Should Local Councils have Surveillance Powers?

I should now be able to return to regular posting (and get round to responding to the comments some of you have left). Today I have two stories involving Burnley Borough Council's use of Surveillance.

First a recent story from the Sunday Times. Apparently they mounted a "direct surveillance operation" against an employee they suspected of using the shower while clocked in.

There have been loads of stories like this over the last few years, and I can't find anybody who defends surveillance for uses like these - reading the newspapers you might get the impression that there's widespread consensus that local councils should not be engaged in surveillance at all.

But the stories keep coming. Presumably the councils doing this think they are doing the right thing, and that they are acting in a proportionate manner - how can there be such a big gap between their view and the widespread public condemnation?

The second story concerns a case which would be easier to defend but I'd be fascinated to hear some responses to the case: a few years back they caught someone flytipping through use of covert CCTV. The cameras covered public space, and surely nobody would object if the dumper had been caught as the result of, say, a chance eyewitness.

So is this a form of surveillance councils should be engaged in? Or is this still inappropriate and disproportionate?