Ofcom confirm they have received a complaint from the Duchess of Sussex re Piers Morgan's comments
I presume OGH would receive complaints from the Duchess of Sussex about my comments, @Cyclefree's comments and @Richard_Tyndall 's comments if she read the site.
Without having paid too much attention, to the extent that i have i don't get the impression that Harry and Meghan are at all on the same page about how this is going. Harry seems to have originally passed on the comment about the skin colour of a potential child, but has been reluctant to labour the point, even to the extent of going out of his way to rule people out. Whereas Meghan has taken it too another level and ascribed all sorts of additional consequences to it, eg. Archie being denied becoming a Prince. I wonder if she even knows who is supposed to have made the comment.
Harry has also said that this interview is intended to be their final word on their departure from the Royal Family and they now want to get on with their lives (and he seems keen to not destroy bridges with his father, brother etc). Meghan is clearly far less bothered about that - after all it wouldn't be the first time, however justified or not that might be. I can't think launching Ofcom complaints etc is exactly consistent with now stepping out of the limelight. I wonder if the response they have received in America has blinded them somewhat to the general feeling in the UK, which appears to be ambivalent at best.
I don't think Meghan is going to stop. I think she feels any criticism of her is unfounded, and she wants to rebuild the platform she's lost in another way.
Harry is torn, but has sympathy with her over the tabloid press because of Diana and his deep-rooted issues he's had since, and is loyal to her.
Meghan is a narcissist, I believe, and Harry just naive and reckless.
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Like all historical records, it is useful as long as you are aware of its limitations, and are prepared to adjust accordingly. And not treat it as a single, unimpeachable source. It is better for historians that it exists, than that it doesn't.
Hopefully plenty of mundane details from our time can survive. It must be a pain to go through, but imagine the joy of finding detailed records of food consumption in the Household of Edward I or whatever.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
But if you looked me up from tax records you wouldn't find out where I live, if you looked me up from rental records you wouldn't find out what I do so I fail to see how it helps you
That is because it is not about you or at least not you specifically. That is where you have it the wrong way round. Primarily it is about occupancy through time and changes in the profile of a building and an area. It is about jobs that no longer exist and land usage changes. It is about social and cultural changes. Look at the most obvious example which is the East End of London and how the various waves of immigration have changed the social fabric of the area. The census captures all of this and gives us huge amounts of pretty accurate information on societal change. It is why it is still almost the first port of call for any researcher wanting to study an area.
RE: AstraZeneca rubbishing. Not generally one for conspiracies - but does anyone wonder if somewhere under the radar there is the influence of the other vaccine makers at play? How convenient that the cheap vaccine being offered at cost is getting such a bad press around the world...
Just a thought
Also Russia and China, keen to promote their vaccines - Sputnik and Sinovac (and others) - to countries all over the world.
Not that these noble nations would ever punt out false info online, of course. Heaven forbid.
On topic, I had to google what conversion therapy is, but what makes me scratch my head is why people who are in support of every progressive idea going are baffled that everyone else doesn't immediately jump on board with them, especially when those supporters are regulars on twitter/discussion boards such as this and are constantly arguing over such things. The ding dong of adverserial argument often refines ideas and facilitates smooth and gradual long term change.
If they just factored in to their workings out that a lot, if not most, humans are instinctively quite conservative/resistant to big changes, but will probably soften in time, then "Faux outrageuxed of Brighton" need not get their knickers in a twist so easily.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I object to their assumption that people have access to the internet - or indeed a telephone. Happy to complete and hand to a collector in line with past practice - or to send via post.
Can you think why in current circumstances handing a paper copy to a collector might not be a good idea?
It can be done with care - in the same way I took delivery of beer this afternoon. Alternatively I am happy to return by post.
And why should your personal preference, when alternative methods exist for other people, trump public safety considerations or require so much additional cost to no additional benefit in terms of compliance?
I'm surprised how cross this has made me, but your objections, despite having the initial figleaf of regard for the public (albeit a nonsensical one as those unable to respond online can do so) seems to do with nothing other than arrogant assumption that you had a right to fill out the census in the way you want, and even though you acknowledge you can still do it you are still mad that they would prefer it be another way.
Since the option has not been taken away from anyone, why are you so offended that an alternative option has been offered? Do you get mad when someone brings out a new flavour of crisps because how dare they assume you want the new flavour?
Is the purpose of the census to gather information or to gather it in a way that makes you personally happy? So long as they get the info from us, what does it matter how?
He regularly posts here so clearly has no problem with using the internet. It is not clear to me what the fuss is. If someone doesn't have access to the internet, they can request the paper copy. What's the big deal?
Still waiting for my copy, by the way.
The Amazing Drakeford should be put on the case, he could sort it out immediately.
More seriously, I suppose give it to Monday? Time to contact and get one in time if so.
I frankly have better things to do with my time than chase a gang of third rate incompetents for a piece of paper a vaguely competent organisation could have sent out. Particularly given the huge amount of extra work the government is making me do right now.
They can have my census return if they send it. If they don’t, they won’t get it. Their lookout.
Fair enough. It is their responsibility to get it to you. They can hardly complain people don't fill it in if they don't get it.
Mine arrived yesterday.
As I mentioned earlier, We received our forms to fill in yesterday. We didn't ask for hard copy. It seems the default option in Wales is hard copy with online available if we wanted it.
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Well, the north may have had a, er, harrowing time, as it were. Might have complicated things eg?
And it must have been tax, surely? Not as though grabbing land could not be done effectively without out I'd have thought, nobles had always seemed able to get by.
But what about Roman censuses? Did they actually make people return to their place of birth, that seems like it would defeat the point?
The reason Matthew had Jesus born in Bethlehem was to make him match an earlier prophecy that the Messiah would be born in the City of David. So he came up with this rather clumsy device to justify it.
Elsewhere in the New Testament it is very clear that everyone at the time knew perfectly well Jesus was born in Nazareth.
RE: AstraZeneca rubbishing. Not generally one for conspiracies - but does anyone wonder if somewhere under the radar there is the influence of the other vaccine makers at play? How convenient that the cheap vaccine being offered at cost is getting such a bad press around the world...
Just a thought
Also Russia and China, keen to promote their vaccines - Sputnik and Sinovac (and others) - to countries all over the world.
Not that these noble nations would ever punt out false info online, of course. Heaven forbid.
The Russians need not resort to that, their vaccine is the dogs proverbials.
