Census/DIY direct action against Lockheed Martin

In message , John Stumbles writes

Forwarded to the mark-thomas list, brother John

Tell me about this mark-thomas list, comrade

(Saw him here in Reading a few weeks ago doing his talk about walking the Berlin^H^H^H^HIsrael wall - excellent!)

Hmm... 404 not found.

Tim

Both 404...

Works for me - did you copy the whole link?

It's back up now. It just went AWOL for a bit.

Tim

Yawn...

Yep.

Ah works now...

I'd rather not support an arms company. I'd rather support a UK company, there are plenty that could do the work.

I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't a clause or three in the contract that allows Lockheed to surcharge the HMG for every form they can't automagically process. In fact I think Lockheed would be daft to have signed a contract *without* such clause(s).

Works here

Prolly busy filling the form in ...

OK, so L-M lose money, and don't bid next time. The bid goes to a more expensive company - and that bid will of course be higher, because they'll have heard about L-M's losses.

Now think carefully - who is it that will pay that higher bill?

Andy

AFAIUI, this will be the last one. When the current gov came in they said[1] that the cost couldn't be justified and that they already had sufficiently accurate alternatives for planning of services. The only joke was that they said they couldn't stop the new one as it had already gone too far.

fred gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Google for "Census 2021", plenty of references.

They've said they will, but that's not sufficient. A "Census (abolition) act" would need to pass parliament and be adopted into law in order to repeal the existing legal requirement for a census every ten years.

In article , Adrian writes

Ah, didn't think of that thanks. First few hits have quotes pretty much as I remembered them.

I hope they do, "expensive and inaccurate" pretty well sums it up for me.

The 1901 questions seem about right to me.

"The 1901 Census for England was taken on the night of 31 March 1901. The following information was requested: Name of street, avenue road, etc.; house number or name; whether or not the house was inhabited; number of rooms occupied if less than five; name of each person that had spent the night in that household; relationship of person enumerated to the head of the family; each person's marital status; age at last birthday (sex is indicated by which column the age is recorded in); each person's occupation; whether they are employer or employee or neither; person's place of birth; whether deaf, dumb, blind, or lunatic."

They already know the answers to all the other questions I looked at when ther form arrived on my hall floor. In fact, they already know most of the answers to the question I listed, otherwise, how did they get the form to me? All that isn't already on record is a list of people who will actually be on the premises on the date it's due.

What annoys me is that they (rightly) go on about accuracy, yet they say that if you send the form(s) back before the 27th, and circumstances change you don't have to tell them.

Now, what should I do if the premises just happen to be unexpectedly empty that night? Maybe because the sole regular occupant is out of the country?

That's what happened to me in 2001, just before I moved here from a caravan. And 1991, as I'd been called away to cover a tour to Paris.