Evidence of meeting #32 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was data.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:30 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Council on Social Development
When I mentioned it, some people did and some people didn't. I said that in my response.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
So my next question then is, if we send out the same survey—and it is the same, just not called the “census”—and it goes in your mailbox and we do a good job of promoting that we need you to fill this out as part of your civic duty as a Canadian, or a new Canadian, that we need your feedback on this, do you think we can still have the same quality or accuracy?
3:30 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Council on Social Development
Evidence suggests that people will not fill it out.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Right, and we've heard a variety of numbers today as to what the evidence suggests. We just heard 30%, but the most we heard was somewhere between 55% and 75%, or somebody said 80%. But let's take 70% as an example.
So right now we get a 95% return rate. I personally believe Canadians think it's the right thing to do. They don't do it out of fear of the $500 fine or the jail term that we know nobody has ever had, but because it's the right thing to do. We are now going to send out 4.5 million copies, and 70% of that is almost a million more returns.
I'm confident and have faith in Canadians of all economic and ethnic backgrounds that they will understand that this is something that's important and it's going to Statistics Canada, they will voluntarily fill it out, and we will get an additional 800,000 back—to be more accurate. I don't understand the argument that this isn't going to represent neighbourhoods. We're going to get more feedback if we do the proper job in terms of getting people to do it. I don't see where the accuracy is going to be hurt.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
3:30 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Council on Social Development
I'm not a statistician. I'm taking advice from statisticians. The advisory council to StatsCan and so many experts across the country have indicated that they do not believe that will render the same results as the mandatory long-form census, so I'm going to trust the expertise on this one.
3:30 p.m.
Conservative
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Thank you.
Just following up on that, the statisticians have told us that it's not how many forms are returned, it's the bias in who fills them out. So even if you get back large numbers, you won't get representative numbers from each group in society, and that's the issue.
But I'd like to ask a question to Mr. McFarlane.
I guess you didn't hear the testimony earlier from the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.
3:35 p.m.
Editorial Writer, Victoria Times Colonist, As an Individual
No, I did not.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Okay, I can summarize it briefly, because I was struck by the big difference between what Ms. Vonn said and what you said.
Her number one concern, obviously, is civil liberties and privacy issues, and she said the long-form census wasn't even on her list of items that she was concerned about. She was concerned about many things, but not that.
She went on to say that if you didn't do the long-form census, some of the alternative methods of doing it instead would cause greater privacy concerns than the long-form census. The examples she gave were if governments used various kinds of databases that they have about individuals to obtain that information, or if they use the methods used in Scandinavia, which are much more intrusive than what we have.
I know you're not responsible for her position, but how would you square your position with the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, which says it's not a significant privacy issue?
3:35 p.m.
Editorial Writer, Victoria Times Colonist, As an Individual
I certainly don't feel the need to defend anything I would say in the context of what the B.C. Civil Liberties Association might say. I think one judges an argument on its own strengths.
The case we're hearing, as I think Mr. Noreau said, is that something like a 30% response rate would not be enough. There are quite a number of studies—I have a couple in front me—that indicate that response rates in the 20% range are perfectly adequate. The issue here is not the size of the survey, it is the way in which it is carried out.
You made a point that I think is accurate, that one has to be careful in ascertaining that certain minority groups have responded. In other words, one of the difficulties with shrinking down the response level is if you see a particular drop-off in certain groups that have a history of not responding to the same level—the poor, certain ethnic groups, aboriginal groups for sure, and one could go on.
The need, therefore, is to come up with a survey instrument that is particularly responsive to those minority groups. I don't know any research that shows that the best way to get to minorities is to threaten them.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Let me just say that today we had two expert witnesses, Professor Veall and Ian McKinnon, who is the chair of the National Statistics Council, both of whom said definitely, based on their experience, the results from the long-form census are more accurate than any survey. Previous witnesses, I believe, including Don Drummond and others, had said the same thing. So I think the view of the experts on that particular issue is clear—
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
—and like Peggy Taillon, I guess, I will believe the witnesses, the experts.
3:35 p.m.
Editorial Writer, Victoria Times Colonist, As an Individual
The experts who you've heard took the view that you gave. There are other experts who are equally credible, who've published peer-reviewed work, who take a different view.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Mr. McCallum; and thank you, Mr. McFarlane.
We'll now go to Mr. Lake.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll direct my questions to Mr. McFarlane as well, if I could.
I want to continue on that conversation, because it's kind of an interesting one.
It seems to me that at an individual level, when a person receives a long-form census—to go back to 2006—and voluntarily fills it out, it would be pretty accurate. I think most reasonable people would assume that they're going to get a pretty accurate response from somebody who receives it in the mail and instantly fills it out and sends it away as part of his or her public duty.
Does that seem to make sense to you, Mr. McFarlane?
3:35 p.m.
Editorial Writer, Victoria Times Colonist, As an Individual
I believe I agree, but carry on.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
So that's at the micro individual level.
I want to stay at that individual level and assume that Statistics Canada has received all the voluntary responses and the next phase is to go out and carry out their threats to the citizens who actually aren't interested in filling out their long-form census. At that point, would a reasonable person agree that you're probably going to get a little bit less accuracy in your responses from the people who are forced to fill it out? Does that make sense to you?
3:40 p.m.
Editorial Writer, Victoria Times Colonist, As an Individual
Intuitively it does. I think it depends, to some extent, what information is being asked for.
I think if you compel someone to give you information that the person knew was easily gotten, such as their address, their name, or how many people in their family, intuitively most of us would figure, “Well, they're going to find out anyway, so I'll give them that”.
But if the question goes to something that I feel should be private and you're trying to compel me to reveal it, I think there's a very high likelihood that I'm going to play games with you.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Again, in this case, I'm thinking specifically about the long-form census. So I am thinking about the questions pertaining to religion, how much housework you do, and how much time you spend with your kids, those kinds of questions.
I guess the point I'm getting at is that there are all sorts of sayings about statistics, and I won't repeat any of them here, but it all depends on the angle you're looking at. At the micro level, the individual level, when a person gives information voluntarily there is no question that we're going to have more accurate information from that person. When we go to the next level, that incremental group, the 15% to 20%, or maybe it's 25%, of the population that only gives you that information on that long form because they are forced to, I think any reasonable person would look at that and say that information is going to be less accurate on average than the information obtained voluntarily.
Does that make sense?
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Is there anybody at the table who disagrees with that?
Maybe Mr. Noreau disagrees with that.
3:40 p.m.
President, Association francophone pour le savoir
I think that, essentially, we have to distinguish between an opinion poll and a survey with factual questions. The census questions are not opinion questions; they are really very factual questions. With very factual questions, the problem you raise is much less of an issue. Forcing people to express an opinion and take a stand can be problematic. When people are asked very concrete, factual questions, the risks you mention are much lower. The problem does not really come up in practice. I think we have to draw a clear distinction between these two types of surveys.
The census is not an opinion poll. It is made up of factual questions that are easy to answer. The information people have to provide is not a barrier to answering, and, in terms of what the census requires from them, the price they have to pay is very low. I think we need to count on that. We need to talk about the reliability of the data, even though the process used to gather those data is mandatory for people.