Re: Canada census
 

Thats not cynicism, its experience!

Re: Canada census
 

Well, there is that.

I've seen what they've done to and are still doing to Alberta.

Re: Canada census
 

I'm with you, smash the state.

Re: Canada census
 

So the white middle class are to be blamed for the fact that those on the margins of society don`t want to voluntarily complete a form. Surely it`s in their interests to do so. You can lead a horse to water, what you seem to be suggesting that you should force it to drink.

Are they no white middle class that are gay, catholic, jewish, single parents etc.? Do all white middle class vote Conservative (if this board is anything to go by you are miles off with that one)? Do all the margins of society vote Liberal, NDP, BQ?

Re: Canada census
 

Bigoted lawyers....

Your point is a misdirection. The census is politically neutral. It's not about giving the people on the margins of society a voice in the sense you are implying. It's about finding out the demographics of the country so that policy decisions can be based on actual real data rather than (as someboday said above) tabloid head-lines and 'common sense' views that are not backed up by any evidence.

Re: Canada census
 

Shucks, once again I've missed a good debate due to an unfortunate nose/grindstone interface. Souvy, could you stop posting thought-provoking posts when I'm busy, please?

Here's my $0.02 on the census shenanigans...

The head of StatsCan had only been in post for a couple of years: I get the impression this was a genuine principled resignation rather than a get-out-of-work-early ticket. Because he quit rather than being terminated, he has no lum sum benefit or golden parachute or anything coming his way. I think that dispenses with the argument of those who think he's just on an early retirement plan.

Second, one of the reasons he has given for his resignation is that while in post he was bound by "cabinet confidentiality," which as a senior advisor to the government prevented him from speaking out on matters relating to the advice his office gave their political overseers. He has taken issue, in particular, with Tony Clement's assertion that StatsCan had no problem with making the long form voluntary.

Also, reportedly, Clement asserted that StatsCan is not independent, because it reports directly to his ministry. Sheikh sees that as in direct contravention of his own mandate at StatsCan: that the agency should work "neutrally and objectively, without interference or influence from any groups or individuals," including, by implication, politicians.

Third, and most pertinent to the discussions on whether a voluntary questionnaire is an adequate replacement for a mandatory census, he has said (as has his predecessor in commentary about the whole mess) that anybody with even a basic grasp of statistics can see that the voluntary questionnaire will skew responses toward the middle of the bell-curve, with those on both the upper and lower margins being less likely to respond. Thus the NGOs, welfare organizations, government agencies and others who rely on reasonable population statistics so that they can direct their own efforts appropriately, will be deprived of those statistics where they are most needed - at the fringes of society.

Vader's red herring about provincial vs federal issues is exactly that - a completely irrelevant red herring. StatsCan is a federal agency, but makes census data available to provincial, municipal and non-governmental bodies alike in order to inform their own policy decisions.

My opinion is this: Clement has got it very wrong. He didn't consult those he ought to have consulted, and ignored the advice of those who advised him. He has a political agenda behind his decision, pandering to a narrow constituency to the detriment of the broader population his government is supposed to represent. Clement should back down, but he won't. Harper should make him, but he won't. The census will be produced with a voluntary questionnaire replacing the long-form survey. Government services will suffer in the long term as a result. Harper doesn't care because, like all politicians, he can only see as far as the next vote and doesn't give a damn for the long-term consequences of his short-term actions.

Harrumph.

Re: Canada census
 

Not the long term. The statistics will only be lacking until another government makes it mandatory again.

Re: Canada census
 

You are talking to the wrong person, I didn`t suggest that it was done to enable any particular agenda, another did.

Re: Canada census
 

Well it matters the second you measure it. What is measuring it going to do?

Again what policies? What kind of policy would be put into place based on a mandatory randomly distributed to 20% of households long census, I am dying to know.

Re: Canada census
 

Please do expalin.

Re: Canada census
 

That makes no logical sense. An example - it's widely accepted that women get less pay than men for the same jobs; by your reasoning actually finding out the truth is sexist and indicates that we've failed.

Who knows - it is enough that it is possible. Just because you can't think of one doesn't mean it doesn't exist or might not exist in the future due to trends discovered over time in the data.

The guys at stats canada are internationally respected (canadians can actually say they have a world class organisation and it not be hyperbole). If they say something is scientifically unsound then it can be taken as read that it is actually scientifically unsound. Everything beyond that is political rhetoric.

Re: Canada census
 

Explain what? It seems self evident to me. Let me put it simply:

1. Other posters pointed out up-thread that some examples where it's helpful to have accurate demographic data containing the sort of information available through the long-form census (on income, ethnic background, language spoken in the home, etc etc) are provincial or municipal agencies in healthcare and education.

2. You seemed to object to this merely on the grounds that these are provincial agencies and the census is federal, therefore there is no need for the federal census to take note of such things.

3. I observed that provincial and municipal agencies are the clients of StatsCan when it comes to access to these sorts of data. Absence, or inaccuracy, of these data because of downgrading parts of the census to a voluntary survey will make it more difficult for these agencies to do their job effectively and efficiently. Where the data is used is not an argument against how it is collected. Your point is irrelevant - it's a red herring.

Maybe you don't care if provincial agencies waste money because they can't get accurate data about how to direct their expenditure most effectively. They're my tax dollars, and I'd rather they were spent properly. If that means I'm one of the 20% mandated to fill in a detailed census form, I really can't see where the argument exists that this is a bad thing.

