Sadly not from the Onion.

August 3, 2009 8:13 AM

The UK Government's Children's Secretary Ed Balls has announced a controversial new CCTV monitoring scheme, in which thousands of problem families are to be monitored 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Balls claims that the £400 million 'sin bin' scheme will put up to 20,000 problem families under 24-hour surveillance in their own homes, to ensure children go to bed and school on time and eat proper meals.

A pilot version of the program has already been running in 2,000 homes.
posted by bergeycm (76 comments total)

but if they're not doing anything wrong, what do they have to worry about?

/1984
posted by billysumday at 8:17 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

Difference is, if this happened here in the US, Fox would make a reality show out of it.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 8:19 AM on August 3, 2009 [3 favorites]

Also, who will be watching all of that footage? Is there just going to be a huge building of 10,000 people watching monitors, all of them waiting for a father to take a sip of whiskey, then calling in the SWAT team? Reminds me of Lives of Others.
posted by billysumday at 8:19 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

Your headline preempted my original impulse, which was to ask, "This isn't parody, is it?"
So... what's going on UK? Is this class warfare? Moral panic? Brain Slug invasion?
posted by Richard Daly at 8:20 AM on August 3, 2009

wait, what? There's no way, right?
posted by kolophon at 8:20 AM on August 3, 2009

That Ed fella sure has some Balls.
posted by billysumday at 8:21 AM on August 3, 2009

Ignoring for a brief moment the utter stupidity of the concept, how are they planning to determine what a 'problem' family is? Under what circumstances would someone be forced to submit to this? I'm assuming they would need to be forced, since voluntarily submitting to twenty-four hour surveillance seems unlikely (unless you're applying for a reality TV show).
posted by Pragmatica at 8:21 AM on August 3, 2009

Has this been reported anywhere apart from the Express? In a real newspaper, for example.
posted by ninebelow at 8:23 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

I, for one, welcome our new government overlords.
posted by incessant at 8:23 AM on August 3, 2009

When will the UK get a clue..???. anything that can be shot with a camera can be BETTER shot with a sniper rifle, with more effective results....
posted by HuronBob at 8:24 AM on August 3, 2009

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
posted by FfejL at 8:25 AM on August 3, 2009 [3 favorites]

WHAT. THE. FUCK. OCEANIA?
posted by Horace Rumpole at 8:26 AM on August 3, 2009 [15 favorites]

Has this been reported anywhere apart from the Express? In a real newspaper, for example.

Interesting question. A quick search for the terms "monitoring cctv uk sin bin" only reveals the Express article and blog/news sites (slashdot being one) that link to the Express article.

I may need a tinfoil hat for my tinfoil hat soon...
posted by Pragmatica at 8:28 AM on August 3, 2009

It's a shame there isn't an Onion article making this claim, because it's a significantly more credible source than the Express.
posted by Bodd at 8:28 AM on August 3, 2009 [5 favorites]

Has this been reported anywhere apart from the Express?
Here's the relevant pages at the Home Office's website - just reading their introductory PDF
posted by Abiezer at 8:29 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

Yeah, I'll wait for a reputable source too.

Or, someone can ask Ed Balls. He's on Twitter.
posted by vacapinta at 8:30 AM on August 3, 2009

Anyone want to start an over/under on "months until this is on pay-per-view"?
posted by jquinby at 8:31 AM on August 3, 2009

Orwellysterical!
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:32 AM on August 3, 2009

crackdown on violent girl gangs

there are strange things in that sin bin article. I'd never heard of girl gangs before
posted by bhnyc at 8:34 AM on August 3, 2009

Balls to this!

They should just line the poor fuckers up and execute them! Or enslave them. Or pith them and use 'em as organ farms. They're just going to ruin the goddamn video cameras with all their bloody awful bean stews and things.
posted by Mister_A at 8:34 AM on August 3, 2009

Won't somebody please think about the children?
posted by Sphinx at 8:35 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

Seriously though, someone needs to kick this guy in the nuts.
posted by Mister_A at 8:35 AM on August 3, 2009

So far comes across as social work on steroids - no mention of CCTV that I can see though phrase "twenty-four hour monitoring" occurs.
The 400 million figure seems to the Express projecting potential costs, while in the HO literature it's touted as a money saver avoiding more costly intervention with persistent offenders.
posted by Abiezer at 8:36 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

Ed Balls is watching you masturbate.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 8:37 AM on August 3, 2009 [3 favorites]

Ed Balls is the one man in this sore and sick community who wants to save you from yourself!
posted by orme at 8:38 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

don't suppose anyone's gonna Direct Message edballsmp via twitter for confirmation?
posted by shmegegge at 8:39 AM on August 3, 2009

...parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction.

