Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good morning, everyone. Honourable members, thank you for inviting us to present today.
I'm Victor Wong, with the Chinese Canadian National Council. Founded in 1980, the CCNC is a national non-profit organization with 27 chapters across Canada. We're a community leader for Chinese Canadians in promoting a more just, respectful, and inclusive society.
Our position is that we support the compromise proposal advanced by the National Statistics Council. That's our first recommendation to this committee, that you also support what the National Statistics Council is recommending, which is to retain the long form in the 2011 census and to rewrite the Statistics Act ahead of the 2016 census.
There are a number of issues I want to cover, but I only have seven minutes.
I just want to say that census data is invaluable to so many groups. As you heard, the issue pertains to anti-poverty programs but also to immigrant settlement services, housing, and to smaller population groups in Canada.
It also has an impact for small businesses. Many small-business owners are newcomer Canadians wanting to establish themselves here, and they benefit from the small-area data. If you don't have this kind of data, it could lead to inefficient business planning, which would lead to reduced tax revenues. This could possibly lead to higher unemployment or underemployment, lost opportunity, increased cases of business failure. This is bad, not just for the business person, but it's bad for the city, the country, and it's bad for society. We would ask the committee to reflect on this impact.
The ethnocultural groups are very concerned with this move to the voluntary national household survey. We believe this will increase the undercoverage because of the non-response bias, and the quality of the data.
No matter what you decide, whatever happens next year we encourage Statistics Canada to conduct a comprehensive outreach program. Whether you have the mandatory long form or the voluntary national household survey, you should do a comprehensive outreach program directed at, and with the involvement of, ethnocultural and other groups so we can increase the participation.
I had sent something to the clerk, but I guess because it was only in English it didn't get to the members. I want to point out a few things with regard to response burden. I'll need you to follow with me as I go through this document; I'm assuming you don't have it.
For the 2006 census, assume there are 15 households. If you have 15 households in the 2006 census, 12 households would get the short form and three households would get the long form. All 15 forms are mandatory.
Now, if you go to the 2011 census, based on the current plan, all 15 of those households would get the short form and then an additional five households would get this national household survey. In fact, 20 forms are handed out under this new process. This is a 33% increase in response burden, but the quality goes down. All 15 short forms are mandatory, and now five of those households will also get the long form. The long form will contain some of the same questions as the short form because the long form is voluntary. Based on Stats Canada's data quality report...they had conducted a test of data quality of the national household survey and found that the response rate was lower, around 16%, compared to 19% for the mandatory approach of the 2006 census.
If you dig a little bit deeper, it has a tremendous impact with respect to the visible minority communities. I'll just read some data. For Toronto, for visible minority communities, it's estimated that this would lead to a bias of minus 2%. So there would be an underestimate of the minority communities in Toronto. And Toronto is a big city.
There's a bigger problem, in that the subgroups within this category will vary tremendously. For the Chinese group, there would be an overestimate, according to the study, of 17.6%. For the black community, it would be an underestimate of minus 13.2%.
You can see that this kind of variation can have an impact on social cohesion, because you don't have the proper data to begin with.
I just want to end there. I'd be pleased to answer questions from honourable members.
Thank you, Madam Chair.