manpower for such a response. So, idle hands & all

A council's failing is its arrogance.

[Iommi]

And so it has been & will be forever. The CCTV issue is a storm in a teacup, mountains out of molehills. What WBC should have done is buried the 'news' in a deluge of fact & information. My guess is that there isn't the manpower for such a response. So, idle hands & all. A council's failing is its arrogance.

Steady on, you'll lose your bonus!

All what you say might be true, but that doesn't mean we should allow them an easy ride.

[dannyboy]

Steady on, you'll lose your bonus!

All what you say might be true, but that doesn't mean we should allow them an easy ride.

As Wilson said - a week is a long time in Politics.

[NWNREADER]

If so, is there any point for someone like Keith Ullyat to be in the position he is?

As a journalist he uses his experience to prepare Council information for presentation to the media. he may guide on content so he can present a coherent statement, but his role is not to go out and get the information. That is for Officers and Members to provide.

[Iommi]

As a journalist he uses his experience to prepare Council information for presentation to the media. he may guide on content so he can present a coherent statement...

Is that a euphemism?

With a lot of things it is about managing expectations and the council are guilty of making bold statements like to paraphrase: moving to Windsor will not be detrimental to the system whatsoever. While long term that might come to pass, but they seem to be making a fist of it, and if people would have any idea that the transition would be as it seems it is, I wonder if there might have been more objection to the plan in the first place. Indeed, perhaps that might account for the 'deception'. Either way, it seeks to undermine confidence in the authorities.

[Richard Garvie]

Dannyboy, if the cameras cannot be controlled by the control room staff, they are not fully operational. The fact is, we're still at less than 30 cameras in the district out of the 40 we will eventually have.

In a press statement this week, Anthony Stansfield said he was delighted that the network is fully operational. Today, he doesn't say anything like the network being fully operational, but that it is being delivered in stages. Luckily Iommi, I have kept recordings of all of his radio statements and copies of the NWN. Unless I get the answers I have requested by the end of today, I will be complaining to the standards committee. If I have to, I will take this to the ombudsman.

This whole issue is now about integrity and trust. On Tuesday they said very clearly that all of the cameras in Newbury were recording and operating successfully. On the same day, the council published some information as a result of an FOI stating that some cameras have still to be replaced, some of the cameras and still in pre set position and cannot be controlled and that some cameras cannot be seen in Windsor.

Keith Ullyat has been used as a scapegoat on all of this, and I'm sure that he has only put out what he was told to send out. Cllr Stansfield and the officers in charge of the move have continually moved the goalposts throughout this mess, and now they have been caught out (again).

[dannyboy]

RG - I'm fully aware of what is involved with a modern CCTV system - its capabilitities & what is involved with such a system.

Problem is your entire sentence ' if the cameras cannot be controlled by the control room staff, they are not fully operational' hinges on the word 'if'.


Take your 'understanding' of Tuesday - you have arrived at - On Tuesday they said very clearly that all of the cameras in Newbury were recording and operating successfully. On the same day, the council published some information as a result of an FOI stating that some cameras have still to be replaced, some of the cameras and still in pre set position and cannot be controlled and that some cameras cannot be seen in Windsor.

Seems to me that the cameras waiting to be replaced, & those not able to be controlled ( funny, no 'if' this time ) & those not yet viewable in Windsor are cameras not in Newbury. If This is the case, then the council are correct. What is incorrect is your comprehension. Instead of offering, with a flourish, your take on the events, offer up some proof to back up your allegations. Any fule, and most of them appear on Newsnight, can waffle on with out ever actually saying anything with any meat to it.

It is a bit like Masterchef - you take one set of ingredients offered up by the council & end up with a dogs diner, I take the same & end up with Quiche Lorraine.

[Richard Garvie]

Cllr Stansfield has said this morning on Newbury Sound:

But despite continued problems in getting all of the cameras working, Councillor Anthony Stansfeld, who's responsible for community safety says a review just wouldn't be possible: "I'm not going to go into detail about which areas it's working perfectly and which areas some are recording and others are not, that's obviously a foolish thing to do".

Are they working, or are they not working? He's now saying he won't tell us which cameras aren't recording, but didn't the council said they are now all recording??? Listen to the news on the Newbury Sound website.

In addition, the FOI material states clearly that the cameras are not fully operational.

[dannyboy]

Cllr Stansfield has said this morning on Newbury Sound:

But despite continued problems in getting all of the cameras working, Councillor Anthony Stansfeld, who's responsible for community safety says a review just wouldn't be possible: "I'm not going to go into detail about which areas it's working perfectly and which areas some are recording and others are not, that's obviously a foolish thing to do".

