Evidence of meeting #32 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was data.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Professor, Department of Economics, McMaster University, As an Individual
I would just like to point out that the labour force survey also remains mandatory. That, of course, yields the unemployment rate variables that lots of people have referred to today that I think most people regard as one of the most important economic indicators.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Hence the absurdity of what we have here, because we're supposedly getting some type of change.
On the prescribed amount for the voluntary census—maybe I can get some opinions—in moving it up to 30% of households, we're going to spend more money to move more voluntary forms out there. Is 30% accurate? Will the government then, for example, if it faces a shortage of returns, make it 50% so every other Canadian will have to do it the next time around? How is 30% voluntary, versus 40% or 50%, or 15% voluntary?
Conservative
As an Individual
I was just going to suggest that if that's the concern you have, that the sample isn't big enough, send the voluntary—
Conservative
As an Individual
I understand.
And Mr. Veall suggested that he doesn't know either what the return rate would be on a voluntary form. He admits that. He'd like to have a pilot project to figure it out.
So if the case is to be made in regard to the national household survey—if that's what it's called now—send it to everybody. Would that be all right with you?
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I don't know. I think that would actually have an increased cost. I'm not sure. To me, it would be about the value of the investment. If we're going to spend millions of dollars more—$30 million, if you believe the government's numbers—to move up to 30% of Canadians, I don't know how many more millions it would cost to do 100% of Canadians, but my concern would be what we get back, whether that is good money in terms of what we have spent. That would be the question.
As an Individual
Well, it's a very good question, but the economics have never been raised. You guys haven't been raising the economics.
As an Individual
So you want the most cost-efficient census. Is that what you're suggesting?
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Well, that's part of the equation. It's also about the value of what you get back. I've been raising this since the beginning of this change.
As an Individual
Then let's have everybody get the voluntary long form. Would the statisticians be okay with that?
Vice-President, Federation of University Professors of Quebec
I would like to reiterate what was said by Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Beaud, namely that the problem is not so much the size of the sample as it is its representativeness. Whether 20%, 30% or 10%, it may work, but what is really important is that completion be mandatory for the sample group. We want to have a good representative sample.
What is at stake here is not really the percentage, the total number or the size of the sample, but the guarantee of the sample being representative. In addition, as we mentioned already—and it is a fact that is misunderstood—many surveys, projects and polls are carried out first, and then their data are corrected using the Canadian census data.
If we undermine the validity of the Canadian census, we indirectly invalidate much of the other data available.
Conservative
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of you for being here today.
I'm going to volunteer some information, so I know some of you will find it inaccurate.
The real thing we're talking about today here—and we can blow a lot of smoke and talk about a lot about other things—is whether the long form should be voluntary or mandatory, whether there should be a punishment for not filling out the form. We've discussed whether it's jail time or fines, but the one question that's at this table today is, should the long-form census be voluntary or mandatory?
We're not talking about the short form. The short form is going to be the way it is and it will have the number of questions it needs to do that job.
We can throw in a bunch of other stuff if we want. Mr. Rutherford just threw in the cost of it, or we can talk about the structure of it. We've talked a bit about privacy and stuff, but let's get the smoke out of the way. We're talking about whether it's accurate and whether voluntary versus mandatory will do the job it's supposed to do.
Mr. Rutherford, you asked earlier why some other people weren't here. I know some great people who are back home volunteering on things. It's the middle of summer. Tomorrow morning I'll attend a firemen's barbecue. They're all volunteer firemen—and trust me, I trust most things they say to me.
Mr. Bélisle, you talked about that pride-in-Canada piece, that people are happy to do it. Whether it's those same volunteer firemen or the United Way workers, or the baseball coaches, hockey coaches, or whatever, these are all volunteers in Canada, and they're happy to do it because they make Canada better.
I want to take the upside of this, that I believe people will voluntarily fill out this form and send it back because they believe it's the right thing to do. You just said that yourself, that the pride-in-Canada aspect is a big part of this. I think that's right. And it's not just my riding. Even in the riding that Mr. McCallum described, of 52% new immigrants and that type of thing, I believe they have pride in Canada. Coming to Canada as immigrants, they've chosen Canada over every other country in the world.
Mr. Oh, you represent an immigrant group, people who have chosen to come Canada. I'm guessing that your group is voluntary. You don't fine your people if they don't join your group, do you?
