Why I don’t consent to the census

I agree with you, Beryl. It has concerned me for years that the population has grown so much. I remember thinking that 55 million was too many. Let’s hope that we do control the number coming into the country.

Drought, famine, epidemic, war, pestilence, have had no effect in reducing the world population. Whether or not they come to the UK they will still be there, needing food and water. I see no way to control population that will leave adequate resources for the reduced remainder. Apart from infertility.

At some point an equilibrium will be attained but that will not be a pleasant outcome – although, perhaps, for those who are there, they will not know any better.

Coincidentally I have just been watching Dr Iain Stewart’s documentary on BBC2 titled ‘Earth: The Power of the
Planet,’ the main theme of which describes how the earth has survived over millennia and how it will continue to survive and replenish long after another catastrophic collision with another meteorite or asteroid which caused the demise of the dinosaurs, or the potential self destruction of the human species through global warming or pollution.

”Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity; and I am not sure about the universe.”

Albert Einstein

I think one should worry more about the quality of the people coming into this country, rather than quantity. Most countries are populated by a variety of individuals. People come and go. Some stay. I, for one, embrace diversity. While I enjoy the company of kind, helpful and honest people. A lot of people come to England to enjoy the higher standard of living. And who can blame them? We all want a better life. I would not like to be in a position to tell people who can come and who should not. Or even worse, who should go, once they got here. It’s a complex subject.
I was surprised to see how many people actually leave Britain every year. Should the people over there turn their noses up at them too? I doubt they do, since the migrants leaving England do so with substantial bank accounts, following house and land sales. But money is not the real measure of a person. Far from it.
I guess It is far easier to control who is coming over borders nowadays anyway. Not so much when the vikings were coming over, uninvited, a while back. It was a lot harder to say no to them, what with the long axes, scary beards and impenetrable shields. One should count his blessings, I say.

[Moderator: this comment was removed as it was off-topic to this conversation. Please remember to remain on topic to the discussion, and to move to the Lobby if you would like to digress from the point being made. For more information please see the Community guidelines]

I imagine (wonder perhaps) whether the proportion of people dissenting and giving incorrect information has been around the same from the start. I expect it is small enough to have no significant effect on the use to which the aggregated information is put.

If those who don’t respond (or maybe don’t respond honestly if forced to respond) are not going to significantly affect the information collected, is it worth going round homes, demanding responses and warning of the penalties of not responding?

I am more worried that websites I visit placing cookies on my computer so that I can be provided with targeted marketing.

I guess the rationale for making the census compulsory is to ensure that a majority of citizens complete it.

Hence also the justification for sending out officers to chase up and help obtain missing responses.

Those things both sound worthwhile to me.

But beyond that, I’m not sure that much can be gained by fining those who absolutely refuse to comply.

Whilst the census is intended to serve the public, tracking cookies on websites only exist for the benefit of site owners. Targeted marketing can be an annoyance and it is certainly no crime to take steps to avoid it.

I am not opposed to people being reminded to complete their response and it would be useful if officers offer a paper form as an alternative to completing their return online. We were all offered the option of requesting a paper form online (!) or by phone, but not everyone gets round to doing what they are asked to do the first time.

I am not so sure that census officers will make visits to every address for which there is no return. It would be a costly and time-consuming exercise for perhaps little benefit. The ONS is not going to comment, of course, and there might be areas where there are numbers of no-returns that make a visit in the night fully justified.

As Wavechange says, there will be those who just haven’t got round to it, but there will also be some who might need help doing it, and some who adamantly refuse to do it. Different techniques might be needed in each case but they won’t know which until the door is opened. Existing ‘intel’ might allow the census office to contact the residents by phone or e-mail before making a visit and then deciding how to handle it. Some in the ‘not got round to it’ category might respond satisfactorily to a form in the post so no visit is required.

I don’t expect I’ll be opening the local paper any day now and finding a list of refuseniks in our area, although we do have some old eggs and tomatoes handy should the opportunity for civic action present itself.

Sending a form to those who have failed to respond would be a good idea, John, especially since many people will not be keen to answer the door during the pandemic.

How would you ever know how many people refuse the uninvited intrusion upon their lives and privacy perpetrated by a government upon a law passed 101 years ago anyway? You seem to have a very active imagination. Have you ever stopped to think that you may be one of the few that DID allow his privacy to be trampled upon and willingly gave information away? Maybe it’s you that are part of a minority. Could that be a possibility too? Rather than look down upon the ‘dissenters’, as you call them, as if they are not people like yourself, take some time to reflect on what motivated you to acquiesce to such a request? If the answer is ‘fear of punishment’, that would be great cause for concern.

I wouldn’t go to them. None of their male practitioners wear neckties. For a firm of solicitors it’s just not legal.

From my motorcycling days:
Q. What do you call a biker in a suit and tie?
A. The Accused.

There are still plenty who wear a necklace and a skirt.

I thought the rehearsal for the 2021 census was interesting. https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/censustransformationprogramme/testingthecensus/2019collectionrehearsalevaluationreportforcensus2021englandandwales
A lot of care seems to have been taken to get it right.