Everyone in the Paris area should sue President Macron, for deligitimising Astra Zeneca. If he hadn't done that maybe a million for Frogs would be immune, and Paris would not be in a desperate healthcare crisis
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I object to their assumption that people have access to the internet - or indeed a telephone. Happy to complete and hand to a collector in line with past practice - or to send via post.
Can you think why in current circumstances handing a paper copy to a collector might not be a good idea?
It can be done with care - in the same way I took delivery of beer this afternoon. Alternatively I am happy to return by post.
And why should your personal preference, when alternative methods exist for other people, trump public safety considerations or require so much additional cost to no additional benefit in terms of compliance?
I'm surprised how cross this has made me, but your objections, despite having the initial figleaf of regard for the public (albeit a nonsensical one as those unable to respond online can do so) seems to do with nothing other than arrogant assumption that you had a right to fill out the census in the way you want, and even though you acknowledge you can still do it you are still mad that they would prefer it be another way.
Since the option has not been taken away from anyone, why are you so offended that an alternative option has been offered? Do you get mad when someone brings out a new flavour of crisps because how dare they assume you want the new flavour?
Is the purpose of the census to gather information or to gather it in a way that makes you personally happy? So long as they get the info from us, what does it matter how?
He regularly posts here so clearly has no problem with using the internet. It is not clear to me what the fuss is. If someone doesn't have access to the internet, they can request the paper copy. What's the big deal?
Still waiting for my copy, by the way.
The Amazing Drakeford should be put on the case, he could sort it out immediately.
More seriously, I suppose give it to Monday? Time to contact and get one in time if so.
I frankly have better things to do with my time than chase a gang of third rate incompetents for a piece of paper a vaguely competent organisation could have sent out. Particularly given the huge amount of extra work the government is making me do right now.
They can have my census return if they send it. If they don’t, they won’t get it. Their lookout.
Fair enough. It is their responsibility to get it to you. They can hardly complain people don't fill it in if they don't get it.
Mine arrived yesterday.
As I mentioned earlier, We received our forms to fill in yesterday. We didn't ask for hard copy. It seems the default option in Wales is hard copy with online available if we wanted it.
That's quite possible. Did you get a Welsh language version too?
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
But if you looked me up from tax records you wouldn't find out where I live, if you looked me up from rental records you wouldn't find out what I do so I fail to see how it helps you
That is because it is not about you or at least not you specifically. That is where you have it the wrong way round. Primarily it is about occupancy through time and changes in the profile of a building and an area. It is about jobs that no longer exist and land usage changes. It is about social and cultural changes. Look at the most obvious example which is the East End of London and how the various waves of immigration have changed the social fabric of the area. The census captures all of this and gives us huge amounts of pretty accurate information on societal change. It is why it is still almost the first port of call for any researcher wanting to study an area.
No not about me but my point is you don't know how many people are also lying on those forms. I am at least not poisioning the data with misleading declarations
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Well, the north may have had a, er, harrowing time, as it were. Might have complicated things eg?
And it must have been tax, surely? Not as though grabbing land could not be done effectively without out I'd have thought, nobles had always seemed able to get by.
But what about Roman censuses? Did they actually make people return to their place of birth, that seems like it would defeat the point?
The reason Matthew had Jesus born in Bethlehem was to make him match an earlier prophecy that the Messiah would be born in the City of David. So he came up with this rather clumsy device to justify it.
That's what I'd heard. I was surprised because the ONS state it as normal practice on their website, when it would seem very silly.
RE: AstraZeneca rubbishing. Not generally one for conspiracies - but does anyone wonder if somewhere under the radar there is the influence of the other vaccine makers at play? How convenient that the cheap vaccine being offered at cost is getting such a bad press around the world...
Just a thought
Also Russia and China, keen to promote their vaccines - Sputnik and Sinovac (and others) - to countries all over the world.
Not that these noble nations would ever punt out false info online, of course. Heaven forbid.
The Russians need not resort to that, their vaccine is the dogs proverbials.
Well, that leads on to the obvious saying. Why do dogs lick their bollocks? Because they can
Russia is so used to online fake news-mongering, they probably do it for fun now, AND because it's so easy. Which means they do even when it isn't *strictly* necessary.
Ofcom confirm they have received a complaint from the Duchess of Sussex re Piers Morgan's comments
I presume OGH would receive complaints from the Duchess of Sussex about my comments, @Cyclefree's comments and @Richard_Tyndall 's comments if she read the site.
Without having paid too much attention, to the extent that i have i don't get the impression that Harry and Meghan are at all on the same page about how this is going. Harry seems to have originally passed on the comment about the skin colour of a potential child, but has been reluctant to labour the point, even to the extent of going out of his way to rule people out. Whereas Meghan has taken it too another level and ascribed all sorts of additional consequences to it, eg. Archie being denied becoming a Prince. I wonder if she even knows who is supposed to have made the comment.
Harry has also said that this interview is intended to be their final word on their departure from the Royal Family and they now want to get on with their lives (and he seems keen to not destroy bridges with his father, brother etc). Meghan is clearly far less bothered about that - after all it wouldn't be the first time, however justified or not that might be. I can't think launching Ofcom complaints etc is exactly consistent with now stepping out of the limelight. I wonder if the response they have received in America has blinded them somewhat to the general feeling in the UK, which appears to be ambivalent at best.
I don't think Meghan is going to stop. I think she feels any criticism of her is unfounded, and she wants to rebuild the platform she's lost in another way.
Harry is torn, but has sympathy with her over the tabloid press because of Diana and his deep-rooted issues he's had since, and is loyal to her.
Meghan is a narcissist, I believe, and Harry just naive and reckless.
The thing is we all know how this is going to end...except Harry.
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Well, the north may have had a, er, harrowing time, as it were. Might have complicated things eg?
And it must have been tax, surely? Not as though grabbing land could not be done effectively without out I'd have thought, nobles had always seemed able to get by.
But what about Roman censuses? Did they actually make people return to their place of birth, that seems like it would defeat the point?
The reason Matthew had Jesus born in Bethlehem was to make him match an earlier prophecy that the Messiah would be born in the City of David. So he came up with this rather clumsy device to justify it.
That's what I'd heard. I was surprised because the ONS state it as normal practice on their website, when it would seem very silly.
My understanding (although TSE will probably know more) is that it varied in practice by province. So in some provinces (Egypt apparently being one) people were ordered to return to their place of birth, in others they were not. Moreover, it tended to be more or less ad hoc, rather than ‘every five years.’ So Augustus order three, I think, and intervals of 41 years, 23 years and 28 years after the previous one.
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Well, the north may have had a, er, harrowing time, as it were. Might have complicated things eg?
