![[Figure 1]](fig1.gif)
1.1 The Council's Community Plan for 1997-2000 clearly identifies public safety as one of its prime objectives. "Fighting Crime for a Safer District" is one of the Council's five strategic priorities. The Bingley and Keighley schemes were introduced in February 1996 and Shipley in May 1998 following successful bids to Home Office competitions held by Government. The Bradford scheme was operative from May 1990 although this has been enhanced on several occasions. Any further improvements/extensions would require a new installation at considerable cost. However, whilst recognising the important role of CCTV prior to considering such longer term proposals the Community Plan gives a commitment to reviewing the effectiveness of CCTV throughout the District.
1.2 There are numerous ways in which CCTV can act to prevent crime. Tilley (1992), in a study primarily of CCTV's impact upon car crime, found that through a multitude of mechanisms "CCTV can alter the perceived patterns of opportunity for crime. One of these mechanisms is the deterrent effect upon potential offenders who do not wish to risk apprehension and conviction by the evidence captured on videotape". Hence two prime considerations of an effective CCTV system is effectiveness of coverage and statistical evidence of crime reduction. Equally important is that the general publics perception is that of being safer and less at risk. This perception must also be carefully balanced against the need to protect civil liberties, the public acceptance of "being watched" must also be a major consideration therefore. The evaluation of the systems in the Bradford District considers these four issues. As the systems have been introduced over a period of 1990 to 1998 not all the schemes can be evaluated against all four criteria (because of newness or lack of information on introduction) the other schemes being restricted to relevant criteria as shown in the evaluation framework below:-
Figure 1
|
Scheme |
Date of Introduction |
Effective Coverage |
Crime Reduction |
Public Perception |
Public Acceptance |
|
BRADFORD |
1990 |
* |
* |
* |
|
|
KEIGHLEY |
1995 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
|
BINGLEY |
1997 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
|
SHIPLEY |
1998 |
* |
* |
* |
1.3 Different approaches were employed in the different locations to evaluate the following relevant criteria:
1.4 The information used to evaluate the schemes include, an independent review of the effectiveness of CCTV schemes in Bingley and Keighley (December 1998), Speak Out Survey (July 1998), Community Plan Consultation and the Report from Inter Force Assistance/Interim Report (November 1998).
1.5 The evaluation considers each city/town location in chronological order based on the date of implementation.
2.1 The scheme was the first in the country introduced by a local authority for the city centre. Since then it has been enhanced on several occasions. One difficulty in measuring crime patterns in areas covered by CCTV and those which are not is that statistics were only kept from 1995 onwards and the Bradford scheme existed before this date.
2.2 The Bradford System can be reviewed against the evaluation criteria as follows:
All the CCTV cameras in Bradford have evolved since 1990 when an initial eight were installed. The majority of cameras cover car parks and subways in the City Centre. Effective coverage is not achieved since many of the streets and pedestrian areas are not under CCTV surveillance.
There is difficulty in claiming that there has been a vast reduction in vehicle related crime in the car parks since the police statistics do not correlate with the exact car park locations. There has been a significant reduction in the number of complaints from users of the car parks covered by CCTV and there was a 60% reduction in car related crime in the John Street multi-storey car park after six months of introduction.
In July 1998 the Council decided to seek the views of the public and organised a "Speak Out" survey which involved sending questionnaires to 2,253 people. The questionnaire focused on issues of crime and disorder, experience of crime, fear of crime, measures taken to avoid crime and opinions about CCTV.
The "Speak Out" Panel was representative of the whole population in terms of gender, age, ethnic origin, employment status and geographical location.
The survey found:
a) That CCTV has a big impact on how safe people feel when using town and city centres.
b) In the main respondents feel that CCTV reduces crime, however there was a certain amount of confusion about the way in which CCTV operates.
c) Most people do not mind being filmed by CCTV cameras in public areas, although some expressed concerns that there should be safeguards to prevent abuse.
d) Virtually all respondents felt that there should be more CCTV cameras in public areas. Subways and car parks were identified as top priority for further cameras.
In the Community Plan District wide survey in 1997/98 the public were where asked in what sort of places would further cameras be most effective in helping them feel safe. Whilst fighting crime for a safer district is a major concern the idea of extending CCTV brought mixed reactions as follows:
a) Many people gave the idea their wholehearted support, and made specific suggestions for types of locations, including (in rough descending order of popularity:
- In car parks
- In subways (though some people favoured closing all subways)
- Outside pubs and clubs
- In any area with high crime statistics (some suggested mobile cameras)
- On estates and outside flats (especially old people's flats)
- Near cashpoint machines
- At traffic lights and pedestrian crossings
- In the city, town and village centres
- In parks.
b) However, a substantial number expressed the opposite point of view and said they did not support extending CCTV at all. Some opposed it on the grounds of civil liberties, but more often it was because they felt it to be ineffective and therefore a waste of money. Usually this was because CCTV did not make them feel any safer - they said that if they were attacked the police response would not be quick enough to help them.
c) Others said they thought that CCTV simply moved the problem from one area to another.
d) Many people said they felt that CCTV was therefore much less effective than putting more police on the streets.
e) Some people expressed scepticism about whether anyone actually watched the CCTV screens, whether they were effective at night, and sometimes whether they worked at all.
2.2 The Community Safety Policy Officer in October 1998 appointed a third year student from Leeds Metropolitan University to review the effectiveness of CCTV schemes in Bingley and Keighley.
