Why I think the census should go further

I agree that the census is a useful tool and I’m happy to complete the form. And yes, let’s celebrate human diversity wherever we are. In the grand scheme of things it may reveal itself to be psychologically as important to us and our survival as biodiversity physically is to planet earth. Who knows yet?

The idea that the Government and local authorities would draw sensible conclusions from the census is laughable. If the census told them that 100% of the mobile population of Brighton had two legs, they would almost certainly spend £1m on a consultant to confirm the fact.

As previous comments made have highlighted, just about all the information can be gleaned from other places both on-line and the way we interact with the rest of society.

However some of this information can be transient and this census return, like the census returns from 1841, will provide a wealth of information for family historians albeit in 100 years on what was happening on a specific night.

If we want local and central government to plan their use of our resources, better that it is done with some foundation in evidence – what they actually do is, of course, driven by other more volatile and unpredicatable considerations. The census is also a fascinating social document for future generations.
There is a curious tension between any ‘suspicion’ bred out of the sense of Census coercion (necessary to ensure a uniform understanding of our society) and the rapid adoption of social networking and associated activities through which we freely share personal data (but in a wildly sporadic way that is of little use to anyone with an interest in social engineering/policy development on a local and central political level). Personally, I am OK with the former but deeply suspicious of the latter.

I am afraid although we all think the census will offer us a snapshot of our population and country it is practically an outdated and useless political agenda. If you consider that it did not ask if you were very very poor, or if you had no opportunities to leave the house or were invalid or scared or if your quality of life was deplorable. It did ask about race and ethnic group and statistically this is to answer all the politicians who use race as a defining agenda ” this race gets that our race doesn’t” etc, – whereas our major problems to be tackled are the lack of social mobility and massive divide between those who become the benefit underclass (elderly, carers, invalids, chronically ill, mentally unwell, learning difficulties etc) and those who with work are not that suffering – the group that can afford a £1000 TV do not aid those who need £250 for the extraordinarily high gas and electric bills. Furthermore the vast numbers of illlegal and migrant workers who should not be in the country and place intense levels of pain and anguish on the services for those already in the poorest and most deprived areas are not going to be on the census – nor are their friends and family and offspring.

Mr P has filled out the census – as he and his wife always do the correct thing but it is not going to mention the six people who came on the lorry from Dover staying in his two bed flat, but the six people will use six bus seats, six false NI cards and six places in the doctor’s surgery…they will also eventually become six more people who will never ever put their names on the census.

As in the last election people who had become British but then returned to their original country of origin were being offered cash to make sure the voted…as is their right…and this vote offered a Govt that is continuing to express its concerns in the versions of categories that simply disguise the problems a census would normally have illustrated…

As one UK – Somali journalist said the official figure for that community is 3000 and he estimated it was 30,000. And when a person who has no legal right to be here stays on or has to get money then they become the gas bill or electric bill unpaid and the flat left with heaving bags of rotting garbage…and they are not on the census so their bill – paid for by taxing gthe pensioners too much – is met by council tax and of course we go around again….the census is a nice piece of bureucracy, but not reality at all. And the uncountable population – particularly those involved in the *** industry and fake marriages – dont pay council tax either.

It would be far better if the Govt had spent real money on doing a real census – Roman Empire style – and not relied on the forms being completed by household names on addresses, as now for the next decade the councils will be planning for a population one third smaller than it is and likewise diverting funds in places to address issues of hardship that can be generated by massive overpopulation burdens on one region rather than by pushing cash into the region.

I hope this is not offensive as I have nothing against any race or creed or religion but I think these defining categoreis in all public instirutions and governemnt should be scrapped as far too much of our GNP is spent on collecting the data now on whether I was born in Latvia or my dad was from Pakistan. Will that change the fact that my mother had cancer and my family was induced into poverty to care for her? No it doesnt AND it is proven after decades of collecting stats on whehter I am a Roman Catholic or Muslim, that it doesnt.

