# can you send the census 2011 forms back directly to the cso ?



## asdfg (14 Mar 2011)

Hi just wondering can you send the census forms back directly to the cso ?


----------



## MANTO (14 Mar 2011)

I was just about to post about Census 2011 too. Maybe you can send to an office near you? [broken link removed]

I was also wondering, why in this day and age, you cannot complete the form online like the UK are advertising. 

Would there not be a better response and also a better cost to serve if you register online?


----------



## The_Banker (14 Mar 2011)

Reading the front page of the the census form it contains the following information.
Your Enumerator will return between Monday 11th April and Monday May 9th to collect your completed form.

If your form has not been collected by May 9th, please return it fully completed to:
Central Statistics Office
PO Box 2011
Freepost 4726
Swords 
Co Dublin

Hope that helps!


----------



## asdfg (14 Mar 2011)

Yes ,and i have a problem with the privacy aspect of this as i live in rathgar and it turns out the man who is collecting them is my neighbour.I dont want him knowing my business


----------



## MANTO (14 Mar 2011)

So why arent we promoting this online and cutting out the cost of the middle man? 

Surely the cost to print a small slip of paper with a pin would be cheaper than full forms?

I certainly wouldn't want my neighbour having access to read mine..


----------



## csirl (15 Mar 2011)

asdfg said:


> Yes ,and i have a problem with the privacy aspect of this as i live in rathgar and it turns out the man who is collecting them is my neighbour.I dont want him knowing my business


 
I think you should give the CSO Census office a call - I'd agree that someone shouldnt be collecting forms from their immediate neighbours. Surely the CSO can swap this person's allocated streets with a enumerator in a neighbouring area.


----------



## Bill Struth (15 Mar 2011)

csirl said:


> I think you should give the CSO Census office a call - I'd agree that *someone shouldnt be collecting forms from their immediate neighbours*. Surely the CSO can swap this person's allocated streets with a enumerator in a neighbouring area.


 It seems to be the done thing. I know a person collecting the forms in her own neighbourhood.


----------



## Staples (15 Mar 2011)

This thread raises the question of whether the Census itself is justified.

I had a lecturer some years ago who made a compelling argument for the scrapping of the process.  Many of the questions are meaningless - How many bathrooms do you have.  Why should this be of interest to the State?

He argued that a fully representative survey, focussed on the issues for which information was really needed, would be much more accurate and could be done at a fraction of the cost of the Census.


----------



## Berni (15 Mar 2011)

Staples said:


> He argued that a fully representative survey...would be much more accurate


Ah, but how do you know that its a representative survey if you never do a census to compare it to?

The 1976 census was scrapped to save money, but then had to be done anyway in 1979 because it turned out we did need the info after all.


----------



## Staples (15 Mar 2011)

Berni said:


> Ah, but how do you know that its a representative survey if you never do a census to compare it to?
> 
> The 1976 census was scrapped to save money, but then had to be done anyway in 1979 because it turned out we did need the info after all.


 
How do you know the Census is representative? For example, can you be sure it catches the ethnic minorities who (it's suspected) don't engage with State authorities (at least not proportionately to the rest of the population). 

How also can you attest to the accuracy of the census. Might some people include some porkies to impress the neighbours who subsequently collect it (see earlier posts)?

And what about proportionality. If the State needs information about the average number of bathrooms per household (although I can't imagine why), is it really necessery (never mind efficient) to consult every household in Ireland?

To present the census as the benchmark standard against which the representativeness of all others surveys needs to be tested is just wrong. The CSO conducts a lot of very good surveys as part of its services, but the census is not one of them.


----------



## csirl (15 Mar 2011)

The census is not a survey. It is a demographic exercise aimed at collecting raw data. This data is vital to planning in both the public and private sector.


----------



## sam h (15 Mar 2011)

I worked as an enumerator before, so here goes:

 - You can ask for a confidential return where the enumerator will give you an envelope which you post back to CSO & then the supervisor holds onto it until the crates are returned......HOWEVER, other than date of birth, there is nothing really all that confidential on the form.  The enumerators are collecting about 450 forms - we have no interest in reading them.  All we do is scan the form at the doorstep (in front of you) which is just to check the form was filled in correctly (no pencil or red pen, has been signed, all people accounted for etc)

 - The Census form does not ask anything about bathrooms - other than to expressly exclude them from the total number of rooms in a house.  

