Industry Committee on July 27th, 2010

[Niels Veldhuis, Senior Research Economist, Fraser Institute]

Thanks for having me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Without further ado, we'll start with Mr. Garneau.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My first question is for Mr. Drummond.

I've heard some of your views about this whole thing, Mr. Drummond, but could you summarize for us what your views are on a voluntary survey versus the current mandatory questionnaire?

[Don Drummond, Chair, Advisory Pannel on Labour Market Information, As an Individual]

I think we have enough experience in Canada with existing surveys and from other countries to know there would be a sharp distinction in the response rate. I'm personally not troubled if the response rate dropped, from almost 100%, even 20 or perhaps even 40 percentage points, if it was still representative of the population. I think the more troubling thing is that, if the experience in Canada and elsewhere is that it's not going to be representative, you would get an over-weighting of--let's face it--white, middle-class Canadians and a dramatic under-weighting of some other groups, particularly the poor and the very wealthy, particularly some recent immigrants, and certainly first nations.

Over time you could probably sort that out, but it would probably take three or four cycles of a survey to understand what the weights are. In the meantime, I think the data could actually be worse than not having anything. It could be misleading. You may be making misleading inferences because you don't actually know how to properly weight the groups that might be underrepresented.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Boyko, I'm going to ask you exactly the same question.

[Ernie Boyko, Adjunct Data Librarian, Carleton University Library Data Centre]

Thank you.

I think my response would be the same. We need to remember that in Canada we use the census to adjust and to weight and to properly estimate using our voluntary surveys. No country in the world has been able to implement a voluntary census. They've all relied on some form of either making questions mandatory or, in some cases, using administrative registers, which in my opinion are far more intrusive than anything we've been talking about here in Canada.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you.

Recently, Mr. Hébert, when the government made its decision, your opinion was in the papers. Could you give us your overall opinion on the government's decision to change the system?

[Paul Hébert, Editor-in-Chief, Canadian Medical Association Journal]

Thank you, Mr. Garneau.

Like my colleagues, I agree that the census is the ideal tool. A voluntary survey can give rise to very specific biases. The big problem, as Mr. Drummond mentioned, is that even though we can still obtain something that works, we are not sure. The census is a very specific tool that helps all health sectors. It tells us if there are economic issues in terms of education and so forth.

We're able to work at the level of a community to better understand how to tailor and adjust programs. It's the only instrument of its kind in our country, and until we develop something better we're stuck with it. It's been studied over so many years that we fully understand its error rate, when it's over-represented and when it's under-represented in certain areas.

For the health and well-being of Canadians, we need this instrument. It impacts policy planners in regions. In fact, public health officials have been sending me e-mails left, right, and centre, and giving me specific examples in their communities of how this is impactful.

For example, if you want a dental program here in Ottawa or in Toronto, where do you put it? Where do your health sector resources go if you're the public health officer in that community? Well, with the census information you're able to target those resources. Similarly, you're able to take those resources away or plan away from areas that you think might not need them, such as wealthy neighbourhoods in sectors of Toronto. So it's an invaluable tool at the community level and for all sectors of government.

My opinions are clear in the paper. I can say more, but I'll start with that.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Hébert.

Mr. Bricker, I read the poll that you recently published, and of course I also read the one that came out from Angus Reid a little bit later. I believe you said that in the poll you conducted, 19% of respondents said that they would not fill out a voluntary form, if I'm correct in my interpretation.

What do you make of the fact that there may be a decision by many people not to fill out a voluntary form, and what are the implications, from your point of view?

[Darrell Bricker, President, Public Affairs, Ipsos Canada]

Well, 19% is what we found, but that meant also that about 80% said they would. So if you imply that, or take that over, to any....

First of all, let's separate between the census and the sample, because they're two different things. Nobody, I think, is talking about changing the census. The sample, which, by the way, 80% of Canadian households don't respond to, is the thing that we're talking about.

