Newbury's CCTV Options

[NWNREADER]

...but I see no reason why the council couldn't go beyond expectation and give a full account; assuming nothing is wrong and everything is fine. By 'playing games' with the reply, it only helps fuel the story.

My question would still be the same: what is the status of the CCTV security system. With all that I have read, I am certain that the system has been compromised with the migration.

I agree but the normal method, especially if there is perceived to be any issue of criticism or weakness, is to expose as little as possible. By having political parties champing at each other on everything the Members look to the Officers to find good in every issue. No-one wants to lose face/admit less than perfect performance.

I can imagine the answer to your question: 'The CCTV system is working". That says everything you asked, but absolutely nothing.....

[Iommi]

I can imagine the answer to your question: 'The CCTV system is working". That says everything you asked, but absolutely nothing.....

But is doesn't. Indeed, how can anyone ask the right question, if we are not given the information before the fact. Before the move, the council made a statement that the migration would have no adverse impact on the security system whatsoever ever. I don't believe that is now true.

[NWNREADER]

But is doesn't. Indeed, how can anyone ask the right question, if we are not given the information before the fact. Before the move, the council made a statement that the migration would have no adverse impact on the security system whatsoever ever. I don't believe that is now true.

Q - 'What is the status of the CCTV system'
A - 'The system is working'
That is an answer to the question, in the pedantic ways to be expected.


Try this -
Q - Is the WBC CCTV System operating today in accordance with the migration plan? Yes / No

Q - Are all the cameras on the system under the control of operators at Windsor for pan, tilt and zoom to the full extent of the cameras scope of operation? Yes / No

Q - Are all the cameras able to be recorded as needed for evidence gathering in support of police enquiries that require research of recordings and production of an evidential tape/disc? Yes / No

[Iommi]

Try this -
Q - Is the WBC CCTV System operating today in accordance with the migration plan? Yes / No

That would depend on the plan and whether the plan was to simply substitute the analogue cameras, or make other changes at the time. So a yes could be given, yet there still be a discrepancy between the old and new system. It also doesn't make an allowance for an effective plan in the first place. That is to say: if the plan was to migrate over, say for the sake of argument, 6 months, then I would regard that as a poor plan albeit on target.

Q - Are all the cameras on the system under the control of operators at Windsor for pan, tilt and zoom to the full extent of the cameras scope of operation? Yes / No

See above.

Q - Are all the cameras able to be recorded as needed for evidence gathering in support of police enquiries that require research of recordings and production of an evidential tape/disc? Yes / No

All cameras could be 'able', but your question doesn't specify that they actual are being used for that eventuality.

At the end of the day, there is always more than one way of answering a question correctly. When I ask for the status of the CCTV system, is just that: what does it actually do? How does it work?

If the new system was better on all accounts, I'd say so if I were in-charge. The fact they have answered questions and made statements in such an obtuse, or ambiguous way, leads me to think they are trying to hide something. If the system was better, I'd say so. I'd explain that there was more coverage, more people monitoring the system, better images, cheaper to run, etc. I understand only one or two of those items are true, or acknowledged.

[Richard Garvie]

Q - 'What is the status of the CCTV system'
A - 'The system is working'
That is an answer to the question, in the pedantic ways to be expected.


Try this -
Q - Is the WBC CCTV System operating today in accordance with the migration plan? Yes / No

Q - Are all the cameras on the system under the control of operators at Windsor for pan, tilt and zoom to the full extent of the cameras scope of operation? Yes / No

Q - Are all the cameras able to be recorded as needed for evidence gathering in support of police enquiries that require research of recordings and production of an evidential tape/disc? Yes / No

No, no and no. But they claim yes, yes, and yes despite there being no evidence to back up what they say.

It's interesting that they still haven't produce the original plans and information that the chief exec said I could have. When ever I go to Nick Carter with anything, they usually come back with what I need within days. This has been going for nearly a month and now they're talking of refusal notices!!! What is there to hide?

Is the WBC CCTV System operating today in accordance with the migration plan?: They told me in the emails above that they are having problems, and the move was more problematic than expected. So no.

Are all the cameras on the system under the control of operators at Windsor for pan, tilt and zoom to the full extent of the cameras scope of operation?: There are 24 visible in Windsor, and there are still problems RE: control. So no.