And it must have been tax, surely? Not as though grabbing land could not be done effectively without out I'd have thought, nobles had always seemed able to get by.
The gaps in Domesday apparently relate largely to tax: the cities of London and Winchester were exempt; what's now County Durham was taxed by the bishop and not the crown.
The far northern counties of England are also missing because they were very remote, not fully under royal authority and, indeed, still coveted by the Scots at that time.
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Well, the north may have had a, er, harrowing time, as it were. Might have complicated things eg?
And it must have been tax, surely? Not as though grabbing land could not be done effectively without out I'd have thought, nobles had always seemed able to get by.
But what about Roman censuses? Did they actually make people return to their place of birth, that seems like it would defeat the point?
The reason Matthew had Jesus born in Bethlehem was to make him match an earlier prophecy that the Messiah would be born in the City of David. So he came up with this rather clumsy device to justify it.
Elsewhere in the New Testament it is very clear that everyone at the time knew perfectly well Jesus was born in Nazareth.
That's a fascinating site. It's intriguing to consider the possibilities for certain myths, including ones with certain details which can be reasonably known.
I recall reading Mary Beard's SPQR, and how the foundational myth(s) of Rome are seriously unusual in some ways, which I had never considered, and why they might be so.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I object to their assumption that people have access to the internet - or indeed a telephone. Happy to complete and hand to a collector in line with past practice - or to send via post.
Can you think why in current circumstances handing a paper copy to a collector might not be a good idea?
It can be done with care - in the same way I took delivery of beer this afternoon. Alternatively I am happy to return by post.
And why should your personal preference, when alternative methods exist for other people, trump public safety considerations or require so much additional cost to no additional benefit in terms of compliance?
I'm surprised how cross this has made me, but your objections, despite having the initial figleaf of regard for the public (albeit a nonsensical one as those unable to respond online can do so) seems to do with nothing other than arrogant assumption that you had a right to fill out the census in the way you want, and even though you acknowledge you can still do it you are still mad that they would prefer it be another way.
Since the option has not been taken away from anyone, why are you so offended that an alternative option has been offered? Do you get mad when someone brings out a new flavour of crisps because how dare they assume you want the new flavour?
Is the purpose of the census to gather information or to gather it in a way that makes you personally happy? So long as they get the info from us, what does it matter how?
He regularly posts here so clearly has no problem with using the internet. It is not clear to me what the fuss is. If someone doesn't have access to the internet, they can request the paper copy. What's the big deal?
Still waiting for my copy, by the way.
The Amazing Drakeford should be put on the case, he could sort it out immediately.
More seriously, I suppose give it to Monday? Time to contact and get one in time if so.
I frankly have better things to do with my time than chase a gang of third rate incompetents for a piece of paper a vaguely competent organisation could have sent out. Particularly given the huge amount of extra work the government is making me do right now.
They can have my census return if they send it. If they don’t, they won’t get it. Their lookout.
Fair enough. It is their responsibility to get it to you. They can hardly complain people don't fill it in if they don't get it.
Mine arrived yesterday.
As I mentioned earlier, We received our forms to fill in yesterday. We didn't ask for hard copy. It seems the default option in Wales is hard copy with online available if we wanted it.
Received the code by default here in the Vale. Openreach down AGAIN so maybe hard copy would have made more sense.
America is diseased. As discussed here a few days ago.
Quite frankly, who, anymore, gives a scintilla of a tinker's F*ck what this insane nation, now governed by yet ANOTHER demented president, thinks of our constitutional arrangements.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
At Canterbury Archaeological Trust the City Council kicked us out of our finds store and put us in a building we were supposed to share with the Museum but the link up never happened. It’s put enormous pressure on our finances.
That's not good. Macron took a gamble a couple of weeks ago by not fully locking down when it looked clear that they were in another wave. 25,229 new cases again today.
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Well, the north may have had a, er, harrowing time, as it were. Might have complicated things eg?
And it must have been tax, surely? Not as though grabbing land could not be done effectively without out I'd have thought, nobles had always seemed able to get by.
But what about Roman censuses? Did they actually make people return to their place of birth, that seems like it would defeat the point?
The reason Matthew had Jesus born in Bethlehem was to make him match an earlier prophecy that the Messiah would be born in the City of David. So he came up with this rather clumsy device to justify it.
Elsewhere in the New Testament it is very clear that everyone at the time knew perfectly well Jesus was born in Nazareth.
Luke has the census story. Matthew just says Jesus was born in Bethlehem, with the implication that his dad lived there all along, and they randomly relocated to Nazareth on returning from Egypt.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
At Canterbury Archaeological Trust the City Council kicked us out of our finds store and put us in a building we were supposed to share with the Museum but the link up never happened. It’s put enormous pressure on our finances.
It’s a good job there’s no sites of archaeological significance in Canterbury so that vital materials might be lost by their actions.
That's not good. Macron took a gamble a couple of weeks ago by not fully locking down when it looked clear that they were in another wave. 25,229 new cases again today.
What you never do with COVID is take a gamble on it getting better / not really been that bad by taking a strategy of mininizing action.
See UK 1st wave, Germany Diet Lockdown, Portugal Christmas / New Year free for all...
I am sure it is because even intelligent human find exponential growth so difficult to grasp, but its only x cases and only gone up a little bit from last week....i just don't believe in a month it will be 100k a day.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all by myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Well, the north may have had a, er, harrowing time, as it were. Might have complicated things eg?
And it must have been tax, surely? Not as though grabbing land could not be done effectively without out I'd have thought, nobles had always seemed able to get by.
But what about Roman censuses? Did they actually make people return to their place of birth, that seems like it would defeat the point?
The reason Matthew had Jesus born in Bethlehem was to make him match an earlier prophecy that the Messiah would be born in the City of David. So he came up with this rather clumsy device to justify it.
Elsewhere in the New Testament it is very clear that everyone at the time knew perfectly well Jesus was born in Nazareth.
Luke has the census story. Matthew just says Jesus was born in Bethlehem, with the implication that his dad lived there all along, and they randomly relocated to Nazareth on returning from Egypt.
Which would have been surprising if they wanted to avoid Herod’s sons, given one of them was ruling the Galilee.
That's not good. Macron took a gamble a couple of weeks ago by not fully locking down when it looked clear that they were in another wave. 25,229 new cases again today.
I saw an extra-ordinary letter the other day on a twitter thread from (apparently) a group of medics promoting doubts about vaccines and potential for blood clots. Assuming it was genuine it was astonishing in its complacency, basically claiming that the EMA had acted precipitately in "fast tracking" its vaccine approvals, when the danger to Europe's hospital systems had passed - and that they should therefore rescind their approvals to allow more detailed research and analysis.
