|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
|
 |
|
 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 2189 times)
|
|
|
GOODDOG
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 62
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
i was replying to Guy reply 28 re the 1920 census he mentioned which would never be released. maybe i misread his thread but on reading it again i don't feel as if i have.
thank you Davidft for your reply.
Michael 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RCB
RootsChat Member
Posts: 242
|
I imagine all of us who have just grabbed the information we have been waiting for from the 1911 census and are now wanting information from later census, but the 100 years rule doesn't allow it, why? The rule is obselete, and I can't see any point in continuing with census in 2011.
We have all bought copies of birth, death, and marriage certificates, you can buy them for £7, and it doesn't have to be family, it can be any individual resident in the uk in the last 170 years. Just as soldiers only give name, rank, and number. Census only give name, age, occupation, place of birth, and address. You get far more info on the BMD certificates which are available to all for £7.
We live in an age where people give credit card details to strangers over the phone, anyone wanting to steal an identity isn't going to bother with a 1921 census thats for sure, not even 1951, in fact there are so many other places to get current information, even the police sell info to newspapers and tap phones, why pay to see a census that gives nothing.
Census do not include anything personal, illigitimate children are commonplace, the first child of most couples is born less than 9 months after the marriage, and anyone who is born and dies between census is never recorded. Census are not an accurate account, these later census are even filled in by the head of the family, they must be full of errors and lies.
I see no reason why I can't look at the first census I appeared in which was 1951, there are family members who moved away and I would like to trace them and complete the story, the 1921 census is crucial. An act of parliament brought in the 100 years rule, an act of parliament can change it, after all the information belongs to us, it's our families. So a petition signed by everyone who uses a ancestry site might start the ball rolling. cheers Fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nick29
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 2905
|
RCB - I'm afraid that I could not resist a wry smile when I read your post.
Looking at your profile, you use a 3 letter user name on the forum (which may or may not be your initials), you haven't even posted your location or your age in your profile, but you're urging me to sign a petition to abolish the 100 year rule so you can read all my family details ? Tell you what, you make a start first, by filling in all the sections of the forum profile, and then change your forum name to your real one ?
The reason the 100 year rule doesn't apply to the 1911 census is because the law wasn't passed until after 1911, and it wasn't applied retrospectively.
Oh, and one more thing - it's quite likely that there will not be a census in 2011 - the government already knows all it needs to know about you, through taxation, National Insurance, Passport, Driving Licence, school, benefits, and TV Licence records. With a pinch on government spending, it may well be abandoned.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
RCB
RootsChat Member
Posts: 242
|
Hi Nick - RCB are my initials, Robert Charles B*****, but my dad was Fred and now I am. You might not be Nick, so you don't give anything away either.
With regard to the 1921 census, apart from there being a rule that stops us looking at census, can you or anyone give any good reason why we should not be allowed access to this information.
Mind you I wouldn't want anyone to know my grandfather worked in a tinplate factory, or that my grandmother had a child before she was married, or that my father was 6 years old, or that they lived in Monmouth. And is the world going to end if I find out where my grandfathers brother and sister moved to.
My eldest daughter will be 81, if she lives that long, when the 1951 census is released (or not) of course she knows I was living with my parents and brother in a council house in Monmouth, and my dad worked on the railways. Does it matter if I never know about my dads uncle and aunt, not really, but it would be nice to know if they did marry, if there are relatives. Buying certificates as a guess gets expensive, and time consuming, census sometimes open up a search.
cheers Fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nick29
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 2905
|
There is nothing at all to stop you gaining access to family information. Under the Freedom of Information Act, you can ask organisations and institutions (and the government) to supply certain things that they know about you and your family. They are, however, entitled to charge you a fee to cover the costs of supplying this information, which could be up to £250.
I have no objections to this. What I do object to is for any Tom, Dick or Harry looking at details about my mother and father, and the 1921 census will inevitably also include thousands of people who will still be alive, if it were to be released now. It's also a gift to those who seek to profit by stealing the identities of ordinary people. You've already answered why they don't steal ID's by buying certificates - because it costs too much money.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
RCB
RootsChat Member
Posts: 242
|
OK Nick - You also say that the last census will probably be the one we filled in in 2001, and I agree, they know all they need to know, and too much current information is made available or accessed too easily by crooks basically, all too often there is a new scandal over police or medical records ending up on rubbish tips or being left on a bus, but the 1921 census is surely not too much to want or expect.
