Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Long Form Census, continued...


I continue to be fascinated by the ongoing battle over the government’s decision to stop threatening us with fines and/or imprisonment if we don’t answer all the questions on the long form census. I would have thought that the idea of replacing “answer these questions or go to jail” with “please and thank you” would be applauded by the vast majority of my fellow citizens. Shows what I know.


As I listen to the debate, however, it seems the participants fall into two basic camps. On one side we have those who simply want the data (statisticians, journalists and academics for the most part). This is by far the more vociferous side, perhaps because these are the people who have the microphone (particularly journalists). On the other side are those who object to being bullied into answering question they consider intrusive, object to seeing their fellow citizens bullied and, perhaps, have concerns about how the data collected will be used.


I am a member of the latter group. In 1996 I refused to completely complete the long form for several reasons, two of which I will mention here. Firstly, I don’t believe our government should be gathering race, ethnicity or religion stats when they can give no assurance as to how this information will be used in future. Secondly, apart from rare exceptions, I don’t believe people should be coerced into answering questions they don’t want to answer.


Of course, many will dismiss my concerns as foolish paranoia. When has any Canadian government ever abused citizens based on race or religion? Have our First Nations people, for example, ever been mistreated in any way? Have Asians ever had their property confiscated or been forcibly relocated, just because they were, say, Japanese? And how about the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jews, Mennonite pacifists, Moslems? Do any of them have any reason to be nervous about government demands for information?


Now, I am NOT suggesting that the government is planning a pogrom. I’m simply saying that it isn’t hard to understand the reluctance of some Canadians to share personal information with government agencies, and by the way, to complain through official channels. –Though Stats-Can is well aware that many people object to the form and process, they keep saying they’ve had very few official complaints. I wonder if they’ve ever thought of doing a survey to determine why that is.– And it seems to me that threatening to fine and/or imprison such people is unlikely to reassure them. Having never been seriously abused by government, I’m not personally concerned about my privacy in this area. But I choose to stand in solidarity with those who are concerned.


PS: I just read that former Stats-Can chief statistician, Munir Sheikh, testified to a House of Commons committee today that his only concern was that the quality of the data obtained from a voluntary census form would be lower than a mandatory survey. Well of course; that’s his department. Coercion, however, is the government’s concern, and it’s always encouraging when someone in Ottawa actually suggest we should dial it back a little.


8 comments:

Anonymous said...

OK, but don't we also have to take into account the responsibilities of the State. In modern Canada we ask it to manage health, education, transportation and the general economy. And if this is done poorly, we generally fire the government. But none of these things can be done without a huge amount of reliable information about demographics, wealth distribution, cultural patterns, etc. That's what I meant by saying these things really are the business of the State. So how can these things be expected of the State while denying it reliable information? And why dismantle coercion here while it remains in many ways in health, education, transportation and the economy (for example)?

Nathan

Dan Colborne said...

Yes, it’s true that these things have increasingly become the business of the state, and that this is one of the key forces driving the increasingly invasive information gathering function of government. But it is my impression that most of the resistance to the “long form” comes from people who have been very dubious about the way the modern state is making it more and more its business to “manage” health, education, transportation, the general economy, and the day-to-day lives of its people.

Some have suggested that the decision to dial back the invasiveness of this census tool is political, and that’s exactly what it is. The recent change of government has allowed some voices to be heard that have been systematically ignored for decades. Among these is a considerable constituency of people who, for many years, have been asking the state to step back a little. I’m delighted to see this issue on the agenda because I believe this conversation is long over due.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you focus on things that actually matter. I have been in your corner for a long, long time. However, I am starting to see what precipitated many of your past and current struggles. Do you have a better idea of a country to live in than Canada? How about the U.S.? Or any one of a host of Countries that make Canada look pretty damn good. Pick more important hills to die on, Dan.

Dan Colborne said...

Sorry if I’ve given the impression that I don’t love Canada, or would choose to live anywhere else in the world; I certainly didn’t mean to. Except for three delightful years I spent in the US – a very fine country indeed – I’ve always lived in Canada, and have always loved living here. I am a Canadian by choice. This is my home.

