Hackney census: a question of religion

Bus adverts bear the slogan ‘Not religious? In this year’s census say so!’

Bus adverts bear the slogan ‘Not religious? In this year’s census say so!’

The question ‘What is your religion?’ was introduced for the first time to the 2001 population census; 400,000 people in the UK answered ‘Jedi’. Yet if some respond to this question in a light-hearted way, the census has also troubled some groups in Hackney. Prominent voices in the Jewish and secular communities in particular have raised concerns about the count of residents due to take place on 27 March.

Every ten years, British inhabitants are asked to provide personal information to the government in order to plan and fund public services such as schools, social housing, transport and healthcare. Participation in the census itself is mandatory for all residents, but answering the question on religion is not.

Hackney had a population of 202,000 at the time of the last census, which revealed great religious diversity in the borough, including the largest Charedi Orthodox Jewish community in Europe, estimated to number between 15,000 and 20,000.

But in the 2001 census, only 11,000 Hackney inhabitants described themselves as Jewish, which suggests that the census missed up to half of Hackney’s Jewish population.

The reasons for this are not entirely clear, but part of the explanation could be that Charedi Jewish families tend to be large, and households with seven or more members are obliged to request an additional form or to complete the census online if they are to list all their members.

The Interlink foundation and the Board of Deputies of British Jews have both urged members of the Jewish community to fill in the census and to answer the religion question.

According to Interlink, Hackney has lost £60 million per year in budget over the past ten years because of the borough’s poor compliance rate (the second worse of the country).

Daniel Hulkan of the Interlink Foundation (for Orthodox Jewish Voluntary Action) said he does not have any evidence to suggest that the number of non-returned forms in the Jewish community is higher than in the population as a whole, but said that the number of Jewish people who did not answer the religion question might be.

Mr Hulkan said: “Due to the persecutions experienced by Jews in continental Europe during the Second World War, it is natural that some people would be concerned about the data falling into the hands of people who might wish to use it for inappropriate purposes.

“In some cases, this might have led to people not completing the census at all. However, it is more likely that people for whom this was a concern would have simply chosen not to answer the religion question.

“Reassurance has been provided regarding the security of the data; several prominent rabbis have issued statements endorsing participation in the census; and surgeries are being set up to assist members of the community in completing the census, including the provision of additional forms for large families.”

Councillor Abraham Jacobson of Cazenove ward said: “The community has been actively encouraged to fill in the census by the rabbis and is very much expected to fill in the census this year,” adding that he regretted the fact that the census form allows for only six people in a household.

Other groups are not so keen on the census, and in particular the question on religion, which some secularists regard as a leading question.

The British Humanist Association (BHA) is running a campaign ‘If you’re not religious, for God’s sake say so’, which encourages atheists and agnostics to tick the ‘no religion’ box when filling the census.

BHA Chief Executive Andrew Copson said:”We are asking people to be honest and if they are not religious, to say so. Ticking “No religion” means that their voices will be heard and we will have a more truthful picture of what people really believe today.”

The secularist group says the formulation of the religious question (‘What is your religion?’) is ‘flawed’ and drives many people to a tick a ‘reflex’ answer, stating what religion they were brought up in rather than their current beliefs.

They are campaigning for a reformulation of the question, and disagree with the way government uses the religious data collected by the census. The BHA argues that the tax-payer should not be forced to fund religious facilities and schools when 51 per cent of the UK population claim to be ‘non-religious’ (according to The British Social Attitudes Survey published in 2011).

The Office for National Statistics has argued that the religious question is necessary to enhance local governments’ understanding of their populations’ needs for community services such as faith schools or the protection of communal buildings. The data collected on religion can also help authorities evaluate discrimination risks and it provides a better understanding of the local demographics.

In the 2001 census, 39,000 Hackney residents declared they did not have any religion.

Related: Taking part in census is essential for Hackney’s funding, says Mayor

15 Comments

  1. Russell Higgs on Wednesday 23 March 2011 at 10:45

    … meanwhile … A growing number of people are planning to BOYCOTT THIS YEAR’S CENSUS amid increasing fears about data security and the involvement of arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin.

    … campaigners are angry that the £150m contract to run the census has been awarded to the US arms giant …

    guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/18/lockheed-martin-targeted-census-protesters



  2. zanne on Wednesday 23 March 2011 at 15:27

    it’s not the census that’s at fault here. it’s the people who are filling it in. boycotting isn’t the way to go. if you had legitimate problems filling in the form ten years ago, then you could have taken some time to contact the authorities to try to have it fixed. let’s face it. no census is going to be perfect, but saying that we don’t want to check a box, or that we checked the religion box out of “reflex” is just being irresponsible.



