UK Census and Lockheed Martin

[Johnstuff]

I've just had my Census through the door and I was supprised to learn that they have been contracted out to Lcokheed Martin, the American arms dealer. This company has a bad track record (they have spied on US citizens and they tried to start the Iraq war etc.) and under the Patriot act they may have to reveal any data they have to the US government.

I light of this I may have to forget to do my Census.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? (I'm supprised there's not already a thread)

[Glen Lambert]

I'm in two minds about this. One the one hand there's the while Lockheed Martin thing but, on the other, there is the fact that it is compulsory and failure to complete it may result in a £1000 fine and a criminal record!

Last time only a very few people were prosecuted from approx 3 million non-completists. However, I understand that they are going to be much tougher this time around.

I'd say fill it in so that money is allocated properly in your area and also hope that the Tories and LM are later found to be using the data nefariously so that both can be sunk forever.

[leedsveg]

John and GL. I would imagine that the money to pay for this has already gone to Lockheed Martin, from the taxes you and I have already paid. Not sure what omitting to fill in the census form would accomplish at this stage.

Leedsveg

[harpy]

I would imagine that the money to pay for this has already gone to Lockheed Martin, from the taxes you and I have already paid.

It's arguably one of the more harmless things we pay them to do :-/

[Ms_Derious]

I'm in two minds about this. One the one hand there's the while Lockheed Martin thing but, on the other, there is the fact that it is compulsory and failure to complete it may result in a £1000 fine and a criminal record!

That's my concern. I'm not overly pleased who is administering the whole thing, but on the other hand it is the law and, at the moment, I can direct my efforts elsewhere.

John and GL. I would imagine that the money to pay for this has already gone to Lockheed Martin, from the taxes you and I have already paid. Not sure what omitting to fill in the census form would accomplish at this stage.

I am a little worried about what they might decide to do with the information, which would be my concern rather than them getting paid for it.

[harpy]

They claim that the data is going to be kept confidential:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/fe...ockheed-martin

I guess I'll fill it in for the reasons already given. I'm not too sure why they got the contract in the first place, presumably they were the lowest bidder

[leedsveg]

I am a little worried about what they might decide to do with the information, which would be my concern rather than them getting paid for it.

I think my concern is with the UK government and the information. True to form, as soon as they receive the disks from LM with all the info, they'll probably lose them.


lv

[twinkle]

I don't think any of the information I'm going to put down isn't already available elsewhere, or what bad use people could make of it even if it wasn't. I can't see how they could possibly get away with the info not being kept confidential though, they'd be sued to heck and back!

[Clueless Git]

I'm not too sure why they got the contract in the first place, presumably they were the lowest bidder

I have no reason to believe it to be so in this particular case, BUT!

It is ... errrr ... shall we just say 'widely suspected'' that tenders are sometimes rigged [cough]richardbransonuklottery[/cough] to disqualify the lowest bidders in favour of bidders who offer ... errr ... 'better value' in areas outside of the tender scope.

[leedsveg]

I don't think any of the information I'm going to put down isn't already available elsewhere, or what bad use people could make of it even if it wasn't. I can't see how they could possibly get away with the info not being kept confidential though, they'd be sued to heck and back!

I think advertisers would pay millions to get their hands on the census results because of the demographic info it contains. This info may be already 'out there' to some extent, in bits and bobs but the census has it all in one place. As for suing Lockheed Martin or the UK Government if my details were leaked, all I can say is that that would involve a lot of time, effort and money, with no guaranteed result.

Leedsveg

[teaboy]

I worked for Lockheed for six years. They weren't in the least bit interested in me during that time, so I find it hard to believe that they'll be too interested in millions of people they don't know

[Ms_Derious]

I worked for Lockheed for six years. They weren't in the least bit interested in me during that time, so I find it hard to believe that they'll be too interested in millions of people they don't know

Now I feel rather rejected.

[veganvoo]

It none of their business what I, a sentient being, do with my life. If they come to the door I'll either say I posted it and it must have got lost or when they ask for my name just say "at this moment I do not wish to disclose any further infomation. Do NOT say your name as at that point your entering a contract. Look up freeman-of-the-land at www.fmotl.com.

