July 2010

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for July 2010.

Just a bit more late night census news

July 28, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, openmovement, policy, politics by Tracey | 2 comments

Graphic By http://www.socialsignal.com/

Tuesday & Wednesday Census Media Roundup

July 28, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, policy, politics by Tracey | Permalink

Graphic By http://www.socialsignal.com/Yesterday’s CPAC watching, and that thing called a job, means that I got a bit behind on my Census media round-ups.  Mia culpa!

Also, you will have noted that I post the articles as I find them, meaning they are not in any kind of chronological order or in any order of importance.  I may have missed one or two, and maybe a link is off.  If that is the case, just let me know and I will add and fix. Also, I am finding it hard to keep up. I must say reading the #census twitter feeds every morning is making me cross eyed!  Bref!  Please send stuff to help me keep the list up to date!

enjoy this loooooooog list.

3 important resources:

  1. Great francophone media Reviews & Roundups: pabsta aka Pier-Andre Bouchard St-Amant. He also maintains a fabulous list of ceux qui Appuis au questionnaire long obligatoire
  2. Another great insiders source: Canadian Association of Public Data Users (CAPDU)
  3. Canadian Council on Social Development (CCSD): Long Form Census Tool Kit

Les manchettes / les clips:

About the National Statistics Council of Canada

July 28, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, openmovement, resources by Tracey | 4 comments

I am really excited to get information about Canada’s National Statistical Council.  Up and until recently all I knew about it was these 2 lines found in the deep lurkium about us section of the Statistics Canada Website.

Some time ago I called the StatCan general information line on numerous occasions, and asked officials about it.  All to no avail.  So I eventually submitted an ATIP request that StatCan has been working on for 2+ months. I still do not have the documents.  For some reason, the work of this Council is secret, as is its membership, as is what they are about.  I did however find some great papers that were submitted to it in the StatCan library.  The Library is a wonderful source of information as are their knowledgeable librarians.  Alas, they have come out of the closet as a result of this censuslessness.

If StatCan were more obvious with what it does and communicated its work more obviously, much of this whole censuslessness would have been much easier to counter.  For instance, other government agencies publish the legislation that govern them and/or mandates what they do.  StatCan does not have that information on their site.

In addition, all the justification about the questions they ask on the Census, how those questions came about, their public consultations are also available.  However one has to know the Agency really well to know where to find these, such as the names of the reports, and which sections of that report and so on.

Eccetera

Here is information about the National Statistical Council of Canada:

Council Role — Overview

The National Statistics Council advises the Chief Statistician of Canada on the full range of Statistics Canada’s activities, particularly on overall priorities. The government appoints Council members and its approximately 40 volunteer members represent sophisticated and diverse data users, researchers and those whose experience enables them to advise on priorities for the country’s statistical system.

A longer description, taken from the United Nation’s description of the Canadian statistical system, is included as another attachment (National Statistics Background.doc and here).

For those who may want to discuss statistical advisory bodies like the Statistics Council and, more generally, the relation between statistical agencies and governments, this is the subject of current research by Prof. Cosmo Howard in the Political Science department of the University of Victoria. howardc at uvic dot ca and has agreed to serve as a media contact on that subject.

It should be noted that Professor Howard is not associated with the Council, nor does he speak for it. He is, however, an expert on bodies like the National Statistics Council.

Also, here is a document that speaks about the Council in more detail:

Establishment of the National Statistics Council

In the early 1980s Statistics Canada embarked on a conscious program of strengthening its active consultative mechanisms with key clients and broadly based representatives of the national interest. Among the major new initiatives were the establishment of a series of bilateral senior committees with key federal departments – both clients and sources of data derived from administrative records (this supplemented already existing strong consultative mechanisms with the provinces); and some 10-15 professional advisory committees were set up. The latter involved experts (typically from outside government) in such areas as demography, labour, national accounting, price measurement, service industries, etc.

In 1985, the government established, at the apex of the Agency’s consultative mechanisms, the National Statistics Council. Its formal mandate is very brief: it is to “advise the Chief Statistician in setting priorities and rationalizing Statistics Canada programs”. In line with other aspects of Canadian policy in relation to statistical activities, a careful balance was attempted between policy relevance and professional independence.

