Canadian Census Reform (Fail)

[kiki_eng]

So. Via sobluethesky, including a slew of the links in here.

Short version is this:

The Canadian Government announced that they were scrapping the mandatory long census form and replacing it with a voluntary survey sent to 30% 20% of houses. They announced this in the Canada Gazette the 26th of June, Saturday, during the G20.

There's a call for a reversal of the decision coming from all sorts of places, including the Ontario Government. (Linked is an article about that that runs through why scrapping the census is a bad decision.)

Statistics Canada's chief statistician resigned over this last week:

“I want to take this opportunity to comment on a technical statistical issue which has become the subject of media discussion ... the question of whether a voluntary survey can become a substitute for a mandatory census,” Mr. Sheikh wrote.

“It can not,” he said.

“Under the circumstances, I have tendered my resignation to the prime minister.”

It's a big deal. Statistics are important.

Some articles, in order of publication:

Tories scrap mandatory long census; Move could affect amount of detailed information obtained

PM facing revolt over census change (Editorial)

Compromise urged to allow mandatory census to go ahead

Census battle: Unlikely hero for unlikely civil war; Census battle exposes rifts, defiance in federal public service

Clement to face MPs on census

Census reform about 'balance': Clement; Tories 'manufacturing crisis' over mandatory form: opposition MPs

Live from Centre Block, it's the Great Canadian Census Debate! - Liveblogging the mandatory long form hearings at Industry

(I've a copy of both the long and short form census downloaded* - sobluethesky was kind enough to send it on to me when I couldn't get the link for either to work - if anyone has similar problems I'm more than willing to send them on if you're interested, just leave your e-mail address in the comments.)

*the 2006 forms

ETA: numbers fix and footnote

Comments

[sinesofinsanity]

Current census is sent to 20% of homes, new survey will be sent to 1/3 of homes (Check out more numbers here my personal favourite is the number of people who complained about the census vs the number of people who take it. I can't be the only one who actually likes filling in censi (censuses?) can I?)

[kiki_eng]

New numbers are interesting. I spent a bunch of hours last night going through news stories, and a little bit of time being frustrated by factual inconsistencies. Actually, no, that's a lie, I am still frustrated by factual inconsistencies. I need to actually go look up what the past fine/term was, just because it is bothering me. Also: I want to do smashy things to people for being misleading and, you know, wrong, wrong, wrong, and either lying or lazy. I do not approve of this bullshit.

[sinesofinsanity]

I feel a bit like this story has been blown out of proportion with the media rushing to get statements from people as quickly as possible, and as a result some of the fact have gotten a bit twisted. However, if you look up Tony Clement's history as an MP, he seems prone to making stupid mistakes (if they are mistakes), one of the articles I was reading about the census thing pointed out that as health minister he opposed the Vancouver safe injection site, and there was some other issue in Sudbury with one of the mining companies but I can't remember now what. It's not just him of course but he at least seems to be following the pattern of this government of decisions that don't make a lot of sense.

[kiki_eng]

Yeah, the media's been a frenzy and, I think, a little careless in it's speed; you're right. I watched some of the feed from the Hill and one of the things in this is that people have been claiming that there are questions on the census that are invasive, which, you know, everyone has different mileage on what "invasive" is, and I respect that, but some people have been using examples for rhetorical purposes that have never been on the census. Ever. Aren't on the newly released survey, even.

Clement did this, when he did it with the Industry committee on Tuesday he concluded with "questions like that" (emphasis mine).

*makes incomprehensible face at you*

[sinesofinsanity]

This whole scenario seems to be using examples that don't really exist. The whole idea of threatening people with jail time is ridiculous as well as I don't think anybody's ever actually been jailed. It's like speeding, you get a fine, but if it's that on top of a bunch of other stuff, then you might be criminally charged.

Aside, if your issue is with the grammar error, I've been told that's one that has become acceptable even in professional circumstances.

[kiki_eng]

I think jail time as a threat is pretty standard, and I don't think that's anything to be ashamed of. I think trying to get rid of that is devaluing the census, not even in the way that it makes it optional; the census has always been optional, it's just that opting out has always had consequences. Taking away the punishment is saying this doesn't matter; this isn't important to us. Laws are always about values and you can tell a lot about a country's values in it's laws. This is important and there should be consequences; it matters.

I don't have issues with the grammar. I have issues with his rhetoric and the way it encourages false conclusions.

[sinesofinsanity]

Ah, see I was just confused.

I don't know, jail time for a census seems pretty extreme. By all means keep a punishment in place, but make the punishment fit the crime. My issue is that the Industry Minister seems to be using jail time as the excuse for scraping the census. The most common rationale for the change has so far been that they don't want to "force" or "threaten" people. My issue is with hiding behind a weak argument and failing to provide reasonable explanations.