Filming, tweeting and blogging at council meetings

It been a couple of months since I began enquiring into local authorities’ attitudes to blogging, tweeting, and in particular filming at their meetings.  All of Wales’ 22 authorities have sent a reply to my enquiry into policies they have on this issue which can be seen here.  It would seem that most councils do not have extensive or definite policies on the issue of the public filming at council meetings.  What is clear is that most councils leave permission to film at council meetings at the discretion of mayors or, in most cases to the council chairperson.  This is, of course a reasonable policy, however there are no guidelines for chairpeople to follow, which outlining under what circumstances can they allow or refuse filming.   When I attempted to ask about such guidelines my requests were refused due to their “similarity” to my initial requests.

It is interesting to note, however, that the Welsh Government has not given any information or guidance to Welsh councils on this issue.  I asked,

“Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, please provide copies of
all:
A) directives
B) discussions (emails / memos)

sent to all or any Welsh councils relating to the following:

1) filming of council meetings
2) tweeting at council meetings
3) blogging of council meetings”

The response was:

“I have not found any information that fits this description. The Minister for Local Government and Communities has not issued any advice, directives or memos to Welsh councils regarding this matter.”

Of course the Welsh Government would argue that they leave such issues to the local authorities, however, this lessaiz fare attitude isn’t always the case in Welsh Government and local authority relations.

Plaid Cymru councillors to challenge filming rule

I’m glad to hear that there are some movement out there on the issue of filming at council meetings.  It would seem that Plaid Cymru councillors in Wrexham will seek to scrap Standing Order 45 (page 4-18), which prohibits council meetings without the chair’s permission.

Here’s what the standing order says,

“45 *PHOTOGRAPHS AND RECORDING AT MEETINGS

Proceedings at meetings may not be photographed, videoed, sound recorded or transmitted in any way outside the meeting without prior permission of the Chair. Failure to comply with this Standing Order may invoke Standing Orders 14 and 15 relating to Disorderly Conduct and Disturbance by members of the public.”

This is something Rhondda Cynon Taff should consider doing also.

What have they got to hide?

caebrwyn arrested (c)Alex Murray Smith

I was shocked to see news of the arrest of a blogger in Carmarthen for the terrible crime of… filming a council meeting from the public gallery. Yes, it would seem that Carmarthenshire county council have something that it doesn’t want to be filmed. In today’s connected world this story was across twitter and on the Telegraph website.

It’s a sad situation to find that a supposedly democratic body stops its meeting in order to have a member of the public arrested for filming proceedings, what have they to hide? I welcome the work @caebrwyn is doing holding the council to account and bringing council proceedings to the public.

There is no wonder that councils across the country are dominated by cliques when they actively oppose transparency and openness.

It is a welcome sight to see more people tweeting blogging, and (attempting to) film council proceedings. Lets hope more people will be willing to draw attention to what councils do.

Jacqui Thompson (caebrwyn) has started a petition to the Welsh Assembly on the issue of filming local government proceedings and openness, I urge you to sign it HERE

UPDATE 13/6/11 : It was only a matter of time before a Freedom of Information request was made. Lets hope the response will give some clarity on the situation.

New Statesman article

Here is the video of what happened in the chamber.

A chance encounter

As I was sent on an errand by Heather this morning, I decided to take my camera with me, after all it was a radiant autumn morning.  This was probably the best bit of luck I’ve had in a while.  I’m not sure if you’re the same as me, but I often curse when I’m out and about without my camera, because that is when something interesting happens.  Well today was the day when Powys Eisteddfod held a precession through the town.  So here are some of the photos I managed to get!

Who gets the rights?

One thing that has puzzled me for a while is the question – Who owns the content of a social network account after the user has passed away. Naturally I would assume that the next of Kin would be the legal patron of the content. However the problems arise with access to that account, and how a friend / family member gains access to an account to make sure that the account isn’t abused. As a flickr member and someone who enjoys taking photographs, i would want ownership of those photos to be passed to my loved ones. So where does the law stand on this issue?

Yr hawl i dynnu llun

DSC_0030

Derbyniais i fy nghopi o Sylw yr wythnos hon, ac mae’n ddiddorol i weld bod yna erthygl gan Marian Delyth ar ffotograffiaeth, a’r ffordd y mae’r Heddlu yn defnyddio deddfau amherthnasol i geisio rhwystro a hyd yn oed atal ffotograffwyr rhag tynnu lluniau ohonyn nhw. Wrth gwrs mae’n hollol ddealladwy nad yw pawb yn hoffi cael eu llun wedi tynnu, ac yn sicr nad yw pawb yn croesawu gweld eu llun yn y papur neu ar y we. Ond mae storïau o Heddweision yn ceisio atal ffotograffwyr rhag tynnu lluniau o brotestiadau a’r ffordd y mae’r heddlu yn gweithredu yn ystod y digwyddiadau hyn yn frawychus. Un o brif arfau’r Heddlu wrth rwystro ffotograffwyr yw’r Ddeddf Terfysgaeth (2000). Gyda deddf Gwrth Terfysgaeth 2008 a hon mae gan heddwas yr hawl i fynd a chamera neu ffôn symudol os ei fod e’n tybio bod y lluniau sydd ar y ddyfais yn mynd i fynd at ddefnydd Terfysgwyr, neu helpu gweithred o derfysgaeth.

Ond yr hyn sy’n digwydd yn gynyddol erbyn hyn yw bod y ddeddf yma yn cael ei defnyddio fel esgus i atal ffotograffwyr rhag tynnu llun heddweision wrth iddynt fod wrth eu busnes plismona pob dydd. Enghraifft o hyn yw stori’r ddynes yma a chafodd ei hatal yn ffisegol gan yr heddlu oherwydd ei bod hi wedi ffilmio triniaeth cafodd ei sboner hi gan yr Heddlu. Ffilmio’r Heddlu wrth iddynt fynd o gwmpas eu gwaith pob dydd oedd hi, nid oedd cynnwys y ffilm yn mynd i fod o ddefnydd i unrhyw fudiad terfysgol. Er hyn dyna oedd y rheswm dros ei hatal, a’r ymgais i gipio’i ffôn oddi wrthi.

Fel person sy’n cymryd diddordeb mewn ffotograffiaeth, ac wedi tynnu lluniau o brotestiadau a hefyd lluniau o weithredoedd yr heddlu yn y protestiadau hynny, mae’r newyddion hyn yn fy mhoeni. Mae’n amlwg bod yr heddlu yn barod i gam ddefnyddio eu pwerau i atal y cofnodi o ddigwyddiadau gwleidyddol eu naws. Mewn ffordd fe ellir gweld hwn fel sensoriaeth uniongyrchol gan yr heddlu trwy greu awyrgylch o ofn.

Dyma beth y mae’r ddeddf yn ei ddweud:

58. Collection of information

(1) A person commits an offence if—

(a) he collects or makes a record of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or

(b) he possesses a document or record containing information of that kind.

(2) In this section “record”

includes a photographic or electronic record.

Deddf Terfysgaeth 2000

No photography.


As a keen amateur photographer, I read with concern articles such as THIS showing a disturbing readiness of the Police to stop, question and even arrest someone on the street for merely taking a photograph. With increasing frequency there are reports in the press of police using the Terrorism Act (2000) as a pretext to stop and search photographers, in public places.

What could possibly be the danger in taking a picture of a building or a protest?