Mr. Drew Harris:

In the first place, the body-worn cameras piece is nearly the easiest to deliver. The purchase of a model of body-worn camera is one of the easier pieces to deliver. What would be more difficult to deliver would be the infrastructure, particularly the storage required. We require a huge amount of digital storage to an evidential standard, not only to receive the body-worn camera data but also to receive material from CCTV and other digital recording devices, be they mobile phones or handheld camcorders, and also from aerial surveillance, including by drones, and vehicular surveillance. There is a lot of material. The digital recording Bill is actually about all the digital evidence we would record. The body-worn camera is one element of that. We anticipate that we will commence a roll-out. In terms of risk, we would have to think about our specialist units and the ability to deliver connectivity. A huge amount of connectivity is required, along with the ability to transmit data. A camera plugged in and switched on for half an hour will require the movement of a huge amount of data across a network. Considering that 25 to 100 members may be doing the same thing at the same time, we need a very robust structure.

There is an expense in that, but we will step our way through it. I am thinking of things like the armed support unit, the emergency response unit and uniformed members on the 24-7 response who, obviously, would use that for evidential purposes, be it at the scene of domestic abuse, in street encounters where they feel there is some tension, etc., or when recording scenes of crimes or crime in action. There are multiple uses. They have been shown to moderate behaviour with the public but also police. They moderate behaviour, reduce complaints and provide good evidential footage for subsequent court appearances.