Welcome, Guest. Please login or register for free.
Did you miss your activation email?
Friday 27 November 09 07:47 UTC (UK)
Welcome Home Help Surnames Library Shop Search Login Register

+  RootsChat.Com
|-+  General
| |-+  The Common Room
| | |-+  The Lighter Side (Moderator: Boongie Pam)
| | | |-+  Census and the 100 years rule
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print
Poll
Question: Do you think (as I do) that more recent census details should be made available
Reduce the time to 50 years   -33 (66%)
reduce the time to 20 years   -5 (10%)
make all census available now   -12 (24%)
Total Votes: 50

Author Topic: Census and the 100 years rule  (Read 2178 times)
Mark1973
RootsChat Extra
**
Posts: 82



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #15 on: Thursday 25 June 09 14:18 UTC (UK) »

50 years would do me fine, would be happy with that Smiley

Apart from that as long as no one has my bank details or pin number i couldn't give a monkey's what they know about me
Logged

Lavender - Ruislip Middlesex / Mitcham Surrey
Adaway - Burnham Buckinghamshire / Mitcham Surrey
Abrehart - Edmonton Middlesex / Mitcham Surrey
Lindsell - Braintree Essex / Morpeth Durham / Mitcham Surrey
Donohoe & Roche - Graiguecullen, Carlow Ireland
Siamese Girl
RootsChat Veteran
*****
Posts: 656



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #16 on: Thursday 25 June 09 14:54 UTC (UK) »

I'm happy with 100 years.

I think that the wording on the 1951 and 1961 censuses that they were "strictly confidential" would have led everyone at the time to believe thats what was meant and that they would not be "given to anyone not employed on the census".

I don't think many people would have been happy to fill the forms in knowing that in 40-50 years the information would be in the public domain.


Carole
Logged

CHILD Glos/London, BONUS London, DIMSDALE London, HODD and TUTT Sussex,  BONNER and PATTEN Essex, BOWLER and HOLLIER Oxfordshire, HUGH Lincolnshire, LEEDOM all.
Nick29
RootsChat Aristocrat
******
Posts: 2886



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #17 on: Thursday 25 June 09 21:24 UTC (UK) »

50 years would do me fine, would be happy with that Smiley

As a 35 year old, I suppose you would be  Roll Eyes

Logged

Best Wishes, Nick.

Research interests:
Field - Luton & Islington
Hole - Somerset, Suffolk & Surrey
Farnish, Parker, Cattermole, Last, Wasp, Church - Suffolk
Lewin/Lowin/Lowen - Hertfordhire
Martin - Eltham & Greenwich, Kent (London)
Stead - Greenwich, London (Kent) & Maidstone
Wood - Hertfordshire

Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Gaille
RootsChat Senior
****
Posts: 418



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #18 on: Thursday 25 June 09 23:43 UTC (UK) »

100 years is fine with me.

My nana lived to be in her late 90's, she died last year, on the 1911 cencus I have uncovered a family secret she wasnt aware of .......................

How would she have felt if the 1911 cencus had been availible say 50 years ago when she was alive..............I know it would have it would have devastated her.

Seeing the cencus is a priveledge, so what if we only get them released after 100 years, I for one am just thankful we have them to see, Australia for example destroyed cencus's after they were enumerated, some countries dont allow access, and some never took them in the 1st place ............... I feel that people should quit complaing about having to wait for them and be thankful we HAVE them to see. (JMO)

Gaille
Logged

Manchester – Bate(s) / Bebbington / Coppock or Coppart / Evans / Mitchell / Prince / Smith

Cheshire Latchford – Bibby / Savage / Smith.
Cheshire Macclesfield,  Bollington & Rainow – Childs / Flint / Mc'rea
Cheshire Crewe – Bate(s) / Bebbington
Shropshire Wellington, Wobwell – Smith
Walsall Midds – Smith

Also looking for:
Mc'Rea/McCrea – Ireland to Cheshire

And
any relatives of Margaret Bibby married to Thomas Smith all over country
Guy Etchells
RootsChat Aristocrat
******
Posts: 1103



WWW
Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #19 on: Friday 26 June 09 06:18 UTC (UK) »

Census records must be considered as one of the thousands of Public Records kept by our government.
This being so the access to census records must be viewed in association with the access to other public records.

