Dear Humphrey

Thank you for calling us to order.  However, the quote below, whilst
appearing to rule out use of the population register to identify those
NOT 'lawfully resident' does not reassure me.  There are at least two
problems for those with problematic status:

(a) at the creation of the population register, how is the lawful
residence status of a person going to be established?  Even as a British
Bulldog for several generations, but one who has joined lunatics and
Lords in their non-entitlement to vote, I have had to turn cartwheels to
prove my existence to a mortgage company; what will the process be like
for immigrants?  Will it lead many to evade therby marginalising them
even more??

(b) subsequently, although the implication is that it will ONLY be used
for statistical purposes, one can imagine the Benefits Agency putting on
a lot of pressure to cross-check the lawful residence status of those to
whom it pays out benefits.

Roy Carr-Hill


"A UK population register is currently proposed,
which aims to create and maintain a high
quality database of core personal details on all
people lawfully resident within UK borders,
UK nationals living overseas and deceased
citizens where these latter records are necessary
for the conduct of government business. The
population register would store core personal
details of name, address, date and place of birth,
date of death and a unique personal identifier,
and would provide a valuable spine for linkage
of data from different sources. With explicit
and special legal authority, such data may be
available for statistical purposes, subject to
public acceptability and the overseeing of its
custody.
-----Original Message-----
From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Humphrey Southall
Sent: 31 October 2003 13:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Censuses and Population Register


It worries me that none of the people responding to my earlier message
seem to have read the ONS discussion document that I think RadStats
needs to respond to.  It is only 8 pages, not technical and easily
available on-line:

        http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=10784

... or, so long as you can read Acrobat documents:

        http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_population/ipss.pdf

Here are some bits:

"The population register would store core personal details of name,
address, date and place of birth, date of death and a unique personal
identifier, and would provide a valuable spine for linkage of data from
different sources." ... "A linked statistical database would be created
that links data from a number of sources, including administrative and
survey data. By linking at an individual level, this database would
enable cross tabulation of variables from different sources for small
areas and populations. There would be significant legal hurdles to this
aspect of the system to overcome, and public acceptability would need to
be addressed."

i.e. for better or worse this is not just about a population register,
but about linking other government data to it.  If you think what
government knows about you, this would not be limited to demographic
variables!

To a fair extent I am deliberately playing devil's advocate, but one of
the main arguments for a new system is:  "traditional censuses across
the world are facing the challenge of falling response rates, with
specific subgroups becoming increasingly difficult to reach".  If
response rates carry on falling at the present rate, 2021 results would
be pretty useless by any standards, so it is unsurprising major changes
are being considered.  If not a population register, what?

The ONS paper mentions ID cards just once, in passing, and a RadStats
response that focused mainly on them would be dismissed as an
irrelevance
-- despite the very obvious link (in some senses the paper's position
may mesh with other parts of government which seem to be saying no to
"identity cards", but yes to the standardisation of all sorts of ID
cards we already have, plus record linkage behind the scenes -- and my
own personal feeling is the whole "biometric data" is a bit of a red
herring, simply because the technology does not really do what it claims
-- bit like the US enthusiasm for lie detectors).

Anyway, PLEASE read the discussion document.  I would personally like to
see a RadStats response, but it needs to be to the document that has
been published, not to my e-mails.

Humphrey

====================================
Humphrey Southall
Reader in Geography/Director,
Great Britain Historical GIS Project
Department of Geography, University of Portsmouth

Buckingham Building, Lion Terrace, Portsmouth PO1 3HE

GIS Project Office: (023) 9284 2500
Home office:  (020) 8853 0396
Mobile:  (07736) 727928

Web site:  http://www.gbhgis.org

******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All'
button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************

******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************