LAST week's meeting of Dawlish Town Council's finance and general purposes committee was briefly suspended while a member of the public was asked to leave.
Resident Peter Harry, who is campaigning against the introduction of CCTV in the town, was asked to leave after twice interrupting proceedings.
Mr Harry had earlier asked a number of questions about the legality of the scheme. He wanted to know what evidence there was to spend £70,000 of public money on 'spy cameras', and was also concerned that the committee was not properly constituted. 'Was there a quorum at all times? Were those who took decisions qualified to do so? If not, this project in null and void,' he said.
He was also worried about the effect of radio signals used to transmit images on wildlife, particularly bats. However, this proved unfounded as all data transfer from the cameras is done using optical cables, not microwaves. Mr Harry became a disruptive influence at this point of the meeting and was asked to be quiet and sit down by the chairman of the finance and general purposes committee, Cllr Wally Protheroe.
Mr Harry refused and at 7.20pm the meeting was suspended and he was asked to leave. The meeting shortly resumed and the town clerk, John Winchester, advised members that extensive consultations had taken place in Dawlish as part of the Regeneration Group. Cllr Wally Protheroe described Mr Harry's questions as improper.
This prompted another resident, Keith Sharp, who agreed with Mr Harry, to walk out. Mr Sharp said later: 'To describe questions as improper, simply because they are embarrassing, is an affront to democracy.
'All the decisions in this project have been taken behind closed doors and we're simply trying to elicit some facts. Facts are apparently very inconvenient for Dawlish Town Council.' Mr Harry said later: 'Some time ago, the town council was awarded quality status. Among other things, this means it has to be transparent, and yet we have been told virtually nothing about this iniquitous project which has been nodded through with no transparency whatsoever. All decisions have been made behind closed doors and £70,000 spent, whether we like it or not. 'This project does nothing to address the causes of crime. The only people to benefit are those who supply the equipment. All the rest of us who object to having their human rights abused are the victims,' he said. Mr Winchester said: 'Dawlish Town Council first started thinking of CCTV in 2003, being urged by Teignbridge Council to consider it. 'A Teignbridge Council CCTV priority action group was set up and in 2004 the cost of it was added to the capital expenditure policy. 'Across the Coastline carried out extensive consultations with the people of Dawlish during three months in 2004. The results showed that people wanted CCTV. 'There will be the capacity to add more cameras if needed, as well a providing webcasts for tourism.'