The keeping and access to most other public records has been determined since 1838 by the various Public Records Acts (PRA).
Under the PRA 1958 Public records transferred to the Public Records Office (National Archives) could, in the main, be accessed after 50 years.
This period of fifty years was reduced to thirty years by the Public Records Act 1967 and finally repealed by the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

This means that many highly classified and even records (when created) classified as Top Secret records may now be now freely accessible.
Birth, Marriage and Death records are available to the public from the day they are created. The full electoral register is available for the public to access from the day it is created. Why should census be treated differently?

While access to most records was being relaxed access to English census records was being tightened.
The 1841 census was released after 70 years with the 1851 being released after 60 years.
In 1871 the census officials in London divulged the names and addresses of all children 3-13 and their parents to the London School Board to help enforce compulsory education.
Only six out of the 15 pre-1910 United Kingdom censuses have been closed for 100 years.
The details of nine out of 15 have been released after less than 90 years. (Source Hansard 29 March 2004).

The truth is with the advent of digitisation of records and the ease of manipulation of digital records there is absolutely no excuse not to allow access to census records within ten years of the census being taken.
Sensitive personal information can easily be redacted from the digital copies whilst still keeping the original copies untouched for future generations.

If Parliament had been told the truth about the assurances given at the time of the census and the date the 100 year rule was introduced instead of lies and miss-information, we would have access to all census within a few years of it being taken.
Cheers
Guy
Logged

http://freespace.virgin.net/guy.etchells   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://www.framland.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.
Nick29
RootsChat Aristocrat
******
Posts: 2886



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #20 on: Friday 26 June 09 07:12 UTC (UK) »

The full electoral register is available for the public to access from the day it is created. Why should census be treated differently?

Because the census reveals the relationships within families, where the Electoral Roll does not ?   I concede that this information could be built up from many hours work with the BMD records, but is it a good idea to serve this information up on a plate at a knock-down price ?  To unscrupulous people who seek to make money by building up files on people in order to steal their identity, this sort of information would be a gift, and I would not want to make life any easier for them.  For the majority of people, most of the information contained on the 1921 to 2001 censuses can be obtained by other means, with a little more work.
Logged

Best Wishes, Nick.

Research interests:
Field - Luton & Islington
Hole - Somerset, Suffolk & Surrey
Farnish, Parker, Cattermole, Last, Wasp, Church - Suffolk
Lewin/Lowin/Lowen - Hertfordhire
Martin - Eltham & Greenwich, Kent (London)
Stead - Greenwich, London (Kent) & Maidstone
Wood - Hertfordshire

Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Mark1973
RootsChat Extra
**
Posts: 82



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #21 on: Friday 26 June 09 08:24 UTC (UK) »

50 years would do me fine, would be happy with that Smiley

As a 35 year old, I suppose you would be  Roll Eyes



I can't help it, i'm impatient Grin
Logged

Lavender - Ruislip Middlesex / Mitcham Surrey
Adaway - Burnham Buckinghamshire / Mitcham Surrey
Abrehart - Edmonton Middlesex / Mitcham Surrey
Lindsell - Braintree Essex / Morpeth Durham / Mitcham Surrey
Donohoe & Roche - Graiguecullen, Carlow Ireland
stonechat
RootsChat Aristocrat
******
Posts: 1577



WWW
Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #22 on: Friday 26 June 09 08:37 UTC (UK) »

Hi
US Censuses run 70 years I think

They released much more sensitive information with the WW1 records now online - records showing someone on my tree had a 'social' disease.

I can't help thinking that things will not move in this direction

Bob

p.s. being born at the end of 1951, the first census that will show me will be released will be the 1961 census, on 1st Jan 2062!
Logged

Douglas, Varnden, Joy(i)ce Surrey, Clarke Northants/Hunts, Pullen Worcs/Herefords, Holmes Birmingham/USA/Canada/Australia, Jackson Cheshire/Yorkshire, Lomas Cheshire, Lee Yorkshire, Cocks Lancashire, Leah Cheshire, Cook Yorkshire, Catlow Lancashire

NOTE I have moved my website to http://www.cotswan.com
Mark1973
RootsChat Extra
**
Posts: 82



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #23 on: Friday 26 June 09 08:42 UTC (UK) »

Hi
US Censuses run 70 years I think

They released much more sensitive information with the WW1 records now online - records showing someone on my tree had a 'social' disease.