Yay! You got one thing right in the whole ghastly program.

Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks...

Hired goons at bedtime! Excellent idea! Private security guards are known for their discretion, decency, and good judgment. They should give the goons tasers, too.
posted by Mister_A at 8:39 AM on August 3, 2009

Here's the relevant pages at the Home Office's website

Presumably all the links in the post relate to this paragraph in the Family Interventions Respect Guide:

Intensive support programme in supervised accommodation

Families in this type of provision receive 24-hour support and supervision from staff in accommodation provided by the project. Families are likely to be involved in many structured sessions complemented by daily unstructured observation. If the family complies with interventions and behaviour improves sufficiently then they will be able to move into one of the above.

It makes it very clear that this is the last resort for extreme situations.
posted by ninebelow at 8:40 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

By the way, since Cory Doctorow almost exploded over this, I dread to think what levels of insane hyperbole he will reach if he gets wind of this.
posted by ninebelow at 8:40 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

Huh. You know, normally I'm pretty forthright in dismissing the idea that the UK is some kind of Orwellian nightmare-island just because we have relatively high rates of public CCTV coverage.

This, however, is panopticon-esque bullshit that completely oversteps the line and I completely accept any criticism of it. On one hand it's abhorrent in principle, turning un-approved families into prisoners in their own home based on the actions of (presumably) only some of their members. On the other it's ridiculous and counterproductive in practise, making the state and by extension the rest of society a despicable jailor to these people, instead of a just and rewarding group to aspire into.

This programme isn't a solution to social problems; it's the embodiment of the worst kind of vicious, controlling impulses we feel against those we despise. Even if it was successful at its stated purpose, which I'm sceptical of, it wouldn't be worth the cost to our humanity and our credibility.
posted by teresci at 8:41 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

Reading Abiezer's posts the only outrage I see so far is shoddy journalism.
posted by vacapinta at 8:42 AM on August 3, 2009

We need to learn from the freedom-loving US - do fuck all to support families in crisis and lock up all young black men in for-profit prisons. Flame on!
posted by Abiezer at 8:42 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

How can you have your pudding, if you don't eat your meat wear your barcode tattoo, electronic ankle bracelet, and bluetooth microphone?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 8:44 AM on August 3, 2009

I predict a high success rate for this program. I give it 5 years until the UK has finally returned to its natural state as a crime-free paradise.
posted by molecicco at 8:45 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

> don't suppose anyone's gonna Direct Message edballsmp via twitter for confirmation?

Can't dm him unless he follows me back (highly unlikely), but I did send "@edballsmp Minister, is this report regarding CCTV accurate? http://bit.ly/vbcs7" a few minutes ago. I'll post any replies I get here.
posted by FfejL at 8:45 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

Uhh, that is... assuming that the Express isn't just exaggerating and/or making things up wholesale, in order to titillate its right-wing base and enrage everyone else -- which on preview, seems entirely possible.
posted by teresci at 8:47 AM on August 3, 2009

I love it when people think of 1984 as a how-to manual, rather than a cautionary tale.

Since logic and a sense of decency seem to be lost on these folks, I can think of only one way to combat this: ask why paedophiles want to watch children all day. Just ask a few times, in the right places. Only paedophiles would like access to a stream of cameras monitoring kids in their PJs (or less) getting into bed, eh?

The whole notion should shortly crumble.
posted by adipocere at 8:47 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

What an excellent contribution to the discussion, abiezer. It is a well-established that the US is the worst ever at everything, but I am glad that you pointed it out in this context.
posted by Mister_A at 8:47 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

What an excellent contribution to the discussion, abiezer.
It was a joke, ffs, and on a par with all the "1984" and your own 'hired goons at bedtime'. Ignorant shite from foreigners who don't know does get the back up, doesn't it?
posted by Abiezer at 8:49 AM on August 3, 2009 [5 favorites]

Well why don't you explain it to us, Abiezer?
posted by Mister_A at 8:53 AM on August 3, 2009

Explain what? Why so many people in this thread are credulous fools incapable of doing anything but spouting slogans?
posted by ninebelow at 8:55 AM on August 3, 2009

It's amazing that people get worked up about this but show no outrage that Obama, a man who is not even a US citizen, is planning to establish euthansia camps in the US for the elderly!