You could imply from that research, and it's just very preliminary, that 20% of that 20% probably wouldn't fill out the form. But in my experience, a survey response rate of 80% is better than anything I've ever seen. I agree with the other panellists, though, that there's a lot of work that has to be done in terms of calibrating all of this and sorting through what the potential biases are. But it's not impossible. These are problems that statisticians deal with every day.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Yet in the last census, 95% of Canadians filled it out without saying a word. They went and did it. So could 95% down to 81%, if that 19% actually turns out to be a good statistic, indicate that perhaps some people are saying, well, I'm not going to participate in this thing, because it's no longer going to be accurate anyway--I've listened to some of the people who've talked about this--so what's the point? I'm just contributing to a biased census data pool.

[Darrell Bricker]

It could very well be the case, and I agree with the other panellists that this is something that's going to have to be assessed if the government decides to proceed with changing the way the sample--not the census--is done.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Can you account for the reason why the Angus Reid poll--I'm sure you get these questions often--has a slightly different result from your own Ipsos Reid poll?

[Darrell Bricker]

They probably asked a slightly different question, but I'm confident that what we found is a fair representation of what the public opinion environment was at the time we did the survey.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

What question did you actually ask?

[Darrell Bricker]

Actually, I have it here. I can give it to you.

It will take me a second to find it.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Sure.

[Darrell Bricker]

Perhaps you can go to somebody else in the meantime.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

While you're looking for that question, Mr. Bricker, we'll go to Mr. Bouchard. Once you've found it, you can let the committee know.

Go ahead, Monsieur Bouchard.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also want to thank the four witnesses for being here this afternoon.

My first question is for Paul Hébert.

Mr. Hébert, in your presentation, you said that Statistics Canada's compulsory detailed form needed to be maintained, as a tool. How do you think the government's decision will affect the implementation of public health policies? I am asking about that specifically because that is your area of expertise, I believe.

[Paul Hébert]

I am a physician, but I do not work in the public sector. So I am more familiar with the issues in the private sector. However, my journal publishes a lot of articles on public health in Canada. Canadian researchers use that data to write for our publication.

The impact on Canadian researchers would be huge. I have been told that a voluntary survey would cost $30 million more. The economic impact is much greater. In Montreal and the Quebec regions, they need that public health tool to determine where to target programs, for example, in the areas of Montreal where people's socioeconomic situations are less favourable, where there are immigrant populations. It could really affect program delivery at the regional level.

Yesterday, I sent an email mentioning that I would be appearing before this committee. Ten or so doctors in the public sector sent me a list of the programs that would be directly affected if the census were to disappear. I have here a list of 15 to 20 programs, such as community dental care programs, public health programs and even influenza A (H1N1) vaccination programs. How will we manage those programs? Which communities will they target? How will we know who is doing well and who is not? How will we obtain a description of those people?

The census sampling is much more important than people know. It forms the basis of all of our surveys. Statistics Canada conducts 250 to 280 surveys a year and uses the census for all the other surveys. Canada's public health researchers use that census information for data matching. They are able to look in large Canadian databases and see what the data means when matched with the census data. So the major impact will be twofold: first, on all the other surveys and second, on all the research linked to other databases. Canada is very good in that regard.

I brought a number of documents with me.

How many Canadians will be diagnosed with diabetes between 2007 and 2017? It's a study done with the StatsCan survey. I have about 20 of these. Major impact studies--on obesity, on diabetes, on aging in our populations--are all using the long-form sample, as was stated before.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much.

Briefly, Mr. Bricker, I believe you have an answer to Mr. Garneau's question.

[Darrell Bricker]

Here is the question we asked:

If I am one of the one in three Canadians who receives the new voluntary long form I will fill it out. Please indicate whether either of the following applies to you. Yes or No.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bricker.

Monsieur Bouchard.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Hébert, what would be the biggest disadvantage of maintaining this decision, in your opinion?