 - We have gotten so much info on our ancestors via the 1901 & 1911 Census, I can't imagine why anyone would not want to fill it in.

 - Online systems and Postal return systems would have a much lower return rate 

 - Re Foreign Nationals....they were generally quiet happy to participate.  I'm sure there were some who were not included, probably becasue they are here illegally or doing something dodgy.  You'll find the same with Irish people.....

 - It is not possible to ensure each enumerator does not know anyone in their area.  I knew lots of people in my area & nobody had an issue with that.  It is normal to use local people who will know the lay of the land & help keep costs down.  Imagine how expensive it would be to have everyone travel out of their own area to reduce the likihood of knowing people.

 - I agree there are a fair few questions & you'd wonder behind the logic of some of them, but they do extensisve research on what questions to include.  If you are going to go to the expense of doing a Census, you may as well gather as much info as is feasible.


----------



## Time (15 Mar 2011)

It was certainly CSO policy back in 2002 when I was an enumerator to send people to areas that were not local to them. My nearest household to collect from was over 5 miles away. There was no way that neighbours were working in their immediate neighbourhoods.


----------



## truthseeker (15 Mar 2011)

sam h said:


> - We have gotten so much info on our ancestors via the 1901 & 1911 Census, I can't imagine why anyone would not want to fill it in.


 
I agree - I got some interesting facts in the 1901 and 1911 census forms for my ancestors.

Theres a website with lots of info on the census here.


----------



## Berni (15 Mar 2011)

Thanks Sam, that neatly covers most of what I was going to say 

Regarding the other surveys the CSO do, the samples included aren't random. They are structured to reflect the overall population, otherwise you couldn't extrapolate totals from the sample. If you lose the input from the census, then the quality of those surveys would decline.


----------



## Staples (15 Mar 2011)

If the purpose of the census is to provide information on how we lived for future generations, that's one thing.  It's a very expensive way to go about doing this, however, and I'm not convoinced it's worth it. The 1901 census was valuable in that there are few other information sources available at that time.  Someone doing research in 100 yeras time will have the benefit of the internet. 

If, on the other hand, the fucntion of the census is to inform policy and decision-making, I still maintain there are cheaper and more efficient ways of garnering the required information.  



Berni said:


> Regarding the other surveys the CSO do, the samples included aren't random. They are structured to reflect the overall population, otherwise you couldn't extrapolate totals from the sample.


 
I'm not sure if this comment was directed at me, but if so I never mentioned random surveys.  I was referring to representative surveys that would be both valid and reliable.  You don't need to reach every member of te population to achieve these standards.



Berni said:


> If you lose the input from the census, then the quality of those surveys would decline.


 
For the reasons given above, I don't accept this but perhaps we should just agree to differ.


----------



## Berni (15 Mar 2011)

Staples said:


> I'm not sure if this comment was directed at me, but if so I never mentioned random surveys.  I was referring to representative surveys that would be both valid and reliable.  You don't need to reach every member of te population to achieve these standards.
> 
> For the reasons given above, I don't accept this but perhaps we should just agree to differ.


I'm just curious how you would construct surveys which are representative of a population without first knowing the nature of that population.
Had we stopped doing the census after the 2002 one, how would you capture the massive demographic change that has happened since then?


----------



## anon473 (15 Mar 2011)

I remember reading last year that the UK was going to axe its census after this one
 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/7882774/National-census-to-be-axed-after-200-years.html 
aiming to get the information from "credit reference agencies, local councils and royal mail"
 There is also a less than convincing arguement in the west wing - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eXqwG3irZc  to go towards quota sampling.


anon473


----------



## BillK (15 Mar 2011)

Thing that annoys me about the Census here in England is that it printed in 50+ languages.


----------



## ericsson (15 Mar 2011)

I never got a census form... got a slip of paper in the door today to day to say "i called today bla bla and i will call back tomorrow between 3 and 7"... should i not have already got a form?


