SIR,

The committee of Monmouth and District Chamber of Trade and Commerce is very sorry to hear of the latest burglaries and vandalism in Monmouth, and many Chamber members and members of the public have been in touch with me asking if the Chamber can increase the pressure on the Town Council to pay for the reinstatement of CCTV, as they feel it not only acts as a deterrent, but also will help the villains to be identified. Comments made to me by councillors suggest that now only two Town Councillors remain opposed to its reinstatement.

Regular Beacon readers will be aware of the great deal of effort Chamber committee members have put into the whole issue of reinstatement of CCTV over the last two years. They will recall the very well attended public meeting that the Chamber hosted on 26th February 2009, and the petition signed by no fewer than 1,037 residents of the town in support of CCTV, which was handed to the Town Council on 3rd April 2009.

We felt that the written response from the Town Council, not received until 25th August, misrepresented some of the history and background to the CCTV issue. To our dismay, the Town Council conclusion included the words "As can be envisaged, the above is likely to be an extended process. The previous process [of review] lasted over nine months and, of necessity, this process will need to deal in more detail".

The Chamber has established over the last five years a reputation for constructive dialogue with the organisations that have interests in the town, and by negotiation and compromise, a way forward is usually found.

However, in this case, the logic for the reinstatement of CCTV seems irrefutable. All other towns in the CCTV partnership are very happy with their latest technology static and mobile CCTV cameras, and their town councillors have been willing to write to me to that effect.

There has been a gradual but lately increasing number of burglaries and smashed shop windows in areas previously covered by the CCTV cameras since they were switched off in February 2008.

Monmouth Town Council is likely once again to have the lowest budget of any Town Council in the CCTV partnership by a substantial margin, and far less than the approximately £12,000 per annum sought by the county council – which puts £138,000 into the pot every year – for participation in the CCTV system.

It has been suggested by some town councillors that businesses in Monmouth should contribute to the cost, but businesses in other towns do not do so. From a statement made by a town councillor from another town at the CCTV public meeting, it would be possible for Monmouth Town Council to promise to pay twice next year, so as not to have to amend this current financial year's budget.

If no progress is made soon, we may face the threat of having the whole current CCTV system removed, making its reinstatement financially unviable.

What are Monmouth businesses doing in response to the loss of CCTV?

Some have responded by installing their own CCTV, and others are considering installing the Smartwater system, which allows people committing a break-in to be directly identified with the crime location. In addition, the Chamber will shortly be in contact with the County Council about the very poor lighting in areas targeted by those intent on crime.

What more can the primary lobbying organisation for businesses in the town do about the issue of reinstatement of CCTV?

The Chamber feels that the petition for the reinstatement of CCTV by 1,037 residents of the town, who are also customers of Monmouth businesses, gives us the mandate to seek further advice as to whether the town council have acted with due and timely process on the review of CCTV, in accordance with the established principles and duty of care required for operating a town council.

David Cummings

(Chairman, Monmouth and District Chamber of Trade and Commerce)