Sort of, because Rennison – named in December as the regulator in addition to job as forensic science regulator – was in Australia when the CCTV seminar ran on March 9. He recorded a video message played to delegates. He went through his work: first, to design a ‘standards framework’ to meet the public interest – so that people who wish to complain about CCTV misuse, can; and to inform the public of CCTV benefits. He admitted that he did not know the answers – ‘I am not a CCTV expert, I was a policeman for 30 years and latterly a regulator’ - and wanted to consult widely. He – and the Home Office man who spoke at the event in person, Alan Pratt, the director responsible for science, engineering and technology – did stress the ‘constrained’ timetable. Rennison has to publish a draft report, to go to ministers in July, and allow for a 12-week consultation process. Final proposals should go to ministers by December.

Rennison spoke of a need to keep public and political support for CCTV; and to demonstrate that CCTV is used responsibly, and genuinely in the public interest. He said he did not want to create ‘a bureaucratic web’ around the use of CCTV. An ‘independent advisory group’ has everyone from lobby groups such as Liberty to security and other bodies with some CCTV connection - the BSIA, SIA, British Retail Consortium, CameraWatch, Skills for Security, the police and Crown Prosecution Service; and the NSI and SSAIB inspectorates. Event organiser Derek Maltby of Global MSC asked for questions to Alan Pratt from the floor. The only one came from Professional Security which asked – after hundreds of millions of pounds of tax money spent for more than 15 years – why the hurry-up? Alan Pratt replied that he did not accept that. “The fact that the Government has looked to introduce an interim regulator is an important example of its commitment to looking at this landscape and proposing more control measures around that.”