  3. Tony N on Wednesday 23 March 2011 at 20:40

    @Russell, whilst I understand that the security procedures people worry about are a concern the fact that Lockhead won it on an EU Tender suggests that it offered best value for money. Now I am not a fan of LM nor of the government but considering the value of the contract would you have been happy with another company if the increase in costs was 33%? As to them making weapons…. the human race has been making weapons since the first primate lifted a bone and used it as a club. It is not the weapon that is the problem but the person that is using it.



  4. Russell Higgs on Thursday 24 March 2011 at 12:15

    …. @ Tony N,

    … I’d say it’s the people making a profit out of weapons that are the problem. The people who are ONLY interested in profit.



  5. Russell Higgs on Thursday 24 March 2011 at 12:18

    … Arms company running the census? Count me out.

    … countmeout.me.uk/



  6. Russell Higgs on Thursday 24 March 2011 at 12:32

    … there is also Lockheed Martin’s links to interogation and torture to consider.

    As part of the ACS and Sytex acquisitions, Lockheed Martin became a contractor for military interrogation. Some of the Sytex interrogators have been linked to Guantanamo Bay, Bagram torture and prisoner abuse and the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse scandals. In 2004, the GSA was reported to have begun investigating Lockheed’s interrogation contracts.



  7. Russell Higgs on Thursday 24 March 2011 at 13:06

    …. PRIORITIES, to make processing your census form VERY EXPENSIVE for Lockheed Martin:

    1. Obliterate completely ALL bar codes, serial numbers and other codes on your form. Don’t miss any!

    2. Obstruct fast and cheap computer scanning of your form so that its information must be keyed in by hand, which is a vastly more expensive process. Do this by e.g. writing text upside down (i.e. turn the form upside down when you write); making corrections to written text and ticked boxes by crossing it all out, writing the information elsewhere on the page and then use arrows to point to the places where the information was meant to be. The computer cannot read upside down text and corrected entries of this type ……

    … peacenewslog.info/2011/03/how-to-fill-in-your-census-form-without-lockheed-martin-profiting-long-version/



  8. Adam on Thursday 24 March 2011 at 22:16

    As an atheist, the question bothers me because it seems to imply that not having a religion is just another religious choice. Or at least it helps to reinforce the notion that being an atheist is some form of “belief.”



  9. Tony Harms on Friday 25 March 2011 at 09:05

    Hi Russell,

    Its very difficult to imagine what could be gained by the measures you are suggesting except increasing the cost of this exercise to all of us. Lockheed Martin designed the systems but actually wont be involved in the data harvesting so wont be able to disclose data under the patriot act as alleged.



  10. Tony N on Saturday 26 March 2011 at 13:16

    Russell really do you think that businesses should not operate for a profit? That would really help the economy. If not for arms companies in the western world how would we help defend those in need? If LM werent making weapons then another company would. Do you really think those in power in certain countries are detered because Russell is peace loving or the the fact we can retaliate? High ideals and morals are great just so long as the country you live in have the weapons to back up those ideals.



  11. Adam on Sunday 27 March 2011 at 16:17

    If not for arms companies in the western world how would we help defend those in need?

    Really? Is this a serious question?



  12. NoopyDoopy on Monday 28 March 2011 at 20:32

    @Russell Higgs

    Yo Russell .. The census is used for planning, boycotting it has more disadvantages than filling it in.



  13. Tony N on Tuesday 29 March 2011 at 07:15

    Adam if you were in another country you might not have the right to ask a question like that, People died to give you your freedom and guess what they used weapons. A moral high horse is easy when you know that your rights are protected. Not as easy in Libya or other places. Should we let those people who only want freedom be slaughtered?



  14. Adam on Tuesday 29 March 2011 at 18:32

    So, it’s okay that western arms manufacturers sell weapons to whomever and that those weapons have slaughtered millions. Because if we didn’t do it, someone else would.



  15. Tony N on Thursday 31 March 2011 at 07:18

    It is not a perfect World Adam. So arms manufacturers are allowed to sell weapons to certain countries that the government at the time see as allies. This is done to try and ensure they remain allies and the policy is set by central government. Sometimes situations change, this is down to policies, elections and revolution in the the countries we have been supplying.

    So they dont just sell to anyone, it is regulated and controlled by central Government (certainly in the UK and America). To be granted an export license the destination has to be on an approved list. The list changes with time but those weapons already sold well not a lot can be done.

    As to the companies that make weapons, they follow policies set for them. Of course the government could ban exports to our allies and the 1000s of jobs that go well thats no problem we will just add them to the unemployed.



Leave a Comment





This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.