Is there any country in the world where I’d rather live? Well, now that you mention it, no. But I never think to compare my country to other countries in this way. Seems a bit like asking if there are any other women I’d rather be married to, or any other kids I’d prefer to my own. I love my family because it’s my family, and my country because it’s my country. Could my country be better? Of course, as could my wife and kids, and their husband and father too. And if I ever recommend any improvements to any of them (my country, wife, kids or self) I do so only because I love them. And the same is true when they recommend improvements to me.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Anonymous said...

Too many people give too much ground where they should not. It is too easy to roll over and let someone else make your descisions for you. There are too many unscruplous people in fancy suits with gleaming white teeth that are willing to take over ... for your own good your own convenience and to help you out of course.
Wake up Nate Big Brother doesn't love you anymore than the farmer loves his sheep. What's that supposed to mean well sheep are generally sweet stupid animals that have two functions on a farm they are to be eaten or fleeced. I am too aware that I among many Canadians are being fleeced... but I'm watching for signs that the farmer is getting ready to invite me for dinner.
Take a close detailed look at the food you buy, what is on the label how much of that can you pronounce and what are they really? What about your cleaners and personal hygene items? Take a look at the rising amount of intelligent, bored, energetic children being told they have disorders and are being drugged. It is harder and harder to find cost effective organic food instead of factory farmed meat and GMO produce grown in sterile soil with chemical fertilizer and sprayed liberally with pesticides and still people are encouraged highly to trust big brother and not to look at the man behind the curtain and watch the celebreties as they make trainwrecks of their lives for the amusement of the populace.

What has this got to do with anything? Connect the dots Nate, I know you are smart enough. It's been twenty years but unless you O.D.'d on stupid pills since I last saw you I know you are smart enough to look behind the scenes. Big Brother's sticky fingers are all over everything that is morally and mortally wrong with our society and the sheeple of our society can't see past the glossy veneer. Tell me you aren't one of them.

respectfully Greenwolf

Anonymous said...

Nathan if you weren't the second anonymous then you have my heartfelt apologies for singling you out.

I am having trouble signing in with my google account and therefore am going "anonymous" myself but when I do I will always sign at the bottom.

My comment stands however. Even if I have to redirect it at someone else. I firmly believe people are intelligent enough to look beneath the surface of our cushy society but are too lazy to bother, in deep denial, or are too afraid to see the truth.

As for fire the Government what part of Canada do you live in? If every person from Manitoba west voted one way it would only take a majority vote in Ontario and Quebec to outvote it. Not by people numbers but by party seats. I cannot even vote green because my party has no seats in my continguent and I am not allowed to vote anywhere else.

Some thoughts to go on: A guilded cage is safe and beautiful and wonderful but it is still a cage and the occupant still trapped...for their own good of course.

A benevolent dictatorship is still adictatorship but they use colgate smiles and distraction techniques to do the job instead of guns.

The quickest way to get people to give over their control is to tell them what they want to hear and give them what they think they want. Offer it in a package of less and less responsiblities to make it all convenient for them and suddenly everything is all for the good.

Chew on that a while.

respectfully Greenwolf

Mary said...

On board with every position that Greenwolf takes. I think you are dead on. I would be surprised if Dan wasn't with you as well, but more diplomatically of course, since he is all about leaving room for other people and other ideas. And for all I don't want to put words in his mouth, I suspect Nathan could be too. There's a little devil's advocate in that boy. And I am certain that the second Anonymous is not him, although I don't know who it is. Nathan always signs his name.

I truly believe you are preaching to the choir here.

Mary

Anonymous said...

Thank you Mary

I appreciate that I didn't check the bottom of the second Anonymous which is why when I did I apologised and retracted my attack on him. Diplomacy is not my style I find subtlety (sp?) is wasted on the masses and I am truly alarmed at the direction our world is going.

There is a biology experiment (horribly cruel and I 've never done it but still...) if you drop a frog in boiling water it jumps out quickly. However if you put it in a pot of tepid water and heat it up slowly it will boil to death. So subtlty and and tact are useful only when they get the job done but there are times when you need to sound a fire alarm.

As for the way our society is and how it's going ...frog soup anyone?

respectfully,
Greenwolf