On 2015-02-18 01:53:10 +0000, Tim Powys-Lybbe said: > 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. If the costs are so great they should be looking at finding ways to reduce them, it can be done in a cost effective way, just look North of the Border. For example, a record from the 1939 National ID Register from Scotland costs £15, its a whopping £42 for England & Wales. A copy WW1 Soldier's will in Scotland is less than £2.50, for England & Wales its £10. -- Tickettyboo