Industry Committee on July 27th, 2010

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay, and actually, I'd like to talk about some of that history. I think that maybe would be interesting for people today, because in 1999-2000, former Privacy Commissioner Bruce Phillips said this in his annual report, and this is a quote:

Canadians have never been particularly comfortable about the intrusiveness of census questions. The number of inquiries and complaints to the Privacy Commissioner over the years is one indicator of this discomfort. Yet Canada's census response rate is high. Despite the intrusiveness of the questions, the sensitivity of the answers, and their unease with the process, Canadians agree to participate. Part of the reason is that they are coerced. Intrusive questions were, and are, backed by the threat of fines or imprisonment.

Do you agree with Mr. Phillips? Do you find this to be an accurate statement?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes, it is.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Do you agree that Canadians are uncomfortable with that?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes. From my office's point of view, they are uncomfortable with that.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

He actually made some very interesting comments in 1999 when he came before the Senate committee. One of the things he said was:

If you would assess the degree of freedom that exists in any particular society, look first to the degree of private life that its citizens can command and you find a striking correlation....“Privacy,” in short, is just another word for “freedom.” Without it, we do not have any personal autonomy, no liberty and darn little dignity.

He also said, when referring to the mandatory questions of the census, the following:

That is a compulsory collection of information. We get, in my office, many complaints from people about the intrusive nature of the questions I mentioned merely to testify to the sensitivity of the information. It is not for me as Privacy Commissioner or, I submit, for any other individual, to decide how much privacy the people who give up that information in the expectation that it will be held confidential and secret by Statistics Canada can be expected to give up.

Do you agree with that comment, that if somebody feels the questions are intrusive, it's not your place or anyone else's place to decide how much privacy they should be expected to give up?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes, I think it points to the fact that privacy is a highly individual thing and that it may vary enormously among Canadians. Therefore, I think it's for Canadians to judge how intrusive they feel the questions are.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

And you're prepared to allow individuals to make that choice?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Well, individuals do make that choice, as a matter of practice in their everyday lives. It's something else with the census because currently the census is obligatory, and both the long form and the short form were until recently.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Do you have concerns about the obligatory nature of that, or not?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I have concerns about the fact that people are obliged to answer questions about which some of them, not all of them.... Although I did say that Canadians were concerned, I must qualify that, because it does vary among Canadians. A good number of Canadians are concerned, which we know through studies and through complaints to my office.

If you put that together, feeling that the questions are overly intrusive on one hand, on the other hand with them being mandatory, then for many Canadians this is seen as an invasion of privacy.

I must point out, though, that others see it as a civic duty and not an invasion of privacy.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

We would agree with that. We think that sense of civic duty would definitely come forward were this to be made voluntary; and with it being made voluntary, people will take up that sense of duty and participate.

I want to talk about a couple of changes that were made, or that supposedly have been made. In the 1995 annual report, it says:

Among the report's highlights is resolution of the Office's

—this is your office, or Mr. Phillips' at the time—

longest and most complex investigation; 27 outstanding complaints against Statistics Canada's Census. To resolve the complaints, Statistics Canada has agreed to a number of important changes, including...eliminate questions about fertility and religion from the long form.

I guess at that point the census had triggered, as they called it, the “longest and most complex investigation” by your office.

Statistics Canada was forced to make those changes, but why didn't they?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I believe they did with regard to the fertility question. I believe that was the question of how many children were ever born to you. My understanding is that has been dropped.

My understanding also is that through the investigations of our office and our discussions with Statistics Canada, another question, which was basically who also slept under your roof last night, was also dropped from the long form.

With regard to religion, I can't speak to that.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Well, the religion one is not.... Maybe they split the difference, but they put it on every second census. I think their agreement with your office was to remove it, but I guess they continue to put it on every second census.

In terms of inquiries and complaints, when you said you've only had 50 complaints in 20 years, I thought maybe they were calling my office instead of yours.

From the data I'm told that you've had about 342 inquiries over the 2001 census, so there were a number of complaints and inquiries. Is that accurate?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I don't recognize the 342 number. I'm only familiar with later statistics that show there are relatively few calls about the census.

I must say, though, that most of the complaints to my office were made before 2000. They were made in the 1990s, and I think specifically around the censuses of 1991 and then some for 1996.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay. In 2006, did you stop publishing information about inquiries on census questions? I think your office stopped publishing that information.

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Not as a conscious decision, no.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay, well, it's my understanding that you did.

I do want to talk about the 2006 census; if you recall, I think you stepped in. Statistics Canada had plans to have the census form containing sensitive personal information processed by the U.S. company Lockheed Martin. I think you stepped in and said that was inappropriate. Is that correct?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

Yes. We said it was preferable that such sensitive information be processed in Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much, Mr. Anderson. Thank you for those questions.

Thank you, Madam Stoddart.

Monsieur Gravelle.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to clarify something that Mr. Anderson is alluding to.

The only thing I'm concerned about--I'm not concerned about the long-form census whatsoever--is that the government has the power to change any question it wants, and it has the power to remove the jail time, and it's not doing it. That's my concern; it's not the long-form census.

I guess Mr. Anderson and some of these Conservatives have selective hearing. We've heard time and time again today from experts about how much damage this would do to Statistics Canada, to the data collecting, but they refuse to hear what the experts are saying.

I'd like to ask this of each member of the panel. If the census were not mandatory, what would this do to the poor, who are least likely to answer the census if it's not mandatory?

What would this do to the minorities and the poor, Madame Kenny?

[Marie-France Kenny]

Firstly, I want to say that I am very concerned when I ear my Inuit colleague tell us about the problems that exist in her region, in particular as regards language issues. Indeed, people will not fill out the form if it is not mandatory and if it is in English. To my knowledge, the census does not exist in any other languages than French and English.

I am here to discuss language issues. I am also a responsible citizen, ready to do my duty for the good of my country. I must tell you that it is difficult for any society, rich or poor, to plan its future if it has no data on its past and if it does not have information on the current context. Thus, it is difficult for communities to prepare on overall development plan if they do not have the data that would allow them to evolve toward a more positive and prosperous future.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

Does anybody else want to answer that question?

[Jennifer Stoddart]

I'll just say that my office has no particular expertise in either demographic data or its impact on poorer Canadian citizens. So I really have nothing to say.

[Claude Gravelle, NDP, Nickel Belt, ON]

All right.

Let me ask another question, Madame Kenny.

Did the Office of Minister Clement, Statistics Canada, the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Office of the Minister of Heritage Canada or any other office of the federal government consult the FCFA before announcing this measure?

[Marie-France Kenny]

Neither the FCFA nor any of its members were consulted in any way regarding the change in the mandatory nature of the long form.