EOLFHS-MEMBERS-L ArchivesArchiver > EOLFHS-MEMBERS > 2002-02 > 1014630593
Subject: Re: [EoLFHS] White Paper: 'Civil Registration: Vital Change'
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 04:49:53 EST
In a message dated 25/02/02 00:05:33 GMT Standard Time,
> I am wondering what the European Court of Human rights would make of this
> latest situation.
I guess it is the Right to Privacy provisions of the HRA that is, in part,
driving the agenda.
Here is my recent posting on the topic.
Subj: Re: [EoLFHS] Fw: UK Government thinking of abolishing the census...
Date: 19/02/02 16:36:36 GMT Standard Time
The reality is that the Census is primarily a governmental data mine. It is
intended to provide information on which to base long term planning. From
the handful of questions in 1841, to 40 odd questions in 2001. Technology
will, and is already, changing the way information can be mined. A 10 year
snapshot limits planning.
Genealogists should be concerned if any attempt were made to vary the 100
year rule on disclosure, or more likely, the much more detailed information
which will become available in 2051, the first post-War census and the first
then for 20 years.
So far as BMD is concerned, we have to recognise that the interests of
genealogists while important (not least as a valuable source of revenue),
will always be subordinate to concerns over the privacy of data. Like it or
not, it is the concomitant of digital storage and access. When the 1901
Census is available on-line, and when and if the access is extended
backwards, and forwards in 2011, then Government will have some sort of
handle on the value of the genealogical community. Then it will be
appropriate to articulate our views.
For the present the paper based retrieval system acts as some sort of privacy
gatekeeper. Purely personally I would be reluctant for the credit agencies to
add the BMD to their data pools. Without safeguards, and given efficient
on-line access, they may be so minded.
EoLFHS # 113