I didn't know so many census had been lost, so the 1951 census would be the next, and I don't need to see that. I might find out about viewing the 1921 census. I take it you would have no objection to any individual with ID going to an office to view their family census records, but you wouldn't be happy with the release of all 1921 records to the public.
Most of us have gone to various county archives to see Parish Records, and have been happy to pay a fee for a copy, I would be more than happy with that if it applied to the 1921 census, and as it would result in revenue I'm sure they would offer the service at a reasonable price.
I actually don't believe census offer criminals anything more than they can find out easily elsewhere. There are clever people who can find out all they need to know on the internet helped by stolen bits of mail etc.
Thanks for the replies. Oh Siamese girl, the birth - marriage date thing, it's something I always look at, my grandparents married 3 years after my uncle was born, my father didn't know until his brother died, and I have found marriages a month before a child was born. Maybe saying most was over the top, but it is very common. cheers Fred.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nick29
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 2905
|
Fred, I don't think you can even begin to equate records being carelessly mislaid, to the release of data on millions of individuals for all to see, so I'm not going to waste time discussing it.
As I said before, it is your right to ask for information under the Freedom of Information Act, and I am not objecting to that at all.
As for the actual publishing of the data - I don't think you've even begun to think about that. At the moment, the 1921 census consists of millions of pieces of paper, just as the 1911 census did. To make this available to the public would be a major undertaking, requiring the same work and the same (if not greater) expense, because the 1921 census will be bigger than the 1911 census.
Re inspecting pages from the census in local centres - that would require an enormous amount of work, because the 1921 census only exists in one place, and to copy it for public use would be a major undertaking.
If criminals can find information contained in the 1921 census elsewhere, then I expect you can too 
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
RCB
RootsChat Member
Posts: 242
|
Nick there are 2.7 million people in the UK over 80, a lot more than I would have thought, and I would suggest that if you asked them "Would you mind if I looked at the census your father filled in in 1921" most (all) would say "No, go ahead, can you get me a copy" I have a few reletives over 80 and they love these details found in census, it helps them remember things long forgotten, and tells them things they never knew, but had a right to know.
As for the work involved in producing census for the public to view, they did it for all census up tp 1911, it pays to do so. They wouldn't have produced the 1911 census unless there was money to be made.
I know nothing I say will change the way you feel about this, but 67% in the poll agree with me. cheers fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
RCB
RootsChat Member
Posts: 242
|
I agree Jan, the post has been read over 1000 times and only thirtysomething have bothered to vote, your 4th option should have been included, and Nick hasn't suggested that the 1000 who didn't vote agree with him (Not yet anyway LOL) I usually avoid polls. cheers fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Nick29
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 2905
|
Nick there are 2.7 million people in the UK over 80, a lot more than I would have thought, and I would suggest that if you asked them "Would you mind if I looked at the census your father filled in in 1921" most (all) would say "No, go ahead, can you get me a copy" I have a few reletives over 80 and they love these details found in census, it helps them remember things long forgotten, and tells them things they never knew, but had a right to know.
I think you're getting a little carried away now, Fred - the census doesn't contain that much data - and I'm not sure that either of us is empowered to speak on behalf of 2.7 million people. Your relatives do not have a right to know what is in the 1921 census, because those who filled it in did so believing that the contents would be kept private for 100 years, and that's what it said on the forms.
The government had to collaborate with a third party to present the 1911 census, but I'm really not sure that they would have the same success with the 1921 census. For a start, there will be fewer people interested. I for one would not be subscribing, because I already know everything that the 1921 census would reveal, and I did it by other means. You say you want to see the census to get in touch with people that your family has lost touch with, and although it's a valid reason, it really isn't real genealogy in my book. I really think the government would have a hard time finding partners for the 1921 census, because it would be much less marketable than the 1911 census. Now, if someone could show me the 1801 census (I know there wasn't one!), I would be there, cheque book in hand !
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
|
|
|
|
|