A more interesting point to me is about the Horizon programme. If it funded research that led to four out of the six main vaccines, and the companies concerned do appear to credit the programme, that's a huge success and one we don't really hear about. I am not talking about EU good/bad/whatever. The programme itself really seems to have delivered !
Evidence for that assertion please.
I suspect (and it's just a suspicion) that almost every vaccine programme will have taken money at some point from the Wellcome Trust, Horizon, regional development agencies, the UK government, and various others. That's the nature of something that was - until recently - pretty unfashionable, and where researchers will have spent their time grubbing for grants.
But having taken (at some point, and for some portion of related research) money from Horizon is very far from Horizon having been the - or even a - major funder.
Agree that funding is a hand-to-mouth exercise for all research institutes. Having looked into this a bit, Horizon is given major credit for funding primary research at the relevant institutes in these links for Jenner Institute, Bio-N-Tech and Janssen Laboratories/J&J, although the latter also got a lot of funding from the US government. Curevac got its original funding from the EU, but most of its primary research in recent years seems to have been funded by Bill Gates. It did get development funding from Horizon however.
Should add the important point that it is entirely because these labs did the unfashionable research for years that they were able to step in to get the vaccines developed in record time.
Investigating further, I think @rcs1000 hit the nail on the head with his comment about unfashionable research. The Covid vaccines come out of research into vaccines for diseases that affect poor countries, in particular ebola, where there is a high failure rate in the development of those vaccines. Funding requires bodies with deep pockets who don't care about commercial return. There seem to be three such bodies: EU Horizon, the US Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. We can be grateful to Bill Gates in particular, who funded research at Curevac over many years and kept Novavax going through a succession of failed vaccines.
The geographic distribution of the laboratories presumably reflects the availability of funding. The Novavax research originated in a Swedish laboratory that was taken over by Novavax, so arguably a fifth European lab.
Also a callout for the Gamaleya Research Institute who seem to have produced a good Sputnik V vaccine based on their research into MERS and ebola with rather little support. They are badly served by their government, but hopefully will get the recognition in the West that they deserve.
Question: Scotland is not, for the time being, a sovereign state and member of the OECD. The United Kingdom is.
So, why doesn't the Scottish Office publish the report? That would doubtless cause the Scottish Government to howl, but is disseminating information about Scotland really such a serious violation of their prerogatives? Under devolution, all the decisions about what actually to do with the information would still rest with the devolved administration and parliament.
Unless there's something that I'm missing then presumably there's no reason for the UK Government not to publish anything it likes in relation to Scotland, unless publication would compromise national security or court processes - which presumably would not apply in this instance?
Politico.com - N.Y. congressional Dems flee from Cuomo as scandals intensify The governor is remaining defiant, saying, “Politicians take positions for all sorts of reasons.”
As more than a dozen Democratic members of the state's congressional delegation called for his resignation, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared that doing so amounted to "bowing to cancel culture" and that he would do no such thing.
The embattled governor on Friday afternoon decried unspecified politicians as "reckless and dangerous" for rushing to judgment.
That's not good. Macron took a gamble a couple of weeks ago by not fully locking down when it looked clear that they were in another wave. 25,229 new cases again today.
By then it was also clear they had Kentish Covid. Macron may have made (another) grievous error. I sympathise with any politician seeking to avoid the trauma of lockdown, however
Many in the office of the Labour leader, including Seumas Milne, had it. Jeremy Corbyn may have had it, although he was never tested and so has never been sure....
On 16 March, Johnson convened a meeting with Corbyn, Ashworth and staffers including Cummings and Milne, as well as Whitty, in Downing Street. It was intended to shore up Labour support for the coronavirus bill, introduced three days later. “Everyone was crowded around one desk,” one observer said. “It was insane if you think about it.”
The Labour group argued forcefully for more economic intervention, given the spontaneous lockdown many people in the country were already beginning to observe. Two sources in the room said Johnson agreed with Corbyn and Ashworth that some form of full national lockdown would be inevitable. The meeting was cordial; Milne and Johnson even shared a joke about their time as journalists.
The meeting’s significance might have been passed over had it not been for what followed.
Milne told friends he came down with a temperature that night – and was subsequently featured on the front page of the Mail on Sunday as the man who might have given the virus to the prime minister. Sources close to Corbyn said the then Labour leader also had some cold-like symptoms. Ashworth, who was also in the room, did not catch it.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
That's not good. Macron took a gamble a couple of weeks ago by not fully locking down when it looked clear that they were in another wave. 25,229 new cases again today.
What you never do with COVID is take a gamble on it getting better / not really been that bad by taking a strategy of mininizing action.
See UK 1st wave, Germany Diet Lockdown, Portugal Christmas / New Year free for all...
I am sure it is because even intelligent human find exponential growth so difficult to grasp, but its only x cases and only gone up a little bit from last week....i just don't believe in a month it will be 100k a day.
Italy is tottering backwards into lockdown in a not dissimilar fashion to that which we suffered between November and early January. France is probably heading that way as well.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
I have to say, I wasn't aware that much of Europe had come out of lockdown.
I think a lot of EU leaders have been very keen to believe the line that the British experience is all down to UK Government incompetence (twice) and have psychologically wanted to dismiss the part that the misfortune of the Kent variant has played since December. When really they should in many ways have been grateful that the Kent variant originated in the UK, one of the few countries carrying out the comprehensive sequencing to aid its identification and tracking, and give them early warning that has been largely ignored.
I'm finding this massive argument about the census a little difficult to understand. It takes very little time to complete and seems pretty innocuous.
Its a principle thing...tell them as little as possible
Its part of living in a society though. There's records in this country going back to the Domesday Book and beyond.
If the questions are unreasonable or intrusive then that would be one thing, but basic questions are not.
Domesday is an interesting one in itself of course, because leaving aside the fact that many of the entries were forged to take land off Saxons and give it to Normans, quite large chunks of the country weren’t covered. That’s especially true of the north. So although it’s so authoritative and famous...
And don’t get me wrong - it is incredibly useful, although still nobody can work out why he actually did it (personally, I’ve always thought the aforementioned land grab is the likeliest explanation, but it may indeed have been about tax, or population, or to Show He Could). But that doesn’t make it accurate.
Like all historical records, it is useful as long as you are aware of its limitations, and are prepared to adjust accordingly. And not treat it as a single, unimpeachable source. It is better for historians that it exists, than that it doesn't.
