Councils defend use of covert surveillance

Despite efforts by the Government to curb town halls using the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), a Yorkshire Post investigation has revealed local authority snooping continues at a rate of more than four covert missions a week.

The tactic has proved hugely controversial – the powers were originally brought in to combat terrorism but were widely used by councils to spy on residents thought to be flouting school catchment rules or committing “bin crimes”.

Now the vast majority of surveillance operations are to try to catch benefit cheats or those committing anti-social behaviour. However, responding to the Yorkshire Post only a fraction of the region’s councils were able to show what they had actually achieved, and the number of prosecutions resulting from the surveillance was only 44.

Rotherham Council launched 157 surveillance operations in three years – one of the highest rates in the country – while Bradford, Hull and East Riding also used their powers more than 100 times.

The authorities have come under fire for excessive use of law supposedly brought in to bring down terrorist cells but they have claimed they are making the streets safer.

A spokesperson for Rotherham Council said surveillance operations were only used as a last resort.

“Surveillance is used ultimately to either protect the vulnerable or to cut down on benefit fraud but it is not used lightly,” she said. “The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act is in place to protect the public’s human rights.

“Rotherham uses it when there is hard information to suggest some illegal activity is taking place requiring further evidence that can only be obtained by surveillance.”

The costs of surveillance are shrouded in mystery –not a single council of the 21 surveyed in Yorkshire could provide a breakdown of the costs.

There was huge disparity across the region on the use of RIPA – as well as Bradford, Hull, Rotherham and East Riding it was widely used by Sheffield, York, North East Lincolnshire, North Yorkshire and Doncaster, and yet Harrogate, Calderdale, Wakefield, Barnsley and Scarborough used it fewer than 20 times each since September 2006.

Harrogate Council did not invoke the powers once in that period.

Asked if they were wasting a resource to clamp down on benefit cheats, a spokeswoman said: “The code of practice and guidance on the use of RIPA is very specific.

“Most cases can be resolved using other methods to collect evidence and or achieve compliance with the law.”

Privacy campaigner Big Brother Watch undertook a national survey and found local authorities carried out more than 8,500 surveillance operations between 2009 and 2011.

Operations included spying on dog owners, fly tippers, smokers, suspected benefit fraudsters, vagrants buying alcohol for under-18s and people repairing vehicles in the street.

More than 12 local councils used Ripa powers to spy on dog owners suspected of letting their animals foul public thoroughfares.

Alex Deane, the director of Big Brother Watch, which carried out the survey, based on freedom of information requests, said: “Now that the absurd and excessive use of RIPA surveillance has been revealed, these powers have to be taken away from councils.

“The coalition government plan to force councils to get warrants before snooping on us is good but doesn’t go far enough.

“If the offence is serious enough to merit covert surveillance, then it should be in the hands of the police.”