Step forward Lester Holloway.
Lester thinks we should all comply with the census because it really matters.
The purpose of this mega survey every 10 years clearly needs to be sold to the public, starting with the people least likely to be enthused by it. Trying to explain why the census personally matters to people might seem like a thankless task, but developing that public awareness is not merely about providing data for Whitehall bean counters, it’s about how resources are allocated, and in many ways that’s more important than voting.
Er, more important than voting? Giving over information that is frankly, private? Lester acknowledged in his opening statement that the British find the gathering of sensitive information goes against the grain.
The last time the government ordered us to fill in a census form, hundreds of thousands wrote “Jedi Knight” as their religion. It was a peculiarly British form of rebellion against the seemingly pointless drudgery of having to tell faceless civil servants everything about ourselves and our families.
Frankly, he needn’t have gone any further than that as it says it all. I can understand some information gathering for the purpose of determining policy based on population. However, the level of information gathered is rather more than is necessary, frankly.
However, Lester likes the information gathering. And, take a look at this little statement if you want to see under the skin:
In Britain, Operation Black Vote successfully deploys a range of strategies to tackle the problem including poster campaigns, civic engagement programmes to encourage fairer political representation, and targeted voter registration drives.
I see. Operation black vote. And if we were to have an operation white vote, would that not be racist either? It is not just black people who are disenfranchised by the political system and don’t vote as a consequence. So, what we have here is another example of identity politics.
It goes on. Here is the warm up:
Some experts believe the black and ethnic minority population is traditionally undercounted in each census, through ethnicity boxes not being ticked and non-return of forms. Officially minorities make up 9% of the British population, but this could in fact be as high as 15%.
These experts being? And, frankly, why should it matter? We all vote for the politicians of our choice – or not, as the case may be. Our skin colour is irrelevant. Why should the census differentiate? Why should policy be based on skin colour or ethnic origin?
When the Commission for Racial Equality first introduced ethnic monitoring, large swaths of the public couldn’t see the point. Today, the equalities bill going through parliament extends the “public duty” to monitor staff beyond women, disabled people and ethnic minorities, to religion, sexuality and age.
Oh, we could see the point alright and I resolutely refuse to complete these forms because I can see the point. My skin colour and racial origins are no one’s business but mine. At no time is either my sexuality or religious belief a matter for an employer or the government (local or national) and I do not expect policy to be made on these matters. And I will never, under any circumstances whatsoever, answer any questions on either subject – beyond “mind your own business”. How dare anyone presume to ask and expect a polite response? How dare they presume that these things are any of their business?
I vigorously object to being “monitored” and refuse to cooperate every time one of these obnoxious forms is placed before me. So far, I stop short of writing “none of your fucking business” but it’s only just.
As we slowly grow to accept workforce monitoring covering various equalities subjects, it is vitally important that we also embrace being counted on a national as well as a workplace level.
I do not accept being monitored and I damn well will not embrace it.
Lester’s article is summed up rather well by commenter Ebert:
The soft silky words of the totalitarian state-mongers. You should be ashamed of yourself for writing such a crappy little 1984-type press release. ‘Embrace’ indeed!
Quite.
————————————-
Update: Spyblog has details of the draft questions. Having read it, I can assure you that should I be in the UK on Census day 27th March 2011, I will not be complying. So, no need for Lester to double dare me at all.
They’ve got an electoral register. That is surely enough for population based funding etc. I’m not aware that your right to vote depends on anything other than being having a British passport (plus Commonwealth passport in national elections or an EU passport with EU elections, I think).
With vouchers for schools, every school would know how many kids want to go there (and I accept that as a tie breaker, a school would choose a child who lives nearer rather than further away from the school).
The same applies to old-age care, for example. If a council knows that a lot of people from the area applied for it this year, then they can safely assume that a similar number will apply next year as well. Whether that’s a hundred pensioners out of a thousand in the area or a hundred pensioners out of a hundred thousand doesn’t really matter, it’s the hundred that’s important.
And so on.
.-= My last blog ..Comment Only Sunday =-.
I would stop here:
“it’s about how resources are allocated, and in many ways that’s more important than voting.”
It might be how a bureaucrat allocates resources, but not real people!
.-= My last blog ..So, you think government has a positive aspect? =-.
If we all tick that we are black will that make whites a minority and therefore entitled to special measures?
Personally I never tick those boxes which seem to appear on just about evry official form that exists.
.-= My last blog ..Wilders and Islamic Fundamentalists =-.
I agree with 99% of this, LR, except that I have no major problem with “Operation Black Vote”.
Sure, it’s identity politics, but so, in their own way, are campaigns that target the youth vote, say, or the elderly. It’s tempting, sure, to say f*ck ’em – vote or don’t vote, I don’t care – but I think it’s healthier for the state of our kleptocracy if the politicos are monitored by as large a swathe of the electorate as possible.
In summary, *if* voting levels are lower among ethnic minorities (is there any evidence of this?) then I’m not viscerally opposed to measures aimed at nudging it upwards, as long as they don’t cost too much and don’t keep too many people on a swollen public payroll.
But I agree 100% with the contention that my ethnicity or colour is none of the state’s business. I’m as white as the blank piece of card that surrounds the ace of spades, but my ‘ethnicity’ is a wee bit more complicated. What of it? What fear or favour do I court, I wonder, by filling out the voluntary form?
We’ll never know, because I refuse to do so. I don’t object to “Operation Black Vote”, then, but I do object to the state holding a record of who is what colour in what household, because – let me be explicit where you are not – it is none of their f*cking business.
.-= My last blog ..Daily Mail: talk about bad timing =-.
I don’t know and Lester doesn’t enlighten us. As far as I can tell, voter disillusionment is pretty much across the board.
To be honest, if some of yous want to stay disillusioned with politics and don’t fill in the census, that’s alright with me. I’ll encourage others to take part, to be recognised and to have a fair slice of the cake. So you opt out… I double-dare you!
.-= My last blog ..Iain Dale flips his lid =-.
Lester – thanks for coming by to comment.
No need to double dare me. The information you feel is so important is absolutely none of the state’s business and I refuse to answer any questions from anyone – census included – on private matters. When faced with those obnoxious equal opportunities monitoring forms, I refuse to fill them in. I expect any decisions on recruitment, selection and promotion to be based solely on competence (competence management being my profession btw) and nothing else. Therefore, my ethnicity, skin colour, age, sex, religious belief and sexuality are irrelevant and beyond those that are obvious upon first sight, are none of the employer’s concern and absolutely, unequivocally, none of the state’s.
I have no way of knowing if I will be in the UK when the census is next run. If I am, I shall refuse to comply. I made this decision pretty much after the disgraceful inclusion of religious belief in the last one.
As Mark Wadsworth mentions here, there is already plenty of information necessary for demographic decisions. The census has outlived its usefulness – and, frankly, I do not trust the state to safeguard sensitive data. The best option, therefore, is not to share it in the first place.