The New Local Government Network want all work on the 2011 Census scrapped as they think they have found a better way to measure population that won't cause errors. They think that taking a mix of administrative data on GP practice rolls, school places, electoral registers and tax rolls will do the job for them. Normally I have a lot of respect for local authority research people as they have a lot of knowledge and experience and understand the holes in official data sources. They are also generally a very dedicated lot and don't move on to political roles, but stay in the background making sure things tick over. I can only assume mavericks got involved in this.
GP practice rolls are totally fallible and will not solve the Slough problem that the NLGN keeps going on about. Research has shown that migrant workers, young men aged 18 to 30 and new immigrants are unlikely to register with a GP, but will use A&E services if necessary. The males aged 18 to 30 issue has always been a problem and was particularly highlighted in the days of the poll tax, when it was looked at as another way of finding "missing" people for tax purposes. Plus do you trust your local surgery to get all your details right and to not pass on things you don't want the Government to know?
School places - not everyone has children and not all children go to schools that this register would cover. What about foreign nationals coming to UK schools? What about the independent sector, who again may not collect or be required to supply all the data required. Nominal numbers of school places are also an issue, as local authorities get into real hot water if they try to close classes or schools.
Electoral registers - the poll tax debacle caused people to remove themselves from the electoral roll. I have had periods in my life when I have either been on no electoral rolls or on two or three different ones - none of it by my own volition I hasten to add. Sharp practices in Birmingham and postal votes have also shown the potential problems with this.
And finally tax records. Where is the Information Commissioner on this one? Again, the tax office doesn't collect all the data you need for a useful population count (qualifications for example). I for one would not be happy that data that I freely give to one source for one purpose is linked to data that I give for another purpose to another source. People go on about civil liberties, but this sort of project, with implicit requirements for huge amounts of fuzzy matching, exceeds all previous Big Brother attempts.
If you don't like the traditional Census, try again to find something better. This does not seem adequate to me.
Comments