Rules of the new spying game

The opposing view contends that such intrusions increase public safety, helping catch perpetrators in the act. This point of view has generally prevailed and the widespread monitoring of both high street and highway are now accepted, if regrettable, features of modern life.

Will hiring private investigators to observe crime hot spots or likely areas of antisocial behaviour be viewed in the same accepting way? As we report on page 26, the use of professional hired snoops by landlords is growing.

Plainly, this has one major advantage – the ability to generate large volumes of evidence without involving neighbours. Increasingly, fear of repercussions or reprisals deters tenants from reporting crime or antisocial activities. While this is not yet the case everywhere, the Home Office campaign to secure more ASBOs looks likely only to increase employment of professional witnesses.

But is hiring a couple of burly spies to monitor tenants going to cause more harm than good? Will this reduce trust between tenants and landlords if the former feels the latter is prying into their activities around the clock? Their use may be isolated at the moment, but when the practice becomes more widespread, will all new tenants be viewed as potential spooks?

Also, as we report, the vast majority of the monitoring focuses on “normal” behaviour. While this may help the investigators identify abnormal conduct, it does have a rather Orwellian ring to it. “Normal” can mean just about anything, depending who you ask, and in any case should we not retain the right to conduct our “normal” activities unobserved.

Or, does the need to crackdown on yobbish behaviour and vandalism, together with the need to bring improvements to tenants’ lives, justify any lawful form of investigation? Do these crimes blight tenants’ lives to such an extent they are prepared to accept the presence of undercover agents?

It is difficult to know for sure how tenants would react. But without actually asking them, landlords are unlikely to find out. While canvassing on estates may undermine the effectiveness of covert monitoring, it may also heighten tenants’ determination to deal with the local problems directly with their landlord – to speak out.

While the witnesses will, for some, have shades 1984, they may prove to be the best and, in some cases, the only answer. But before going ahead, landlords should grant tenants, in their roles as victims of antisocial behaviour – and objects of surveillance – a say in the matter.