----------



## Complainer (15 Mar 2011)

MANTO said:


> I was also wondering, why in this day and age, you cannot complete the form online like the UK are advertising.
> 
> Would there not be a better response and also a better cost to serve if you register online?



Many people don't have internet access or a computer. CSO offered the online option on a recent survey to businesses, and got a 10% online response rate. Most people prefer pen and paper, despite what Bertie told us.




Staples said:


> This thread raises the question of whether the Census itself is justified.
> 
> I had a lecturer some years ago who made a compelling argument for the scrapping of the process.  Many of the questions are meaningless - How many bathrooms do you have.  Why should this be of interest to the State?
> 
> He argued that a fully representative survey, focussed on the issues for which information was really needed, would be much more accurate and could be done at a fraction of the cost of the Census.



Every question on the Census has been pored and fought over for the past five years. For every question, the demand for the resulting data has been clearly established, and indeed there are about 10 more possible questions that have been ruled out. Questions aren't made up on the spur of the moment by some bloke in Cork. There is a very well established scientific process to put together the Census. But it seems that yet again, the AAM armchair experts conclude that because they personally don't use the data, therefore no-one else does either.


----------



## Berni (15 Mar 2011)

ericsson said:


> I never got a census form... got a slip of paper in the door today to day to say "i called today bla bla and i will call back tomorrow between 3 and 7"... should i not have already got a form?


They only started delivering them last weekend. It is still almost 4 weeks away, so I wouldn't worry yet


----------



## Leper (16 Mar 2011)

sam h said:


> I worked as an enumerator before, so here goes:
> 
> - You can ask for a confidential return where the enumerator will give you an envelope which you post back to CSO & then the supervisor holds onto it until the crates are returned......HOWEVER, other than date of birth, there is nothing really all that confidential on the form. The enumerators are collecting about 450 forms - we have no interest in reading them. All we do is scan the form at the doorstep (in front of you) which is just to check the form was filled in correctly (no pencil or red pen, has been signed, all people accounted for etc)
> 
> ...


 
Great post.  Completing the Census form is no big deal.  The information supplied will help those in generations to come.  I just wonder if the generations to come will have access to the likes of this forum and what they will think of their forebears with stupid moans, moans and more moans.


----------



## Staples (16 Mar 2011)

Complainer said:


> But it seems that yet again, the AAM armchair experts conclude that because they personally don't use the data, therefore no-one else does either.


 
Presumably the armchair experts comprise the UK authorities who are giving serious consideration to scrapping the process and using other databases and methods to produce the required information.

I have no real issue with the nature of the information collected (bathrooms aside). My view is that there may be more efficient ways of getting it.



Leper said:


> I just wonder if the generations to come will have access to the likes of this forum and what they will think of their forebears with stupid moans, moans and more moans.


 
Hopefully they'll be open enough to allow them distinguish between a moan and the expression of an observation.


----------



## Complainer (16 Mar 2011)

Staples said:


> Presumably the armchair experts comprise the UK authorities who are giving serious consideration to scrapping the process and using other databases and methods to produce the required information.


Do you think that it is just vaguely possible that the Irish experts in the CSO know exactly what the UK are up to, and have taken this into account in their decision about how to proceed in the Irish situation?

Do you really think that the experts in the CSO are going to learn much from a thread on AAM?


----------



## Staples (16 Mar 2011)

Complainer said:


> Do you think that it is just vaguely possible that the Irish experts in the CSO know exactly what the UK are up to, and have taken this into account in their decision about how to proceed in the Irish situation?
> 
> Do you really think that the experts in the CSO are going to learn much from a thread on AAM?


 
I don't really care to be frank.

I was expressing an opinion - not seeking to change the way the CSO does its business.  If I felt so compelled I'd contact them directly.


----------



## dereko1969 (16 Mar 2011)

Staples said:


> If, on the other hand, the fucntion of the census is to inform policy and decision-making, *I still maintain there are cheaper and more efficient ways of garnering the required information*.


 
Care to give an example here? The census is hugely important and is the one chance we have to get really detailed, generally accurate information about the whole country. 