Same here, found in the WW1 discharge records my Gg Grandad had been a very naughty boy indeed!
Logged

Lavender - Ruislip Middlesex / Mitcham Surrey
Adaway - Burnham Buckinghamshire / Mitcham Surrey
Abrehart - Edmonton Middlesex / Mitcham Surrey
Lindsell - Braintree Essex / Morpeth Durham / Mitcham Surrey
Donohoe & Roche - Graiguecullen, Carlow Ireland
Evelina
RootsChat Member
***
Posts: 227


Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #24 on: Friday 26 June 09 08:45 UTC (UK) »

I was delighted when the 1911 England census was available early as I had been trying to solve a family query for ages and cannot wait for the Scottish one to complete my task.  However I see the argument for some privacy but personally feel 50 years is sufficient time to keep them sealed.

Cheers Evelina
Logged

Porter & Chalmers - Perthshire, Laing - West Fife, Stirrat - Glasgow, Ferguson - Glasgow & Skye, Coulter & Wilson - Northern Ireland, Kean - Glasgow & Northern Ireland. Ferrier - Perthshire. Lawton - Church Lawton, Cheshire.
Siamese Girl
RootsChat Veteran
*****
Posts: 656



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #25 on: Friday 26 June 09 09:10 UTC (UK) »

I think you have to remember that anyone filling in a census return only as far back as 1991 would have had no idea that within 20 years this thing called the Internet would explode on the scene and that so many people would come to expect instant and easy access to all kinds of information that in 1991 they would have found extremely difficult if not impossible to obtain.

I really see no need that in 10/20 years time anyone in the world who is just curious, should be able to see who is now living in my house  - and I think if that happened you'd find very few people willing to fill in a census return.


Carole
Logged

CHILD Glos/London, BONUS London, DIMSDALE London, HODD and TUTT Sussex,  BONNER and PATTEN Essex, BOWLER and HOLLIER Oxfordshire, HUGH Lincolnshire, LEEDOM all.
stonechat
RootsChat Aristocrat
******
Posts: 1577



WWW
Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #26 on: Friday 26 June 09 10:40 UTC (UK) »

I am not sure people even take the census seriously
With Jedi Knight being entered as a religion by many!
Logged

Douglas, Varnden, Joy(i)ce Surrey, Clarke Northants/Hunts, Pullen Worcs/Herefords, Holmes Birmingham/USA/Canada/Australia, Jackson Cheshire/Yorkshire, Lomas Cheshire, Lee Yorkshire, Cocks Lancashire, Leah Cheshire, Cook Yorkshire, Catlow Lancashire

NOTE I have moved my website to http://www.cotswan.com
Nick29
RootsChat Aristocrat
******
Posts: 2886



Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #27 on: Friday 26 June 09 12:41 UTC (UK) »

It's OK - Facebook records will come to the rescue !  Smiley
Logged

Best Wishes, Nick.

Research interests:
Field - Luton & Islington
Hole - Somerset, Suffolk & Surrey
Farnish, Parker, Cattermole, Last, Wasp, Church - Suffolk
Lewin/Lowin/Lowen - Hertfordhire
Martin - Eltham & Greenwich, Kent (London)
Stead - Greenwich, London (Kent) & Maidstone
Wood - Hertfordshire

Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Guy Etchells
RootsChat Aristocrat
******
Posts: 1103



WWW
Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #28 on: Friday 26 June 09 17:15 UTC (UK) »

The question in the poll is academic anyway as legally no census taken under the 1920 Census Act can be released for public access ever.

It would require a change of law to allow access in 100 years just as it would require a change of law to allow access in 50 years.
Cheers
Guy
Logged

http://freespace.virgin.net/guy.etchells   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://www.framland.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.
GOODDOG
RootsChat Extra
**
Posts: 60


Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Re: Census and the 100 years rule
« Reply #29 on: Friday 26 June 09 18:12 UTC (UK) »

can you tell me what is the difference between the 1911 census and the 1920 census  that means you can never get to see the 1920 one  no matter how long one lives.  why was the decision taken to withold all of the 1920 census.  some big scandal. Huh
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print 
« previous next »


[Copyright] [Shrink Link] [About Us] [Terms of Use]
All Census Lookups are Crown Copyright, National Archives for academic and non-commercial research purposes only
RootsChat.com cannot be held responsible directly or indirectly for the messages or content posted by others. Inline images in messages are the copyright of the respective linked sites.
RootsChat.com, Europa House, Bury, Lancashire, BL9 5BT

In loving memory of Eric George Davies, 1934-2009, the father of RootsChat.com































Powered by SMF 1.0.7 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
0.049:21