The Chief Constable of Police Scotland, Sir Stephen House, is convinced CCTV works.

"It makes a huge contribution to keeping people safe," he says.

This is not just by preventing crime. Because cameras in busy public settings help deter criminality and anti-social behaviour, there is an assumption that its main beneficiaries are the police.

But others benefit from CCTV too. Housing associations use the systems to help keep residents safe. Councils use them for everything from traffic management to making sure street lights are working. As well as ensuring justice is done, they can help prevent miscarriages of justice.

Everyone benefits, not just the police. So it is understandable that Police Scotland are frustrated at having to bear the whole cost of such schemes in parts of the country, and fearful that more local authorities may cut back on their own contribution.

There is plainly a case for others to support CCTV financially, too. But, crucially, there is no statutory requirement on any one body to fund the schemes.

This fact is particularly important at a time when public bodies are looking to cut back on costs in every area. We report today on another council, West Lothian, which is planning £30 million worth of cuts. When there is no legal requirement to fund something, the temptation for any finance chief is to make a saving.

But it is not just revenue costs that are needed. Much of Scotland's CCTV infrastructure is pre-digital and systems across the country are becoming obsolete. Some are close to becoming non-viable.

A balance needs to be struck between wholesale replacement -desirable but costly - and a more realistic programme of upgrading and replacing where necessary.

Meanwhile, the Scottish Government must step in to help clarify the funding issues. It was their report in 2009 that flagged up a looming crisis over the systems. Now ministers say it is clear that it is the responsibility of police and councils to work in partnership to keep communities safe.

This is as clear as mud. If no-one sees CCTV as their core responsibilty, nobody will take responsibility for it.

Wishful thinking about working in partnership formerly dominated discussions about social care but, when it came to asking NHS teams and council social services departments to share budgets, ultimately legislation was needed.

There are a worrying number of areas of public life where partnerships such as this are likely to come under scrutiny and funding of non-core work will come under severe pressure.

In relation to CCTV, there have been several reports, underlined by the new evidence from Police Scotland, that set out the problem.

The Scottish Government published two of them. So it should now take a leading role in working out a solution.

Ministers could usefully start by considering whether a coherent national system, with the potential for cost-sharing and standardised technology, could offer a more rational and affordable solution.