No doubt Jean Talon is rolling in his grave. He took the better part of a year going door-to-door to survey the inhabitants of New France in 1666 becoming the first census-taker in North America. I’m pretty sure he didn't take "no” for an answer. As a result, he set the baseline for measuring our country’s social and economic development which continues to this day. Maintaining those high standards of accuracy, thoroughness and continuity of data are at the forefront in the growing battle against the government’s proposed changes to the 2011 census-taking process.
The Canadian Historical Association is one of a growing number of groups speaking out against the federal’s government’s plan to do away with mandatory participation in the long-form census. They argue that the shift will render it virtually impossible to compare data and analyze historic trends. They’ve outlined their case on their website and are appealing to Canadians to add their voice to the debate by signing a petition to Minister Tony Clement advocating for restoration of the long-form to the mandatory census program.
Gordon Watts, writer for The Global Gazette has also encouraged genealogists to make their views know, observing that throughout their long fight to open the 1901 census records there was not a single complaint about that information becoming public. Over 75,000 Canadians supported the cause inferring that most Canadians appreciate and understand the value of the information gathered in the census, not just for informing public policy today, but understanding changes in patterns, trends and developments that happened over time.
Eric Waddell, speaking on behalf of Minister Tony Clement, confirmed that the decision was made by the federal government and not the ministry, Statistics Canada. "This change was made to reasonably limit what many Canadians felt was an intrusion of their personal privacy." The Frazer Institute supports the government’s position. Niels Veldhuis, senior economist stated that ``…Canadians ought to have a very sober second look at the mandatory long-form census and really ask themselves whether or not we should be forcing Canadians to answer what I consider to be very private questions.''
An Ipsos Reid study released today confirms that 50% of Canadians do agree that the long-form census is an invasion of privacy. On the other hand, two-thirds of Canadians said they believed it was a reasonable intrusion.
I’ve looked at the long form census questions and there is a lot of similarity in the information asked about income, property, household dependents, and disability needs on our annual income tax returns. But I don’t expect the government to make that civic responsibility voluntary any time soon.
Participating in the national census once in a decade is one of the few responsibilities we demand of our citizenry. Electoral voting is another responsibility – and sadly recent voter turnout patterns only fuel the case for continuing with mandatory service. I can’t imagine how many Canadians who routinely refuse to volunteer to answer one simple question would willingly answer fifty-three more.
By most accounts, the national census is one of the few civic duties that Canadians widely respect and accept as worthwhile. Over 97% of Canadians participated in the 2006 study and a total of three people registered complaints or objections. According to Ipsos-Reid, among those who actually completed the long-form census, the majority do not believe mandatory completion should be scrapped.
Given the profoundly negative consequences this decision would have on current public policy decision-making it seems to me this is a clear case of “it’s not broken, so don’t try to “fix” it.” For historians, the impact is even more grave – as John Lutz, award-winning author of Makuk: A New History of Aboriginal White Relations puts it, downgrading the long-form census “… is a huge loss because [it] is the one source that has done the best job of capturing the history of groups who do not leave a lot of historical records of their own.”
This is one political issue Canadians should not be ambivalent about.