2.3 The study report goes into great detail to assess the effectiveness of CCTV. It also covers civil liberty issues. Recommendations are made for improved monitoring, operational procedures to be established, the continuation of the policy of incorporating CCTV into a broader crime prevention strategy and for increased publicity for CCTV Systems.
2.4 The Keighley and Bingley systems can be reviewed against the evaluation criteria as follows: Effective Coverage
Unlike Bradford the cameras in Bingley and Keighley Town Centres cover a large proportion of the central areas. The number of cameras provided were dependant upon the finance available at the time. Every effort was made to place cameras in strategic parts of the town centres. Areas on the periphery could, however, be covered more effectively with additional cameras.
Crime statistics for recorded burglary, stealing and unauthorised taking of motor vehicles, criminal damage and violence against the person between 1 January 1995 and 31 March 1998 have been analysed. It was difficult to conclude that the fall in crime statistics were directly related to CCTV, nevertheless it is reasonable to assume that CCTV is effective in assisting the prevention of crime.
Whilst recognising sociological factors and other crime prevention measures can affect crime statistics, it is considered possible to make reasonable assumptions through the comparison of crime statistics based on before and after implementation. In Bingley and Keighley incidences of burglary, criminal damage and car crime in particular dropped markedly between comparisons of 1995 figures with those of 1998. These are shown in figures 1, 2 and 3.
![[Figure 2]](fig2.gif)
![[Figure 3]](fig3.gif)
Instances of violence rose slightly over the same period as shown in Figure 4. This suggests CCTV is more effective at protecting property.
![[Figure 4]](fig4.gif)
Based on the above the report concludes that it is reasonable to assume CCTV is effective in assisting the prevention of crime and disorder. However the report recommended the use of greater publicity regarding the success of CCTV.
Close links between the Police Control Rooms ensure that public safety concerns can be dealt with using CCTV coverage. These include bomb scares and missing persons scares.
Police Inspectors for Bingley and Keighley saw CCTV as part of an overall crime strategy which should continue.
The public and traders were questioned as to whether Bingley/Keighley has become a safer place to visit since the introduction of CCTV. The results of the surveys are given in Figure 5.
![[Figure 5]](fig5.gif)
Comparison with the Speak Out Panel responses from the same area indicates the general public felt safer in various places with CCTV as shown in Figure 6.7 below.
![[Figure 6]](fig6.gif)
![[Figure 7]](fig7.gif)
These figures were confirmed with responses to other_ questions with 65% of people in Bingley and Keighley believing CCTV deters vandalism and 70% believing CCTV in car parks reduces crime.
The report recognises that this is a contentious issue, with numerous cases of misuse and civil liberties abuse of CCTV being reported elsewhere in the country. However no cases have been reported in Bingley and Keighley.
The Speak Out Panel asked a specific question about personal privacy aspects of CCTV, the response to which was overwhelming in favour of the use of CCTV in public areas as shown below in figure 8.
![[Figure 8]](fig8.gif)
The report recognised the need to ensure that the public perceive that CCTV systems are properly safeguarded against abuse. It stressed the need for a consistency of approach. It recommended on this issue:
a) More effective monitoring be put in place.
b) Clear operational guidelines be developed.
2.5 This scheme was introduced last year which limits the opportunity for evaluation. However this scheme was independently assessed and devised based on a partnership approach as follows:
In August 1996 the Home Office invited bids for Round 3 of the Closed Circuit Television Challenge Competition for 1997/98. One of the requirements of any successful bid was that the scheme be evaluated by an independent assessor.
Inter Force Assistance from Salford was appointed to carry out an independent evaluation of the Shipley Town Centre scheme. An interim report was submitted to the Council in November 1998.
This report, albeit an interim report, did conclude that the "system designed to very high specifications should serve Shipley well for some considerable time to come". It is intended that a further evaluation will be carried out later this year.
Since the CCTV scheme was only commissioned in May 1998 it is too early to assess the effectiveness of statistics relating to crime for several months. However in the past two months there have been several significant cases spotted by the CCTV cameras including an arson attempt, indecent assault and theft. These cases are pending court decision.
Similar detailed studies as those carried out in Bingley and Keighley will be carried out in the fullness of time. Until then the general findings of the Speak Out surveys are considered to apply equally to Shipley as well as other areas in the District. These are dealt with earlier in this report.
3.1 Based on the fmdings of this report it can be concluded that:
(i) The CCTV systems in Shipley, Keighley and Bingley all provide effective coverage of the Town Centre car parks and public locations and are able to deal with public safety concerns.
(ii) Based on evidence in Keighley and Bingley where there is direct comparison of crime statistics available there is strong evidence to show that CCTV is effective in reducing crime and assists in apprehension of criminals.
(iii) CCTV cameras generally reduced the fear of crime and offered public assurance.
(iv) A majority of the general public in Bradford District did not mind being filmed by CCTV in public places. However, there were indications from several sources that a significant minority of people were worried about the systems being open to abuse.
and hence the overall aims of effective CCTV systems are being met.
(i) Bradford Council's Speak Out: Crime and Disorder.
(ii) Bradford Council's response to the Community Plan 1998.
(iii) "Review of the effectiveness of CCTV in Bingley and Keighley" 1998.
(iv) "A proposal for CCTV in Shipley", Inter Force Assistance 1996.
Transport Cttee Agenda, March 9, 1999