CCTV Hmmm

This isn't about Nottingham but the Grauniad has an article saying that Birmingham recently installed a huge number of CCTV cameras in largely Muslim areas which were paid for out of anti-terrorism funds administered by the Association of Chief Police Officers.

The scheme was sold to residents as being an anti-crime measure.

Now I don't want to spread any panic or alarm and it was obviously on a much smaller scale but last year Forest Fields had a CCTV scheme imposed on them which was sold to residents as being about crime. I don't know where the money for it came from.

There was some discomfiture expressed about the fact that two of the three cameras were placed outside Mosques. As I mentioned before, if CCTV was about crime then surely Bestwood would be a veritable forest of the things. In fact, at the last count, they had four.

Hmmm.

Farmyard Animals Drafted in to Improve Neighbourhood Management in Forest Fields

This is a bit surreal.

Forest Fields councillors have agreed money to "fund a billygoat* to improve the service to the residents of Forest Fields."

No, it really says that, go and look.

Next week, the Chief Executive is replaced with a small poodle so as better to carry out the required lapdog functions for Cllr Collins. Rumours that any councillors would be replaced with farmyard animals were strenuously denied on the basis that they are all efficient enough at keeping their noses in the trough already. Arf.

*Ok, I'm presuming it's not REALLY a beardy ruminant of the male persuasion we're talking about here, although I truthfully haven't got any idea what they are actually talking about.

Update; I am told via the magic of Twitter that it's all about one of these. Which is just dull.

CCTV Decision

Wrote before about hearing that the decision whether to install CCTV posts in Forest Fields had gone through, now the Executive Portfolio Decision made by Cllr Jon Collins has finally been posted on the Council's website.

Have a look at this bit from the supporting report -

"Residents asked that the whole of Forest Fields be consulted and that it went to a vote which was included in the second letter. Neighbourhood management are of the opinion that this has skewed the results as only one vote per household was allowed therefore biasing multiple occupancy households."

I don't know about you but to me that reads as though they are claiming that the consultation biased results in favour of multi occupancy households when of course the opposite would have been true. Pulling the wool over eyes or just badly written?

And have a look at this bit, I wasn't aware of this before -

"Concern has been expressed that 2 of the 3 proposed columns are outside mosques."

In response 'Equalities and Diversity' recommend -

"To work with the Muslim Communities Steering Group (MCSG), Safer Neighbourhood Teams, and the targeted communications strategy to tackle the negative perception."

Yeah, I'd do that.

A quick note about these portfolio decisions. A portfolio decision is one which has revenue implications of less than £500k or capital implications of less than £1m. The decision must also not affect 2 or more wards. If the decision does not fit in with these restrictions then it must be taken by the Executive Board unless it is one of the decisions that must be taken by full council as set out in the Council's constitution.

Clearly the idea behind delegation of authority in this manner is that large numbers of councillors' time is not taken up with making every single decision. Fair enough in principle, nothing would get done.

But as you can see it still leaves quite big decisions within the gift of one individual. And should the inner circle decide that a controversial policy (like CCTV) needs to be imposed with the minimum of democratic interference all they need to do is ensure it is rolled out on a ward by ward basis, thus making each individual decision a 'portfolio decision' to be taken by just one individual. Just saying.

Surely area committees should have some say over genuinely area specific decisions? Otherwise what's the point of them?

Forest Fields CCTV

(Thanks to www.photofunia.com)

I'd previously blogged about the prospect of CCTV being installed in Forest Fields and that the idea wasn't universally popular. There were also suggestions that the methods of 'consultation' were a little flawed.

Today, Indymedia is reporting that the scheme has "has been approved by Councillor Jon Collins". The information apparently comes from a letter to the campaigners from NCC.

Presuming it's true, this doesn't say a lot about democracy or even the much vaunted 'area working' within NCC. The Area 4 Committee didn't even mention CCTV at their meeting on 21 May, despite the fact that campaigners had written to Berridge Ward Councillors raising further objections on 1 May, not to mention the public meeting on 23 April.

Still, JoCo wants it ergo it happens.

CCTV in Forest Fields

(thanks to jamesholden.net/billboard)

Nottingham City Council is 'proposing' a new CCTV scheme in Forest Fields. They are planning three masts and it is being planned by NCC's Area 4 Neighbourhood Management team.

There was a recent 'consultation meeting', see the Indymedia report here by regular Indymedia contributor, journalist and photographer Alan 'Tash' Lodge. Amusingly, members of the Area 4 team objected to Alan photographing them. Alan reminded them they were they there hawking a CCTV scheme, yet objecting to being photographed themselves. Some people just walk into them don't they...

Further consultation is apparently planned on a 'by house' basis, somewhat ignoring the high level of multiple occupation in the area.

Note the start of a new Forest Fields blog, linked over there -->

More Indymedia coverage here.

Update; Forest Fields blog's own report here.