[leedsveg]

Hi veganvoo

Not something that I'd risk, as I don't feel strongly, one way or the other.

But I'll be watching your campaign with interest.

Leedsveg

[Johnstuff]

I wouldn't trust them an inch, this is the company that set up a group to try and start the Iraq war. It annoys me that they make such threats as giving you a criminal record if you don't fill it in. Refusing to fill in a census does not make someone a criminal, being involved in illegal wars does IMO.

If they knock on my door I'll tell them the home owner is on holiday and that I'm too busy to talk to them.

[Risker]

If they knock on my door I'll tell them the home owner is on holiday and that I'm too busy to talk to them.

They want the "householder", not the homeowner. If you're the only one there you're the householder.

[veganvoo]

It wasnt even addressed to me just some guy called "the occupier". Ive never heard of him and he/she certainly doesnt live under the same roof as me. If it was addressed to my name then I may have opened it but Im afraid to say its gone in the shredder.

[Morat]

John and GL. I would imagine that the money to pay for this has already gone to Lockheed Martin, from the taxes you and I have already paid. Not sure what omitting to fill in the census form would accomplish at this stage.

Leedsveg

Well in theory if enough people protest this decision by not filling it in, then the 2021 census might go to a less objectionable company.

[leedsveg]

Well in theory if enough people protest this decision by not filling it in, then the 2021 census might go to a less objectionable company.

I think, if I understand right, that this is going to be the last one.


lv

[Risker]

I've heard the same leedsveg, apparently they'll be able to get all the info they need from other sources in future. Except the information that we're becoming a more secular society which they don't want to know about.

[Morat]

It's possible that this will be the last one. That isn't for definite though.

[twinkle]

Will they get the info from chips forcibly implanted in us? I hope not, I've got a bet on with my mum and she wins £100 off me if that happens!

[rainbow]

I'm filling it in (late, I know, oops, I was in France), and under religion, I'm putting "vegan".

[Risker]

If you were in France when you were supposed to do it then you shouldn't be filling it in. You're only supposed to do it for people that were in the household on the date they requested.

[rainbow]

I disagree. I am a permanent resident of the UK and the householder. I was not physically present in my house that day but I am still the occupier. I should not be excluded from the census because I was temporarily absent on that day. It asks questions about the household and the people who usually live there, and we usually live there. It says nowhere that you should not fill in the survey if you were temporarily absent that day. In fact, it says "visitors [staying overnight in this household on 27 March] who usually live elsewhere in the UK must also be included on a census questionnaire at their usual address", so even though they were not at their usual address on 27 March, they still need to fill in the census for their usual address.

[harpy]

I think you're supposed to fill in the household questions anyway ("who usually lives here" etc), but that you don't have to fill in the individual questions except for the individuals that were there on the relevant date?

[rainbow]

Have doubled-checked.

Households: "If this address is unoccupied on 27 March 2011 because the whole household is away, the questionnaire should be completed as soon as possible upon their return."

People temporarily away from home: "Anyone who is temporarily away from their permanent or family home on 27 March 2011 should be included in their home address in household questions and individual questions. This includes people who are living away from home while working (unless outside the UK for 12 months or more)."

That has me covered then. I was right to fill it in.

[harpy]

Excellent!

[Risker]

My mistake. Was thinking that because my parents didn't have to fill one out near us because they were staying at a different address.

[harpy]

Yes, I was confused as well because my friends who have a flat here only had to fill in the first bit, but that was because their normal residence is abroad

[rainbow]

These things are confusing! I had to fill out a French census as well, even though I was only a temporary resident (but they did allow me to state explicitly on the form that I was only there temporarily).

[harpy]

How did the Fr one compare, rainbow?

[rainbow]

They seem to do it annually so not sure it is strictly comparable. They don't collect data on religion and ethnicity, but wanted to know details about my household (how many rooms, what kind of heating etc - not that different really), my employment, my means of transport etc. So quite similar really.

