The Census

While I respect those individuals who are determined not to complete the Census, I have no faith that the law would uphold their just objections to this excessive intrusion by the State.  As such I have bowed to the demands of the parasite class and completed my form online.

To those who refuse to complete the very questionnaire – opposed by the Conservatives in opposition, but distributed when they were in government – I wish you every success in avoiding prosecution and criminal records.  I don’t believe anyone should suffer such a sanction for refusing to answer so many searching questions that are utterly irrelevant to central government.

The only satisfaction the Census gave me amid the seething resentment I felt while completing it was being able to tell the government to ‘Mind your own’ on the religion question and identifying myself as English, even though the parasites do not recognise English as a nationality.  No doubt for this triviality I will be recorded on a database somewhere as a non conforming trouble maker or extremist. That would fit in with this story from last year about the EU instruction to build lists of people involved in:

“extreme right/left, Islamist, nationalist, anti-globalisation” groups

This should give us cause to fear the burgeoning surveillance state because we know such lists will include people who simply disagree with that which our supposed servants have forced upon us. As always it is their interests that take primacy, our interests are an irrelevance.  But hopefully, come the day people in this country finally decide to throw off the EU and remove their self serving poodles in Westminster and the civil service, these lists will not matter.

It is not a crime or offence to believe in and desire a strong, independent nation state that serves the interests of its people.  It is not a crime or offence to believe in and desire genuine representative democracy and accountability.  It is not a crime or offence to be committed to bringing about such an outcome.

If such beliefs and desires mark a person out as a radical or extremist then it shows up the political class for what it is – our enemy.

18 Responses to “The Census”

  1. 1 Jim 27/03/2011 at 12:37 pm

    You wouldn’t recognise me from my answers on my form……. :)

  2. 2 Techno Mystic 27/03/2011 at 12:50 pm

    Apparently, 3 million households failed to fill it in last time but only 38 were prosecuted, so the chances of avoiding prosecution are very high.

    I will simply not answer the door to the census taker. If they accidentally catch me outside I will simply say that the flat is rented (which it is) and nobody was living in it on 27th March.

    I am now too furious to cooperate with the government anymore.

  3. 3 graham wood 27/03/2011 at 12:50 pm

    Here is what I believe is an appropriate letter to the CEO of the census, asking a number of relevant questions. I do not expect a reply.
    Graham Wood (York UK)

    Dear Ms Mateson,
    2011 UK & EU Census.

    I acknowledge receipt of the Census form 2011. There are a number of aspects in the form that I find extremely disturbing, and before completion I would be grateful for your answers to several questions which I now raise. On receipt of satisfactory answers to these I will complete the statutory requirements.
    Many people will note that the census form runs to some 32 pages of questions, some of which appear to be very intrusive concerning private and personal data of no legitimate interest to the government, and even less to the European Union, and which appear to exceed the statutory requirements under the Census Act 1920.
    I outline as follows some areas of concern:


    A. It is my understanding that data collection for the census will involve a USA subsidiary company of the arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin. Can you confirm this?
    B. Lockheed Martin is known to assist more than two dozen American government agencies and is involved in surveillance and data processing for the CIA and FBI. It has provided private-contract interrogators to the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and Guantánamo Bay in Cuba. Please explain therefore in your view is our personal data safe in the hands of such an organisation which in the past has been charged with illegally spying on UK citizens.
    C. As you will know All US-based companies are subject to the Patriot Act, which allows the US government to have access to any data in the company’s possession. In other words, the US government will have legal access to detailed and highly personal data on the UK’s entire population. If this is the case please confirm what protection UK citizens will have from dissemination of their data?
    D. Please confirm that whether census data collected in England will be treated as ‘restricted’, or as ‘confidential’? If the forms will be processed by some 1300 temporary employees at a warehouse in Manchester the prospect of either seems rather remote. Please clarify as the Coalition government has provided no convincing assurances about the vetting of these temporary staff, nor the security being imposed on them and the data they handle, neither during nor after the process.

    E. As many of us are painfully aware the massive and scandalous losses of personal data by the British government and its civil servants over recent years is a lamentable fact. – i.e. Many hundreds of ‘lost’ laptops and memory sticks by the Ministry of Defence, and “Confidential,” even ‘highly secret’, government data left in taxis and public transport buses, trains etc. You will be well aware of this.
    How then can there be any government guarantees that criminals will be prevented from gaining access to raw census data. Will the NSO be able to guarentee this?
    Also please confirm whether government can issue such a guarentee of census data when it will be available to the police, the intelligence agencies, immigration authorities, tax inspectors, DWP investigators, foreign governments, the EU, and to private sector and academic ‘approved researchers’? Clearly the scope here for further potential incompetence or deliberate “leaks” is hugely extended.
    In connection with the above security issues please confirm whether the absolute confidentiality of personal information in the census is to be guaranteed by law in England and Wales, given that the last Labour government abolished this guarentee in the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007, section 39.
    If no such guarentee is forthcoming from the ONS or government concerning the absolute confidentiality of this data please confirm if the ONS will take full and legal responsibility for any loss or mishandling of data. Please advise who is the guarantor of last resort in this case.