Hopefully plenty of mundane details from our time can survive. It must be a pain to go through, but imagine the joy of finding detailed records of food consumption in the Household of Edward I or whatever.
So I heard a historian say that the reason they chose to study the Tudor period was that there was so much more material to work with than in earlier periods, so you could get a better sense of who did what, why and what people were actually like - but there wasn't so much material that it was overwhelming and impossible to deal with.
Maybe GPT3 will have to be the historian of our times (God help us).
That's not good. Macron took a gamble a couple of weeks ago by not fully locking down when it looked clear that they were in another wave. 25,229 new cases again today.
I posted the other day that they are sending patients from the North of France into Belgium as they had minimal capacity left..
On topic, I had to google what conversion therapy is, but what makes me scratch my head is why people who are in support of every progressive idea going are baffled that everyone else doesn't immediately jump on board with them, especially when those supporters are regulars on twitter/discussion boards such as this and are constantly arguing over such things. The ding dong of adverserial argument often refines ideas and facilitates smooth and gradual long term change.
If they just factored in to their workings out that a lot, if not most, humans are instinctively quite conservative/resistant to big changes, but will probably soften in time, then "Faux outrageuxed of Brighton" need not get their knickers in a twist so easily.
I take your broader point. However, it was a promise by the PM prior to the election. Although not in the manifesto of the Tories. So, hardly a "progressive' idea. Indeed, some of the most anti-woke posters on here have welcomed it. Fact is though. It is more complex than it first appears, which is maybe why we've heard no details as yet.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
That's not good. Macron took a gamble a couple of weeks ago by not fully locking down when it looked clear that they were in another wave. 25,229 new cases again today.
What you never do with COVID is take a gamble on it getting better / not really been that bad by taking a strategy of mininizing action.
See UK 1st wave, Germany Diet Lockdown, Portugal Christmas / New Year free for all...
I am sure it is because even intelligent human find exponential growth so difficult to grasp, but its only x cases and only gone up a little bit from last week....i just don't believe in a month it will be 100k a day.
Italy is tottering backwards into lockdown in a not dissimilar fashion to that which we suffered between November and early January. France is probably heading that way as well.
If they don't, their death tolls aren't going to be pretty.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
I'm surprised there aren't laws against that.
If not, there should be.
Because someone ultimately has to pay.
We live in a time when private collectors pay ever-increasing amounts for globally significant artefacts, but the public funding to preserve somewhat less prestigious artefacts, or the philanthropic donations that created our culture of museums, is reducing.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
One of my favourite jokes is about an American who had been clearing out his mother’s house and came across a battered old Bible that he threw out without a second thought. He later mentioned to a friend that it had been printed by some German firm or other called Gutenburg.
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
Why bother havent done a census ever
You don't see it as a public duty then.
Not in the least no
Although it carries a fine of up to £1k. So I wouldn't broadcast it too widely.
Shrugs yet to be fined and lets face it the whole thing is a joke unless you really think we have half a million jedi's
That's hardly the only information the emerges, and it's a voluntary question anyway, so some useful info may well be gleaned.
I would be interested to know if they ever fine people for not completing the census, as I doubt they expect perfect compliance and as long as they get sufficient compliance for somewhat reliable public policy planning it's likely not worth chasing too hard.
But at least a refusal to fill out the damn thing makes more sense that getting mad on behalf of other people who don't have the internet, even though those people can still fill it out.
As I replied to Kinablu the only thing I would tell them is what they already know so its pointless
I had heard it is considered that in future there won't be censuses for the very reason all the info will be able to be compiled from other sources. Interesting if that is the case.
They said that in 2011 and 2001.
Apart from anything else, the census isn’t terribly accurate. Lots of HMOs housing illegal immigrants that are apparently inhabited by one old woman and her cats, while supermarkets and pressure on local sewage systems all show there are far more people there than officially recorded.
:LOL:
Those claims are, how can I put it, utter shite.
Then you should have told my former line manager at the ONS that, because I’m quoting her.
Got a name? I might have worked with her in 2011.
Truthfully, I can’t remember it. It was a long time ago. She was Australian if that helps.
I knew one Australian whilst I was there, but it probably wasn't them.
I slogged my guts out getting the HMOs right in 2011 and then spent a lot of time working with our field team to make sure we were capturing all the beds in sheds etc.
I even created records for one set of people the police wouldn't let us enumerate. Well, that's not quite true. They told us that it wouldn't be a good idea to try to enumerate them as the situation at the time was delicate.
I spent a great deal of time doing that too.
That’s one reason I am so confident a decade later that they were completely wide of the mark.
You worked on 2001? The worst thing about 2011 was that we were separating communals from the household list. Trying to reduce the overlap without missing anything was not fun.
Trouble is for all those refusing to complete the census or anything else leading to it being discontinued is that they are ruining a vital source of historical information. It is true that the Government can get the information other ways but anyone else cannot. Historians set huge store by the census for social and economic history, for things like house history and for myriad other lines of research. They simply cannot have access to all those other sources of information, many of which are considered private even long after people have died. Whilst it is true that we will not see the post war census returns until probably after I am dead it saddens me that people in the future may not be able to reply on this information.
I am particularly shocked by the response of ydoethur who is, I believe, a history teacher.
And has published research on nineteenth century census data, at that.
But that was then, this is now.
If you are saying it no longer has use then I have along list of professional historians who would beg to differ. Indeed I attended a talk by several of them only last week.
Undoubtedly. Just as you will find long lists of professional historians who bemoan the loss of telephone directories. Or newspapers. Or local libraries. Or national railway timetables. All of which are incredibly valuable in doing historical research.
All of which still exist.... well with the exception of national railway timetables and I happen to know there is a whole loose society of enthusiasts who religiously record those from the various websites on a daily basis. They even have various rail companies providing them with details of cancelled services.
But for most historians the census is pretty much irreplaceable as a snapshot of occupation.
You still get telephone directories in Lincs? I haven’t had one in years. Only once since moving north, I think.
As for local libraries, when it comes to keeping local records they are a very pale shadow of what they once were. Even twenty years ago when I was doing my BA it was perfectly normal to travel to different local libraries to consult several collections of local material. Now, they’re more or less all gone. Cannock is a particular disappointment in that regard.
True, county archives heroically try to gather up the slack, but they’re hopelessly under-resources and pushed for space as it is.
I must be lucky. Both Grantham and Newark libraries have excellent records. And yes I am also a reader at both Lincoln and Nottingham CROs so - before covid at least - spent far too much time poring over old documents. Enclosure maps and Turnpike Acts are my favourites. Oh and Tithe maps.