(Pssst: sometimes crappy newspapers publish claims that are not, in fact, true).
posted by yoink at 8:55 AM on August 3, 2009

Beyond my two earlier posts on the official position - the first a link to the HO intro and the second my take on it? Get a grip.
posted by Abiezer at 8:56 AM on August 3, 2009

Abiezer is pointing out that everyone is so quick to actually believe this - and that itself betrays a lot. He actually did some digging and cant find any reputable source to back this up.

No, this is not the Onion but its just about as bad.
Don't believe everything you read, either in online newspapers or on Metafilter.
posted by vacapinta at 8:56 AM on August 3, 2009

Ed and Co’s moves are just the dying embers of a meddling, bubble and debt fuelled faux social democratic government. The hard core of ‘problem families’ in the UK are just another manifestation of societal fracture and failure caused by the distorting of the welfare state towards a means tested system of ‘rights’ and perverse incentivises rather than a mechanism to help the needy and the failure to adjust to an economy in need of rather less semi-skilled and unskilled labour than before. As with state schooling and everything else, they are unable to tackle the root causes of family breakdown etc because of their own taboos. So the fact that in the UK no form of co-habitation has an economic point until joint incomes reach £60k or that the law over privileges problem parents when placing children compared other caregivers, abortion is only practiced by and large by the middle class, etc etc cannot be discussed. Instead we will install expensive cameras, send more armies of management consultants and computers against the problem etc etc. It’s just pathetic. Not the Tories will have much of an alternative except to send round the odd church group or offer theoretical admission to a Montessori school.
posted by The Salaryman at 8:57 AM on August 3, 2009

Has this been reported anywhere apart from the Express?

Not in this form. For those wanting a bit of context, this announcement by Ed Balls seems to be tied to the publication of a document tracking progress against the UK Government's Youth Crime Action Plan, published just over a year ago. Here is the press release announcing its publication. From what I can understand the 'sin bins' appear to be 'Family Intervention Projects'. These started to be set up in 2006 and are based on a famous project run by NCH, a children's charity, called the Dundee Families Project and running since 1995. The project works with families with significant involvement in crime or anti-social behaviour. Here is a bit more background, from an evaluation [PDF] of projects modelled on the Dundee Project, on what they provide:

- Residential Support via a core block, where up to three families can live. These are
families who have been excluded from local authority housing because of a history of anti-social behaviour. Staff have regular contacts with families on a daily basis and practically every aspect of family life comes under scrutiny. Inappropriate behaviour is challenged and also counterbalanced with support to encourage change. Parents are assisted in establishing routines and boundaries for children and their parenting style may be challenged.

- Community Based Support via dispersed tenancies. This is normally used as a transitional measure for families moving out of the core block, but may, in the right circumstances, be offered to families living in temporary accommodation, who have poor tenancy histories. Acceptance of a programme of support is a condition of occupancy. The eventual goal is to assist the family in re-settling, with a view to the tenancy becoming permanent.

- Outreach Support to families who are Dundee City Council tenants, and who are at risk
of losing their tenancy because of concerns about their behaviour. Methods used include: one-to-one work with parents and/or children; children’s groups; family group work; anger management; developing home-skills; parenting groups using established programmes; video work; tenancy workshops, focussing on responsibilities as well as rights. Referrals will also be made, where appropriate, to specialist services, such as drug alcohol or mental health services.

- Support Plans: all families have detailed support plans which are tailored to meet the needs of family members. Other agencies’ contributions are included, and the Project takes a central role in co-ordinating the support plan. This means that all – Project, family, and other agencies, are held accountable for their contribution. Support plans are reviewed and
adjusted on a six weekly basis.


