The Newham Story

The Newham Story => Tracing your family history => Topic started by: jplant1 on 02 March, 2011, 09:51:34 AM

Title: 2011 census
Post by: jplant1 on 02 March, 2011, 09:51:34 AM
An idea from my brother Andrew. 2011 census forms will soon be arriving. If you're interested in family history, why not keep a photocopy of the completed form, so your descendants don't have to wait 100 years to see them? Even scan and upload to websites so your family archive can develop over the decades.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: sharonjcurtis on 03 March, 2011, 07:32:10 AM
What a fantastic idea.  The census here in NZ has been cancelled, it wont be happening this year.  There are too many displaced people from the Christchurch earthquake, its just heartbreaking.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: MickG on 03 March, 2011, 09:49:03 AM
Although I think the idea is great, I would still tend to be cautious. There is a possibility the Government may still retain copyright to census material. The other main point is ID fraud. You would be telling the world exactly who you are, were you live, your children's details, and possibly a lot more. If I were an ID fraudster I would be rubbing my hands with glee at seeing such details on-line.

I think there is also a possibility under privacy legislation that the names of everyone appearing on a census return would have to give their permission for it to be published. I don't think it can be assumed that children have given their permission even if you are their legal parent/guardian. For instance, a one year old child is is no way capable of making an informed decision as to giving permission. Later in life when they are legally adults they might even be able to take action against the perpetrators of their privacy. I suspect it will propably be an offence under census legislation to publish such information.  It's just a thought.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: jplant1 on 11 March, 2011, 05:13:45 PM
Fair points Mick - best to keep photocopies safe somewhere.

Legal ownership of the info is an interesting point. Since somebody in each household is obliged to provide the information, presumably they have to have some ownership of it.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: Peter Marshall on 27 March, 2011, 03:36:27 AM
There is nothing to prevent us a all from keeping a photocopy or scan 'for private study' by descendants.  Only the layout of the form may be copyright.  Once the form has been handed over, what is written on it cannot be made public for 100 years by the registrar and any other government employees .   
But if you are happy to reveal things to others in your family then distribute copies by email so that it stands a better chance of still being in existence in a generation or two. 

The 'Census (Confidentiality) Act 1991' applies.  It can be read at

Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: jplant1 on 28 March, 2011, 10:33:04 AM
One important exception to confidentiality in Census2011 is that the company responsible for the data processing, Lockheed, is based in the USA and therefore subject to the "Patriot Act". This requires any US based business, if required, to provide any confidential data to the US Security agencies, regardless of the law applying in the countries where the data was collected. So you and your family will not be able to look at the data for 100 years, but US spies will be able to check your family tree in case there have been any Irish Republicans, anti-war activists, people who have visited islamic countries etc, when looking at your application for a visa to visit the US.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: jplant1 on 29 March, 2011, 03:51:19 PM
Actually it seems the information I passed on about Lockheed may not be correct. It has now been suggested that they have only been involved in printing the forms, not processing the data. There is a long complicated discussion about it on the website of the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) if anyone wants details. The general warning remains however, that American businesses can be compelled under the Patriot Act to disclose your confidential data to the US authorities.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: fairyanna on 30 December, 2014, 11:48:37 AM
I would guess that the church in question was "St. Johns" North Woolwich which I believe was destroyed during the 1940s. I think the church continued to exist in a new building during the 1950s and 60s but I do not know what the current situation is. It may be useful for you to contact the Diocese of Chelmsford who should be able to help you in your search for information.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: MickG on 30 December, 2014, 12:45:55 PM
Lily, I don't think I saw St John's North Woolwich mentioned earlier in this thread. However now that the question as to its fate has been raised, the building that was once St John's still exists but as part of the Brick Lane Music Hall complex. The link below will take you to a street view of it.

As with many Church of England buildings, a mixture of falling congregations and old property with expensive repair bills, many of the existing churches have amalgamated with each other. As far as I can determine, St Mary & St Edward with St John (North Woolwich/Silvertown) now forms the parish and their church is a newish structure in Newland Street near the junction of Kennard Street.,0.0426984,3a,75y,30.25h,96.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZjgnMMTM-VUxkdOQAH7DSA!2e0?hl=en
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: Orontes44 on 28 March, 2015, 09:51:03 AM
An idea from my brother Andrew. 2011 census forms will soon be arriving. If you're interested in family history, why not keep a photocopy of the completed form, so your descendants don't have to wait 100 years to see them? Even scan and upload to websites so your family archive can develop over the decades.
Since so many folk are researching and storing Family records in Family History programs such as Familytreemaker, there wont be the need as they wont have to dig for information like we all have done over the years, it will be at their fingertips.
Title: Re: 1911 census
Post by: nollanhej on 20 November, 2018, 06:02:54 PM
Interesting thing about the 1911 census version that as released early. My mum's parents and family were all registered in Rich Street, Limehouse at that time. I accepted that as correct because I had seen that address in an Old Bailey Court Case dated 1899. The spelling of their surname had a slight error in as much that a letter had an FR instead of an FL because of script writing. All the family members were there that I knew of. I wrote at the time to whoever it was who published it [a while ago now] to correct the surname spelling. Low and behold, when the official 1911 Census was published, there surname was corrected with exactly the same family members, but, the address was a mile or so away in Mile End, not in Limehouse! I don't pay too much heed to census returns now only some info.
Title: Re: 2011 census
Post by: MickG on 20 November, 2018, 10:14:29 PM
One of the big differences with the 1911 census is that it was the first time the census was completed by the householder rather than the enumerator. I think prior to that when census taking started in 1941, not everyone was literate. There are pros and cons however with the census being completed by either the householder or the enumerator. The enumerator wrote down things as they sounded and this led to lots of surnames being misspelled. With the house holder, often a persons first name was put down as what they used to call them. Jim instead of James would be an example of that.

The 1921 is likely to be the last census we will see for many a year. I am not certain but I think the 1931 may have been destroyed during the war, the same way many WW1 military records were. About 25% of those military records survived but many of the images have burned edges. There was no census in 1941 due to the war, but there is the 1939 war registration records now available which are very useful. These records show name, address, age and occupation. The only problem is the images have a number of black lines across the page saying 'This record is officially closed'. These lines tend to block out some name so a little guesswork is required.