The following comments reflect the balance of views we have received:

I thought Paul Kenyon rather naive, frankly, when he expressed surprise (as did, to my amazement, a former senior Fraud Squad officer) that he was able to obtain David Blunkett's birth certificate as part of his scheme to "steal" the home secretary's identity. Does he not know that full access to birth, marriage and death certificates has been an established part of the General Register Office services ever since civil registration was introduced into England and Wales in 1837?

These are records which are in the public domain, and rightly so. That a few people (and it is a relatively tiny number) may abuse them for criminal purposes is no good reason why access to them should be closed, as Mr Kenyon seemed to be suggesting. These records are absolutely vital to genealogists and family historians (of which there are several million in this country), who would be gravely inconvenienced by any restrictions.

Did not Paul Kenyon also notice on the birth certificate copy a large printed notice (which appears on EVERY certificate issued) saying: WARNING: A CERTIFICATE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY"? That banks and other institutions do in fact accept them as evidence is their folly and not the fault of the General Register Office.
R Stockdill (Mr), Genealogist, Watford, Herts

Earlier this year we received a redirection notice for our mail from the Postal Service (something we had not instigated). On telephoning them to complain, no information could be given because of the Data Protection Act. Instead we had to prove who we were. The Swindon police seemed to find it amusing - we, however, did not. If it had not been for our village policeman we would not have been given a crime reference number. As it was, we had to do all the chasing round to get our mail stopped from being redirected.
Sue & Ian Budd