On 2015-02-17 07:16:29 +0000, Guy Etchells via said: > On 07/02/2015 00:08, Iain Archer via wrote: >> I've just seen this, which I presume will be welcome news, on the SoG >> website: >> >> "The Society of Genealogists is delighted to announce that the >> Government has accepted an amendment to the Deregulation Bill currently >> going before the House of Lords that allows for the publication of >> information from Birth, Marriage and Death Certificates in England and >> Wales to be issued otherwise than in the form of a certified copy ..." >> <http://www.sog.org.uk/news/article/gro-information-on-births-marriages-a >> nd-death-doesnt-have-to-on-expensive-c/> > The announcement is not quite correct, it is the House of Lords that > accepted the amendment it still has to go back to the House of Commons. > The Dergulation Bill which contains the agreed amendment is scheduled > for a 3rd reading in the House of Lords on 04 March 2015, it then has > to go back to the Commons for Consideration of Amendments and then on > for Royal Assent. > The final stages should be more or less rubber stamping but not always. > > This amendment (when passed) does not in itself mean that certificates > will be cheaper but it does open the way to this happening. > > We still need to campaign to get not only the Registrar General, Paul > Pugh, but the Home Office Minister responsible James Brokenshaw, MP to > agree to allowing Private Intiative to make the Historic BMDs available > online. > > If that happens costs will drop drastically. > > The bulk of the Births and Deaths have already been digitised but > Marriages have yet to be started. > This means that online historic Births and Deaths could be online > within a 12 or 18 months with Marriages following a year or two after. > > It is only when the records are available online that costs will drop. > Cheers > Guy Okay, so what should I do to campaign? Given that my current, but not for long, MP spends most of his time playing Candy Crush there's not much point trying to bombard him with email. I'll campaign, with gusto, if someone can tell me the most effective route to do that. This is (despite the Govt's opinion) OUR heritage and data, I do think its important to remind them of that and also remind them its already bloody well been paid for, big time! so they should be letting us access it at a cost that reflects the cost of making it available - not a price that reflects them making a profit to prop up shortfalls in other services. -- Tickettyboo

On 17 Feb at 21:40, Tickettyboo <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2015-02-17 07:16:29 +0000, Guy Etchells via said: > > > On 07/02/2015 00:08, Iain Archer via wrote: > > > I've just seen this, which I presume will be welcome news, on the > > > SoG website: > >> > > > "The Society of Genealogists is delighted to announce that the > > > Government has accepted an amendment to the Deregulation Bill > > > currently going before the House of Lords that allows for the > > > publication of information from Birth, Marriage and Death > > > Certificates in England and Wales to be issued otherwise than in > > > the form of a certified copy ..." > > > <http://www.sog.org.uk/news/article/gro-information-on-births-marriages-a > > > nd-death-doesnt-have-to-on-expensive-c/> > > The announcement is not quite correct, it is the House of Lords that > > accepted the amendment it still has to go back to the House of > > Commons. The Dergulation Bill which contains the agreed amendment is > > scheduled for a 3rd reading in the House of Lords on 04 March 2015, > > it then has to go back to the Commons for Consideration of > > Amendments and then on for Royal Assent. The final stages should be > > more or less rubber stamping but not always. > > > > This amendment (when passed) does not in itself mean that > > certificates will be cheaper but it does open the way to this > > happening. > > > > We still need to campaign to get not only the Registrar General, > > Paul Pugh, but the Home Office Minister responsible James > > Brokenshaw, MP to agree to allowing Private Intiative to make the > > Historic BMDs available online. > > > > If that happens costs will drop drastically. > > > > The bulk of the Births and Deaths have already been digitised but > > Marriages have yet to be started. This means that online historic > > Births and Deaths could be online within a 12 or 18 months with > > Marriages following a year or two after. > > > > It is only when the records are available online that costs will > > drop. Cheers Guy > > Okay, so what should I do to campaign? Given that my current, but not > for long, MP spends most of his time playing Candy Crush there's not > much point trying to bombard him with email. > > I'll campaign, with gusto, if someone can tell me the most effective > route to do that. The answer must be to find who is likely to back pedal the final stages of the Bill. Find those MPs or Lords and then find out what they are really objecting to and deal with that, somehow. > This is (despite the Govt's opinion) OUR heritage > and data, I do think its important to remind them of that and also > remind them its already bloody well been paid for, big time! so they > should be letting us access it at a cost that reflects the cost of > making it available - not a price that reflects them making a profit > to prop up shortfalls in other services. I do not think you are right about the costs. My understanding is that the government is entitled to be and even should be paid for the costs of providing the current service. The trouble is that a manual service is very expensive, Guy is absolutely right. You will not help your case by making statements that aren't correct and only upset those with misgivings about your case. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe [email protected] for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/