I’m delighted to hear it, but such libraries are increasingly exceptional, sadly.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
It is one reason why I would urge people these days to think very carefully before donating archaeological artefacts to museums. Far too many of them have decided they can no longer afford to keep the artefacts and have just skipped them. We had a real fight with Newark museum at the time of its conversion to the National Civil War Centre to prevent them dumping large amounts of ceramics and other artefacts dating back to the Roman period.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
But why would a museum chuck excess artefacts in the bin, as Richard alleges?
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
I lusted after a Gobekli Tepe arrowhead (there's no shortage of them) but didn't have the bottle to try to smuggle one out - my Turkish phrase book usefully gives the translation for "I am terribly sorry Mr Customs Officer, I had no idea about the savage penalties for unlicensed antiquity exports," and I have watched Midnight Express.
I remember when I found my Gobekli Tepe arrowhead I was almost overcome with excitement. I pocketed it eagerly (and clandestinely). Then I had a big spasm of guilt and looked around, with a mind to putting it back - then I realised I was standing on a hill of flints which was practically all arrowheads and axes. Thousands of them
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
Does it provide inspiration for your flint dildo designs?
The EU vax programme is deeply saddening. I can’t believe how badly it’s been managed. Very, very depressing to see.
I think the only way the French in particular can turn this around is to ban the AstraZeneca vaccine on the grounds that it’s too expensive and the ordinary French people aren’t worth using it on.
Then there would be actual rioting until they were all duly jabbed.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
One of my favourite jokes is about an American who had been clearing out his mother’s house and came across a battered old Bible that he threw out without a second thought. He later mentioned to a friend that it had been printed by some German firm or other called Gutenburg.
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
Is that a philistine friend or a Philistine friend? Seems like an amazing extra detail if it is the latter.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
One of my favourite jokes is about an American who had been clearing out his mother’s house and came across a battered old Bible that he threw out without a second thought. He later mentioned to a friend that it had been printed by some German firm or other called Gutenburg.
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
Is that a philistine friend or a Philistine friend? Seems like an amazing extra detail if it is the latter.
The SNP are certainly testing to destruction the notion that their voters will forgive them anything.
Because they will. Watch.
I have to admit I'm personally finding it very difficult, because it's a lot of weird shit coming from a lot of different angles at the moment.
What the alternative is, no idea. Not sure the Willie Rennie "disillusioned SNP voters should vote Lib Dem" school of thinking has much mileage in it.
TINA. The SNP has the secessionist vote completely wrapped up, for the constituencies at any rate. And if they bleed votes for the list then they'll mostly go to the sock puppets instead, so there's no possibility of their losing control of Parliament at all.
At least I have something in common with @Leon - we both had our first Covid vaccinations today.
First thing, I thought I had uncovered a huge fraud in Government reporting when I thought I was going to be vaccinated 1100 times - until Mrs Stodge reminded me that was the time for the appointment.
Couldn't fault the logistics at Excel - the cavernous space was well organised and can clearly handle a lot more people than the trickle that was coming in this morning.
No side effects so far apart from a hankering for Chinese takeaway so no change there.
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
One of my favourite jokes is about an American who had been clearing out his mother’s house and came across a battered old Bible that he threw out without a second thought. He later mentioned to a friend that it had been printed by some German firm or other called Gutenburg.
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
Is that a philistine friend or a Philistine friend? Seems like an amazing extra detail if it is the latter.
At least I have something in common with @Leon - we both had our first Covid vaccinations today.
First thing, I thought I had uncovered a huge fraud in Government reporting when I thought I was going to be vaccinated 1100 times - until Mrs Stodge reminded me that was the time for the appointment.
Couldn't fault the logistics at Excel - the cavernous space was well organised and can clearly handle a lot more people than the trickle that was coming in this morning.
No side effects so far apart from a hankering for Chinese takeaway so no change there.
What time was yours? Mine was 3pm. I've been told that if you don't feel anything after 9 hours, you'll probably be fine (family anecdotage). So, I wait
Well, speaking as someone who has visited and enjoyed Newark museum, we owe you a debt of gratitude for that fight.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Your low opinion of university libraries is correct. Once at the University of REDACTED, I attended a sale of surplus items. "A librarian's life is a constant battle against space", I was told.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
One of my favourite jokes is about an American who had been clearing out his mother’s house and came across a battered old Bible that he threw out without a second thought. He later mentioned to a friend that it had been printed by some German firm or other called Gutenburg.
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
Is that a philistine friend or a Philistine friend? Seems like an amazing extra detail if it is the latter.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I am not best pleased to receive a letter from the Census Office inviting me to complete the survey online - or to ring a freephone line to request a hard copy. Deeply resent the assumption that people wish to use the Internet for this. Frankly unless the hard copy is provided in the normal way, they can sing for their supper!
I had a feeling there would be some reactions like this, and I cannot say I really understand it. What if someone had received a hard copy and said they equally resented the assumption that people wish to use a hard copy for this? Would their resentment be less reasonable than your resentment? Is a hard copy census a god given right?
So long as the information is collected in the usual way and people are able to fill it in offline if they wish, what exactly is there to resent?
It's not as though they are taking a choice away from you. You never had a choice about how to fill out a census, other than in ways the government said you could. They are encouraging it to be in a different way without prohibiting the other.
I object to their assumption that people have access to the internet - or indeed a telephone. Happy to complete and hand to a collector in line with past practice - or to send via post.
Can you think why in current circumstances handing a paper copy to a collector might not be a good idea?
It can be done with care - in the same way I took delivery of beer this afternoon. Alternatively I am happy to return by post.
And why should your personal preference, when alternative methods exist for other people, trump public safety considerations or require so much additional cost to no additional benefit in terms of compliance?
I'm surprised how cross this has made me, but your objections, despite having the initial figleaf of regard for the public (albeit a nonsensical one as those unable to respond online can do so) seems to do with nothing other than arrogant assumption that you had a right to fill out the census in the way you want, and even though you acknowledge you can still do it you are still mad that they would prefer it be another way.
Since the option has not been taken away from anyone, why are you so offended that an alternative option has been offered? Do you get mad when someone brings out a new flavour of crisps because how dare they assume you want the new flavour?
Is the purpose of the census to gather information or to gather it in a way that makes you personally happy? So long as they get the info from us, what does it matter how?
He regularly posts here so clearly has no problem with using the internet. It is not clear to me what the fuss is. If someone doesn't have access to the internet, they can request the paper copy. What's the big deal?
