ROFL

I'm afraid that I have no reason to accept this guy's opinion over anyone elses. I take the view that if some statistical big wig feels the need to throw a wobbler and quit his job over these proposed changes then there has to be more going on behind closed doors. The cynic within me thinks that, in general, things going on behind closed doors are not good.

(Where's the paranoid smilie?)

Two points here:

- either it's right for the state to gather information on the populace or it isn't. In my view a form containing questions that are in the public domain is more acceptable than covert data gathering such as you suggest.

- datawarehousing has been my business for yonks, the content of those databases aint as great as all that and, if you know the stuff in it about you is wrong, there's nothing you can do. At least with a form you provide your own misleading or inaccurate data.

The official line appears to be that as an incumbent civil servant the advice he gives the minister is confidential, and therefore he is unable to comment on events.

After resigning he has no such obligation and is able to respond to the allegations thrown around that as he supplied the options presented to the minister that he must have not had any problem with them at the time, which clearly he did. Im not going to question his understanding of statistics, its seems unlikely you get to head one of the most respected statistics organisations without knowing a bit more about it than the average lay person.

Im not sure whats going on really, clearly cost cutting and internal politics are probably on the list somewhere, but its unusual for a career civil servant to chuck their toys out of the pram without very good cause. I dont imagine political interference is welcome at stats canada, where trying to determine "the truth" (whatever that may be) is the main order of the day.

It's not covert, it's simply anonymous and given that it is anonymous no one individual would care if data that they have (Albeit unwittingly) supplied is accurate or not.

The combination of my "grocery receipts, mobile phone locations and foot fall along footpaths" is not anonymous. It's more revealing of me than the data requested on the census. An army of magnumtys gathering such data would be far more intrusive than the census questions.

Certainly I have responsibilities as a citizen, but I don't discharge those duties particularly well by just accepting the status quo in the face of something I belive to be at best highly inefficient and at worst runs contrary to the tenants of liberty and personal freedom.

I only cease to be a good citizen at the point I harm to common good by failing to aquiesse to the wisdom of the majority of my peers.

On the contrary, my "grocery receipts, mobile phone locations and foot fall along footpaths" would provide a certain amount of contradictory 'data'.

I found this big list of questions* that have been on the Canadian census in the past. I find this to be wholly intrusive, much more so than someone making guesses based on my Ikea purchases and the frequency of my beer & wings consumption.

http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/datalib/censusq.htm

*Disclaimer: No, I have not thoroughly researched the source. If it transpires to be the work of some right wing internet lunatic, then so be it.

Cross referencing your "grocery receipts, mobile phone locations and foot fall along footpaths" use of ip addresses, and similar information with those of other people provides a good stab at the answers to many of those questions. Inferences drawn from the lack of data provides others. For example, based on an analysis of your attendance at religious ceremonies, the government might well infer that, while culturally Jewish, you do not practise. Wouldn't you rather tell them something of your choice than let them guess wrongly?

Leaving aside this short and long form issue a true census wouldn't give me the choice about whether I tell the government I'm Jewish or Christian I'd be obliged to tell them and that is the breach of personal privacy.

On the other hand if the hand if the government want to infer that the area I live in has a high concentration of jews, christians or one legged dwarf transvestites and plan services on that basis I couldn't care less.

Which brings us neatly back to where we set off from.

Either the government should set off to gather the most accurate information is can, or it should not bother at all. The end result either way is probably wasted time and resources.

They have the unique distinction that they can make laws to compel people to do stuff. If they wanted they could pass a law requiring for example military service, and have done so in the past. Im pretty sure at least some of those called up were none to thrilled, but they went anyway. In the great scheme of things having to fill a form out to maintain accurate information with which to plan services etc from is not the end of the world.

If you make it less than mandatory, then you run the risk of the information being flawed. If I was the chief statistician, I would probably be pretty annoyed at that prospect too after working for so long to avoid it.

Personal privacy has nothing to do with it, its all anonymous data, Stats Canada go to remarkable lengths to ensure anonymity.

No! I would not.

I fail to see how my shopping and texting habits would have any correlation to many of the topics on that list.

How would the government know which religious ceremonies I attend? What if, once, I hover in the doorway of the Church of the Highly Powered Delusionists?

Location of your phone, your footfalls on the pathway.

Then they might count you one. If the Church of the Highly Powered Delusionists set up a temple outside White Hart Lane then the government might infer, from the many people trekking there, that the CHPD was a growing religion worthy of grants, charter schools and all the rest of it.

I think the government can make quite enough of a cock of things using reasonably accurate data; they don't need poorer data.

I think the census is popular with politicians just because it lets them get enough statistics so they can feel like they're just playing a giant game of Sim City.

The government has no need to know which cult I subscribe to any more than they need to know which ring on my oven I use the most. If people wish to provide this information, then fine, if not, then a succinct summary of the basic essentials should suffice.