Are all the cameras able to be recorded as needed for evidence gathering in support of police enquiries that require research of recordings and production of an evidential tape/disc? One camera looks down on Octupus opposite the Kennet Centre, and it didn't catch the vandalism there. Other cameras in the market place had no operational capacity over Christmas, not sure what the status is now. But we do know that some are not working, so no.

[NWNREADER]

No, no and no. But they claim yes, yes, and yes despite there being no evidence to back up what they say.

It's interesting that they still haven't produce the original plans and information that the chief exec said I could have. When ever I go to Nick Carter with anything, they usually come back with what I need within days. This has been going for nearly a month and now they're talking of refusal notices!!! What is there to hide?

Is the WBC CCTV System operating today in accordance with the migration plan?: They told me in the emails above that they are having problems, and the move was more problematic than expected. So no.

Are all the cameras on the system under the control of operators at Windsor for pan, tilt and zoom to the full extent of the cameras scope of operation?: There are 24 visible in Windsor, and there are still problems RE: control. So no.

Are all the cameras able to be recorded as needed for evidence gathering in support of police enquiries that require research of recordings and production of an evidential tape/disc? One camera looks down on Octupus opposite the Kennet Centre, and it didn't catch the vandalism there. Other cameras in the market place had no operational capacity over Christmas, not sure what the status is now. But we do know that some are not working, so no.

i wasn't asking anyone on here for answers, and the questions I proposed are the start, not the finish. Were I to be so hung up on the CCTV system I would direct my questions to Nick Carter/Andy Day/Cllr Stansfield.
Therefore everything else you/Iommi say is thereafter hypothetical.

[Richard Garvie]

i wasn't asking anyone on here for answers, and the questions I proposed are the start, not the finish. Were I to be so hung up on the CCTV system I would direct my questions to Nick Carter/Andy Day/Cllr Stansfield.
Therefore everything else you/Iommi say is thereafter hypothetical.

I try to only email Nick Carter as a last resort. Andy Day won't speak to me because "Garvie ruined his Christmas". Cllr Stansfield won't talk to me because I said he should resign.

If I get a refusal notice, I will then email Nick Carter again.

[Iommi]

i wasn't asking anyone on here for answers, and the questions I proposed are the start, not the finish. Were I to be so hung up on the CCTV system I would direct my questions to Nick Carter/Andy Day/Cllr Stansfield. Therefore everything else you/Iommi say is thereafter hypothetical.

Then why get so hung up on the discussion in the first place. All we are doing is discussing, it is you that decided that this thread merited criticism of Richard Garvies methods and then proceeded to to advise how to do it 'properly', in your view.

[NWNREADER]

I try to only email Nick Carter as a last resort. Andy Day won't speak to me because "Garvie ruined his Christmas". Cllr Stansfield won't talk to me because I said he should resign.

If I get a refusal notice, I will then email Nick Carter again.

If you are a resident or business owner in WBC area I don't think they can refuse to answer your questions. Unless you become a vexatious litigant they are stuck with having to answer your questions - comes with the territory.

No secret, I think you could start a fight in an empty room, and you fail to focus issues, but that is only my opinion.

[NWNREADER]

Then why get so hung up on the discussion in the first place. All we are doing is discussing, it is you that decided that this thread merited criticism of Richard Garvies methods and then proceeded to to advise how to do it 'properly', in your view.

The issue for me is whether, if & when things go wrong (or appear to), a Council is under an obligation to be open about the failing and who to.
If someone thinks they are onto something with a matter of general concern, but seems to be struggling with real progress, and the person may have good grounds for thinking they are being fobbed off then I see no problem in offering an alternative to banging heads on doors when the door is open just a step away. RG - in his view - is going about it the right way no doubt. In my view, if he wants to get answers (whatever the topic), he should change tactics - in my view.

[Iommi]

That is reasonable, but it seems if an authority want to 'play games', they can do so regardless of how concise someone tries to be. One of the problems as I see it is that the primary opposition in Newbury, viz, the Lib Dems, have gone mute.

When the CCTV system was put under financial review, one would expected for there to have been a survey, if there had been, then we might have something to measure against. Beyond that, it also seems surprising that the council chose to migrate the system at the time the did.

Unless we have someone that looks out for the stakeholders in these circumstances, it seems the council can do as they please and we have little power to hold them to account.

[NWNREADER]

That is reasonable, but it seems if an authority want to 'play games', they can do so regardless of how concise someone tries to be. One of the problems as I see it is that the primary opposition in Newbury, viz, the Lib Dems, have gone mute.

