Don't know about UK but in France they are now using CCTV to fine not well parked delivery guys for a 2 minutes stop. While I agree vehicle parked anywhere can be a big inconvenience and deserve a fine, I don't think that's a big crime justifying deployment of such a surveillance system.

This totally makes sense, having one cop checking 100+ CCTV is far more efficient than a full team walking in the streets. Once you justified the cost on privacy and managed to deploy such system, it's so easy and convenient to use it for something else.

The UK government explicitly lays out a strategy for provate cameras to be bought and operated with mandatory rules for police access to footage. [1]

This is on top of the cameras that ARE owned by government entities - 18+ city councils [2]. And it's expanding [3].

Why do you think it matters if they are linked together? Retaining footage and handing it over to police on request (not warrant) is a requirement. The IPA allows collecting this information in bulk (eg from cctv providers) with warrants. [4]

[1] - PDF Warning https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

[2] - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-17116526

[3] - https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/uk-funds-stre...

[4] - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/25/contents/enacte...