Still waiting for my copy, by the way.
The Amazing Drakeford should be put on the case, he could sort it out immediately.
More seriously, I suppose give it to Monday? Time to contact and get one in time if so.
I frankly have better things to do with my time than chase a gang of third rate incompetents for a piece of paper a vaguely competent organisation could have sent out. Particularly given the huge amount of extra work the government is making me do right now.
They can have my census return if they send it. If they don’t, they won’t get it. Their lookout.
Fair enough. It is their responsibility to get it to you. They can hardly complain people don't fill it in if they don't get it.
Mine arrived yesterday.
As I mentioned earlier, We received our forms to fill in yesterday. We didn't ask for hard copy. It seems the default option in Wales is hard copy with online available if we wanted it.
That's quite possible. Did you get a Welsh language version too?
Fascinating to hear of the ructions in the local East Ham Labour Party which, along with West Ham CLP have both been suspended.
It seems this is about recruiting of members and may not be wholly unrelated to Momentum's attempts to take control of both local parties. I don't know whether Stephen Timms, the long-serving MP for East Ham, wa sunder threat of de-selection.
I've also heard (though unconfirmed) the candidate previously chosen for the East Ham Central by-election has been removed and a new candidate will be "provided". To be fair, given Labour won 81% of the vote in 2018, we could always test the adage anything with a red rosette could win the seat.
Perhaps a small carriage clock or a fern or a lightly-varnished table might be on the short list. The Conservatives have put up a candidate and he'll presumably be hoping against hope the inanimate object makes a serious gaffe as he needs all the help he can get to find the 33.5% swing needed to take the seat.
One suspects that Scottish Labour is literally dying off. It'd be interesting to see the cross tabs on some of the Scotland only polls. At a guess, there probably aren't that many left-of-centre Unionist voters of working age remaining. Certainly Labour's base in England is disproportionately tilted towards ethnic minorities and youth; AIUI the youth vote in Scotland is overwhelmingly pro-secession; according to the 2011 Census returns Scotland is 96% white, and I doubt things have changed radically since then.
At least I have something in common with @Leon - we both had our first Covid vaccinations today.
First thing, I thought I had uncovered a huge fraud in Government reporting when I thought I was going to be vaccinated 1100 times - until Mrs Stodge reminded me that was the time for the appointment.
Couldn't fault the logistics at Excel - the cavernous space was well organised and can clearly handle a lot more people than the trickle that was coming in this morning.
No side effects so far apart from a hankering for Chinese takeaway so no change there.
What time was yours? Mine was 3pm. I've been told that if you don't feel anything after 9 hours, you'll probably be fine (family anecdotage). So, I wait
I'm through the 10 and a half hour mark and apart from the Chinese takeaway urge (which is quite normal for me on a Friday night), I'm good. I had no reaction to the normal flu jab in December so I was cautiously optimistic.
I'll be happy with a good night's sleep and a breakfast featuring a full English and the Racing Post - I'm only getting one of the last two unfortunately.
I've been in staff development meetings where the triumphs of British Cycling were given as a motivational example of what you can achieve by obsessive attention to detail.
So, no; I suppose I didn't entirely believe them. It's sad but true that outlier success is frequently due to either a bit of random noise or undetected cheating. Not always, but frequently.
At least I have something in common with @Leon - we both had our first Covid vaccinations today.
First thing, I thought I had uncovered a huge fraud in Government reporting when I thought I was going to be vaccinated 1100 times - until Mrs Stodge reminded me that was the time for the appointment.
Couldn't fault the logistics at Excel - the cavernous space was well organised and can clearly handle a lot more people than the trickle that was coming in this morning.
No side effects so far apart from a hankering for Chinese takeaway so no change there.
What time was yours? Mine was 3pm. I've been told that if you don't feel anything after 9 hours, you'll probably be fine (family anecdotage). So, I wait
I'm through the 10 and a half hour mark and apart from the Chinese takeaway urge (which is quite normal for me on a Friday night), I'm good. I had no reaction to the normal flu jab in December so I was cautiously optimistic.
I'll be happy with a good night's sleep and a breakfast featuring a full English and the Racing Post - I'm only getting one of the last two unfortunately.
Quite right, given the recent decline of the Racing Post.
Comments
Harry is torn, but has sympathy with her over the tabloid press because of Diana and his deep-rooted issues he's had since, and is loyal to her.
Meghan is a narcissist, I believe, and Harry just naive and reckless.
I’m particularly sad and angry at what happened to Gloucester’s local collection, which was basically sold off, but even that‘s better than the fate of one of the finest local collections on classical Britain, at Carlisle, which ended up in a skip.
Not that these noble nations would ever punt out false info online, of course. Heaven forbid.
If they just factored in to their workings out that a lot, if not most, humans are instinctively quite conservative/resistant to big changes, but will probably soften in time, then "Faux outrageuxed of Brighton" need not get their knickers in a twist so easily.
Elsewhere in the New Testament it is very clear that everyone at the time knew perfectly well Jesus was born in Nazareth.
Edit: you may find this link of interest. https://historyforatheists.com/2019/10/nazareth-myth/
https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/2011census/howourcensusworks/aboutcensuses/censushistory/censustakingintheancientworld
Russia is so used to online fake news-mongering, they probably do it for fun now, AND because it's so easy. Which means they do even when it isn't *strictly* necessary.
Why not?
The far northern counties of England are also missing because they were very remote, not fully under royal authority and, indeed, still coveted by the Scots at that time.
I recall reading Mary Beard's SPQR, and how the foundational myth(s) of Rome are seriously unusual in some ways, which I had never considered, and why they might be so.
But ultimately, it unfortunately comes down much too often to lack of funding. If they haven’t got the money, they make hard choices and very often it’s the historical material that’s of interest to fewer people that gets squeezed out.
That’s even true of uni libraries, although there are others that are infamous for not making sensible choices (apparently Lampeter university library still has an excellent geography section two decades after the geography department closed).
Antifa protesters set fires and damaged property during demonstration outside Federal Courthouse in Portland
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9354103/amp/Federal-agents-fire-tear-gas-Antifa-protesters-burning-American-flags-Portland.html
Quite frankly, who, anymore, gives a scintilla of a tinker's F*ck what this insane nation, now governed by yet ANOTHER demented president, thinks of our constitutional arrangements.
https://twitter.com/snpwatch/status/1370476474784956417?s=20
Edit: as per link in your edit.
(If the sarcasm isn’t plain, it should be.)
See UK 1st wave, Germany Diet Lockdown, Portugal Christmas / New Year free for all...