When the CCTV system was put under financial review, one would expected for there to have been a survey, if there had been, then we might have something to measure against. Beyond that, it also seems surprising that the council chose to migrate the system at the time the did.

Unless we have someone that looks out for the stakeholders in these circumstances, it seems the council can do as they please and we have little power to hold them to account.

Pretty much agree with all of that. Too many things are run on party lines, and rely on mass inertia to go through on the nod. Thus process becomes compacent, and the need for each party to stand its' ground means that any question becomes a combat rather than an opportunity. But in my cynicism I believe that to be fairly widespread, and regardless of party holding office.

[Richard Garvie]

Pretty much agree with all of that. Too many things are run on party lines, and rely on mass inertia to go through on the nod. Thus process becomes compacent, and the need for each party to stand its' ground means that any question becomes a combat rather than an opportunity. But in my cynicism I believe that to be fairly widespread, and regardless of party holding office.

Pretty much agree with what you say here too. The council should be based on dealing with local issues on merit, not by party political affiliations. But this isn't just about the political aspect, there now appears to be an undercurrent of dishonesty at West Berkshire. Now it comes down to the chief exec to look into what has gone on and take the appropriate action.

[Cognosco]

Pretty much agree with what you say here too. The council should be based on dealing with local issues on merit, not by party political affiliations. But this isn't just about the political aspect, there now appears to be an undercurrent of dishonesty at West Berkshire. Now it comes down to the chief exec to look into what has gone on and take the appropriate action.

And explain to the taxpayers why it went wrong and what is going to be done to correct it?

[Richard Garvie]

And explain to the taxpayers why it went wrong and what is going to be done to correct it?

Exactly.

[Richard Garvie]

CCTV has made the news on Newbury Sound today. There is comment from me and Cllr Stansfield, and the council have admitted that the network is still not fully operational.

Having listened to the news again, it would appear that Cllr Stansfield is now admitting that some areas are not yet recording!!!

[Cognosco]

CCTV has made the news on Newbury Sound today. There is comment from me and Cllr Stansfield, and the council have admitted that the network is still not fully operational.

Having listened to the news again, it would appear that Cllr Stansfield is now admitting that some areas are not yet recording!!!

It would seem certain members posting on this forum seem to be able to obtain more accurate information on the state of the CCTV system than our elected members are able to?

They should inquire why some of their own employees and contractors are relaying this information to third parties?

Probably like the taxpayers they have had enough of being, kept in the dark for security reasons, lied too, and the council being non-answerable ignoring the taxpayers.

[Richard Garvie]

fromRichard Garvie <richard.garvie@googlemail.com>
toGraham Jones <gjones@westberks.gov.uk>,
Nick Carter <NCarter@westberks.gov.uk>,
Andy Day <ADay@westberks.gov.uk>

dateThu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:58 PM
subjectCCTV
mailed-bygooglemail.com

hide details Feb 10 (2 days ago)


Graham / Nick,

First of all, I am not very happy that the documentation I requested in late December has not been passed to me. I did get a spreadsheet, and if this is genuinely the only documentation available, I'd be appalled.

Secondly, we are now being told via the local media that all of the cameras are operating successfully. I have one single question relating to the CCTV network, and I would appreciate a simple yes or no answer.

Is the CCTV Network in West Berkshire fully operational?

Taking into account that the spreadsheet published by the council suggests it isn't, maybe you could clarify what exactly the situation is now and why we are still getting weekly media comments suggesting everything is working when it actually isn't fully operational. Surely you both can see the issue with regards to telling the media one thing, and then publishing information on your website that shows the media statement in incorrect.

Once again, I'm sorry to involve you in this Nick, but Andy Day refuses to speak to me because I "ruined his Christmas" apparently. For the record, I can assure you that I did not want to spend the Christmas Break talking about CCTV either. If you could please send me the information I requested previously, that would be helpful too.

Best wishes,

Richard Garvie

---------

fromAndy Day <ADay@westberks.gov.uk>
toRichard Garvie <richard.garvie@googlemail.com>,
Graham Jones <GJones@westberks.gov.uk>,
Nick Carter <NCarter@westberks.gov.uk>

dateThu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:56 PM
subjectRE: CCTV
mailed-bywestberks.gov.uk

hide details Feb 10 (2 days ago)


Richard:

I just want to confirm that I have never refused to talk to you. I am saddened that you have suggested this.