Do we need to perpetuate the census? Is it worth the £40 per household it seems to cost? Are other data systems sufficiently accessible and integrated to get all this information from existing sources without a dedicated form? If it is, it might well lead to more accusations about the lack of our privacy.

I expect a very high percentage of the census forms have been submitted on-line and will be digitally translated onto the database. Paper forms will probably be scanned into the on-line format and then dealt with in the same way. I don’t know whether the paper copies will then be archived; I can’t see the need to do so once the data has been extracted.

I was amazed to read that 17,000 field officers had been recruited by the ONS and wondered why such a large number were needed if the majority of returns were done on-line, but perhaps that is because the non-returns are so thinly and widely scattered that it will require a lot of staff to gather in just a few each to complete the task within the period allowed.

Given that a lot of the money allocated by the government to local authorities, the NHS, voluntary organisations, and various projects relies on population and demographic factors it is desirable to conduct a basic headcount and profile for each part of the country to ensure accurate and equitable allocations [before the politicians get their hands on it for contrived ‘levelling up’ purposes] but if other controversial issues get in the way of that essential process then I see no point in continuing with the census in its present form. There are other ways and techniques for acquiring the necessary information without spending £900 million on it and taking several years to spit out the bits.

Amazing what people do with the money, when they didn’t have to work hard to get it, isn’t it? You, I and the rest of the population may see no point in continuing with the census in its present form(or at all). However, the big money making, usually corrupt and squandering mob that governments are could not care less about what we, the taxpayers, think. They are made of people that had a burning desire to get there, into a position of power. And now they are enjoying the big salaries and perks that come with the job. When would people realise that governments are a good idea in theory, that fails miserably in practice?

The CEOs and staff of some charities earn significantly more than the Prime Minister is paid. 🙂

VynorHill, you seem to underestimate the power of the AI. Do you really stand 100% behind all that you hold to be true for you? Because to me, just because someone wraps a poison pill in sugar coating does not change the way I look upon it and there’s no way I am going to put that into my mouth. Same with this so called census. No matter what they tell us, no matter what good intentions they try to hide it under or attach to it, it remains the same: an invasion of privacy. I am old enough(if not wise enough yet) to know I should judge a tree by its fruit. I am yet to be convinced that that tree I am talking about produces fruit that are even remotely close to being healthy for us.
Now, most of us agree that they have most of the data anyway, from centralised databases that are all under their their control. They add a few more seemingly harmless questions amongst the others. Put together, they now get to paint a better picture of us. Now, why would that be, I ask you? And please don’t say ‘it’s for our own good’! Please! I stopped believing that a long, long time ago. Nobody should be falling for that anymore, not after what has been happening around the world lately. It’s all about control.
You say that ‘Most schools have an in depth knowledge of their children and can give a personal, year group and school based description of their cohort. They can answer any “what if?” questions and their success as an education establishment relies on doing just this on a regular basis. This is an example of data being gathered and used for the benefit of the children and their parents.’ I’m very worried about some of that wording. ‘Their children’!? Heck no! They are OUR children. ‘Cohort’. Wow, I guess some see our lovely, unique beings that we call children as being that. I don’t. But OK, let’s agree to disagree. But please don’t believe for a second that schools have the benefit of the children and their parents at heart. I know some of the teachers are good people and indeed they want the best for our kids. But they are not many, unfortunately. I urge you to read a book called ‘Dumbing us down’, if you have the time. And if you don’t, please make some time. It can even be listened to, or read online as a free PDF. Our children deserve that much from us.

Gatto’s book (‘Dumbing us down’) is sadly deficient in several aspects; from the simple fact that glowing testimonies, forewords and a great deal of other padding occupies the first third of the entire book, to the sad observation that nothing, absolutely nothing he says is new nor original, then to the fact that most of what he says is based on his own unfortunate experiences teaching in New York, with its immense litany of social problems, its relevance to UK schools is partial at best.

That there are major issues with UK education, however, cannot be denied. and some aspects of what says are applicable. But sadly the current model of teaching is dictated by what is fiscally possible, which produces a framework within which the best teachers still do amazing work, Home schooling is a better option in some ways, providing the parents are capable of delivering it.

Thank you, Ian, for bringing your knowledge to bear. Under the muck we discover gold.

Yes, it’s a bonus if you have parents or close family members who are enthusiastic teachers but we have to help everyone else.

The truly interesting aspect of education is the fragmentation of it. From years 1 – 9 ‘subjects’ as such are not necessarily of any real importance. The two most important – English and Mathematics – can be taught as part of a general coverage approach. It’s really only from year 9/10 onwards that specialisation should play any real part.

Watching the boat race today I was struck by the number of ‘subjects’ covered. Time, distance, acceleration, flow, strategy, heading – just showing that to a class of enthusiastic 12 year-olds and then showing the kids how to apply various observational skills would cover about a week’s ‘normal’ schoolwork.