I haven't yet figured out where the CCTV fits in, but I presume it is used as part of the intensive supervision for families living in residential support. So it seems to be one small element of a much larger of series of projects designed to try to tackle the risk factors that can lead to criminal behaviour in 'families with high levels of anti-social behaviour, often combined with criminal activities, and who were homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless, because of their behaviour'.
posted by greycap at 8:57 AM on August 3, 2009 [8 favorites]

We need to learn from the freedom-loving US

we tried teaching you over 200 years ago and, damn, but you were slow to get it
posted by pyramid termite at 8:58 AM on August 3, 2009

ninebelow has it.

This isn't CCTV in the home, this is a last chance intervention for families in chaos. The supervised accommodation is not their own home, but a government-run unit. The 24-hour supervision itself is probably more to do with staff, and less about cameras (though I don't doubt that these units would have CCTV installed in some places). I think, though I haven't read the whole document, that families can refuse this kind of intervention, but the alternative is having social services break up the family.

The Sunday Express can fuck right off for coming out with their bullshit. Oh but it looks like the have a new website.
posted by Sova at 9:03 AM on August 3, 2009 [3 favorites]

Wee Willie Winkie
Runs through the town,
Upstairs and downstairs
In his nightgown.
Rapping at the windows,
Crying through the lock,
"Are the children all in bed?
For it's now eight o'clock."
posted by Biblio at 9:03 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

we tried teaching you over 200 years ago and, damn, but you were slow to get it
Well, you nicked our Tom Paine and left us to flounder alone.
I've flagged greycap's post for introducing unwelcome facts into an otherwise extremely useful pissing match.
posted by Abiezer at 9:03 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

Is this one o' them tabloid newspapers I've heard about?
posted by Mister_A at 9:05 AM on August 3, 2009

Keep calm it's just the thrashing of a dying beast... everything will be fine when Eton Boy gets in.
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 9:07 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

Also, who will be watching all of that footage? Is there just going to be a huge building of 10,000 people watching monitors, all of them waiting for a father to take a sip of whiskey, then calling in the SWAT team? Reminds me of Lives of Others.

Well, it is established that people tend to behave better when they believe they are being watched or even -- and this is the interesting part -- just talk about being watched.

I mean, sure, panopticon and all that. It's a horrifying idea. But psychologically speaking, the knowledge that someone could be watching is what makes the behavior change, not the knowledge that someone is.
posted by verb at 9:09 AM on August 3, 2009

I believe that the UK is full of thought police trying to keep control over roving packs of football hooligans causing riots and burning everything in sight while the BNP calls for the public disemboweling of anybody who is darker than a certain shade of pale white, just as much as I believe the US is full of 400 lb Hummer driving soccer moms who would shoot you for stepping on their property.
posted by Saydur at 9:11 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

Keep calm it's just the thrashing of a dying beast... everything will be fine when Eton Boy gets in.

Boys - it's plural. Aren't we so lucky?




(Oh, and I've flagged this entire post, as it's the equivalent of posting an Onion article as though it were fact. So the 'Sadly not from Onion' title is beautifully ironic.)
posted by Sova at 9:13 AM on August 3, 2009

Wait, so this article was established as a bunch of bullshit, and yet we continue to moralize? Fun times on Metafilter!
posted by muddgirl at 9:14 AM on August 3, 2009

In-home surveillance? Something tells me this won't go o'erwell.
posted by sleevener at 9:14 AM on August 3, 2009 [3 favorites]

Sounds like a load of bollocks purposely spun up with the intent of getting a bunch of credulous idiots jumping up and down like puppets on a string, TBH.

Ah yes, I see it is. Well played, Sunday Express.
posted by Artw at 9:22 AM on August 3, 2009 [2 favorites]

Safe in your homes, monitored by the Ear.

Should anyone need tending, the Finger-men will be called.

And every hour on the hour, the Voice of London reassures all and relates the weather.

"England prevails."
posted by grabbingsand at 9:24 AM on August 3, 2009

Pretty obviously a hoax. The right wing British tabloids used to routinely make up stories about the European Union passing legislation banning black boards on the grounds that they were racist, and what degree of curvature was acceptable in a banana.
posted by Major Tom at 9:26 AM on August 3, 2009

So if this story really is a lie, then I suppose what you're all saying is...

This will not Orwell.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:37 AM on August 3, 2009 [4 favorites]

I hereby declare a moratorium on half-remembered and/or inappropriate quotes from prominent works of 20th century dystopian fiction.
posted by Jofus at 9:40 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

(Except for Faint Of Butt. He's doing just fine.)
posted by Jofus at 9:41 AM on August 3, 2009

I hereby declare a moratorium on half-remembered and/or inappropriate quotes from prominent works of 20th century dystopian fiction.

