SIR - Security Service Centres MAKING use of CCTV to ascertain why an intruder alarm has been activated currently have the choice of acting illegally or closing down.

That situation has arisen as a result of a bureaucratic muddle, and all because the Security Industry Authority (SIA) suddenly changed its collective mind and said that all CCTV operators needed to be licensed.

Last September, the SIA assured leading security services providers - via e-mail - that licensing for security response-related CCTV operations wasn't going to be necessary. Then, on 6 February - a mere six weeks before the 20 March deadline for mandatory licensing of certain aspects of private sector security provision - SIA officials telephoned providers to say that licensing was necessary. Those services providers had little or no time to prepare.

Those same providers don't object to being licensed. What they do object to is the SIA's muddle which gave them no time to comply. In fact, only in the last few days of March - over a week after the 20 March deadline had passed, in fact - did the SIA change its web site.

Originally, the SIA's list of CCTV Scenarios included this provider set-up: "We operate a Remote Video Response Centre (RVRC) where CCTV is only viewed when triggered by an alarm. The operator will then identify the situation and respond accordingly. For example, if trespassers are on site, a security officer will be sent to the site or the authorities notified". That is verbatim.

In response to this scenario, the SIA's web site used to say: "This is not proactive and, as such, the individual is not licensable as a CCTV operative. However, this role might mean that the individual may be licensable as a security guard"... Now, it clearly states: "If the alarm-driven monitoring is being undertaken to identify intruders or trespassers and/or to protect property, these operators will not require a CCTV licence. They will, however, need to have a security guarding licence."

To compound this ‘felony', the SIA has no relevant qualification for the operators to attain in order to test them for the award of their licence. Neither the security officer licence nor the Public Space Surveillance CCTV licence have much relevance for the work carried out by non-proactive monitoring staff.

According to the SIA, since 20 March all existing remote alarm monitoring operatives using CCTV to verify alarms have been working illegally. As a result, many service providers are now seriously considering shutting down this part of their operation for fear of prosecution, leaving burglars with a field day on their hands. Is that what we really want?

Ray LeMonde Director Active Security Group

Source

SMT