I am sure it is because even intelligent human find exponential growth so difficult to grasp, but its only x cases and only gone up a little bit from last week....i just don't believe in a month it will be 100k a day.
Insane. There must be hundreds of kids - in any sizeable town - with a passion for history who would be delighted, enlightened and energised by the outright gift of some Roman pottery shards or medieval glassware and so on. Give these things away.
I've got a collection of two dozen tiny little historic objects in my living room. I found them all by myself which adds to their lustre, but I would love them anyway - a flint arrowhead from Gobekli Tepe, a bit of amphora handle from the Valley of the Shadow of Death, some shrapnel from Gallipoli, a Piece of Pol Pot's Patio.
I love these things. Historical objects are history you can touch. Priceless. Never bin them!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/12/no-10-plague-pit-how-covid-brought-westminster-to-its-knees
The geographic distribution of the laboratories presumably reflects the availability of funding. The Novavax research originated in a Swedish laboratory that was taken over by Novavax, so arguably a fifth European lab.
Also a callout for the Gamaleya Research Institute who seem to have produced a good Sputnik V vaccine based on their research into MERS and ebola with rather little support. They are badly served by their government, but hopefully will get the recognition in the West that they deserve.
So, why doesn't the Scottish Office publish the report? That would doubtless cause the Scottish Government to howl, but is disseminating information about Scotland really such a serious violation of their prerogatives? Under devolution, all the decisions about what actually to do with the information would still rest with the devolved administration and parliament.
Unless there's something that I'm missing then presumably there's no reason for the UK Government not to publish anything it likes in relation to Scotland, unless publication would compromise national security or court processes - which presumably would not apply in this instance?
Politico.com - N.Y. congressional Dems flee from Cuomo as scandals intensify
The governor is remaining defiant, saying, “Politicians take positions for all sorts of reasons.”
As more than a dozen Democratic members of the state's congressional delegation called for his resignation, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo declared that doing so amounted to "bowing to cancel culture" and that he would do no such thing.
The embattled governor on Friday afternoon decried unspecified politicians as "reckless and dangerous" for rushing to judgment.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/12/cuomo-ny-congress-democrats-resignations-475522
Editorial Comment - Many PBers will be gratified, by denunciation of "cancel culture" by such an eminent (for time being anyway) source.
On 16 March, Johnson convened a meeting with Corbyn, Ashworth and staffers including Cummings and Milne, as well as Whitty, in Downing Street. It was intended to shore up Labour support for the coronavirus bill, introduced three days later. “Everyone was crowded around one desk,” one observer said. “It was insane if you think about it.”
The Labour group argued forcefully for more economic intervention, given the spontaneous lockdown many people in the country were already beginning to observe. Two sources in the room said Johnson agreed with Corbyn and Ashworth that some form of full national lockdown would be inevitable. The meeting was cordial; Milne and Johnson even shared a joke about their time as journalists.
The meeting’s significance might have been passed over had it not been for what followed.
Milne told friends he came down with a temperature that night – and was subsequently featured on the front page of the Mail on Sunday as the man who might have given the virus to the prime minister. Sources close to Corbyn said the then Labour leader also had some cold-like symptoms. Ashworth, who was also in the room, did not catch it.
If not, there should be.
Maybe GPT3 will have to be the historian of our times (God help us).
However, it was a promise by the PM prior to the election. Although not in the manifesto of the Tories.
So, hardly a "progressive' idea.
Indeed, some of the most anti-woke posters on here have welcomed it.
Fact is though. It is more complex than it first appears, which is maybe why we've heard no details as yet.
There was amongst the discarded debris a first edition of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility
Being honest, I remonstrated that this book should be retained in the collection, which it was.
Well, until the next lunatick decides the library is short of space and needs to get rid of surplus stock that students don't need.
We live in a time when private collectors pay ever-increasing amounts for globally significant artefacts, but the public funding to preserve somewhat less prestigious artefacts, or the philanthropic donations that created our culture of museums, is reducing.
So I kept it and took it home. And I can see it now as I type. An arrowhead knapped by the same hunter-gatherers who built the world's oldest structure, a veritable temple in Eden, maybe 12,000 years ago.
Marvellous
https://twitter.com/simongerman600/status/1370482238903701506?s=20
‘You threw away one of the first Bibles ever printed!’ gasped his horrified friend. ‘One came up for auction at Christie’s last year and sold for $500,000!’
‘Mine wouldn’t have been worth a dime,’ retorted his Philistine friend. ‘Some clown by name of Martin Luther had scribbled all over it.’
At a wild guess, if the report was positive it would have been published.....
What the alternative is, no idea. Not sure the Willie Rennie "disillusioned SNP voters should vote Lib Dem" school of thinking has much mileage in it.
Then there would be actual rioting until they were all duly jabbed.
The guilty verdict on Dr Richard Freeman puts everything achieved by British Cycling and Team Sky under scrutiny"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2021/03/12/can-believe-british-cycling-team-skys-glorious-successes-bombshell/
At least I have something in common with @Leon - we both had our first Covid vaccinations today.
First thing, I thought I had uncovered a huge fraud in Government reporting when I thought I was going to be vaccinated 1100 times - until Mrs Stodge reminded me that was the time for the appointment.
Couldn't fault the logistics at Excel - the cavernous space was well organised and can clearly handle a lot more people than the trickle that was coming in this morning.
No side effects so far apart from a hankering for Chinese takeaway so no change there.
(sometimes capital is a copout)
https://twitter.com/BramleyTweets/status/1369965025729859584
The ratio goes from infinity to 84.
It seems this is about recruiting of members and may not be wholly unrelated to Momentum's attempts to take control of both local parties. I don't know whether Stephen Timms, the long-serving MP for East Ham, wa sunder threat of de-selection.
I've also heard (though unconfirmed) the candidate previously chosen for the East Ham Central by-election has been removed and a new candidate will be "provided". To be fair, given Labour won 81% of the vote in 2018, we could always test the adage anything with a red rosette could win the seat.
Perhaps a small carriage clock or a fern or a lightly-varnished table might be on the short list. The Conservatives have put up a candidate and he'll presumably be hoping against hope the inanimate object makes a serious gaffe as he needs all the help he can get to find the 33.5% swing needed to take the seat.
I'll be happy with a good night's sleep and a breakfast featuring a full English and the Racing Post - I'm only getting one of the last two unfortunately.
So, no; I suppose I didn't entirely believe them. It's sad but true that outlier success is frequently due to either a bit of random noise or undetected cheating. Not always, but frequently.