Quote:
Partnership manager R* *** said he hoped to add ANPR cameras in order to work out “how these vehicles are travelling around”.
He said there were no plans to use the data for enforcement but admitted it could be used as evidence. “If the police are aware that it’s there then they would want to look at it and then obviously there are issues about whether they would want to use it as evidence,” he added.
If he really said that to a journalist - he was foolish to do so as it's the sort of comment which can send shivers and alarm waves across the public majority.

.
Let me clarify - Police and CPS could only use something as evidence if material to the alleged offence. If the person was picked up as speeding - and then pinged again - then this would be recorded and dealt with under normal tot-up procedures. The sundry movements of that vehicle would be immaterial to a series of speeding raps leading to a ban - as mor than one person could be entitled to drive the vehicle. We would still have to prove the same person was driving and provide abslolute evidence of an offence committed.
Logging all cars to a tracking database could impact on a new owner if sold on and records not updated with immediate effect.
I think it to be another gimmick somehow

Possibly over-egged in the PR too and it comes across as an "own goal"
This sort of information would have to have very strict guidelines as to how to use appropriately and with respect to society at large.
Yes- we may look at ANPR data as a form of intelligence to get some profile on a known and identified suspect in the course of normal police work. We certainly should not be suggesting "mass surveillance" nor give the impression that this is the case as per the above quote from the article.
Laws can be enforced intelligently - but should not mean tracking of the entire population. Actually this would be counter productive given there would be just too much data to sift through. It;s sometimes faster to "drive" the "old fashioned way"