    As a general comment what possible connection can there be between the European Union and a British census ostensibly for use by British governments to plan future housing, education etc for purely British interests? How can any EU interest or involvement contribute to these objectives which purportedly drive the census? I have several concerns in relation to the role played by the EU.

    1. I understand that EU Regulation L218/14 makes a claim to have some sort of jurisdiction in and over member states statistical data which would include information from this census. The regulation requires that information collected in the UK is passed to Eurostat which is the EU’s statistics institution.
    Given that this EU body has for many years been involved in systemic fraud and corruption within its senior staff and which has been a major public scandal, please explain what justification there is for UK census data to be passed to this institution.

    2. Please explain how the passing of such data to the EU conforms to the provisions of the British Census Act 1920 which expressly forbids the passing of census information to a third party (Section 8, Clause 3 – which states: “If any person discloses to another person any personal census information which he knows has been disclosed in contravention of this Act, he shall be guilty of an offence”)

    Further, I and no doubt in company with many others, am deeply concerned about the political and constitutional implications of data being passed to the EU.

    The civil liberties body Statewatch which monitors the EU, has discovered that Brussels wants law enforcement agencies in member states to build lists of political activists as part of a ‘systematic data collection’. Civil servants in member states charged with this duty have been told to collate information on what the EU chooses to call ‘agents of radicalisation’. They have been sent a lists of questions to elicit information on family members, psychological traits, religious affiliation, activities, economic status and significantly, ‘oral comments’ – presumably via ‘phone taps – on political issues. (This was raised with comment in the Guardian 8th June 2010)
    In view of this information please explain what possible justification can there be for any British person to be the subject of any sort of potential EU political surveillance through information passed to this corrupt body via a British census. I suggest to you that not only is such a course of action imprudent, but worse it is highly dangerous, and a complete denial of all democratic principles and those of freedom, as expressed for example under the Human Rights Act. Please confirm what elements of the British census will be passed to the EU, and on what legal grounds.

    Please explain how any EU involvement with a British census is consistent with the lawful obligatory duty of government and servants of the Crown to recognise and implement the provisions of our major Constitutional enactments such as the Magna Carta (1215) and the Bill of Rights (1689). Those with but a passing knowledge of these will understand that these are wholly incompatible with the EU’s claims.
    Both of these were contracts made directly between the Crown and the people. Both were, and are, beyond the powers of parliament (see the declaration by Speaker Betty Boothroyd – Hansard July 1993).
    Please confirm your recognition and acceptance that the Declaration and Bill of Rights, both constitutional documents with an authority higher than Statute law, expressly forbids British governments or subjects to allow jurisdiction to be exercised by any foreign power “within this realm”.
    All British constitutional rights, privileges and freedoms were guarenteed fully and finally in the Coronation Oath sworn by British Sovereigns, including that of Elizabeth II in 1953, and confirmed in the original Coronation Oath Act of 1689.
    It is therefore a matter of fact that these enactment fly directly in the face of claims by the European Union to have jurisdiction over British subjects and their private and personal lives and data. To be complicit in passing such information to Brussels to assist their ‘governance’ of the UK is therefore unlawful. Please confirm your acceptance of the legal priority of these enactments over the claims of the EU in relation to the divulging of data in the census.
    Finally, and with regard to the British Constitution I remind you that that the State in Britain answers to the people and not vice versa. We, the people, do not answer to the state. There is no such legal entity as a British state, or under our Constitution is there a legal authority known as the European Union with jurisdiction over British subjects of the Crown. Clearly the ONS needs to aware of this larger political and constitutional backdrop to the census.
    I await your comments before completion of the 2011 census form.
    Yours sincerely

    Mr G Wood.

    Ms Jil Mateson, C.E.O.
    Office for National Statistics
    Government Buildings
    Cardiff Road
    South Wales

    c.c. Mr Julian Sturdy MP. House of Commons.
    Statewatch. UK

  4. 4 Liz Elliot-Pyle 27/03/2011 at 1:31 pm

    Unfortunately, I live in France and will not be asked to take part in this census. I would LOVE to have the chance to deface my paper, or shred it, or any of the other suggestions I have found on the blogoshere.
    I have no trust in our rulers to keep this information secret (it is going to be shared with the EU anyway) and I have the deepest suspicions of their motives for wanting most of it anyway.

  5. 5 Dave H 27/03/2011 at 2:03 pm

    It turns out that the census is printed on very absorbent paper and the felt tip pen I’m using is spreading badly, including bleeding through onto the pages underneath.