Are they working, or are they not working? He's now saying he won't tell us which cameras aren't recording, but didn't the council said they are now all recording??? Listen to the news on the Newbury Sound website.

In addition, the FOI material states clearly that the cameras are not fully operational.

I know the entire system isn't fully operational.

"We are still awaiting a final update on the cameras outside Newbury so are not in a position to confirm any numbers yet.”

[Richard Garvie]

West Berkshire Council has announced that all cameras are operating successfully, following weeks of uncertainty

FOLLOWING weeks of uncertainty, West Berkshire Council has announced that all of the CCTV cameras in Newbury are now working. A statement released on Tuesday by the authority said: “All of the cameras are operating and recording successfully, and 18 of the 21 cameras in Newbury are being monitored live 24 hours a day, seven days a week at the new control room in Windsor.”
A link will also be installed to Newbury Police Station and Thames Valley Police Control Room so that officers can view live and recorded footage.
The move to the new hi-tech system in Windsor and Maidenhead is expected to save the council £250,000.
The entire switch-over project is still not complete however, and the status of the remaining 19 cameras across the district is unclear.
Newbury Labour Party spokeman Richard Garvie, while praising the council for the upgrade, criticised the timing of the release and said he disputed that all the cameras were operational, citing information published on the West Berkshire Council website under the heading “CCTV systems in West Berkshire”.
Mr Garvie requested a copy of the CCTV project transfer plan, and has responded to the document on the Newbury Labour Party website, claiming that correspondence with council chiefs indicated that upgrades to some dome cameras is still ongoing.
"I was promised information from the chief executive of the council, and despite waiting over a month, the officers in question have provided me with a spreadsheet that I could have put together in twenty minutes,” he said.
“It’s about time we had a full and independent investigation on this matter, and that action is taken against those who appear to have tried to conceal the facts of what has happened,” he added.
A spokesman for West Berkshire Council, Keith Ulyatt, said: “We are still awaiting a final update on the cameras outside Newbury so are not in a position to confirm any numbers yet.”
The West Berkshire executive member for community safety, Anthony Stansfeld (Con, Kintbury), said he was delighted to see the new system fully operational in Newbury.
“We take our responsibilities to protect resident’s safety very seriously,” he added.
At a meeting of the Newbury Retail Association on Tuesday, chairman Brian Burgess said he was very grateful that the new system was up and running in Newbury, but that the town’s retailers had no confidence those responsible for the incidents of anti-social behavior and crime over recent months would be brought to justice.
However the West Berkshire Local Police Area Commander, Supt Robin Rickard, has hailed the new system.
"The new CCTV arrangements are a really positive move in that the evidential quality of the picture is now far greater than it has been previously.
"Clearly, CCTV is only one element of a crime investigation and cannot on its own prevent and detect crime. However, it is a really valuable tool when it records crime and criminal activity,” he said.
The Liberal Democrats have requested a review of the CCTV switch-over to be carried out by the council’s Overview and Scrutiny panel.
A vote on the matter will take place on Tuesday, March 1.

So in a period of a few days, Cllr Stansfield goes from being delighted that it's all working to admitting on the radio that some cameras are not recording. Surely I am not the only person who thinks this is unacceptable behaviour from an elected member? How can he say to the paper that evrything is fine when he knows it isn't? This is an intentional statement to mislead the public, and had the FOI not been published, would he be admitting today that there are still problems?

[Richard Garvie]

The FOI shows that the cameras in Newbury are not fully operational. The comments on the radio from Cllr Stansfield today show that he knows there is still a problem, yet he was happy to tell the paper something else.

[dannyboy]

The FOI shows that the cameras in Newbury are not fully operational. The comments on the radio from Cllr Stansfield today show that he knows there is still a problem, yet he was happy to tell the paper something else.

Post the bloody proof then!

Some hack you'd make!

[Richard Garvie]

It's on the council website.

[Iommi]

Problem is your entire sentence ' if the cameras cannot be controlled by the control room staff, they are not fully operational' hinges on the word 'if'.

How can that be done if he is denied information, or the council seemingly indulge in obfuscation? With out doubt RG has rattled cages of people that are not familiar with theirs being rattled.

[Richard Garvie]

So in a period of a few days, Cllr Stansfield goes from being delighted that it's all working to admitting on the radio that some cameras are not recording. Surely I am not the only person who thinks this is unacceptable behaviour from an elected member? How can he say to the paper that evrything is fine when he knows it isn't? This is an intentional statement to mislead the public, and had the FOI not been published, would he be admitting today that there are still problems?

[Rosewinelover]

Just been listening to you on Newbury Sound Richard, your voice is not what I imagined it to be! (In a good way )

[Richard Garvie]

Really? I hate the sound of my voice (doesn't stop me from talking though!!!)

