I READ with interest the response from Bury Council in last week’s Bury Times to the concerns raised by myself and unions regarding the use of powers to spy on staff, businesses and local residents.

The trouble with the council’s limited response is that it offers no assurances, no names, just a big fat “trust us, we know what we’re doing”. And that really isn’t good enough.

The powers the council are using to justify their surveillance operations may well be justified, ultimately.

However, without any transparency and democratic accountability, we don’t know that.

So we are left with yet more questions: Who is the senior officer who approves surveillance? Who are the team of officers who vet the process? Who carries out the surveillance — staff or outside contractors? If contractors are used, how much do they cost the council? And perhaps most pertinently, do the means justify the end? In other words, how many of these instances result in convictions or a result for the council?

The problem is, the most high profile of the cases so far resulted in an out-of-court settlement that cost the council thousands of pounds, and readers may be interested to know that no report on surveillance operations has ever been scrutinised by a council committee.

I believe the public and staff have a right to know the answers to these and other questions. They have a right to know invasive and quite extreme powers are being used sensitively and prudently, and they have a right to know that operations of Bury Council are subject to scrutiny and appropriate checks and balances.

It is time for answers and assurances.

Vic D’Albert Prestwich councillor and Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Bury South