Re: Canada census
 

:rolleyes: Data stats canada provides is central to the formulation and implementation of most of the governments policies.

Just off the top of my head, environmental policies, policies relating to social equality, health care provision policies , housing policies, economic policies, education policies, taxation policies, immigration policies all require accurate data in order to determine first what the situation is, and then later on to determine how its changing based on what the government does and other external factors (which are also monitored by the census)

The census isnt intended to work like an opinion poll with degrees of accuracy plus or minus 3%, its actual hard factual data for that fixed point in time, a bed rock foundation to all the other surveys.

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.c...773041artw.jpg

Re: Canada census
 

I think most of you are giving the long census way waay waaay too much credit. The vital stats are on the short census. Where to put a new highway, hospital, police/fire station are made from direct observations of local authoriies. The long census doesn't uncover previously unknown suburbs lurking in forests without road access.

Crying the gov't won't know what to do no more is just dumb IMO. To me it really tells more about the difference about what type of role the government should have in peoples lives. Most of you are throwing around Oakvillians red herrings with talk of a blind gov't. The real issue is about the choice of mandatory vs volunatry. So I pose this questions to you all. What do you think the punishment should be for someone who decides not to complete a mandatory census?

Re: Canada census
 

A decreased tax allowance to reflect the decrease in efficiency in government would seem appropriate.

Re: Canada census
 

Dont be putting words in our mouths. We are not saying they will be operating in the dark, just that the information they have will not be as accurate as it is with the long form.

Do you have an argument that says the information will be as accurate with a voluntary long form. I havent seen one.

Do you deny that if the information is not as accurate as it could be, then money is likely to be wasted as a result?

Do you deny that sending out surveys to 33% will be more expensive than sending them to 20%?

Do you deny that the short survey is still compulsory, so just as unacceptable from an idealogical point of view in compelling citizens to fill out a form every few years.

Are you alleging that the anonymity of data collected for the census is anything other than water tight?

I give up, Im off home for a beer.:beer:

Re: Canada census
 

Having to read this thread 100 times.

Re: Canada census
 

Do you have any proof that government policies (that no one can seem to come up with) are made better by a mandatory long census form as oppose to a voluntary one? Enjoy your beer Iaink, I will be digging in myself.

Re: Canada census
 

No, because there has never been a voluntary census in this country against which to judge. In the only other major democracy to have dabbled with a misguided attempt to answer people's misplaced bleatings about "privacy rights" by making part of the census voluntary, they have realised that it's a really stupid idea and have gone back to a compulsory survey. Enough said, IMHO.

on edit: Enough said, that is, except to add that everybody who harps on about privacy rights seems to forget that there are responsibilities that go along with them. Answering a detailed census once every (on average) 50 years (10 years x 20% long-form) is one of them.

Re: Canada census
 

what is the census requirement in the UK?

Re: Canada census
 

it is mandatory. There is no "long form" and "short form" - everybody answers all questions.

Francis Maude, the new Cabinet Office minister, has indicated that the government plans to scrap the census after 2011 and adopt a different approach to counting the population. But since so much government policy is dependent on census data (not to mention that it is all reported up to Eurostat and used to determine such important things for the UK as rebates on EU budgets) it is in my view unlikely that any alternative will be successfully implemented and the census will still be in place in 2021.

Re: Canada census
 

They are every 10 years and are quite detailed if I remember. Not sure if there are two forms of the survey or not - I don't think there is because the normal one is pretty comprehensive. I've not seen the long form or the short form here - I guess if I see it and it asks me how many times a week I knock one out or have a shit (to increase my positivity) then I might be more sympathetic to your side of the debate;)

Re: Canada census
 

I might be more sympathetic to your side if it was used for anything other than being overly politically correct and stereotypical. ;)

Re: Canada census
 

and you know it's only used in this way...HOW?

Idiot.

Re: Canada census
 

well then,.. fell free to explain how else, oh intellectually divine one. I both await and encourage.

<snip>

Re: Canada census
 

This thread is probably dead but...large-scale social surveys are my professional area of expertise and I can't resist.

Anyone who has ever run such a survey will tell you that different types of people are more or less likely to respond to surveys.

If the long-form is voluntary you will under-represent:
- young people, esp. under 24
- visible minorities
- poor people
- people living in urban areas esp. Toronto

These people will all be less likely to respond.

You will over-represent:
- older people, esp. 55-74 year old
- people on middle incomes
- white unhypenated Canadians
- people in rural areas esp. on the prairies

These are all facts you can easily look up and check.

The result of this means that the census becomes less accurate and makes it difficult to tell where the bias is. How much is due to response, how much is due to changing demographics.

Anyone who works with this type of data is likely to tell you the same thing.

If you are against 'big government', fine. This is your political view and you are entitled to it.

Re: Canada census
 

I hope this reply wasn't aimed at me because I agree with everything you said. ;)

Lord Vader is the one who disagrees.:thumbdown:

Re: Canada census
 

Yup, sorry Steve, wrong button.

That one was aimed at the Dark Lord...

Re: Canada census
 

perhaps breaking down the content of the 2006 census and giving its usefulness of info and potential gov't use that can't be easily gathered from other sources would be a better start. You might be the first.