1939 National Register??

[andrewalston]

The "broadcast" specifically mentions that evacuees need to have their dates of birth recorded too. I think that ought to have been part of the paperwork which went with the children at evacuation.

[Blue70]

Does this also involve children?

And if so would evacuees be listed at there 'new' address (some were evacuated in very early Sept 1939)

I have my uncle's details he was evacuated to Wales. It only has his address and household for 29 Sep 1939 when he was living as an evacuee in Wales. His date of birth is included.


Blue

[Guy Etchells]

According to the FindMyPast blog, the original 1939 register was updated until 1996, so as to mention changes of name and deaths.
So if your mother had already married by 1939, she wouldn't have her maiden name mentioned. If she married in 1940, she will be listed under her maiden name, and some sort of marker (extra columns?) added to give her married name. If she died before 1996, that date too should be marked up in the register.
If an entry mentions a person's death, of course, that person's details ought not to be redacted, even if they were born well after 1915.

The National Registration Act 1939 was repealed on 22 May 1952 so it would have been illegal to update it after that date.
It is probable that FindMyPast meant 1946 rather than 1996.

In a debate in the House of Commons on 21 May 1953 the following exchange took place.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01gcn/

“HC Deb 21 May 1953 vol 515 cc2233-4 2233
§ 11. Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
asked the Minister of Health for what purposes national registration numbers are still required; and when the use of these numbers will be abandoned.
§ Mr. Iain Macleod
National registration has been wholly abandoned. Some numbering system, however, is necessary for purposes of the National Health Service and, for reasons of economy, this is based upon the old numbers.
§ Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
How is it possible for the Minister to say that national registration has been completely abandoned when people are required to keep, remember and make use of their national registration numbers? Is he not, in effect, still attempting to hoax the public into believing that national registration has been abandoned, whereas unless the individual remembers his national registration number he can find himself in all kinds of difficulties?
2234
§ Mr. Macleod
Oh, no. Any large scheme—for example, the National Health Insurance scheme before the Health Service was introduced—is bound to be based upon a system of numbers. We have used the same system of numbers, but national registration, happily, does not exist any more, and as a consequence a lot of staff and a great deal of money have been saved.
§ Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
We have to have a number?
§ Mr. Macleod
Of course. ”

Cheers
Guy

[andrewalston]

The blog post mentions expecting to see the name her auntie took when she married in 1960.
It may have been illegal to update the register, but we all know that there is something of inertia when it comes to bureaucracy, and as your snippet says, the documents were also used for other purposes after the war.

[Mean_genie]

National Registration ended in 1952, but the 1939 Register volumes (and the other registers created shortly afterwards) were retained as the basis for the NHS Register. They continued to be updated until 1996 when the manual system was discontinued and the NHS Register was computerised.

[Guy Etchells]

National Registration ended in 1952, but the 1939 Register volumes (and the other registers created shortly afterwards) were retained as the basis for the NHS Register. They continued to be updated until 1996 when the manual system was discontinued and the NHS Register was computerised.

No the National Register was not retained as the basis of the NHS Register; The National Register numbering system was used as the basis of the NHS Register but the National Register was not updated after 1951.

The National Register which is what Findmypast is releasing is not the same as the NHS Register (it could not be released if it was) and should not be confused with the NHS Register.

Cheers
Guy

[Mean_genie]

In 1999 the Office for National Statistics celebrated 60 Years of the Central Register, and produced an anniversary publication. The introduction reads 'Record Holders for Sixty Years: Introduction - Since 1948 the Central Register maintained at Smedley Hydro, Southport, has been linked inextricably with the National Health Service and the need to provide every one of its members with a unique identifier. It is perhaps less well remembered that the Central Register had been in operation for almost nine years prior to the setting up of the NHS and that the 29th September represents its 60th birthday'. The term 'Central Register' is the collective term for what we are now calling the 1939 Register, and the other central registers created for National Registration, held in Southport. From 1948 to 1952 the same books were used for both National Registration and NHS purposes, and from 1952 until the 1990s for NHS only. Until the NHS index was finally computerised the books were updated manually, as Findmypast have correctly statedd, changes of name were recorded, as were deaths - and many other pieces of information that the NHS noted, but which cannot be released. Findmypast have digitised the 1939 enumeration pages which can be released (with redactions until 100 years after the recorded date of birth of the youngest person in it). It would have made no sense to create a duplicate register containing more than 40 million entries, and then maintain two registers in parallel, which is why it didn't happen.

[Chris Dallimore]

Ive noticed various changes to FindMyPast and it seems to be rather slow. Maybe we will get some news today? I'm not sure how helpful it will be for my research, but I'm hoping for a few unanswered questions to be answered!

[Guy Etchells]

So you are claiming that Mr. Macleod (the Minister of Health) intentionally lied to Parliament on 21 May 1953 when he claimed -

“National registration has been wholly abandoned. Some numbering system, however, is necessary for purposes of the National Health Service and, for reasons of economy, this is based upon the old numbers”

He then further expanded his answer with the following answer in reply to another question

“Oh, no. Any large scheme—for example, the National Health Insurance scheme before the Health Service was introduced—is bound to be based upon a system of numbers. We have used the same system of numbers, but national registration, happily, does not exist any more, and as a consequence a lot of staff and a great deal of money have been saved.”

These were not slips of the tongue but direct unequivocal answers to direct questions
The complete exchange was as follows -

“§  Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
asked the Minister of Health for what purposes national registration numbers are still required; and when the use of these numbers will be abandoned.

§ Mr. Iain Macleod
National registration has been wholly abandoned. Some numbering system, however, is necessary for purposes of the National Health Service and, for reasons of economy, this is based upon the old numbers.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
How is it possible for the Minister to say that national registration has been completely abandoned when people are required to keep, remember and make use of their national registration numbers? Is he not, in effect, still attempting to hoax the public into believing that national registration has been abandoned, whereas unless the individual remembers his national registration number he can find himself in all kinds of difficulties?

§ Mr. Macleod
Oh, no. Any large scheme—for example, the National Health Insurance scheme before the Health Service was introduced—is bound to be based upon a system of numbers. We have used the same system of numbers, but national registration, happily, does not exist any more, and as a consequence a lot of staff and a great deal of money have been saved.

§ Lieut.-Colonel Lipton
We have to have a number?

§ Mr. Macleod
Of course. ”

Further as I stated earlier the National Registration Act 1939 was repealed on 22 May 1952 so it would have been illegal to update the National Register after that date.
A fact that the Information Commissioner took into consideration when he was considering my submissions

If the NHS were aware that the National Register was still being used today they could have used that fact to block my attempt to have it released.

The 1939 National Registration and the NHS Central Register are two distinct and separate datasets
Cheers
Guy