B-b-but I was gonna post Huxley vs. Orwell!
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:48 AM on August 3, 2009 [3 favorites]

I'm just sad that Neil Postman didn't survive long enough to witness this thread. (Though reading it probably would have killed him, anyway.)

[On preview: What Alvy said.]
posted by Atom Eyes at 9:50 AM on August 3, 2009

I prefer the Daily Stars sensitive reporting on the matter: 'SIN BINS' FOR SCUM FAMILIES
posted by Artw at 9:54 AM on August 3, 2009 [1 favorite]

That Daily Star page is interesting, Artw. It has a link at the bottom that reads: "More 'News' Here..." It's refreshingly honest of them to put "News" in quotation marks.
posted by yoink at 10:02 AM on August 3, 2009

Why, by the way, do these OMG UK NANNY STATE stories work so reliably to generate the "Hurf Durf Orwell" response when every. single. one. of them turns out to be bullshit? I mean, they're entirely the province of the right-wing anti-government gutter press, and yet the US left seems amazingly susceptible to the narrative. Tis a puzzlement.
posted by yoink at 10:06 AM on August 3, 2009 [3 favorites]

Why, by the way, do these OMG UK NANNY STATE stories work so reliably to generate the "Hurf Durf Orwell" response when every. single. one. of them turns out to be bullshit? I mean, they're entirely the province of the right-wing anti-government gutter press, and yet the US left seems amazingly susceptible to the narrative. Tis a puzzlement.

Eight years of Vice President Cheney will do that to you. Forgive us our left wing paranoia; we will soon be exchanging it for right wing paranoia.
posted by Pragmatica at 10:09 AM on August 3, 2009

Why, by the way, do these OMG UK NANNY STATE stories work so reliably to generate the "Hurf Durf Orwell" response when every. single. one. of them turns out to be bullshit? I mean, they're entirely the province of the right-wing anti-government gutter press, and yet the US left seems amazingly susceptible to the narrative. Tis a puzzlement.

I agree.

Though of course 33 people disagreed. But hey, what do they know?
posted by Sova at 10:15 AM on August 3, 2009

Maybe Metafilter could do with a "tabloid journalism" flag?

As pointed out by Azeiber and greycap, the reported story has very little to do with, you know, the truth.

As a rough guide for non-Brits, please completely ignore any contentious story broken by:
The Express,
The Daily (or Sunday) Mail,
The Star
The Sport

...as they're almost certainly on that merry little spectrum between "misreported" and "outright lie".

The Sun is somewhat better (lowbrow and annoying, but actually not too bad for factual accuracy), with the broadsheets (Gaurdian, Telegraph, Times) somewhere out in front. I see a lot of complaints about the Telegraph and the Guardian, but they mostly seem to be (left-wing) Guardian fans comaplaining about the (right wing) Telegraph and vice versa; more about political bias than factual accuracy.
posted by metaBugs at 10:15 AM on August 3, 2009

I'm pretty sure Hummers are more than 400 pounds.

SAIT
posted by Lemurrhea at 10:16 AM on August 3, 2009

B-b-but I was gonna post Huxley vs. Orwell!

The contrast has got to be interesting for anyone watching from outside, though: the US is going down Huxley's path of entertaining people into fascism, while the UK is walking down Orwell's, with curtailed speech, ID cards and cameras everywhere.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:18 AM on August 3, 2009

As pointed out by Azeiber
You make one flame-bait crack and they start air-brushing you out of history through constructive misspelling. It's like Stalin's Russia.
posted by Abiezer at 10:21 AM on August 3, 2009

Oh, and I've flagged this entire post, as it's the equivalent of posting an Onion article as though it were fact. So the 'Sadly not from Onion' title is beautifully ironic.

Meta
posted by Artw at 10:29 AM on August 3, 2009

Just to comment on someone above who said that obviously no one would agree to this sort of thing voluntarily, don't be so sure. People will do a lot of things "voluntarily" when the alternative is loosing custody of their children. It would not at all have surprised me if this story was true.
posted by threeturtles at 10:32 AM on August 3, 2009