67 million for cameras — but what about people?

 67 million for cameras — but what about people?

B.C., pay attention.

The province is replacing all 140 red-light and speed cameras across British Columbia under a $67-million, 10-year contract with Jenoptik Canada.

The government says the new cameras will have higher resolution and provide “better data” to help reduce dangerous driving and serious collisions.

And yes, road safety matters.

But whenever we install increasingly sophisticated cameras, we should also be asking some very basic questions:

What exactly are these cameras collecting?

How much information is stored?

How long is it kept?

Who can access it?

Can the technology eventually be expanded to identify and track vehicles beyond red-light and speeding violations?

And what safeguards prevent a road-safety system from slowly becoming something much bigger?

I want people to understand something else, too:

Don't confuse this $67-million Jenoptik project with Flock Safety. Flock is a separate automated licence-plate-reader system used extensively in the United States. The B.C. announcement is about replacing the province's existing intersection safety cameras.

But that doesn't mean we should simply shrug and say, “It's only traffic cameras.”

Technology changes.

Capabilities change.

Policies change.

And once expensive surveillance infrastructure is installed, it can be very difficult to put the genie back in the bottle.

So here's another question I can't stop thinking about:

If British Columbia can find $67 million for cameras, why can't we find enough money to make sure people have somewhere safe to sleep and enough food to eat?

We have people living on sidewalks.

People sleeping in vehicles.

People moving from couch to couch.

People choosing between groceries and rent.

People who are working and still can't afford housing.

We keep hearing that there isn't enough money.

Yet somehow, there is money for infrastructure, contracts, technology and enforcement.

I'm not saying don't make roads safer.

I'm asking whether safety should also include the people who are already struggling to survive.

A society should be able to do both.

Keep people safe on the roads.

And keep people from freezing, starving or sleeping outside.

So, B.C., here's what I want to know:

What does “better data” mean?

And if we can spend $67 million watching the roads, why can't we spend the same determination making sure nobody is left without a place to call home?

Reflective Questions

1. If cameras are installed for road safety today, who decides what they can be used for tomorrow?

2. What happens when technology created to catch dangerous drivers becomes useful for tracking ordinary people?

3. How much information should governments be allowed to collect about people who have done nothing wrong?

4. If a system can identify a vehicle, where it was and when it was there, is that still just a traffic camera?

5. Who audits the people with access to this information—and what happens when someone misuses it?

6. Should police or governments be able to search historical vehicle movements without a person ever knowing?

7. What safeguards exist to prevent a legitimate road-safety system from becoming a mass-surveillance system?

8. If we would object to a government following us on foot, why should following our vehicles electronically be treated differently?

9. Why are we so willing to spend tens of millions monitoring people, while telling people without housing that there simply isn't enough money?

10. If $67 million can be found for cameras, what would $67 million invested in housing, food and human survival look like?

B.C. cameras, traffic surveillance, licence plate readers, Flock Safety, Jenoptik Canada, privacy, mass surveillance, road safety, housing crisis, public spending

#BritishColumbia #BCRoadSafety #TrafficCameras #PrivacyMatters #Surveillance #FlockSafety #Jenoptik #HousingCrisis #HousingJustice #PublicMoney