This particular census will be hugely valuable in terms of getting a proper handle on ghost estates, emmigration figures etc as local authorities, government departments are still bound to operate on the information from the last census which was at the height of the boom and which is obviously way out of kilter with where we are now.


----------



## Complainer (16 Mar 2011)

Staples said:


> I don't really care to be frank.
> 
> I was expressing an opinion - not seeking to change the way the CSO does its business.  If I felt so compelled I'd contact them directly.


In fairness, you did more than express an opinion. You stated that " Many of the questions are meaningless" and the one example that you gave was proven to be incorrect. So perhaps you'd like to tell us which of the other questions are meaningless.


----------



## Staples (16 Mar 2011)

Complainer said:


> In fairness, you did more than express an opinion. You stated that " Many of the questions are meaningless" and the one example that you gave was proven to be incorrect.


 
There's certainly nothing you've offered that's challenged my belief that the example I offered was incorrect. I can't imagine why people's bathrooms are of any interest to anyone any more tan the number of rubber ducks they have within them. 

However, if somebody, somewhere really wants to know how many bathrooms exist in Ireland, I belive that there are more efficient ways of elicitting this information than consulting the entire population on a Sunday evening.

Apologies for not making clear that my contributions here were the expression of opinion.  Now that I'm aware of your sensibilities in this regard, I promise to be more careful next time.


----------



## Complainer (16 Mar 2011)

Enough with the bathroom obsession. You've already been told that "The Census form does not ask anything about bathrooms - other than to expressly exclude them from the total number of rooms in a house. "

It doesn't ask anything about bathrooms, and I guess that you've now realised that you have nothing substantial to offer on the 'many of the questions are meaningless' point.

To hell with my sensibilities - if you have serious critique, let's get it on the table. If you have more of the usual AAM bar-stool expertise, then....


----------



## Staples (16 Mar 2011)

I could equally ask why the number of rooms in a house is of such consequence that a census is justified, or, even if it is, why there is a need to exclude bathrooms from the equation. 

And by the way, if "serious critique" was a prerequisite for offerings on the Letting Off Steam for, it would be a pretty quiet place.  However, it is what it is so if it continues to offend you.....


----------



## dereko1969 (16 Mar 2011)

Number of rooms can have a correlation to how many people might live in the house allied to age of "parents" might give an indication of future inhabitants of house and services that might be required, extrapolating from same given the average fertility rate etc etc 

You still haven't given an example of how the detailed information can be obtained cheaper/easier - just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true, even if you write FACT afterwards!!


----------



## Complainer (16 Mar 2011)

Staples said:


> I could equally ask why the number of rooms in a house is of such consequence that a census is justified, or, even if it is, why there is a need to exclude bathrooms from the equation.


Indeed, you might ask those questions. You are welcome to ask questions. You might just find that those who know more than you or I about how this particular bit of census data actually gets used can answer those questions. 

I had a brief exposure to the CSO process of designing one part of the Census. It was clear to me that every single answer to each of the questions in that part of the census got careful consideration from the CSO experts, working in partnership with the people who will use the data.

However, you didn't start out 'asking questions'. You started out with a claim that 'many of the questions are meaningless'. It is clear that this claim has no basis.


----------



## thesimpsons (16 Mar 2011)

I'd feel alot better about the costs involved in organising a countrywide census if I thought that the info contained in the final reports was actually being used for a genuine purpose. Every census we do, we are told that the info is vital for establishing the numbers of schools, hospitals, etc requried for the future. Yet, we are loosing hospital beds, kids are crowded into larger (and older) classrooms the whole time cos of money shortages, services for the elderly are at a shocking level, etc etc etc etc. Every census we have had has shown up the age of the population and the needs for all these services. Even when the country was supposed to be awash with money, we still didn't get the services we should have received as a result of the census showing up all this vital information. In my opinion (and an opinion shared by many I have spoken to) its just an exercise in PR and money wasting.

some of the questions I find are very ambigious.   Do you speak Irish on a daily basis, weekly, monthly, less often is the wording (or similiar).  Now, while I might use irish daily cos I shout to the kids the very odd focal, another person will not consider that as "speaking" irish.  There is no quantifying what level I use.   How can that be representative of a true answer and fact finding.


