Census Forms

[August1991]

I just received the 2006 census form. I received in fact two forms (English and French), both 40 pages long. (I don't know if everyone received the same form as I did, or if I'm part of a smaller sample with a detailed questionnaire.)

IMV, the questions are too personal, too difficult and frankly too stupid to answer. Why should I encourage government bureaucrats to design new policies to spend my money by giving them (inaccurate) information about myself? No marketing firm would operate this way.

The questions range from sources of household income to the amount of time I spend talking on the phone to other family members. There are the expected questions about same-sex living arrangements, and questions about the origins of my great-grandparents, the street address of our employers and our addresses five years ago. (Bear in mind that this an off-year census. Historically, the real census was conducted every ten years, in years ending in 1.)

The original idea of a census comes from tax collecting. This I can understand. The modern idea of a census comes from the US Constitution because the US republic based representation on population. The US census conducted every 10 years determines the number of representatives by state. The BNA Act imitated the Americans and hence our 10 year census, started in 1871.

The post-modern idea of a census comes from bureaucracy, the banality of evil. As governments and bureaucracy have grown, so too the census. We are far, far from merely counting the number of people in a province to determine ridings and riding borders. IME, bureaucrats have no sense of cost when the cost is borne by someone else.

So, should I complete the census form? And if so, should I complete it accurately?

Your opinions are welcome but let me explain my own view at the moment.

If I don't complete the form at all, then the Quebec government will get fewer transfers from the federal government (from other Canadians). Do I care? Does it matter to me whether something I do will mean that Pierrette will give or not give money to Paulina?

If I conclude it matters, then logically I should overstate the size of my household on the form. (The paper form allows for five people, beyond that you need a new form but there is an Internet version.) I don't think I could claim to have a household with 345,234 members but I could try for 14, or even 27 without any serious follow-up. (We're talking about bureaucrats who process paper. I think I could get by with 27, sans trop de problèmes.) My exaggeration would improve the finances of the Quebec government by several thousand dollars but I'm still not certain that it would make any difference to me personally. So, why should I bother?

Apart from the question of the size of my household, there remain the questions about living arrangements, age of my house, people's health, income and so on. Do I have any reason to answer honestly these questions? There might be an advantage to claim that I and the other 26 people in my household are impoverished. This might improve Charest's hand at the negotiating table - assuming I'll see any of the "poker" winnings.

In a slightly different direction, if a straight couple is strongly in favour of gay marriage, I can see a reason why the she could become a he, or vice versa. Why not send a message that the phenomenon is wider than previously suspected?

There's a law somewhere stating that Canadians must answer a census question. I've been trying to find the law without success. I'm curious to know what happens if I answer a question incorrectly. (I don't know how many hours I helped my lodger's son to do his homework last week. Do I go to prison if I indicate 5 hours when in fact it was only 2? Can I defend myself by saying that it felt like 5 hours? "Honest Officer, I always thought she was a man!")

Statistics Canada is apparently downplaying the legal aspect of the answering-question business. If I were them, I'd make a big deal of it. Without a legal penalty, I suspect that Statistics Canada will soon find itself with response rates similar to federal elections. Low sixties. What would the bureaucrats do with data from such incomplete surveys? (Don't worry. They'll fudge the numbers anyway.) No, Statistics Canada should aim for response rates like Revenue Canada (CRA). The low nineties. In Ottawa, the name of the game is: who runs the best shop?

Statistics Canada has revamped its advertising strategy for the May 16 census after a study found that Canadians got annoyed with proposed ads saying they're legally required to fill out census forms.

Canoe

[Naci Sey]

I've been a census-taker for StatsCan and also value the quality of the work that they do. While I don't like the Lockheed connection with this year's census, that's not going to stop me from filling out my census form.

I visited the StatsCan online site today. Seems to take forever for the security thingie to finish its verification process... Anyway, once I was in, I was immediately ticked off.

The very first question, which isn't a question but an assumption, is for your telephone number.

Not all households have a telephone.

Where do you go if you want to comment or ask what you're to do with this required field in the event you don't have a phone?

You click the Help button.

Guess what? There's a toll free help line you can call. No online feedback form or email option.

Re the length of the form you received, I know that for the 2001 census, 1 out of every 5 households received the long version of the form. I guess you just got lucky this time.

[uOttawaMan]

[/end rant]

[seabee]

FYI; there is a message circultating (in French) on the Internet:

Attention à tous et toutes les francophones

Français seulement

Dans le prochain recensement (le mardi 16 mai 2006), il est important pour

les francophones d'indiquer qu'ils parlent le francais seulement.

Bien que le fait d'être bilingue soit un atout pour les francophones dans la

plupart des situations, celle-ci les désavantage lors du recensement. Les

gouvernements ont tendance à prendre pour acquis que les répondants dits

bilingues sont 50 % francophones et 50 % anglophones. Pour ne pas que les

services offerts aux francophones diminuent, n'oubliez pas d'indiquer que

vous parlez le francais seulement!

Précision

Passez-vous le mot...

Statistiques Canada conclut, de facto, que de tous les répondants ayant

coché la case "bilingue", 50% sont anglophones et 50% sont francophones, et

donc, ils ne financent, pour la culture francophone, que le nombre qui

représente la moitié des répondants bilingues, ce qui est incorrect et ce

qui réduit également l'obligation financière du Fédéral envers la

minorité (Francophones hors Québec). Sachant que le gouvernement n'accorde

des services en français que "là où le nombre l'exige", nous devons indiquer

clairement que notre langue est bien le français pour être comptés comme un,

et non comme la moitié d'un Francophone ! Ainsi, si dans une communauté de

5000 francophones, ceux-ci indiquent qu'ils sont bilingues, il n'y aura que

2500 francophones enregistrés et l'offre des services en français en portera

les conséquences... Et la culture francophone en subira les contrecoups...

In short, it asks bilinqual francophones to say they are unilingual french-speaking, otherwise funding for francophones will be reduced by half.

[Cameron]

While I don't like the Lockheed connection with this year's census

[August1991]

[/end rant]

True, it was a rant.

Yet you would never have read such a rant in a Canadian newspaper in 1966 or 1976, also census years, but people (such as you) can read my rant now, in 2006.

What's different? Since 1966, has the Internet changed the way people express their opinions, or has the Census become more intrusive?

And UOttawaGuy, you didn't answer my questions. Should I fill out the census form? And if so, should I fill it out accurately?

Seabee has advised me to fill it out, but inaccurately. His advice is that I should claim to be a unilingual francophone. Seabee apparently has no advice about the size of my household.

So UOttawaGuy, rants aside, what do you advise?

[seabee]

Seabee has advised me *[..]

I advised no one to do or not to do anything!

I just posted an information; period.

I do not even have an opinion on the appropriatess of that particular post.

Don't read intentions that are not there!

[Riverwind]

IMV, the questions are too personal, too difficult and frankly too stupid to answer. Why should I encourage government bureaucrats to design new policies to spend my money by giving them (inaccurate) information about myself? No marketing firm would operate this way.

I find the social engineering uses for the census data to be quite disturbing. I understand why you are concerned.

[August1991]

Seabee has advised me *[..]

I advised no one to do or not to do anything!

I just posted an information; period.

I do not even have an opinion on the appropriatess of that particular post.

Don't read intentions that are not there!

OMG!

Seabee, let me go on the record stating that you merely posted an Internet quote.

Legality aside, my query is different. Should I bother to fill out a form? And if so, should I "alter" the truth?

In an election, everyone gets one ballot with a choice of local candidates. In a census, most people get short ballots but some people get long ballots.

In this census, it appears that I have lucked out with the "long" ballot. So, what do I do? Should I "vote", and if so, how should I "vote"? And this ballot is not merely a choice of local candidate. I've got many questions to answer.

Any advice how I should answer, if I should answer at all?

[geoffrey]

I just finished my Census survey dealy. Mine was only the three pager common one.

I don't see the point in lying. I don't see the point in not doing, from the questions I was asked. It was all common knowledge someone could figure out by ringing my doorbell pretty much.

What kind of personal questions does this unique long census ask? Is this unique to Quebec? Has anyone outside Quebec got this?

Here is the list of approved questions apparently: http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/i.../index.cfm?S=11

I don't have nearly that many on my form.

[August1991]

I just finished my Census survey dealy. Mine was only the three pager common one.

I don't see the point in lying. I don't see the point in not doing, from the questions I was asked. It was all common knowledge someone could figure out by ringing my doorbell pretty much.

What kind of personal questions does this unique long census ask? Is this unique to Quebec? Has anyone outside Quebec got this?

Don't see the point in lying? Geoff, do you believe in Santa?

The census form is a ballot. I wonder why anyone would bother voting in an election. Then again, I wonder why anyone would bother telling the truth in a census.

An election ballot is a yes/no vote on a single question. A census form is a black/grey/white vote on numerous questions, and some Canadians get the longer votes. It's a vote with opinion. Honest to God, I'm inclined to declare that I live in a household with another wife, and two husbands living together as lodgers.

Geoff, you haven't advised me what to do. Should I complete the form and if so, should I complete it honestly? (I have voted strategically in elections, should I not also express my opinions strategically in a census?)

Geoff, or anyone else, I intend to declare a household of 27 unilingual francophones. Am I wrong to do this?

[geoffrey]

I'll take a Kantian ethical argument to this. If everyone did that, we'd all be significantly worse off.

You'll have to clarify your position that a census is ballot. I see it as a tool to develop an accurate demographic picture.

[August1991]

I'll take a Kantian ethical argument to this. If everyone did that, we'd all be significantly worse off.

You'll have to clarify your position that a census is ballot. I see it as a tool to develop an accurate demographic picture.

Kant? Ethics? We all? Sorry if I laugh. I'll go with Pareto, Marshall, Walras.

You see a census form as a "tool to develop an accurate demographic picture". How do you see an election ballot?

[geoffrey]

I'll take a Kantian ethical argument to this. If everyone did that, we'd all be significantly worse off.

You'll have to clarify your position that a census is ballot. I see it as a tool to develop an accurate demographic picture.

Kant? Ethics? We all? Sorry if I laugh. I'll go with Pareto, Marshall, Walras.

You see a census form as a "tool to develop an accurate demographic picture". How do you see an election ballot?

An election ballot? It's my say in public policy, to some extent, and most importantly its a measure of accountability for my elected official. It's definitely not a tool to develop and accurate demographic picture.

[GreenWhiteandPink]

What is the problem August 1991? Just complete the census form. 1 in 5 households get a long questionarie which it looks like you have, it will only take 15 mintues. Your making a big deal over nothing.

From the Stats Canada website

Do I have to fill in my census form?

Yes. By law, every household in Canada must provide the information requested in the census and by the same law, Statistics Canada must protect the personal information provided by respondents.

Is the information on census questionnaires confidential?

Yes. Employees working on the census must follow specific instructions and procedures to ensure that confidentiality is maintained. Only those employees who need to use completed census forms for their work will see individual forms.

Statistics Canada is bound by law to protect the identity of individuals in all published data. Anonymity is assured in all data releases — data are randomly rounded to the nearest multiple of five or ten, and no detailed data are released for areas with populations below a certain size.

PS As of the 1996 Census that I worked on it was a summary offence not to complete the Census form, which means 6 months in jail or a $1000 dollar fine or both.

[uOttawaMan]

[/end rant]

True, it was a rant.

Yet you would never have read such a rant in a Canadian newspaper in 1966 or 1976, also census years, but people (such as you) can read my rant now, in 2006.

What's different? Since 1966, has the Internet changed the way people express their opinions, or has the Census become more intrusive?

And UOttawaGuy, you didn't answer my questions. Should I fill out the census form? And if so, should I fill it out accurately?

Seabee has advised me to fill it out, but inaccurately. His advice is that I should claim to be a unilingual francophone. Seabee apparently has no advice about the size of my household.

So UOttawaGuy, rants aside, what do you advise?

Why should I advise you, (and who am I to advise you at any rate) on a subject in which you already seem to have your mind set on one course of action.

It's a census, not the end of the world.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

You should not seek advice from others on how to fill out the form, you should be doing whatever you heart tells you to do. That being said, I find it difficult to believe that you would consider resorting to dishonest measures in the hopes of personal gain, yet at the same time deny that this mindset would occur in the free enterprise world.

[scribblet]

Actually I was wondering the same thing, havn't got mine yet. I guess maybe the question is, how can we frame our answers to best benefit Canadians as a whole, or, is there any benefit to be gained from not answering honestly. Enquiring minds would like to know

[GreenWhiteandPink]

Actually I was wondering the same thing, havn't got mine yet. I guess maybe the question is, how can we frame our answers to best benefit Canadians as a whole, or, is there any benefit to be gained from not answering honestly. Enquiring minds would like to know

Answer all your responses truthfully, as is required by law. Why would you want to lie on a census form.

I got mine a few hours ago, had it completed within 4-5 mintues online. It was the 2A (short).

[Renegade]

False or unlawful information

31. Every person who, without lawful excuse,

(a) refuses or neglects to answer, or wilfully answers falsely, any question requisite for obtaining any information sought in respect of the objects of this Act or pertinent thereto that has been asked of him by any person employed or deemed to be employed under this Act, or

( refuses or neglects to furnish any information or to fill in to the best of his knowledge and belief any schedule or form that the person has been required to fill in, and to return the same when and as required of him pursuant to this Act, or knowingly gives false or misleading information or practises any other deception thereunder

is, for every refusal or neglect, or false answer or deception, guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both. 1970-71-72, c. 15, s. 29.

STATISTICS ACT

So August, go ahead and lie to your heart's content. All you need to do is find a "lawful excuse".

[theloniusfleabag]

Hmm, $500 fine and 3 months in the hoosegow. Seems a little 'Leninesque', I should say (just for putting in Elvis Presley or Adolf Hitler and Marilyn Monroe as residents, with some 50+ kids) Mayhaps we offer deportation or a beating to wring a few more answers out of you.

[August1991]

Why should I advise you, (and who am I to advise you at any rate) on a subject in which you already seem to have your mind set on one course of action.

It's a census, not the end of the world.

It was a rant. But I was genuinely looking for new opinions about what to do. In the meanwhile though, I think I have come to an understanding about what a census form is and whether it should be filled out accurately.

Since census data will influence government policies, and in particular transfer payments between governments (such as equalization payments), then the census form is like a ballot in an election.

People make a big deal about their ballot in an election, they should make an even bigger deal about a census form. In a sense, the government is asking our opinions about many different things, and we have a chance to influence government policies.

People vote in elections presumably to advance their interests; why wouldn't people do the same in a census form? In the case of a census form, telling the truth and advancing one's interests are not necessarily compatible. To give one small example, I can see why two otherwise separate but progressive same-sex roommates might check off the marriage relationship box as a way to support gays.

My primary question is what incentive exists for someone to complete the census form accurately. I don't see one other than civic duty, and a ridiculous law that will not be enforced and should be struck down if anyone tested it.

You know, Canadians used to follow the rules set by their governments. There was a sense of civic duty. That is increasingly not the case. Fewer people vote, and fewer people are going to fill out census forms. Unsurprisingly, this is happening at a time when the government is getting larger, more involved in our daily lives and more complex. This census form is a perfect example.

At the moment, I'm hesitating between throwing the form in the garbage and filling it out very fast. In the future, I'm certain that more Canadians will do as I'm doing.

[August1991]

Canadians are not legally forced to vote in elections, let alone forced to vote honestly.

But Canadians are not only forced to respond to to long bureaucratic questionnaires about personal matters and our opinions, Canadians are forced to respond honestly to the questions. Penalty for false replies? $500 or 3 months prison.

Who controls Ottawa? The bureaucrats or the politicians?

Someone should test this Statistics Canada law.

What is more important? Votes in an election or responses to bureaucratic surveys?

[CoachCartman]

Our household got our form, the short one, a few days ago. Last time I had the long one and I filled it out. This time I also, got an agriculture form. Do all farmers get this or only a few unlucky ones?

This form is nuts. Besides all the regular questions, I am supposed to fill in:

was anyone injured (farm related)

total area of workable and non-workable land

what I have seeded or going to seed

was there any herbicides, insectisides, fungicides, commercial fertilizer, or lime used in 2005.......report area of land where used

Market Value of all land and buildings owned or rented

Present value of all farm equipment owned or leased

all operating expenses

all farm income

this is more like an income tax questionaire. And to send it out in the middle of seeding.....there is a good chance this will be filed in the trash.

[shoop]

That's a pretty weird and random example.

How exactly would lying about your sexsual orientation going to help anybody?

What kind of person would think along those lines?

To give one small example, I can see why two otherwise separate but progressive same-sex roommates might check off the marriage relationship box as a way to support gays.