Status of Women Committee on Nov. 16th, 2010

[Céline Duval]

I don't understand your question.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

In fact, if someone really wants to fill out the census, they will find someone to help them and it would be the same thing as if it were mandatory.

You are saying, and I agree with you, that some people in minority communities will not answer or did not answer the questions because they were either illiterate or they had another reason. So I feel that, if someone really wants to answer the questions, they will still find a way.

[Céline Duval]

Although people are willing to do it, they are constantly running around and have all sorts of other things to do. So imagine if they received an envelope with the word “voluntary” on it. But if it is mandatory, they will take it as such.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

All right. You are from AFEAS. So you can do a test. I did it myself at some point. I do a lot of volunteering. One day, we put up a notice on a bulletin board that we wanted people to read. When we put “do not read”, no one read it, but when we removed those words, everyone was in front of the bulletin board reading it.

I would personally not answer some of the questions because I find them intrusive. There are things that should be out in the open, but some should stay private.

You're telling us that, when participation is mandatory, people can get help, but when it is voluntary, they throw out the questionnaire. I don't think I agree with you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I'm sorry. We have gone well over seven minutes here, so I'm going to have to move on.

Ms. Mathyssen, for the New Democratic Party, please.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

And thank you for being here.

I have a number of questions, and I'll try to be succinct. It's interesting, this whole business of the long form being invasive and intruding on privacy. Ms. Jennifer Stoddart, who is the Privacy Commissioner, said that over the last 20 years, she's received 50 complaints about the census. She couldn't break them down in terms of long form or short form. That's 50 complaints over 20 years.

This is an opinion: would you say that people are concerned about an invasion of privacy generally, or is this a specious argument?

[Céline Duval]

People are not concerned about that. If we tell them that they must fill out the questionnaire because it will help them and make their needs known in order to better address them, they will do it. If we tell them to fill it out, but that we don't know what it will be used for, they will not care as much. It is different if they really know why they're filling it out.

I still don't believe that it is an invasion of privacy. If someone does not answer question 33 because they don't find it appropriate, but they answer all the other questions, data will still be collected for all those other questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Dr. Fellegi, you had your hand up.

[Dr. Ivan Fellegi]

I have just two quick points.

If something is judged to be invasive, the government shouldn't approve that question for the census. That's a decision of the government. If the government believes some questions are privacy-invasive, let's take them off the long form. That's the first point.

The second point is about whether or not voluntary surveys are more likely to be responded to or not. We don't need to speculate; there is hard, empirical evidence that voluntary surveys have a vastly lower response rate. The long-form census had a response rate in the mid-90% range, and Statistics Canada's working assumption about the replacement survey is 50%. In everybody's experience around the world--the statistical societies have all written to the government expressing their view that this will render the long-form data much less usable, and for some purposes probably not usable at all.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you.

It's interesting that chapter 11 of the 2011 census consultation report says that 30% of comments were negative with regard to question 33, and 30% were positive, saying it was essential data. The whole issue comes down to question 33.

In the last three censuses, only one question has ever been dropped. Now this furor is focused on question 33. What is so upsetting about question 33, the question about unpaid work, that it has to be expunged?

[Céline Duval]

It's just that it is the only question providing us with statistics on unpaid work. Question 33 should be called “Household Work” from now on instead of “Household Activities”.

Someone used the expression “go walking” earlier, but, if that means getting a sick person some fresh air and, by doing so, helping them on a psychological level, it is still work. Many aspects of this responsibility are work. But it is not recognized as such, and as long as that's the case, similar paid work will be affected. If we recognize that work being done at home is in fact work, we could agree to pay or recognize domestic employees more. We will increasingly recognize the work of people working in daycares and the work of everyone doing what a good mother should do at home by taking good care of her children.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Merci.

I want to talk to Ms. Jackson. You talked about the fact that we see poverty among senior women as persistent. We have evidence of that. This committee has had a number of studies in regard to the economic security of senior women. We have discovered that because they have had sporadic work or unpaid work, the CPP they receive is very low and OAS and GIS put them well below the low-income line.

We are in the midst of a study in regard to non-traditional work. One of the issues that came up in that study was that Statistics Canada evaluated that women dropped out of apprenticeship programs more often, not because of financial reasons or a better job offer but because of family responsibilities--in other words, unpaid work.

It seems that this is pivotal in terms of how, if we're going to address the reality of poverty among senior women in the future, we have to have this information.

I wonder if you could comment on that.

[Samantha Spady]

I'm going to comment for Robin.

That's exactly the case. You look at the numbers of women who had single-parent households and then the amount of unpaid work, and the burden of this unpaid work responsibility ends up putting them in a more impoverished place in their elder years.

It's not just child care. A lot of women are now in the generation where they're taking care of their children as well as their parents. If you look at the emerging long-term care crisis in this country, this is going to be extremely important to monitor. There will be effects for women who have to leave their work earlier to take care of aging parents or spouses requiring long-term care, that either it is unaffordable or they want to do it but there's no support for them.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I have one last question. I hope I can get--

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Sorry, Irene, you can't get that in. I'm sorry, you're all done.

This is the end of our question and answer segment. I want to thank our witnesses for coming.

Before the witnesses leave, though, I would like to ask one quick question of Mr. Fellegi.

Over all of the years you have been at Statistics Canada, and since, what percentage of people have refused to answer the mandatory long-form census? That's the first question.

The second question is, what has happened to those people who have refused? What are their penalties? Did they do jail time? Did they have any huge number of penalties added to them? Can you answer that question in terms of percentage a year?

Thank you.

[Dr. Ivan Fellegi]

The number who have refused over the years has been infinitesimally small. I don't know what it is. I just don't remember anymore, and I apologize. After every census, it was 100 to 150, something of that order. Of those, a careful selection of who will be prosecuted is made by the Department of Justice. Typically, with very few exceptions, those prosecutions were successful--it was never a jail term, never ever--and the resulting fines were in the order of $100, $150, $200, something like that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Mr. Fellegi.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

A point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes?

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

There have never been any prosecutions of anybody who has not filled out the census, and nobody has gone to jail, so effectively it has been voluntary.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Ms. Brown.

Thank you very much to the witnesses. I want to thank you for taking the time.

We need to have about a minute's suspension so that we can go in camera, please.

[Proceedings continue in camera]