----------



## Staples (16 Mar 2011)

Complainer said:


> However, you didn't start out 'asking questions'. You started out with a claim that 'many of the questions are meaningless'. It is clear that this claim has no basis.


 
In offering the OPINION that there are more efficient ways of establishing required information, I expressed the OPINION that many of the questions are meaningless, particulalrly because much of the information is not productively used. For example, the question about what time you leave home to go for work would be very relevant if it contributed to a transport policy framed around people's schedules. But since there never has been any such policy, the question becomes meaningless - IN MY OPINION. Notwithstanding the presence of the thread in "Letting Off Steam", had I known that some people would require empirical evidence in support of every utterence and that they would so quick to take such umbrage, my language would have been much more guarded. 

Dereko

IN MY OPINION, (everybody happy?), the means by which information could be gathered would depend on the use to which it would be put. A good example is the Quarterly National Household Survey which is regarded as the more accurate measurement of unemployment.  This is based on a repreentative survey avoiding the need to consult the entire population.  Using one of the examples you offered how do you suggest that the census would inform policy in relation to ghost estates?

My point is that IN MY OPINION there are some alternatives to the Census process that are at least worthy of consideration, as is being done in the UK.  I appreciate that the threat of change may upset some with an emotional or other attachment to the status quo so, again, apologies to all concerned.


----------



## Complainer (17 Mar 2011)

I can only assume that you don't know much about transport policy. You assume that the Census data is not used. I don't know too much about the area, but I'd bet a fiver that the Census data is used extensively by folk at the NRA, RPA, CIE and Dept Transport. 

You assume that the alternatives have not been considered. Why would you assume this?

You know what they say about ASS-U-mptions, don't you?


----------



## Staples (17 Mar 2011)

Complainer said:


> You know what they say about ASS-U-mptions, don't you?


 


Complainer said:


> *I can only assume* that you don't know much about transport policy.


 
If you're going to slag yourself off as well, there's nothing for me to add.


----------



## olddog (17 Mar 2011)

*1841 census ........ strictly O/T *

With so much steam being let off here due to the census I just wanted to post that I found my Great Great Great grandfather and Great Great grandfather from the 1841 census records. 

This has totally changed my attitude of what I previously considered as "old history"


----------



## DublinTexas (21 Mar 2011)

So Friday the local census mandarin showed up trying to delivery my copy of the form that should give our government the total insight into my personal life to an extend even greater than the evil empire of Google has on me.

Our government as part of the census does not only want to know my name, race, religion and room numbers, now it all wants it linked to my personal name. No, this is not an anonymous data collection; the most personal questions are linked to my name/personal details.

This is how it started in several countries; collect as much personal data as possible and then miss-use that data to get rid of the Jews, communists and other groups.

Now don’t get me wrong, I appreciate that our government wants to know data that helps them to plan but why is it needed to have my name on the form that asks too much personal details?

Why can’t this be done anonymous? 

And the only way out of this compulsory (there is even a fine for not doing it) data collection of the most private data is not to be in the country on Sunday 10 April midnight. But even than you can’t escape totally because the form demands you name and other personal details of anybody at the residence that is out of the country.

This is outrages; an incompetent government is getting their hand on a massive data base about the population. And before someone says, but your data is protected, it can only be used by the CSO and only in a limited way they should have done a reality check. It’s there, it can be hacked, it can be miss-used.

I’m already having a nice holiday planned on 10 April and when the census mandarin shows again attempting to deliver the form I’m going to tell her.


----------



## Berni (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> No, this is not an anonymous data collection; the most personal questions are linked to my name/personal details.
> It’s there, it can be hacked, it can be miss-used.


The data are *not* linked to your name. Your name is never scanned into the database at all. 

Your name is only asked for two reasons. Firstly so that the enumerator knows who they have dealt with, and can check that the form looks consistant. Secondly, so that in 100 year time when the forms are made public, they will make sense to those looking them up.


----------



## Latrade (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> This is how it started in several countries; collect as much personal data as possible and then miss-use that data to get rid of the Jews, communists and other groups.