[Rosewinelover]

Really? I hate the sound of my voice (doesn't stop me from talking though!!!)

Yes, I don't think you paused for breath!

[Richard Garvie]

Well, that might be the editing

[dannyboy]

Well, that might be the editing

You mean interviews could be edited?

[NWNREADER]

You mean interviews could be edited?

Haven't heard this interview, but I noticed on another one that Mr G uses totally differenct forms of language on the radio to what he does on this forum. Far more moderate in tone and less blustering/lobbing of grenades. Is that due to editing, or an awareness a wider audience might be even less taken by such tones? Or even that Newbury Sound do not allow unsubstantiated statements re lies, fault, etc?

[user23]

Or even that Newbury Sound do not allow unsubstantiated statements re lies, fault, etc?

I suspect that he realises he wouldn't get away with such language if said on more serious media.

[Iommi]

I suspect that he realises he wouldn't get away with such language if said on more serious media.

And there are fewer more serious media outlets than Newbury Sound!

[user23]

And there are fewer more serious media outlets than Newbury Sound!

This forum isn't one of them.

[Iommi]

This forum isn't one of them.

What does serious media outlet mean?

[user23]

What does serious media outlet mean?

One that the majority of people take seriously.

[dannyboy]

What does serious media outlet mean?

I have three of them in my house.

[Iommi]

I have three of them in my house.

What with your house and here, you have some hard core media outlet issues in your life!

[Iommi]

One that the majority of people take seriously.

So the majority of people on here, whether reading or posting, don't take this forum seriously?

[Cognosco]

If the quote attributed to Keith Ullyat is accurate then it does seem he was incorrect. But he works entirely on information he is given to present, he does not research the details himself. If Keith said it, that was what he was told to say.

As for the spreadsheet, is it a live document? If so, when was it last updated?
if the published version is just a snapshot then what it says today, tomorrow or next week may not change even if the situation does.

The data in the spreadsheet, to comply with the Freedom Of Information Act, should have been the latest data the council has at the time of issuing that data under the Freedom Of Information Act.

That does not mean it should be older than a day or so before issuing as WBC has to ensure it is updated before being sent?

[Cognosco]

As a journalist he uses his experience to prepare Council information for presentation to the media. he may guide on content so he can present a coherent statement, but his role is not to go out and get the information. That is for Officers and Members to provide.

As he is speaking for the council then it is the councils responsibility to ensure the information is accurate before releasing?

As the saying goes I am in charge the buck stops here. Is the Chief Exec offering hes resignation then?

[Iommi]

I have heard a rumour that the CCTV system isn't live yet! If that is the case, I hope our local crims don't find out, but if they do, they had better avoid doing anything bad, just in case it isn't true!

I have also heard a rumour that the picture quality of the new system isn't up to all that much either.

I hope none of this is true!

[Cognosco]

I have heard a rumour that the CCTV system isn't live yet! If that is the case, I hope our local crims don't find out, but if they do, they had better avoid doing anything bad, just in case it isn't true!

I have also heard a rumour that the picture quality of the new system isn't up to all that much either.

I hope none of this is true!

Iommi are you doubting the local man in blue who has stated that the cameras are all working and the quality is excellent? Or perhaps he is nearing retirement and requires a comfy post with a local authority?

[Iommi]

Iommi are you doubting the local man in blue who has stated that the cameras are all working and the quality is excellent? Or perhaps he is nearing retirement and requires a comfy post with a local authority?

It is only an allegation, but it is possible that the images he has seen are fine, that doesn't mean all features work well.

It often isn't about what people say, often it is about what people don't say!

[Cognosco]

It is only an allegation, but it is possible that the images he has seen are fine, that doesn't mean all features work well.

It often isn't about what people say, often it is about what people don't say!

And WBC are certainly not saying very much are they?

[Iommi]

They certainly don't seem to be very 'Candid' about the 'Cameras'

[Cognosco]

They certainly don't seem to be very 'Candid' about the 'Cameras'

And its certainly not only the cameras they are being candid about either is it?

[Iommi]

And its certainly not only the cameras they are being candid about either is it?

Pssst...you might want to go and check the meaning of 'candid'!

[Cognosco]

Pssst...you might want to go and check the meaning of 'candid'!

Quite right Iommi got carried away didn't I? I have made myself a note must try harder?

[Iommi]

Quite right Iommi got carried away didn't I? I have made myself a note must try harder?

That's better!

[user23]

Quite right Iommi got carried away didn't I? I have made myself a note must try harder?

See my previous post about confusing yourself.

[Cognosco]

See my previous post about confusing yourself.

Yes major disaster to the debate missing out the word not? Still as long as I keep taking my medication and don't get as bad as you I should be OK then?