John MacDonald: Police cameras yes - with a couple of provisos

I’ve surprised myself a little bit with my reaction to the news the police are looking at introducing body cameras. 

Generally, I’m all for it. But the civil liberties people have raised some very good points about them being misused. 

One example they’re giving is the potential for the cameras to be combined with facial recognition technology. Which I'm torn on, after finding out about facial recognition being used at the Richmond Club, in Christchurch, to keep an eye on people using the pokie machines. 

They're are asking how we're going to know - once police start wearing body cameras - when an officer is filming and when they’re not.  

Is there a chance, for example, that you or I might be walking down the street and get filmed by the cops walking towards us? 

Which is why the head of New Zealand’s civil liberties council is saying that there needs to be robust policies in place before any officer starts going around the place wearing one of these things. 

The bit Thomas Beagle is concerned about most, is the lines between body cameras and facial recognition getting blurred. 

He’s saying: “Suddenly, it turns footage into data of who was where, what their names are, and what they were doing. In a way, that’s really quite worrying and can be put together to build up the surveillance society.” 

So he wants clear, robust policies in place. Policies which make it clear, for example, who will be able to access any footage captured on the body cameras. 

He says if we’re going to bring-in body cameras, we may need to look at the idea of having someone independent deciding when footage is released and who it’s released to.  

He reckons that could be a job for the Independent Police Conduct Authority, making the very good point that the cameras not only need to serve the police well - but they also need to serve the public well. 

And that’s the bit that has probably surprised me a bit. That I’m not as holus-bolus enthusiastic about police body cameras as maybe I expected myself to be. 

The civil liberties people are spot on - referring to cases overseas where police have refused to release body camera footage when officers have been accused of things like misconduct. 

I’ve also been reading a BBC report which talks about other ways these things have been misused. Or abused. 

It reports more than 150 examples of camera misuse by police in England and Wales.  

For example, officers turning the cameras off when they’ve been dealing forcefully with someone. Giving someone the old heave-ho. You know: “I’ll just turn this thing off for a minute while we give this turkey what he deserves.” 

The BBC has also discovered cases where police have deleted footage and even shared footage with other officers on WhatsApp. 

But, before you think I’ve gone totally civil liberties on it - I’m all for the police wearing body cameras. 

For many reasons. For starters - it’s crazy that security officers and parking wardens can wear them, but police can’t. 

And, even though there are a truckload of examples of these cameras being misused, you could say the same about any bad police behaviour. 

There are dodgy cops everywhere - but that doesn’t mean we get rid of the police. 

And, as police commissioner Richard Chambers is saying today, New Zealand is one of the few countries not using them. 

He says body cameras are great for gathering evidence and they’re great for keeping staff safe. 

So he’s going to have people working on options over the  next 12 months and, hopefully, by that time - they’ll be ready to press go. 

I see Chris Cahill from the police association is a bit worried about the cost. 

He’s saying that some countries are getting rid of them because of how much it costs to store the footage. 

And, not surprisingly, he doesn’t want to see the spending on body cameras meaning there’s less money to be spent on frontline officers and police vehicles.  

He says: “It isn’t the game changer that we thought it might be, but it has certainly got significant benefits and many officers in Australia don’t want to deploy without it.” 

But all up, when I consider what Chris Cahill is saying about the cameras not being the silver bullet and the many cases overseas of these things being misused, I still think is a great move by the police commissioner. 

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
I have how about this. I've surprised myself a little
bit with this body camera plan the police are talking
about because generally I'm all for it. Generally I'm all
for it, but these civil liberties people have raised a
very good point about the potential for these cameras to
be misused. Now, one example they're giving is the camera's

(00:33):
being combined with facial recognition technology. And if you were
listening last week, you'll know that I'm a bit torn
on the old facial recognition after we learned about it
being used at the Richmond Club in Christchurch to keep
an eye on people using the poke machines. Remember that.
So what the civil liberties people are saying today is
how are we going to know once police start wearing

(00:56):
body cameras? How are we going to know when an
officer is filming and when they're not? And is there
a chance, for example, that you are you're right, might
be walking down the street and get filmed by the
cops walking towards us and what happens to the footage
if they are Which is why the head of New

(01:16):
Zealand Civil Liberties Council is saying that there needs to
be robust policies in place before any officer starts going
around the place wearing one of these things, and I
agree one hundred percent. The Thomas Beagel is most concerned
about is the facial recognition stuff and the lines getting blurred,
and he's saying today quote, suddenly it turns into footage,

(01:39):
or turns footage into data of who was where, what
their names are, and what they're doing. And he says,
quote in a way that's really quite worrying and can
be put together to build up the surveillance society. So
he wants clear, robust policies in place. He wants policies
which make it clear, for example, who will be able

(02:00):
to access any footage captured on the body cameras. And
he says, if we're going to in body cameras, we
may need to look at the idea of having someone
independent deciding when footage is released and who it's released to.
All very good points. He reckons that could be a
job for the independent Police Conduct Authority. Are saying that

(02:24):
the cameras not only need to serve the police well,
but they also need to serve the public well, and
he's getting no argument from me. And that's the bit
that has probably surprised me a bit that I'm not
as whole as bowldless enthusiastic about police body cameras as
maybe I expected myself to be. And the civil liberties

(02:44):
people this spot on referring to cases overseas where police have,
for example, refused to release body camera footage when officers
have been accused of things like misconduct. I've also been
reading a BBC report this morning which talks about other
ways these things have been misused or abused, for example

(03:06):
reports of more than one hundred and fifty examples in
England and Wales of the police being dodgy with cameras,
for example, turning them off when they've been dealing forcefully
with someone, you know, giving someone the old heave ho,
and thinking I've just turned this thing off for a
minute while we give this turkey what he deserves. The

(03:30):
BBC has also discovered cases where police have deleted footage
and they've even shared footage with other officers on WhatsApp.
But before you think I've gone totally civil liberties on it,
let me reassure you that bone large. I'm all for
the police wearing body cameras for many reasons. For starters.
It's crazy, isn't it. It's crazy that security officers and

(03:52):
parking wardens can wear them but the police can't. And
even though there are a truckload of examples of these
cameras being misused, I've talked about some of them already.
You could say the same about any bad police behavior.
You know there are dodgy comps everywhere, doesn't mean we
get rid of the police. And as Police Commissioner Richard
Chambers are saying today, New Zealand is one of the

(04:14):
few countries not using them. He says they're great for
gathering evidence, they're great for keeping staff safe, and just
like the civil liberties people are getting no argument from me,
he's not getting any argument from me either. So he's
going to have people, this is the Police Commissioner. He's
going to have people working on options over the next
twelve months and hopefully, hopefully by that time they'll be

(04:37):
ready to press go. I see Chris Carhill from the
Police Association, these are a bit worried about the cost.
He's saying that some countries are actually getting rid of
their cameras because of how much it costs to store
the footage and not surprisingly, he doesn't want to see
the spending on body cameras meaning less money for frontline
officers and police vehicles. So there you go, he says, quote,

(05:00):
it isn't the game change that we thought it might be,
but it has certainly got significant benefits and me any
the officers in Australia don't want to deploy without them,
So all up, I'm going to weigh it all up, concerns, enthusiasm.
When I weigh it all up, they're great. It's a

(05:20):
great move by the Police Commissioner.

Speaker 1 (05:23):
For more from Canterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks at be christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio