Census - Mandatory or Voluntary

[Topaz]

I don't know if this is possible, what about the government tells Canadians, if you get a LONG form please fill it out and YOU will never have to do another LONG form again. As long as the information isn't used for negative things, I have no problem with the long form. How can you be against thing that you only have to do it once in your life time?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The concept has been proven to be useful in the past, as per usual the government screws up the simplest things.

[CANADIEN]

As I asked elsewhere, would you apply that logic to voting in elections too?

And how do you propose ensuring that thye information provided is accurate? Would you have census police?

The comparison between the gathering of statistical data and voting is a wrong one. In the case of voting, citizens are asked to make a choice, that belongs to them, of who will represent them in parliament, Provincial legislatures, municipal councils, school boards, etc. This is NOT the same as data gathering. Besides, refusal to vote in itself is a form of judgement on the process and/or the candidates.

As for your comment about the census policy... please can you find a way of being even more assinine. Nobody can or would claim that methods of data gathering, be it census or large databanks, are or could be fully accurate. This is not a reason for any argument against gathering data. Besides, how can you be sure that central databases would be accurate, and that nobody would be providing false information, a databank police?

[CANADIEN]

I don't know if this is possible, what about the government tells Canadians, if you get a LONG form please fill it out and YOU will never have to do another LONG form again. As long as the information isn't used for negative things, I have no problem with the long form. How can you be against thing that you only have to do it once in your life time?

Sounds nice in principle. In fact, the type of simpling method used in the census only works if it is random. That is if, every time the sample is conducted, everyone runs the risk of having to do it.

The long form dates back to the 1960`s or 1970`s. at the time, the proportion of non-Caucasians in Canada was lower than today. So was the proportion of people born outside of the country, people living in the larger urban centres, people with a post-secondary education. If these people only had to fill the long form only once, it is very possible that, as years passed, the proportion of Caucasians, people born in the country, etc. that respond to the long form in any given year would decrease even in comparison to actual numbers and percentage, with results biased other groups.

[bebe]

Sounds nice in principle. In fact, the type of simpling method used in the census only works if it is random. That is if, every time the sample is conducted, everyone runs the risk of having to do it.

The long form dates back to the 1960`s or 1970`s. at the time, the proportion of non-Caucasians in Canada was lower than today. So was the proportion of people born outside of the country, people living in the larger urban centres, people with a post-secondary education. If these people only had to fill the long form only once, it is very possible that, as years passed, the proportion of Caucasians, people born in the country, etc. that respond to the long form in any given year would decrease even in comparison to actual numbers and percentage, with results biased other groups.

You are right Canadien. Good example. Removing people from the 'population' used to generate the sample can also result in a selection bias.

Random sampling from the entire population is very important.

[CANADIEN]

You are right Canadien. Good example. Removing people from the 'population' used to generate the sample can also result in a selection bias.

Random sampling from the entire population is very important.

Mind you, I am not personnally convinced that, statistically speaking, a mandatory census will give more accurate results than, let`s say, a centralized set of databanks. But it;s still far better than the poor excuse of a census that the government is coming weith.

[bebe]

Mind you, I am not personnally convinced that, statistically speaking, a mandatory census will give more accurate results than, let`s say, a centralized set of databanks. But it;s still far better than the poor excuse of a census that the government is coming weith.

I can't imagine the logistics of setting up such databanks ... boggles the mind. Just thinking about the consent issue is daunting enough: the anti-government/protection of privacy lobbies would have a real field day with that one!

I hereby consent to allow (eg) MTO to share this personal information with any level of government that wants it, and any private interests that purchase it.

I don't think so!

Also ... we'd each have to be issued a single personal ID number so that our own data in all the different databases can be linked.

I can see a few obstacles there!

[capricorn]

Speaking of databases, why doesn't StatsCan create a database of Canadians volunteering to complete the long form? Since half the population seems A-OK with with the personal questions on the long form, building a database comprising about 10 million names shouldn't present a problem. The question could be incorporated into next year's census. I would like to see those defending the present system put their money where their mouth is. I wish a polling company would conduct a survey along those lines. "Would you volunteer with StatsCan to have your name placed on a list to complete the long form?" I wonder what the results of such a poll would look like, plus or minus the error margin, of course.

[bebe]

Speaking of databases, why doesn't StatsCan create a database of Canadians volunteering to complete the long form? Since half the population seems A-OK with with the personal questions on the long form, building a database comprising about 10 million names shouldn't present a problem. The question could be incorporated into next year's census. I would like to see those defending the present system put their money where their mouth is. I wish a polling company would conduct a survey along those lines. "Would you volunteer with StatsCan to have your name placed on a list to complete the long form?" I wonder what the results of such a poll would look like, plus or minus the error margin, of course.

The problem with that, as Munir Shiekh's resignation demonstrates, is that a sample of volunteers would not validly represent all Canadians.

See here:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=16773&view=findpost&p=563621

http://www.thestar.com/article/838589--travers-forget-the-beaver-dumber-canada-needs-the-ostrich

Expertise, the prime minister once publicly reminded his party, is as suspect as elites. Intuition and the nodding wisdom of next-door neighbours are to be trusted.

Yes ... and the earth is flat.

Edited July 26, 2010 by bebe

[CANADIEN]

Speaking of databases, why doesn't StatsCan create a database of Canadians volunteering to complete the long form? Since half the population seems A-OK with with the personal questions on the long form, building a database comprising about 10 million names shouldn't present a problem. The question could be incorporated into next year's census. I would like to see those defending the present system put their money where their mouth is. I wish a polling company would conduct a survey along those lines. "Would you volunteer with StatsCan to have your name placed on a list to complete the long form?" I wonder what the results of such a poll would look like, plus or minus the error margin, of course.

obviously, you don;t understand anything about basic statistics. A sample based on people volunteering to respond is the LEAST accurate method of gathering the type of data gathered through a census. The results it produces are not worth the time and energy and MONEY spent in gathering it, such is the bias and distortion that creep into the results. Unless, as an experiment conducted in the U.S. a few years ago demonstrate, you end up with a sample so high and spend so much money that the exercise becomes economically non-viable.

I have received the long form in the past. I filled it, despite my relun ctance at providing personal information to the government Because I knew the data gathering being done was useful. Next year, I will not fill the long form if I get it, because I will not volunteer information that will be gathered in such a phenomenally dumb fashion as the way conceived by the onservative government.

Edited July 26, 2010 by CANADIEN

[msdogfood]

Funny thing is, 168,000 people didn't complete the last census and to my knowledge nobody was charged or fined - just a few that were hounded a little bit. That seems an awful lot like a voluntary census......and now that everyone KNOWS that you won't be charged, it would become even less mandatory - or more voluntary. I just thought I'd open a poll to see where people stand. In addition, it seems that other countries are starting to make do with other means.

- Mandatory!!!!.

[Smallc]

How come your not?

You're

[capricorn]

The problem with that, as Munir Shiekh's resignation demonstrates, is that a sample of volunteers would not validly represent all Canadians.

Bebe, the point I tried to make, unsuccessfully I gather, is that many of those who support keeping the mandatory long form would probably not want to submit their names to a StatsCan database of volunteers. In other words, I may support keeping the mandatory long form, as long as I'm not required to complete it.

Yes ... and the earth is flat.

Was it really necessary to finish up with that comment? Until now, I believed you could discuss an issue without resorting to the usual "Conservatives are neanderthal idiots" insult.

[capricorn]

obviously, you don;t understand anything about basic statistics.

Neither do millions of Canadians.

I have received the long form in the past. I filled it, despite my relun ctance at providing personal information to the government Because I knew the data gathering being done was useful. Next year, I will not fill the long form if I get it, because I will not volunteer information that will be gathered in such a phenomenally dumb fashion as the way conceived by the onservative government.

If I worked at StatsCan, I'd slot you into the non-respondent group.

[Topaz]

This may not surprise some of you here, but Harper planned this issue back in Dec.09, to make another reason to bring on an election. perhaps this fall. As I said before, he needs an election soon. Why? Well he keeps saying the fighting part of Afghanistan is over in 2011, but if he thinks he can get a majority, he then can do what he really wants to do. I'm sure he has a long list of things he wants and I bet most are not good for Canada but for him and his Reform values. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harpers-census-push-months-in-the-making/article1651526/

[capricorn]

This may not surprise some of you here, but Harper planned this issue back in Dec.09, to make another reason to bring on an election. perhaps this fall.

You mean the media and other people who said he sprung this on us to change the channel from the G20, the F-35 purchase and Guergis are wrong? Well I'll be.....

[capricorn]

Looking ahead to 2016, the council recommends the Statistics Act be re-written to remove the threat of jail time for not filling out census forms, noting that other countries conduct successful census counts without that potential punishment. However, they recommend that jail be used as a punishment for "those who wilfully break confidentiality provisions" for census data.

As part of the planning process for the 2016 census, each question on the census questionnaires should be reviewed to ensure it meets a strict set of criteria, the council says. Questions should only ask information that is required by legislation or cabinet direction, and necessary for users of small-area neighbourhood data for which there is no other source of information. Each question should contribute to establishing benchmarks for difficult-to-reach groups, providing data on important national issues such as the economic integration of new immigrants and creating a base for other surveys of small or dispersed groups such as urban aboriginals or people with health conditions that limit their activity.

Finally, the council recommends that the series of questions on household activities on the current long form, which asks how much time people spend caring for children or seniors and doing housework, should be removed because "it was the question that occasioned the largest number of objections" on privacy grounds, and it doesn't meet the other criteria for questions that should be included.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/StatisCan+Compromise+census+battle/3323368/story.html

These recommendations, from a very reputable body, are sound. They address the major concerns about the mandatory long form.

The planning for the 2011 census is well underway. Let it go ahead as presently structured and initiate the changes leading up to the next census.

[Alta4ever]

I wonder how many out side of the political geeks around here really give a sh__ about this issue.

I know how seriously I have answered the census in the past because most of it I really don't deem as the governments business.

[Smallc]

I wonder how many out side of the political geeks around here really give a sh__ about this issue.

Ummm....it's already been shown that the people who actually use the census care. That's enough of a reason to know that this decision is wrong. As for people like you who don't fill out the census properly, well, you do us all a disservice.

[Alta4ever]

Ummm....it's already been shown that the people who actually use the census care. That's enough of a reason to know that this decision is wrong. As for people like you who don't fill out the census properly, well, you do us all a disservice.

Good you aren't entitled to know my business or anything about me, just what I care to share.

A good book to read about the census and how it was used by an unscrupulous government.

IBM and the Holocaust is a book by investigative journalist Edwin Black which details the business dealings of the German subsidiary of International Business Machines (IBM) with the government of Adolf Hitler during the 1930s and the years of World War II. In the book Black illustrates the way in which IBM's technology helped facilitate Nazi genocide against the Jewish people through generation and tabulation of punch cards based upon national census data.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

I suggest you read it.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Alta4ever

[Smallc]

I'm no entitled to know, but the government is.

[Alta4ever]

I'm no entitled to know, but the government is.

No they aren't.

Everything thing they need to know about me they can get from CRA.

[Smallc]

No they aren't.

Everything thing they need to know about me they can get from CRA.

They aren't entitled to share the information.

[Alta4ever]

They aren't entitled to share the information.

you better read the book i suggested.

[Argus]

Is the census intrusive? Yes. Are some questions not necessary? Yes. But for the other questions, the benefits, in terms of data being available to inform public decision-making, far, far outweight this ihe inconvenience.

As an apparently strong supporter of mandatory long forms perhaps you could illustrate the damage which could result from making this form voluntary.

I'm looking for a specific example, not broad generalizations like "Without mandatory census long forms all life in the universe will come to an end!!!!!"