By Nick Heath, 5 June 2008 17:05
NEWS
Manchester is now protected by a "ring of steel" - a network of surveillance cameras that will log almost every car entering the city centre.
The network of 15 automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras cover main approaches to the metropolitan area.
Security from A to Z
Click on the links below to find out more...
A is for Antivirus
B is for Botnets
C is for CMA
D is for DDoS
E is for Extradition
F is for Federated identity
G is for Google
H is for Hackers
I is for IM
J is for Jaschan (Sven)
K is for Kids
L is for Love Bug
M is for Microsoft
N is for Neologisms
O is for Orange
P is for Passwords
Q is for Questions
R is for Rootkits
S is for Spyware
T is for Two-factor authentication
U is for USB sticks/devices
V is for Virus variants
W is for Wi-fi
X is for OS X
Y is for You
Z is for Zero-day
Every car is screened against a network of police and government databases, with the system able to instantly trigger alerts about everything from suspected terrorists and stolen vehicles, to banned drivers and tax dodgers.
The plate number, car colour and entry time of an estimated 600,000 cars per day are being kept by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) for five years.
This addition to the existing Manchester Metronet system of about 100 cameras is one of the first "rings of steel" outside London.
Mobile ANPR cameras used in Manchester over the past two years have already resulted in police seizing more than 30,000 cars flagged as illegal by the system.
Assistant chief constable Dave Thompson said the new fixed camera sites "will bring enormous benefits to the police and aid us in protecting our communities".
In a statement Mike George, ANPR project manager for GMP, said: "GMP has historically invested in vehicle-based ANPR systems which have proven effective as a mobile solution."
A GMP spokesman said the stored data would be used to provide criminal intelligence and evidence in police investigations.
Each ANPR camera costs about £5,000 and it costs about £1,000 per year to keep the Metronet CCTV system running.
Because Metronet is a wireless IP CCTV network it is cheaper for GMP to move existing ANPR cameras and to introduce new ones, with 10 more expected to be fitted over the next year.
The databases that GMP run checks against include the Police National Computer, Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA's) system, as well as other local police logs.
A trial of an ANPR-linked database checking system in 2004 ran into trouble because information in the DVLA's databases was so unreliable but the agency claims accuracy has greatly increased since then.
London's ring of steel was introduced in the early 1990s following a bombing campaign by the IRA.
Comments
There are 11 comments. Join the discussion
1. Chris Walker
What possible justification can Manchester police have for keeping for 5 years the records of tens of thousands of innocent citizens going about their legitimate business. Police State big style. I certainly won't be visiting Manchester, thank you very much.
2. Roy Lambert
I wonder of the 30,000 siezed cars how many were tax dogers and how many criminals/terrorists.
Assistant chief constable Dave Thompson said the new fixed camera sites "will bring enormous benefits to the police and aid us in protecting our communities".
See comment above
3. Chris Goodman
This is to be applauded in it's success in removing uninsured, untaxed vehicles from the road - but - the criminal fraternity will rapidly know where the cameras are located and will equally rapidly find routes that avoid camera detection. However, the criminal alternative to being "camered" is logically to use a newly stolen vehicle that won't show up in the database while carrying out criminal activities.
A lot more thought is needed to prove that the system is not just a costly car tax supporting project but is actively successful in crime prevention and detection.
4. Karen Challinor
why hang on to the details for five years ? if it's untaxed, uninsured or stolen then it will come up immediately and the police can deal with it there and then so a week at most should be sufficient
5 years amounts to another scheme to monitor the activities of the innocent so that it's prepared for future function creep when it happens
5. Drew Stephenson
Swings and roundabouts for me on this one. The positive side is that if this reduces the number of uninsured and un-MOT'd (potentially unsafe) vehicles on the road then that will benefit all of us who do pay our premiums regularly as well as reducing the total number of cars on the road.
There are two bits that concern me: one is the holding of data for 5 years - this seems hugely excessive given that the vast majority of the data will be related to people who have committed no offence. What will happen with this data? How secure is it? How long before someone sells it to a company who will bombard you with offers of cut price parking in manchester etc?
The second bit that concerns me is around the quality of the data that they'll be using in the first place. I know that the DVLA have been improving this but i hear that it's still a long way from reliable...
6. MusicFan
Thats another city crossed off the "visitation list".
Even the phrase "ring of steel" has a heavy handed police state sound about it.
Whats next...
"City of zero tolerance" ?
how about
"The land of forgotten free will"
or
"The day of no return"
Why not build a wall with a guarded gate? that would protect the citizens of manchester right?
we could call it "The wall of imprisonment"
7. Simon
Good god, do people REALLY have to ask why the police are keeping the details for 5 years ? It's damn obvious, it's so that for any crime, they can just go fishing through the database - just hope that you weren't in the database as having been in the city on the wrong day.
8. GALLEY SLAVE#41
Who keeps a car for FIVE years?
So not much point keeping data or does big brother have another motive????
9. Jeremy Wickins
I was thinking about getting a job in Manchester, but not now - I won't ever go to the place again. This is inappropriate use of potentially beneficial technology. I, like others, cannot see any justification for keeping the data for five years - to my mind, they'd have trouble justifying five months.
10. Joe Whitehead
Seriously though, what's the point except to pay someone to keep track of millions of hours of the recordings? I too expect that it will be (ab)used to gather behaviour statistics for marketing purposes or other more anomalious reasons.
11. Charles Smith
There are at least 32 roads into Manchester. How will 17 cameras provide a ring of steel? This approach is easily avoided unless every road is covered.
Essentially this is just sticky beak policing paid for by public money.