 
Did you miss out a smilie after this statement?

Why not go the UK route though where the census is contracted to a private company. I mean there are no problems at all that arms manufacturer Lockheed have been awarded the contract is there, I'm sure that decision was all above board.

Though they do seem to have negotiated a humdinger of a deal in that they get paid the same amount no matter how many returns are made. That the get paid the same even though there's a push to fill in online (and therefore cost much less for Lockheed) oh and that given the nature of American anti-terrorism legislation all "information gathered by arms manufacturers" has to be made available to the American Government so that Lockheed may be required to hand over the entire UK census data to the US.

That seems a much better model to me.


----------



## DublinTexas (21 Mar 2011)

Berni said:


> The data are *not* linked to your name. Your name is never scanned into the database at all.
> 
> Your name is only asked for two reasons. Firstly so that the enumerator knows who they have dealt with, and can check that the form looks consistant. Secondly, so that in 100 year time when the forms are made public, they will make sense to those looking them up.


 
If the enumerator wants to know who they dealt with it could be on a seperate cover letter that I can keep when the form is collected, it does not need to have my name and date of birth on the same sheet it asks me personal questions that are none of the goverments business.

Your statment that my data is not linked to my name is incorrect, ff you look at the [broken link removed] it clearly shows my name/birthday on the sheet about personal questions. 

Your statement that it will never be scanned into the database has no impact at all. 

Similar promisse (i.e. it's not linked to your personal data) was made in Germany before they Nazi's came to power and used the census to root out people they did not like. And if the forms are stored any goverment could go back and scan it all in the name of what ever reason they come up with.

The data is not anonymous, it is clearly linked on the form to my personal data. Your claim that is not scanned at this point is not relevant, the goverment at any point could change their minds. And also even if I might be dead in 100 years I still don't want my personal data to be known, it's non of your business if I am a black Jew that spoke 6 languages, had a Ph.D and have an emotional problem. 

I have no problems with providing anonymous data but filling out a form that links my personal name/birthday to questions about my health is just outrages.

Stick to the facts, the form asks my name/birthday and it's linked to my personal responses, the excuse of never scanned is just that an excuse, if it's never scanned than it should not be on the form.

When will we learn from the past?


----------



## Berni (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> When will we learn from the past?


Well clearly we should have destroyed all computers after what the Nazi's did. If IBM hadn't provided them with their newfangled counting machines they wouldn't have been able to have such an efficient holocaust.


----------



## DublinTexas (21 Mar 2011)

Berni said:


> Well clearly we should have destroyed all computers after what the Nazi's did. If IBM hadn't provided them with their newfangled counting machines they wouldn't have been able to have such an efficient holocaust.


 
Let me see, I disproof your "it's not linked" by showing you the form where it's linked and you come up with this?

Germany for example stopped one of their census work a while ago because their highest court agreed that the form used could lead to have a person identified and the final form then was done in a way that personal data was seperated so that it could not be used to draw conclusions about a person. They learned from it.

Why can't we do this?

And let's not forget that this census is actualy done for the EU as it's driven by the EU demanded EU wide 2011 Census.


----------



## Firefly (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> And let's not forget that this census is actualy done for the EU as it's driven by the EU demanded EU wide 2011 Census.


 
Someone tell Michael Noonan quick...an interest rate reduction or you won't get your census.


----------



## Latrade (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> Similar promisse (i.e. it's not linked to your personal data) was made in Germany before they Nazi's came to power and used the census to root out people they did not like. And if the forms are stored any goverment could go back and scan it all in the name of what ever reason they come up with.


 
In all the years of the government running a census here in this current fashion, have you any examples of where the data has been used to engage in a programme of ethnic cleansing, a holocaust, the rooting out of undesirables or even just one example of the government using the data for anything other than a statistics gathering exercise that is used for socio-economic planning?

Please stop using the example of one extreme regime's heinous acts as if it were a fait accompli for every single regime, it's tiresome and hysterical. Though an opportunity to link to xkcd is always welcomed:

http://xkcd.com/261/

Mind, the Doomsday book was also used to instigate and expand an oppressive regime... Enda = William I England? Is the 5 point plan really just the introduction of the feudal system and the working class forced into serfdom? Holy Moly, you may have a point, this is a slippery slope...