If we compare our economy with two health countries Sweden and Australia one can see that they both practise an incredibly strong migrant worker control and so in both large and tiny populated states the citizens benefit from this by having services and funds (Sweden gives tons more in charitable donations) to specifric and clearly defined “good” works and their elderly, disabled, invalid, carers, and others in real need are not subsumed in the torrent of other “new needy” groups migrating to either country and Oz afterall is a huge non indigenous population in itself…and I should imagien their census will be more accurate than our own. I am not saying htat any country is not without problems but in reality the services cannot be paid for by the incessant categorisation the previous decades of govt undertook as these were all politically motivated to raise the profile of (predominantly) Labour Party voting ‘blocs’, like the divisions in the USA, endlessly lobbying for subdivisions of society and never working collectively for the “commonwealth”. And this also always diverts attention to the failings of our society to care for the old and unwell – the UK is now shamelessly demanding the old somehow conjure up money to pay for being naturally old..or infirm or sick.

What is clear is that if you have the economic power to take legal action against a silly B&B then you are better off than the elderly and sick, and those who cannot afford a lawyer because they are forced to live on less than £54 per week as a carer. We pay £1000s for legal advice to be given to prisoners and negate the citizens who did nothing wrong except get old….any race, any religion and any ***uality and any gender…their “crime” was being old and not rich and old.

The Census is a long outdated governmental whimsy of no proven value, producing little (if any) statistical information that isn’t either already in the public domain (most of it) and/or easily and more cheaply available by other means. The accuracy of the data produced is also highly questionable, due to increasing numbers of disenfranchised citizens deliberately entering false data (how many practising Jedi knights are there really in the UK?).

The standard justification of it ‘aiding planning’ remains empirically unsound and historically inaccurate. ‘Planning’ by any central authority is a classic misnomer, with understandably short-term (re-election) thinking generally being the sole driver for governments of all flavours. In any event how does knowing (say) the number of people occupying three-bedroom houses, aid planning? Market forces alone remain the single most reliable ‘planning’ tool – and they come free!

Spending a small fortune on an exercise that serves only to annoy a significant proportion of the populace, for no discerible benefit, at a time when we are sensibly attempting as a nation to reduce our deficit, seems to me to be a sadly misconceived and detrimental concept. I suspect that its main purpose is really to help justify some of the huge government departments that are so busy counting Jedi knights in 3-bedroom semis, that they can’t afford to be downsized!.

It is obviously important in future planning for schools, housing needs etc to respond to this census, but what is more important is the deliberate avoidance of a long overdue referendum on the EU by the present government, who have deliberately gone deaf on the subject.. Politicians seem to see the EU as an escape route for failed politicians, who all come back after their stint in EU with pockets bulging.
Cameron had better listen to voters, because the outrage felt by the bailing out of the ever growing failed Euro countries can only get worse. We need our say and it would not have been difficult to have added a simple ‘Yes or No’ question on the EU membership in the census document, if for nothing else but just to gauge public attitudes.

The danger of referenda that they can be swayed by active minorities.
Motion. To get rid of the Police Force.

In favour 20%
Again: 15%
Not in favour of change but could not be bothered to vote : 65%

This is what happened to the recent referendum in Wales.

A page of barnyard twoddle. It wouldn’t make any difference how clearly the logistics of society were laid out before government or local authorities – they would still make a mess of things. And as for the proportion of homosexuals to normal people, it has been established as being no more than 1.5% – a figure that will remain constant irrespective.

Well Martyn Saville you certainly got what you wanted. Stonewall has successfully lobbied the ONS to ask about sexuality until they have effectively outed everyone over 16 in the country to both the State and to the household.

The ONS has asked trick “voluntary” questions where the choice to decline indicates you won’t belong to the heteronormative, and they have as the only safeguard made it possible for someone to request their own login, which simply alerts the householder to what the secretive issue may be versus what they already substantively know.

The fear of rejection is what keeps people in the closet, and nobody is more vulnerable to this than the young. 40% of homeless youth in this country are gay, indicating the scale of the problem, and now, during a pandemic, the ONS has irresponsibly dictated when they will come out of their closet.

The correct way to have handled this, if indeed personal questions should ever be asked by the State, was for everyone over 18, as registered on the electoral register, to be given their own login, and for personal questions to be separate to a form which has your name, address and d.o.b. on it.

That is if this truly is simply about statistics and service provision and not the sexual profiling of the unknown singles who have not already declared their sexual orientation by way of a legal union, something unnecessarily asked in the Census when the ONS already has all those records and publishes the data.