  6. 7 Avril 27/03/2011 at 6:20 pm

    Dave H – yes, very good! And I also find that, if you write like a 10 year old, and press reeeellly hard you can go through THREE pages! Hehe

  7. 8 jameshigham 27/03/2011 at 8:05 pm

    Suppose I’d better start looking at this document.

  8. 9 Brian H 28/03/2011 at 5:54 am

    G&S weigh in:
    “Britons, never, never, — well, hardly ever — shall be slaves!”

  9. 10 Captain Ranty 28/03/2011 at 10:42 am

    One site I visited suggested that you turn the form upside down and then fill it in.

    Shockingly, the rules do not prohibit this.

    The Lockheed Martin computers will have a lot of trouble scanning your answers.


  10. 11 georgesilver 28/03/2011 at 12:01 pm

    “come the day people in this country finally decide to throw off the EU and remove their self serving poodles in Westminster and the civil service”

    Well obviously you will be hiding in the cupboard when this happens.

    “I have bowed to the demands of the parasite class”

    Let somebody else do the freedom getting then.

  11. 12 luikkerland 28/03/2011 at 3:46 pm

    Well, what a mess I got into with the Census form, I am almost embarrased to send it back.

    First of all I got through half of the Person 1 information before I notice that the pen I was using had bled through the page. I wrote an apology note on the front page explaining my error – all the time trying my hardest not to obliterate the bar code in the top left hand corner.

    When I had finished the envelople wouldn’t seal, so I had to wrap some selotape around it – only then to discover that I had put the form in upside down! I suppose they will have to file me under “thick”.

  12. 13 Trundler 28/03/2011 at 6:49 pm

    I’ve filled out the questions that are essential ie those that were on previous census forms but I have refused to answer the other more intrusive questions on the grounds that those questions contravene Article 8 of the 1998 Human Rights Act. The questions ARE so much beyond the basic statistical data needed to classify the population.

    I await the visit of the ‘Census Stasi’ with interest.

  13. 14 Tom Mills 28/03/2011 at 10:03 pm

    Interesting thoughts here –
    Perhaps we are not legally bound to fill it in.

  14. 15 cosmic 01/04/2011 at 5:33 pm

    I filled it in, but I’m not two gud at this reedin and ritin lark and could only find a laundry marker pen, which is black as requested, but a bit well used and blunt, and soaks through.

    Unfortunately the envelope was trodden on before posting, obscuring the bar code.

    An absolute cheek and waste of money, as well as being sinister.

    The fact that the new government didn’t scrap it says the lot.

  15. 16 John Plumridge 27/04/2011 at 1:56 pm

    You probably don’t need to fill it out by law. They made it a ‘crime’ but that is dubious. The Law is not statute, though it may be served by statutes. No criminal harm is done by not filling it out.

  16. 17 John Plumridge 27/04/2011 at 2:19 pm

    quote: Tom Mills
    28/03/2011 at 10:03 pm
    Interesting thoughts here –
    Perhaps we are not legally bound to fill it in.

    ref the above url: The reasoning is good. It’s not idiosyncratic. We have no contract to fill in the census form, even if you voted. However if you go to court when/if summoned and admit failure to comply with an obligation in any way, then you’re done. They must prove a contract with the individual (yourself), and this is what should be requested.

    I am not filling mine in and I notified the office, that I do not believe I am lawfully required to fill it in, that they are merely parroting the word obligatory. If you send a notification and state your intentions, and ask them to prove a contract, that could be fun. But, it’s not necessary, though may avoid a magistrates summons form the start, assuming you were to get one.

    A magistrate may rule against you anyway, but if you are pleading no-guilty, and as it is a ‘crime’ then you have access to a a court de jure (county court), i.e a jury. The verdict would depend upon their intelligence and the guidance of you or a suitable barrister. CHances are the ptb wouldn’t want to risk that public exposure. To enforce it against you’re wishes is totalitarian control, or theft, extortion, violence even; even where a segment of the population agrees, as per the idea of a ‘government mandate’, by the group the party represents.
    E.g. The council can, with sufficient people’s votes, damn a river, but they can’t force you to drink from it.

    When they state ‘obligatory’ they are not saying lawful duty. these are distinct. Obligatory, is used as a word to make you believe it is compulsory as in a lawful duty required, by contract or by nature (e.g. parental) and to not do so would be negligence. They would try to compel you (fine threaten), and they are permitted to so far as yo accept by not refuting their claim.

    In any case, damages for negligence have to be proportional to the harm cause. i.e harm must be shown to be caused by the failure (e.g suffered hunger).

  1. 1 The Census « Autonomous Mind | Floark Trackback on 28/03/2011 at 1:17 pm
Comments are currently closed.

Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive

%d bloggers like this: