You could just as well have responded that Statistics Canada was perhaps aware of the situation in the past, that this information has escaped you and that the question should be reviewed. That would not be a problem. I just want to be sure that, in the discussions in progress, as you said, this subject will indeed be examined and we won't simply say that perhaps we will do it.
In the opinion of the witnesses we have received in this committee, this isn't something that we might perhaps do if needed; this is a legal obligation. As a government, we have the obligation to do it, by virtue of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada and of the charter. Otherwise, it could be argued that the census is anti-constitutional because it does not respect the charter.
I am not asking you to give me your opinion on this point, but I have to share this comment with you.
In the 2016 British Columbia case about education in French, the Supreme Court of British Columbia established that the data available was not good enough to justify the right to have French schools in certain regions of the province. It also said that if the data were better, it could make a different ruling and grant the right to go to school in French. Mr. Nater also spoke about the importance of the sample. The Supreme Court of British Columbia said that it would not be a post-census survey like the one done in 2006 that would give us a good sample, but rather a complete census of the population, which respects the charter.
I will leave it at that.
I yield the floor to Ms. Lapointe, who would like to ask some questions.