----------



## Berni (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> Let me see, I disproof your "it's not linked" by showing you the form where it's linked and you come up with this?


Well I had started to type up a reasoned argument, but then I realised there was no point as you clearly aren't open to reason. 
So I decided to join in and have a hysterical overreaction to a one off event instead.


----------



## Complainer (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> This is how it started in several countries; collect as much personal data as possible and then miss-use that data to get rid of the Jews, communists and other groups.


Congrats on proving Godwins Law. It usually takes more than three pages for a thread to descend into this nonsense.


----------



## DublinTexas (21 Mar 2011)

Latrade said:


> In all the years of the government running a census here in this current fashion, have you any examples of where the data has been used to engage in a programme of ethnic cleansing, a holocaust, the rooting out of undesirables or even just one example of the government using the data for anything other than a statistics gathering exercise that is used for socio-economic planning?
> 
> Please stop using the example of one extreme regime's heinous acts as if it were a fait accompli for every single regime, it's tiresome and hysterical. Though an opportunity to link to xkcd is always welcomed:
> 
> ...


 
It's amazing how many people are ignoring the fact that the goverment is collecting massive amount of personal data with the view that our incompetent goverment won't do anything with it because they have not done anything with it in the past.

Now sure comparing our goverment to the Nazi's might be a bid harsch but it still does not address the main point. 

The goverment is collecting a massive amount of private data that they on the form link to your personal details. Scan or no scan the form is there linked to your personal data.

Do you really feel that the goverment should have access to your private data (and if you look at the form you see loads of personal data) in this amount?

What would be so bad of separating the names from the questions? It has been done in other countries and they still had a good census?

I'm open to reason and I do not dispute that the goverment needs good data to be able to plan, but again why does it need to be linked to my personal data?

You might feel happy about the goverment hoarding this data and that is fine, but I don't.

But from the looks of it I'm in the minority and it's all irrational fear in my head.


----------



## truthseeker (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> You might feel happy about the goverment hoarding this data and that is fine, but I don't.


 
Nazi regime aside - what do you think they government will really be doing with this data that might impact on you in any negative practical manner?


----------



## Berni (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> it's all irrational fear in my head.


Now we're getting somewhere 

I think you're worring too much about this, particularly when you consider all the data held by other gov depts - who actually do store info with your name, address, etc attached directly to the data.


----------



## Latrade (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> You might feel happy about the goverment hoarding this data and that is fine, but I don't.
> 
> But from the looks of it I'm in the minority and it's all irrational fear in my head.


 
That's not really what I'm saying at all, I'm taking objection to the absurd comparissons of this census and the personal data to Nazi war crimes. 

I've looked at the forms and there's nothing there that overly worries me other than the effort of filling it in. I don't really see anything that could be misused by the Government. Other than if they chose to start "cleansing" the country of people who commute to work by car they'll know who you are, but I'll be safe given use of cycle.


----------



## callybags (21 Mar 2011)

DublinTexas said:


> It's amazing how many people are ignoring the fact that the goverment is collecting massive amount of personal data with the view that *our incompetent goverment* won't do anything with it because they have not done anything with it in the past.
> 
> .


 
That conclusion was reached quickly!


----------



## Ceist Beag (21 Mar 2011)

Latrade said:


> I don't really see anything that could be misused by the Government. Other than if they chose to start "cleansing" the country of people who commute to work by car they'll know who you are, but I'll be safe given use of cycle.



How do you know it's not the cyclists they're after...


----------



## truthseeker (21 Mar 2011)

I came across this on boards.ie and it appears the poster came across it on another site (not named) but:



> Actually, I was inclined to think that Jakdelad was alittle off his rocker until I read on another board that a CACI UK is a census contractor and a subsidary of an AMerican company, CACI International.
> 
> CACI provides intelligence and interrogation staff to the US Military and/or their civilian contractor is Iraq. Most notably they allegedly provided over half of the interrogators in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.
> 
> ...


 
Anyone interested in the rest of the thread its this one.


----------

