The accuracy of the census has been called into question by various councils. This is because their budgets are calculated based on the figures from the census. They are worried that the census might not count enough people to allow them to keep their budgets.

I’m not sure if this is just shroud waving based on the premise that even though they might really have a lower population they still need the existing grant levels to keep paying the salary of their CEO. Or it could be that the council really do have a problem with too many people using their services and they are stretched to breaking point.

But reading about how the ONS works out the addresses to send the census forms to it seems to me that the the councils should have accurate figures already. The ONS does have a single address database, and they get their addresses from the Royal Mail, the National Land and Property Gazetteer, and Ordnance Survey. These are organisations that the councils inform about the existence of properties or who send their data to the council. For instance the council informs the Royal Mail of new properties that have been built and also the names of new streets. The OS allows the councils to use their maps so that the council can map out their coverage using GIS tools. The council should have some idea of their constituents from the council tax figures.

So the need for a census doesn’t seem so clear cut. There is a case for a pure statistical role of analysing the population and how it’s changing and moving around. Even with a small state that doesn’t plan everything down to the last nail and bolt, I believe there is still a need for statistical analysis of what’s going on in the country, even if only for the scientific purpose of studying human populations. But it needn’t be at such a huge cost nor have to be a census on a particular day.

However, the information from the census will date a lot more quickly than it has done in the past. The modern population is a lot more mobile than in past generations. In the past people did move to go where the jobs were. In fact it wasn’t unusual for whole villages to empty when the jobs disappeared. But it was on longer timescales than now. The average time that someone lives in one place is now only around 7 years. So it’s purpose for setting out council grants for years into the future doesn’t seem quite so valid.

I would argue that rather than spend £100’s of millions to work out how to spend £billions from the taxes that are collected nationally, it would be more efficient for councils to collect their own taxes instead of the national ones and spend the money locally. So VAT would be levied at a local level, income tax would be set locally, property tax would be collected locally as it is now, and wages would be set locally rather than nationally.

Some would argue that this would lead to a postcode lottery of taxes. Well, actually that would be the point of it. Just like countries can set different tax rates to either stop or encourage certain types of businesses or people to come to their country, so will councils. And councils, being closer to the coal face will know more about their own demands and needs. And constituents of the council will also be closer to the decision makers and so be able to influence the direction their councils take.

So some councils in deprived areas will have low wages and low tax income and might not be able to do all the things a rich council will do. That doesn’t mean that these council will have slums, it only means that some things that are luxuries will not happen in the poorer councils. Things like having expensive buildings designed and built, statues and other artworks placed in public locations, etc.

However the poor councils will be attractive to businesses as it means that businesses will have lower overheads in terms of taxes and wages. Over time such areas will thrive and different areas will lose out as they make bad decisions about how to tax and spend or some event occurs which means they lose their unique selling point. Over an even longer time there will never be a steady state, just a constant state of flux as each area sets its taxes according to the demands of the moment.

SBML

Simon Cooke March
8, 2011 at 11:02

So we spend millions on something that is wildly inaccurate? Last time the
figures had to be adjusted/estimated to account for significant undercounts
especially of: 1) Young males; 2) Ethnic minorites;

http://www.ccsr.ac.uk/staff/Ludi/documents/RSSONSNov03Simpson.pdf

“The quality of a research tool such as the census can be assessed in many
ways. It should have a defensible, documented design, be rigorous in its
conduct, provide credible and verified results, and contribute new knowledge
about the UK for useful purposes. The 2001 census has been questioned on all
four of these criteria. It has been said that the design to cope with
contamination between the Census and its coverage survey was faulty from the
start and patched up at the end; on conduct, the commercial contracts
including that with the Royal Mail were far from rigorous; the credibility of
some of the results has been questioned because of their uncorroborated
implications for international migration; finally the fitness of the data for
small areas has been questioned because of non-response and the adjustment of
small numbers before publication.”

Pile of useless rubbish costing hundreds of millions of your and my
pounds.

Ancient and Tattered
Airman March 7, 2011 at 21:12

. The ONS does have a single address database, and they get their addresses
from the Royal Mail, the National Land and Property Gazetteer, and Ordnance
Survey.

Oh dear, we’re doomed. If I order anything by telephone from a company they
ask for my address. When I give it I am invariably informed that my address
does not appear ‘on the register’. I then explain that as my house was built
in 1744 and as far as I know has not been wandering around the countryside
willy-nilly perhaps, just perhaps the chuckleheads who compile the register
might, conceivably might have made a teensy-weensy error. Or two. When I say
I’m going to cancel the order I am suddenly assured that they will after all
accept it after all (seeing that my credit card is up to snuff). I can
sympathise with stateless persons now.

Gloria Smudd
March 7, 2011 at 20:48

to suite the language

Mind you, I’m clearly not a very good typist, so just ignore me.

woodsy42 March 7,
2011 at 20:18

Our form arrived today too. I can’t decide whether to leave them blank or
write not applicable.
Maybe Q17 is a language question used in some regions
and not others, there are differences between the forms for England Wales and
Scotland.

Gloria Smudd
March 7, 2011 at 20:47

Could be, woodsy. Still, I’ve done layout for product-brochures in
umpteen languages (including Finnish which is worth a look, if only for the
lack of what we think of as vowels – it taxes one’s touch-typing skills, I
can tell you!) in the past and I’ve never not been able to adjust the layout
to suite the language and I’ve never had to include anything as nonsensical
as the legend for Question 17.

Maybe everything is new, improved and partially devolved these days.
Therefore One-Size really does have to (partially) fit all.

Dave H March 7, 2011 at 18:32

I understand the concern of some councils, such as Peterborough. They got
grants based on the 2001 numbers and then had a large number of immigrants
from Eastern Europe turn up in later years. Central government wouldn’t give
them any more money despite this., which goes along with your argument about
the census quickly becoming out of date.

The LibDem local income tax to replace council tax seems to have gone
quiet. If it ever managed to see the light of day, I wonder if it would be
wrecked by some councils jacking up the cost per head to ridiculous amounts,
as they did with the poll tax? After all it’s the same thing, except adjusted
as it should have been based on ability to pay.

Gloria Smudd
March 7, 2011 at 18:29

Our Census form arrived this morning. I note with puzzlement that
throughout the form question 17 is “… intentionally left blank (arrow pointing
right) Go to 18″. Stunning stuff.

Should I just send the thing back with a note saying “All answers are
intentionally left blank”?

Joe Public
March 7, 2011 at 19:49

Question 18 was designed specially for Gotty:

What is your main language?
• English
• Other, write in – so he can
enter “Foul”

Gloria Smudd
March 7, 2011 at 20:03

BTW – are you completing your census form under the name of Joe Public?
Shall I do that too? Shouldn’t we all?

Status: Overtaxed, underpaid and over-childrenated?

Just a thought.

Demetrius March 7,
2011 at 15:06

Having done a lot of stuff on all the Census returns from 1841 to 1911,
especially detailed work on that of 1881, I and others who have done the same
can say that they are often riddled with errors in detail, for perfectly human
reasons. Sometimes in some place more substantial groups of error occur. Also
because of the way ennumerators interpreted the directions there can be real
variations between places. The 2011 one, because it is more complicated, asks
more personal questions and will have to be done my many non-Brit’s stands to
be an expensive fiasco.