Andy

---------

fromRichard Garvie <richard.garvie@googlemail.com>
toAndy Day <ADay@westberks.gov.uk>

ccGraham Jones <GJones@westberks.gov.uk>,
Nick Carter <NCarter@westberks.gov.uk>

dateThu, Feb 10, 2011 at 2:24 PM
subjectRe: CCTV
mailed-bygooglemail.com

hide details Feb 10 (2 days ago)


Hi Andy,

I suggest you look at the contact between me and your colleagues then. At the end of the day, you have failed to answer any of the concerns or questions that I have put to you, refused access to information that Nick said I could have and repeatedly said to people at meetings that "we should not speak to Richard Garvie or give him any information because he ruined our Christmas".

My concern on this matter has been about establishing the facts of what has gone on on behalf of traders who were refused information. The Lib Dems were also misled, and only now have started asking for a review of this matter. At no stage over Christmas did I really want to discuss CCTV. I did so because I was receiving call after call from traders in the district raising concern. Technically, as the project manager, you ruined my Christmas by acting in the way that you did. But I didn't complain, or talk about you behind your back or act in any manner that could bring my conduct into question. If you had dealt with this matter in an open and honest way, consulting with traders within the district to ensure that they were aware there may be some problems, none of this would have happened.

Are the cameras fully operational?
If not, why has the council told the media that they are? (remember the FOI info shows they are not)
When will the project be fully completed?
Why did you not provide me with the information requested (even under FOI)?

Your behaviour is baffling if I am honest, and I really don't understand why you have acted in this way. Even if there was a major disaster and nothing was working, evading the questions, withholding information and issuing media releases that weren't quite true has done nothing but lead to the council looking like it cannot organise the proverbial in a brewery. After more than six weeks, not one person has stepped up publicly and said "there have been problems but we are working to fix them and public safety remains our priority / extra measures are being taken etc.". Traders could have been advised to beef up security in house and this would have been nothing more than a bump in the road. The way you have personally handled this affair has left the council with a real issue surrounding integrity.

For the record, by publishing the project brief and plans to move the control room would have shown you were adequately prepared. Showing the variances would have shown that the contractors had let you down and that this was out of your hands. By hiding this information, maybe this is in fact an admission that you have not been adequately prepared and you are simply reverting to damage limitation mode?

Please answer the questions within this email. If I do not receive answers to the four question above by close of business tomorrow, I will be raising a formal complaint with the relevant bodies.

Yours frustratingly,

Richard Garvie.

-----------------

fromAndy Day <ADay@westberks.gov.uk>
toRichard Garvie <richard.garvie@googlemail.com>

dateThu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:04 PM
subjectRE: CCTV
mailed-bywestberks.gov.uk

hide details Feb 10 (2 days ago)


Richard: I have spoken to Nick about the contents of this e mail and he will respond.

Andy

-----------------

fromRichard Garvie <richard.garvie@googlemail.com>
toAndy Day <ADay@westberks.gov.uk>

ccNick Carter <NCarter@westberks.gov.uk>,
Graham Jones <gjones@westberks.gov.uk>

dateThu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:10 PM
subjectRe: CCTV
mailed-bygooglemail.com

hide details Feb 10 (2 days ago)


Thanks.

I'm sorry if you think I've been rude or got a little heated, but my patience has completely gone on this matter. It's been dragged out for over six weeks, and there needs to be closure.

Regards,

Richard Garvie

---------------

fromAndy Day <ADay@westberks.gov.uk>
toRichard Garvie <richard.garvie@googlemail.com>

dateThu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM
subjectRE: CCTV
mailed-bywestberks.gov.uk

hide details Feb 10 (2 days ago)


Richard: Nick will deal with it.

Andy

----------

Those messages are from Thursday. heard nothing since so will now be submitting a complaint to the standards committee.

[NWNREADER]

Those messages are from Thursday. heard nothing since so will now be submitting a complaint to the standards committee.

Quick question - What does your elected member have to say to you on this matter? He/she should be the first line of your enquiry, not the last (if not involved).
Starting at the top can look impressive, but can slow accurate responses.

If I want to ask why my post was late yesterday I would sooner ask my postman than send a stinging email to Moya Greene. Even if it was at the time of a restructuring of post service

[Iommi]

If I were the Boss being complained to, I'd point the complainant to our official complaints procedure. Does WBC have one?

As a complainer, I have found that the most effective results are when you go straight to the top.