Human Resources Committee on Nov. 18th, 2010

[Dr. Cordell Neudorf]

I can tell you, based on the fact that I do voluntary surveys in Saskatoon and in our region on a regular basis, that it is not the same. Depending on the audience I speak to, even using the authority of the health region and my office as medical officer, with repeated follow-ups with individuals I cannot approach the level of compliance that the mandatory census gives me with data, even when I'm collecting locally and people know me and how I'm using the data.

The reality is, people like that, who you mentioned, are inundated with voluntary surveys on a regular basis, and that's becoming more the norm. The fact that it's voluntary means it's no different and it gets put into the garbage.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I'll just stop you because my time is limited. My question is, do you think that question should result in a fine or an imprisonment to the single mother of three who's working? That's the question. Do you think there should be fines?

[Dr. Cordell Neudorf]

The issue, to me, is that there should be repercussions for not answering a mandatory census?

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Should they be fined or imprisoned in that case?

[Dr. Cordell Neudorf]

I don't know what the nature of those would be. Some kind of fine, probably.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Then do you feel there should be a threat of some kind of a consequence to compel people to do what they might otherwise be prepared to do voluntarily?

[Dr. Cordell Neudorf]

It's been shown throughout our history that when that is applied to the census, it gives us the compliance without having to exercise the threat, and that's the point.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Here's what the same Lawrie McFarlane had to say on the matter of compelling data: “I've heard it said that important interests are at stake here justifying gathering this data by compulsion.” He said, “I disagree.” I guess he would disagree with you. He said, “I worked in the health care field for some years. I was a deputy minister of health in British Columbia, and I set up the first regional health authority in Saskatchewan. We don't compel people to participate in clinical trials. We don't access or link their patient files without consent, and we certainly don't threaten them with jail time if they don't release their medical records.”

He seems to say that there is another way of doing that, and that is not through threatening them through fines or penalties.

[Dr. Cordell Neudorf]

And for this fundamental information, I guess I would have to disagree.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

I guess my point now is somewhat along the same lines. I have to get my head around the fact that some here actually believe that we're not going to get information of the kind that I think we all need for good planning. I certainly want that. I think my colleagues all around the table want good information for planning, and will and can still get that. So I think maybe there's misunderstanding or possibly some other things going on here.

I do know that with the mandatory long-form census, one in five households got the long form--not everybody, as we know, so about 20%. With the survey, as we call it--we just changed the name, same number of letters actually--33% will get the long-form survey, as an attempt, as I understand it, to offset. So some 13% more will get that. We understand from statisticians and so on that this will in fact provide the appropriate offset to get the same levels and competence of information.

The other thing that I've heard, and it's troubled me a little bit because I've heard it said in the last set of witnesses and again now.... I don't know if you'll even have time to respond, because my time's going to run out pretty quick here, but Corey, whom I count as a friend--we worked on the health board in Saskatoon together, and instead of the more formal “Dr. Cordell”, I refer to him as Corey--I appreciate the good work you've done, especially the surveys on the west side of the city, digging down and getting to some of the stuff there. It's so much appreciated, the good work you do.

It has been said, and, Corey, you may have acknowledged this as well...it's our more vulnerable aboriginal and those populations where there's less participation in a voluntary.... I think Rob was the gentleman's name in the last group that made that point as well. So let me get my head around this one. If there's less participation by vulnerable groups in a voluntary census, do we then want to suggest bringing a threat against them in terms of a mandatory possible fine and so on? I can't quite get my head around that one. These are vulnerable groups already, and now we're going to threaten them with fines and so on.

Getting back to the question of whether we even have the time to answer it...an aboriginal person on the west side of Saskatoon with a poverty-level income I do not believe should be threatened with a fine for not providing that. I think there are ways to do it--advertise it, publicize it widely, stress the need for it--but I don't think fines against a poverty-level aboriginal on the west side of Saskatoon is the way to go.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Vellacott, your question time is over, but I'm wondering who you would direct that question to, and then I will give that person--

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

I think Corey would be good to respond.

[Dr. Cordell Neudorf]

Very, very briefly, I can tell you by doing those voluntary surveys on the west side, with repeated follow-up, explanations, parent meeting groups, that I get a 50% response rate compared to 80% to 90% in other neighbourhoods, without having to do that, simply because it's voluntary.

The mere fact that the census is mandatory means people respond at a much higher rate right now, and have in the past, in those areas. It's not the fact that you're fining them or putting them in jail. The mandatory nature raises it to a different level. People understand it is their duty to fill this out, in a way that they wouldn't by having it voluntary and saying it is one's duty.

That has been our experience.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you very much.

I want to again thank all the witnesses for being here, and, as Mr. Savage said, the ones who are experienced did a great job and those who were new did a very good job too. So thank you very much, all of you, for being here.

We do have a very small amount of committee business to take care of. We have the budget that we need to approve. You've been given a notice of motion, so I wonder if someone would please move that motion to adopt the budget.

It is moved by Mr. Martin.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.