Industry Committee on Aug. 27th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Cappe.

Mr. Ornstein.

[Michael Ornstein]

Let me first say something about the burden. One-fifth of the population gets the mandatory census every five years, so I would get one every 25 years.

Actually, only one is filled out per household, typically, and one person in the household would do it. So perhaps every 25 years I'd fill out, on average, half a census. So over 50 years, I would fill out a full census, which would take 20 or 30 minutes. It seems to me that the whole issue of the amount of burden is colossally inflated.

Let me make a second point. I'm struck by the notion that the burden isn't balanced by the community benefit. The nature of the way in which this debate is being phrased is that there are only costs. This is, of course, why the government didn't consult with the users before making this decision. This thing is being put forward as having costs but really no benefits.

About one-third of Canadians will get the voluntary proposed form, versus 20%. So there will be about a 30%, 40%, or 50% increase in the burden on the population with this new form.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Ornstein.

Mr. McKinnon.

[Ian McKinnon]

I look at it in a similar way to Michael. To me, it's what is the cost or burden to the individual and what is the benefit that the individual or his or her family derives. The burden may be a bit less, especially if you're bitterly opposed to answering some questions. On the other hand, the benefits drop dramatically under this circumstance. We go from having good, reliable information from which governments, individuals, and voluntary organizations can make good decisions, to that being thrown seriously in doubt.

I'd say the burden is similar or will maybe drop a bit, but the benefits drop dramatically. The balance swings very disproportionately.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much, Mr. McKinnon and Mr. Masse.

Monsieur Bélanger.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My first question is for Mr. McKinnon.

Sir, in the previous session we had, there was considerable discussion on the confidentiality of the information gathered. Today the concern about confidentiality was brought up. What we heard last time was that there has not been a single incident in the history of Statistics Canada where any information gathered by a census has been revealed. Can you confirm that?

[Ian McKinnon]

Although I won't speak specifically on behalf of Statistics Canada, I know of no instance in the last 40 or 50 years in which individual census returns have been revealed either to another agency of government or to a business, a researcher, or the public.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you.

My next question is for Mr. Chartier.

Mr. Chartier, in law there's a concept of honour of the crown, which places a particular obligation on the government to consult with the aboriginal communities in terms of any decisions that might affect them. The last time we met, we had a representative from the Inuit community and I asked her if indeed there had been any consultation from the crown, from the government, vis-à-vis her community. The answer was “No, there has not”.

Did the government consult the Métis National Council or any of the Métis community before it made the decision to scrap the mandatory long-form census?

[Clément Chartier]

The short answer is “no”.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you, sir.

I have some questions for Mr. Cappe.

In your letter to the Prime Minister—well, it's not your letter; it's a letter signed by 30 people, or so—you say this course was tested and tried in the United States:Tests of a move from mandatory to voluntary in the U.S. yielded unsatisfactory results and the process was dropped.

Could you elaborate a bit, please?

[Mel Cappe]

I don't have the particular details around that. Perhaps Mr. McKinnon does. I know that in the U.S. the attempt proved to be unreliable, and we go to the question again of the benefit.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. McKinnon, can you add to that?

Also, I have one more question for Mr. Cappe.

[Ian McKinnon]

I would add several things to that, but first to compliment the United States on the mechanism. They were looking at the issue of moving away from a mandatory census, or portion of the census, so they tested it. They took several years and got very serious about testing.

Their conclusions were as follows.

They would lose approximately 30%. There were certain groups—ethnic and racial minorities, poor people, and the wealthiest people—who would be heavily under-represented and there would be no way to benchmark the results.

The second finding was that the costs would increase dramatically, and to push response rates beyond the 70% range, which is still unacceptably low, became impossibly expensive.

The third and very interesting finding was counterintuitive. One of the things they tested was a question raised earlier by Mr. Lake, which is whether you get better quality answers item by item by having it voluntary, because people could opt out of questions. They looked very carefully at analyses of item responses and what is called “item non-response”. I think it would have been to my surprise—I don't know what their researchers thought going in—that they could find no difference. It was counterintuitive, but that's why we do research, to find out whether the things that seem intuitively appealing or clear in fact are proven out.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

And this was done during the Bush administration.

[Ian McKinnon]

Yes.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you.

My final question is for Mr. Cappe.

You mentioned the Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics, which I have also read and have right in front of me. I don't know if we could say Canada was a signatory, but it is my understanding that it has endorsed these principles. Is that correct?

[Mel Cappe]

Yes, that's my understanding.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

If you were to look at principles 2 and 3, would you conclude that the decision to abandon the long-form census respects either of those principles?

[Mel Cappe]

My comment in my opening remarks was to suggest that the committee should look actually at principles 2, 3, and 4, because those principles deal with trust in official statistics, with the correct interpretation of the data, and with the statistical agencies—and this is an important point—entitled to comment on erroneous interpretation and misuse of statistics.

In the circumstances that arose this summer, Mr. Sheikh, the Chief Statistician, was unable to comment on erroneous interpretation and misuse of statistics until in his resignation statement he made the point. I think we need to find a vehicle to allow the professional in charge of the statistical agency to comment on erroneous interpretation and misuse of statistics, as well as correct the interpretation of the data that you've identified in principle 3, and retain the trust in official statistics, in principle 2.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Hoback.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, everybody, for coming in on a Friday.

I'm going to start with Mr. Henderson and probably go over to Mr. Chartier, and if I have time, I'm going to get back to you, Joseph.

Mr. Henderson, I think a lot of the people around this table don't understand what farmers have to go through with the agricultural census and the long form at the same time.

Of course, that form comes out in May. What are you doing in May?

[James P. Henderson]

That's our calving season and seeding operations.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

So you're busy every day, night and day. You're calving at night and seeding during the day. Basically, you are doing all of that for the month of May. Is that correct?

[James P. Henderson]

Yes.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Of course, if you don't fill it out, when do they call you back to get you to do so? It's in September. What are you doing in September?