system in parts of the City of Hamilton mean that "Big Brother'' will be watching. That is true -- but the real question is who "Big Brother'' will be watching.

The cameras, of course, are designed to fight crime in the City and to make it safer and more secure for law abiding people. Locals want that and visitors need that.

Lawyer Timothy Marshall argues against surveillance saying: "I hope that the people of Bermuda will decide that their personal liberties and, in particular their right not to be monitored by Government, significantly outweighs what the Corporation of Hamilton is seeking to achieve by installing surveillance cameras.'' Mr. Marshall has said in a letter to the Corporation of Hamilton: "You are making a monumental mistake and I can only hope that you will have the courage to reverse your position and ensure that the law abiding citizens are allowed to go about their business without being under the watchful eye of Big Brother.'' The reverse argument is that the freedom of law-abiding citizens is jeopardised by criminals and is considerably enhanced if they can go about their business without being personally threatened or without having their possessions stolen by people who might be identified by the cameras. If you have nothing to hide, then the cameras should not bother you.

The presence of cameras has led to some remarkable arrests like the two boys who killed a toddler in England. We must also remember the efficiency of cameras in the recent drugs Operation Cleansweep.

In our time, individuals have given up most of their secrets. Credit cards expose our financial dealings to a great degree. Our mailing addresses are for sale to all and sundry who plague us with junk mail. Our telephone calls are seldom private, especially if they are overseas calls, witness the Prince of Wales. We can be libelled on the Internet with little hope of redress. The list is long and includes the lack of privacy created by living in a small Country.

The fact is that the cameras only serve to protect the areas they cover and that those people intent on committing crimes will simply move along to areas where they know there are no cameras. They do not decrease general crime, they simply make the areas they cover more secure. Monitor one street and crime will move to another. The same is true for buildings.

Yet even the most law-abiding may well feel that it is unpleasant to be spied upon by cameras which intrude on our privacy. The presence of "Big Brother'' is not very pleasant for anyone. Yet today we accept that our actions are monitored in all kinds of public places for security reasons. We all know the signs which say that security cameras are in operation.

Do we feel threatened? It seems to be an intrusion of modern life which we have learned to live with. We will probably do the same with street cameras.