[harpy]

Blimey, must be expensive to do annually...although we did ours online this time so that ought to save processing costs.

[rainbow]

Outside France, the French are known for wine, cheese, patisserie and other such. Inside France, everyone knows that the country's defining feature is its obsession with gratuitous bureaucracy.

[veganvoo]

Just had one of big brothers spies on my doorstep asking if I'd filled in the census to which I replied "yes so it must have got lost in the post!" With that he was off. Aparently millions of people boycotted the census and they just cant afford to chase everyone. So much for the bully tactics of "its the law"written all over the envelope

[harpy]

Outside France, the French are known for wine, cheese, patisserie and other such. Inside France, everyone knows that the country's defining feature is its obsession with gratuitous bureaucracy.

That's half my ancestors taken care of...You're probably right though

[leedsveg]

Do I understand right that the size of government grants to local authorities is based on the size of the population in the authority area? In other words the more people who complete the census in an area, the higher the recorded population figure and so, the higher the grant?

lv

[rainbow]

That's half my ancestors taken care of...You're probably right though

Harpy, I have lived in France four times because I love the country and its people. It's my second home. But this portrayal of them (from the Twelve Tasks of Asterix) does hit amusingly close to the mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=momD3XyV2a8

[harpy]

Harpy, I have lived in France four times because I love the country and its people. It's my second home. But this portrayal of them (from the Twelve Tasks of Asterix) does hit amusingly close to the mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=momD3XyV2a8

What's wrong with that? Looks like a good system to me

thanks for the larf

[Johnstuff]

Why fill it in? Don't be intimidated by their threats!

Again this is Lockheed Martin, the world's 2nd largest arms manufacturer. The company that set up a group who's sole purpose was to help cause the Iraq war.

[Risker]

Why fill it in? Don't be intimidated by their threats!

Again this is Lockheed Martin, the world's 2nd largest arms manufacturer. The company that set up a group who's sole purpose was to help cause the Iraq war.

They've already been paid, not filling it in wouldn't make a jot of difference, however by filling it in you are making yourself represented. Personally I don't want any more funding to go to faith schools so by filling in my religion as atheist it's one more vote against them.

[rainbow]

To exist, to be counted, to say that I use public transport and don't have a car, to say that veganism is my most significant world view, and as Risker said, to be represented, and it doesn't make any difference to Lockheed Martin, alas.
Also, I am a social scientist. Survey data like this allows us to understand the world, make better and more informed policy decisions, identify problems and come up with tailored solutions.

[Johnstuff]

I suspect those who control this data will use it for their own good, not for ours.

[Risker]

The data is made freely available. No one controls it.

[Johnstuff]

^I don't understand, just a quick search and I found:

"Census data is not divulged to the public until 100 years after it has been collected. However, under the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 Census data can be shared amongst the 27 EU member states and bodies of ‘approved researchers’"

From a seemingly pro census site: http://www.northstarmarketresearch.co.uk/tag/census/

I'm sure in previous years the government has come under fire for selling census data to market researchers. Am I wrong?

[Risker]

Specifics aren't shared, so you can't find out what any individual household has entered, no one should have access to that data. Generalised data though everyone will have access to.

You can view data from the 2001 census here - http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2...ss_results.asp

[Jonny Nexus]

Do I understand right that the size of government grants to local authorities is based on the size of the population in the authority area? In other words the more people who complete the census in an area, the higher the recorded population figure and so, the higher the grant?

lv

That's also my understanding. The vast bulk of a council's income comes not from council tax, but in the form of a grant from the government, and that is based (I believe) largely on the number of people in the area, with possible bonuses if the census indicates that they are poor - things like not having access to indoor toilets, English as a second language and so on. (i.e. An area with lots of social problems such as Tower Hamlets will, I understand, be given more money per head of population than a rich area like Esher, to cover extra costs such as teaching English as a second language, providing social and health care, and so on).

So yeah, if you don't fill in the census, then your council misses out on a big wodge of cash. Which is fair enough if you think about it: why should a council be given money to provide services to people who supposedly don't exist?