2967.0 - Information Paper: Parliamentary Inquiry into the Treatment of Census Forms: Submission from the Australian Bureau of Statistics , 1997
ARCHIVED ISSUE Released at 11:30 AM (CANBERRA TIME) 18/07/1997 First Issue
Page tools:
 Print Page
 Print All
| ||||
OVERSEAS PRACTICES
Overseas practices are mixed Census forms are destroyed not only by Australia, but also within countries such as New Zealand, Japan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Italy and the Federal Republic of Germany. New Zealand has recently reversed its previous policy of form retention and will destroy census forms from their 1996 census. Canada recently decided not to retain its 1996 Census forms due to the high costs of microfilming. A number of Western countries, such as the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Sweden retain at least some of their census forms. These countries generally restrict public access for extended periods of 70 to 100 years, for example, 100 years in England and Scotland. United Kingdom Censuses in the United Kingdom are held every ten years. Original census forms in the United Kingdom are held indefinitely, although there is no specific provision in the Census Act to do so. In the 1991 UK Census the public was advised by the Registrar General that "the forms will be kept securely within my Office and treated as confidential for 100 years". This form of words covers the selection, within the Office for National Statistics, of a sample of identified census records, based on birth dates, that is matched over time with various administrative files such as birth, death and medical records. A resulting file of de-identified individual records is then released for epidemiological research. Under the terms of the Lord Chancellor's Instrument No.12, the records for England and Wales are closed to public inspection for 100 years. Similar arrangements apply in Scotland. Under current law, access is not provided to census forms in Northern Ireland (no Northern Ireland census records are as yet more than 100 years old). In England and Wales, returns for censuses prior to 1901 are held by the Public Record Office. The returns for the 1901 and 1911 are also held by the Public Record Office, on behalf of the Registrar General. Though these are closed to the public, limited access in certain circumstances is granted. The returns for subsequent censuses (except the 1931 and 1941 censuses) are held by the Office for National Statistics, and no access whatsoever is granted. In Scotland similar limited access to the returns is granted for the censuses for 1901-1931. All subsequent records are kept strictly closed. In Northern Ireland, the census forms are not retained by the Registrar General but are handed over to their Public Record Office after processing has been completed. They are nevertheless kept strictly closed. Privacy concerns in the United Kingdom adversely affected both the 1971 and 1991 censuses. During Great Britain's 1971 census, there were public demonstrations against the census:
United States Census are conducted every ten years in the United States. The United States retains micro-filmed copies of its census forms and keep them confidential for 72 years, with the exception of an "age-search" function provided to help individuals verify their age. Micro-filmed copies of the census forms are made as they are received in the various field offices of the Bureau of the Census and are not sorted or indexed - this will make the tracking down of particular forms very difficult. The micro-filmed copies are then transferred to Archives about 2 years after census day. The original census forms are destroyed. Before 72 years Before the 72 year release period, census information is only available for the age-search function (a way for older people to verify their age) and only to the individuals who provided it and their heirs or authorised agents. For a small fee, the Age Search Service will search old census records and issue a certificate which has legal standing and substitutes for a birth certificate which either never existed, has been lost or has been destroyed. People need them to qualify for retirement, for Social Security, for Medicare, to get a passport, and many other uses. Part of the original reason for the retention of census forms, decided many years ago, was for the age search function. Since the 1940's, however, birth registration completeness has been very good. While there are still a number of people born before the war who do not have birth certificates, this number is steadily declining and it is expected that the requirement for the use of census records for this purposes will decrease sharply over the next 20 to 30 years. Access to census records within the 72 year period is not provided to people attempting to trace families for medical or family history reasons, to law enforcement agencies seeking evidence, to attorneys looking for unknown heirs or to people seeking information about their natural parents. After 72 years Title 44, United States Code, enables the Archives to release identified census information for genealogical purposes, in accordance with an inter-agency agreement providing protection of the information from disclosure for 72 years after the census. In the 1990 United States Census the public was advised that "for 72 years - or until the year 2062 - only Census Bureau employees can see your form." Effect of retention on data quality There are concerns in the United States about the effects of form retention on data quality. Research undertaken by the Bureau of the Census to investigate the effect of privacy and confidentiality concerns has shown some significant differences in response behaviour. The United States has had other problems with its census. The Bureau of the Census admits that the 1990 Census was the least accurate in its history. Up to 18.7 million people were not counted in the census although, due to double counting etc, the net underenumeration was 4.7 million. There was also a large and persistent differential in undercounts between the black and non-black populations. It is not possible to say how much of these problems was caused by growing community concerns about privacy and the United States' policy of census form retention. Some mis-uses of census information Several attempts to breach guarantees of confidentiality were made during World Wars 1 and 2 in the United States, in order to gain access to personal details on age and race. The following quote from Vincent P. Barabba, ex-Director, Bureau of the Census (The Right of Privacy and the Need to Know, 1974), elaborates:
We do have some information on one case which demonstrates the type of situation in which it was considered proper in the past to release data about individuals. This occurred in 1918, during World War One. Congress has passed a War Powers Act, and presumably this was the basis for such an extreme use of census data. Information about individuals was given to the Department of Justice for use as evidence in prosecuting young men who claimed they were too young to register for the draft. While we do not know the exact circumstances surrounding the release, we do know that personal information for at least several hundred young men was released to courts, draft boards, and the Justice Department. The Bureau stopped such releases during the 1920's, a position which was made official in 1930 by an opinion from the Attorney General. His opinion said that even the name and address of an individual is confidential. Now we jump to 1941. It's hard to imagine now, but with World War Two underway, there was near hysteria about the Japanese-Americans living on the West Coast - emotion which led to one of the most embarrassing moments in US. history, the internment of large numbers of these loyal Americans. At the height of this feeling, the Secretary of War requested that the Census Bureau supply the names, addresses, and ages of all persons of Japanese extraction living on the West Coast. This time - in spite of the national emergency - the Bureau held to its position on confidentiality of individual records and refused. The Bureau did supply summary data at the tract level, which is now part of the regular publication program. In 1947, during the rising concern about possible communist infiltration and sabotage, the attorney general requested information about certain individuals in census records on behalf of the FBI. Again, the request was denied." While it is hard to imagine that similar scenarios could ever occur again, it serves to demonstrate the demands that could potentially be made of name-identified census records if they are kept. It is always possible for governments to change the law in order to obtain access to identified census information for a variety of purposes. Canada Canada has recently reversed its previous policy of census form retention, deciding to destroy the 1996 Census forms. In 1995, the Canadian National Archives authorised the destruction of all 1996 Census paper returns provided that the Dissemination Database (of unidentified, anonymous records) to be created from the 1996 returns is maintained according to archival specifications for long-term retention. The Canadian policy had been in place for over 75 years. The decision was based on the high costs of microfilming the forms. The 1996 Census forms will be destroyed without being micro-filmed. ABS understands that the position with future Censuses has not yet been determined. New Zealand New Zealand has recently reversed its previous policy of census form retention, deciding to destroy the 1996 Census forms. The New Zealand policy of retention was first introduced in 1966 and today census records from the censuses of 1966, 1976 and 1986 are retained. The decision to change to a policy of destruction of 1996 Census forms was taken, after vigorous public debate, to support the assurance of confidentiality given in the census. The passage in 1993 of the Privacy Act had heightened public awareness of the issues and was surrounded by a greatly increased awareness on the public's part of the information held about individuals by government agencies and the possibility of that information being exchanged among such agencies. The Government Statistician believed that the change in public perception could compromise the management of an effective census in 1996. He noted that "Public support is essential for conducting a successful census, and a crucial way of retaining this support is to give an unqualified guarantee that individual records will remain confidential to Statistics New Zealand." In announcing the decision, the Government Statistician said (Media release 18 December 1995):
Statistics New Zealand would not risk adverse reaction to the 1996 Census by raising on the census form the issue of retention." France The policy regarding census archives in France is made in consultation with the National Archives of France. The National Committee on Informatics and Privacy has also been concerned about census privacy since its creation in 1978. The position adopted in France is:
b. only a sample of forms to be archived; c. sample drawn on a geographic basis (whole cities) for practical reasons and to provide future researchers with contextual information; and d. same sample for the four last censuses. The Archives in France has questioned whether there is justification for the financial cost of retaining the records given the considerable amount of paper to be kept (the original paper forms are retained). While a final decision for future censuses has not been reached, Archives have concluded that to scan all the forms would be much too expensive. The Netherlands In 1971 a public campaign led to the destruction of that year's census forms in the Netherlands. A number of action groups arose in Amsterdam and in university towns to challenge the census. Noting that the census answer booklet was printed on punch cards and that the census was linked with municipal registers, protesters said that the individual was endangered, that the computerisation of the census marked the arrival of Big Brother. Extensively covered by the mass media, the protest spread and "resulted in a high level of non co-operation" (p2, Census Working Paper 91/3, Ian Castles, 1991). Among the responses of the Dutch government to this anti-census campaign were a decision to destroy the identifiable records from the 1971 census and an indefinite postponement of the census which had been planned for 1981. On present indications, there will be no more traditional censuses in the Netherlands. Instead, population register data is used to prepare population counts and some limited population characteristics for districts and municipalities. West Germany In (then) West Germany, a substantial campaign of opposition to the 1983 Census led to the cancellation of that census because of public concerns about protection of privacy. West Germany subsequently passed a law making the destruction of census forms mandatory. The issue arose in late 1982, when at a large peace rally, the organisers distributed flyers advising that if the government would not tell people where US missiles would be based, then the people should not tell the government about themselves in the census. In the next months, similar rallies elsewhere included the same statement and flyers. The missiles, not the census were the focus at that time. In 1983, however, the census issue heightened, with the Green Party using the census as a vehicle for attacking "government agencies' increasing appetite for computer data files on individuals". The Party charged that various agencies and levels of government planned to use census data to identify and expel illegal aliens, to identify and enlist illegal draft dodgers, to locate tax evaders and to ferret out persons illegally benefiting from various government programs (p4, Census Working Paper 91/3, Ian Castles, 1991).
Influential media got behind this issue, and opposition spread. Finally, Germany's Constitutional Court ordered the government not to hold the census. After the most intense parliamentary debate, the outcome was a new law - the Population Law 1987 - which called for a census on 25 May 1987 and explicitly provided for the destruction of census forms (p6, Census Working Paper 91/3, Ian Castles, 1991) :
|
||||