Skip to main content

Covert Tape Recording

One of the issues raised in the Sunday Telegraph today is that of covert tape recording. The recording of Video pictures with CCTV is covered by the Data Protection Act because it records someone's face.

As far as I can tell a Public Authority is prevented from doing a covert tape recording unless it is done in accordance with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

However, as it is entirely reasonable to take notes of a conversation that someone has with another party then I cannot see that the privacy aspects of ECHR constrain recording the same conversation. The situation may be difficult for a situation where someone is "bugged".

I know that Childrens Social Services don't like meetings being recorded. I think, however, that this is wrong and they should be willing to have recordings made. It is much like the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 where tape recordings are used for interviews to ensure there is accuracy of evidence.

I would think that having accuracy of evidence in respect of Child Protection Proceedings would be a step forwards.


moira said…
Secretly taping ss has saved some families.They were able to prove lies in statements and meetings.

I wish I had secretly taped them,then I could prove in the complaint malicious,childish and bullying behaviour.

Due to social services having power to instigate care proceedings,I would think it was absolutely necessary to record them. Similar as you say to the offender who is taped as he is going to end up in court.

Why do criminals have more rights than someone who has asked for help from SS and suddenly find themselves in a nightmare situation.

due to secrecy, social services have been allowed to become a corrupt organisation where lying is now considered perfectly normal if it gets social workers the results they want.A situation that must be righted.
Benedict White said…
John, I thought PACE was 1984?

Actually for a one off recording the Data protection act will not help them.

As it is not yet in court they can't rely on the secrecy of that either.


I have also linked back here from my blog.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…