More wasted money on legalised snooping. Why don't they just pay Google
for the info?
Every ten years I have fun trying to (legally) make it as difficult as
possible for the coders/OCR equipment to read my census return. For
example, many years ago the requirement was for it to be completed in
blue or black ink. That year I used the palest blue colour I could find
- it was almost indistinguishable from the background, but it /was/
blue. The next time it was a requirement for the ink to be black, so I
used a square font (like the one here
) with the lines of the letters
entered without spacing between them and the edges of the black boxes.
But the ink /was/ black.
I wonder what the requirement will be next year?
I do my best. But it is a drop in the ocean compared to the overall cost
of a census.
The Census Act 1920 was a short, but very well written piece of
legislation which makes it impossible to refuse to complete a census
request. Well, you /can/ refuse, but it leads to a conviction, fine, and
another request to complete the census form. Refuse that, and another
fine, etc (maybe eventually leading to even a "contempt of court"
conviction). It's obviously a really heinous crime in the eyes of the UK
Nearly all the information available from a census is obtainable form
other sources (the birth, marriage, and death register is a good start).
Some countries have realised this and don't require a general census
If those countries can do it, why can't we? After every census, there is
talk of abolishing it, but it gets nowhere. Even talk of making the 2021
census fillable online misses the point; it's just not necessary as the
information is already out there. If anything sensible is required which
/isn't/ out there, well, great, ask for it - but specifically.
Resistance may be futile, but if upsets the "governmental Borgs" in any
way, it is worthwhile IMHO.
I'd have thought Google will be able to do it any time you like unless you
are a non person, ie never been on line or banked with any services which
uses google systems or do not live in a council area using google services.
Irrespective of the way in which the information is collected (census
document sent to every household or "other sources") I wonder if the
information that is gathered will be kept for posterity and for the use of
future genealogists 100 years from now when it is released from the 100-year
I wonder how the accuracy and completeness of the "other sources" of
information will be checked. I think it is an offence to give false
information (or no information) in the census, but I bet it's not for the
"other sources", so the quality and completeness of data will be highly
suspect. Using electoral rolls as the primary source of the census is dodgy
because some people choose not to go on the electoral roll (thus forfeiting
their right to vote) because they want to remain "under the radar"; other
people are on the electoral roll in two places (eg home and university)
which has always seemed a dubious practice even if they only vote in one
place - it leads to some people (but not others) being able to choose which
constituency will benefit more from their vote.
How are people identified in a census - I've forgotten? Is it just by name
or does each person in a household have to give a unique ID such as National
Insurance number? If they gave NI number, it would make it much easier for
genealogists to trace the correct John Smith as he moves from house to house
between one census and the next.
The census is quite a valuable source of information for those doing
family genealogy. What annoys a genealogists, historians & family
members doing research is the UK's insistence on sticking rigidly to the
"100 year rule" whereby the 1921 census will be released in 2022. The US &
Australian census (for example) are released under a "72 year rule" & can
be researched up until 1940, & the US 1950 Federal census will be released
It seems a strange delusion that illegal immigrants somehow have more
access to human rights than the rest of us. On the contrary, they are
just more likely to be a position to need to appeal to the courts
regarding their rights. It there is a human rights ground to object to
the census (or anything else for that matter) then you have as much
access to it as anyone else.
I suspect that there are quite a lot of people who have managed to escape the system. When elections come around it usually turns out that something like 30% of young people are not registered to vote. Some of them are probably just lazy but others, I think, deliberately don't register in order to avoid official notice such as the tax system. Many of them, no doubt, get picked up by officialdom in other ways, but there is almost certainly a residue who escape all notice. Some of them will be homeless with no regular job - just what a decent census ought to tell the government about.
My Mrs just had to renew her driving licence (because she's nearly 70
I think). She had her old (paper) driving licence but that (and a
photo) wasn't good enough to be able to issue a replacement
apparently, so because she didn't have a passport or any of the other
acceptable ID related things, had to send an original birth and
I get why etc, but as has been mentioned, these agencies have enough
information on us anyway but 1) *they* requested of her she update her
licence and 2) she (or someone fraudulently) has just replaced her
paper licence with no photo with one with a photo licence (of them if
it was fraudulent etc). Was all that because a photo licence would be
more powerful as a form of ID (to a fraudster) compared with the old
Cheers, T i m
p.s. I still have the green paper licence and believe it has been
refused as ID in some instances as it's not 'Photo ID'. I just enjoy
not having to replace it but maybe I could as I may not have that many
'every 10 years' (is it?) left. ;-)
I've heard it said that most Americans (land of the free) know their
social security number. I've always thought that the NI number had some
merits as a potentially unique identifier. There are places that use it
as your login ID on the computer system.
I don't remember the wording on the last census form but for at least
the last 12 to 15 years I've declined the "invitation" to be part of the
"electrol roll" or to name others at the address.
The form of lies is always addressed to "the occupier" which is not a
name I am familiar with at the address to which it's posted so it always
gets returned ANR RTS.
Likewise, even if I were to open it I still couldn't complete it as the
box that requires a signature also requires the ALL CAPITALS NAME to be
entered and a signature bonding the signatory to the fact that they then
become liable to a £1000 fine should something not be correct.
That's not a contract that benefits me and I can't sign it under a false
NAME, that's fraud.
Bloody council canvasser scum just get a "no thankyou" and the door shut
on them, to which they say "so I'll take that as a refusal then"
No joinder no problem.
I recently purchased a 30 day contract data only SIM card in my mothers
name to provide a VoIP phone in her room at the care home. Had it
delivered to the house that I frequent (which I don't complete electoral
roll for) and within days of it turning up a letter came from the local
authority addressed to her stating she is a resident of the property.
Needless to say it was returned stating the person in question did not
live at the address.
So councils are already using mobile phone accounts, and presumably
mobile phone accounts/contracts have a get-out clause to skip GDPR
presumably the "I accept" button when ordering on-line.
I have a driving licence with a photo ID on the reverse and ignored all
the threats of £1000 fine for not renewing it once 10 years (?) had passed.
What people don't realise is it's 2 cards in 1. One side is the driving
licence which has the expiry date for each class of vehicle as being the
drivers 70th(?) birthday and the other side is a picture I.D. which has
a 10(?) year expiry. The deception is with the implication that the
driving licence becomes invalid after 10 years which it doesn't.
I certainly know my NI number - it's used for filling in tax returns and
various other things that are not *directly* related to state pension and NI
contributions to build up credits for pension.
But then I'm the sort of person who can remember all my car registrations
and the postcodes and phone numbers of all the houses I've lived at. ;-)
I can see a lot of benefit from using some form of ID number (and NI is as
good as any) as the number on lots of databases, as an easy means of
relating one database to another *once the legal confidentiality "just
cause" conditions have been met*.