Appointment process and membership

Members of the Council are appointed for a period of three years but subject to renewal. There are about 40 members. While there are no rules for representation, the following practice has generally been adhered to:

1. All members serve in their individual capacities – there are no formal representational appointments;
2. Most members are interested and prestigious analysts of some aspect of Canadian life, but few are professional statisticians;
3. Some members from Statistics Canada’s various professional advisory committees serve on the Council. This ensures the availability of a wide range of subject matter knowledge within the Council, as well as linkage with the Agency’s other advisory bodies;
4. A senior member from the Statistical Society of Canada sometimes serves;
5. At least one senior journalist on social or economic affairs is a member;
6. Membership is selected in such a fashion as to ensure appropriate knowledge of the different provinces and territories of Canada ;
7. No federal official is a member of the Council. This enhances the de facto independence of Council to “speak up” should it be necessary;
8. The Chief Statistician is an ex officio member;
9. An Assistant Chief Statistician serves as secretary.

A large proportion of the initial members, were appointed by the Minister from a list of persons recommended by the Chief Statistician. Subsequent appointments have been proposed to the Minister by the Chief Statistician following discussions with the Chairman of the Council.

As a result of these measures, the Council is a very knowledgeable, influential and broadly representative group. Indeed, its influence derives from the individual prestige of its members.

Agenda and Modus Operandi

The Council normally meets twice a year, each time for a day and a half. Regular agenda items are “Statements by Members” in which Council members may raise questions or concerns either for immediate response or subsequent discussion, and an in-depth report by the Chief Statistician on recent developments at Statistics Canada (including new substantive initiatives, forward planning, budgetary expectations). Other agenda items usually deal with major statistical or policy issues – such as: Census content, Environment statistics, Longitudinal data, Issues in social statistics, National accounts, Dissemination practices, Pricing policy, Privacy and record linkage, Contingency planning in the face of expected budget cuts, the Provincial component of the national statistical system, Significant statistical information gaps, etc.

Agenda items are selected from items raised by members and issues identified by Statistics Canada in discussions with the Chairman. From time to time a subgroup of the Council is formed to deal with particular issues (e.g. access to historical censuses) between Council meetings.

The Council generally provides feedback to the Chief Statistician through a discussion among its members. Consensus is usually (though not always) achieved.

Conclusion

There can be no doubt that members of the Council take their function seriously. The Chief Statistician regards their advice as being of very substantial benefit. In addition, through the prestige of its members and through precedent, Council has evolved into an additional and – should the need arise undoubtedly very influential – bulwark in the defence of the objectivity, integrity and long-term soundness of Canada’s national statistical system.

Monday Census Media Roundup

July 27, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, policy, politics by Tracey | 2 comments

Graphic By http://www.socialsignal.com/Hamilton Spectator: Local agencies support long-form census

The Chronicle Herald: Countering misinformation about the census

Le Devoir: Retrait du formulaire long du recensement – Les discussions se poursuivent: De l’autre côté de l’Atlantique, plusieurs pays ont aboli le recensement

New York Times: Lessons of the Census

Post Media: Statistics council suggests compromise to end census battle

Globe and Mail:  MPs grill Tony Clement, top statisticians over census changes

BI Professional: Why Data Quality Matters

CBC news: Stop the census presses! This just in from the National Statistics Council…

The Hook: Seniors’ group attacks voluntary census with a voluntary poll

The Toronto Star: Government-appointed advisory group says Canadians need full census info: National Statistics Council joins census debate the day before former StatsCan boss to speak out on why he quit

Globe and Mail: Three cheers for a hidden agenda!

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives: All the latest on the census long-form debacle

Globe and Mail: Race is on to find compromise on census
Industry Minister Tony Clement testifies at 9 a.m. (ET) on Tuesday before the House of  Commons industry committee on the Conservatives’ decision to do away with the long-form census. With time running out, statistics council puts forth deal that aims to salvage mandatory survey and allay privacy concerns

Rabble.ca:  Lies, damned lies, and the census

Samara: Philosophy lives! (the census edition)

The Toronto Star: Walkom: The census kerfuffle isn’t about the census; it’s about Stephen Harper

The Record: Census cynicism? Worries raised over response rates for 2011 census and survey

Canadian Press: Will Canadians fill out the census and the survey?

Toronto Star: Government-appointed advisory group says Canadians need full census info National Statistics Council joins census debate the day before former StatsCan boss to speak out on why he quit

CBC:  UPDATED – CensusWatch: The Statistical Society of Canada, the Fraser Institute and Don Drummond? Now it’s a party!

Globe and Mail: Why did top statistician take so long to resign over census?

David Eaves: It was never about privacy…

National Post: Stephen Taylor: The beginning of the end of the Canadian welfare state

Globe and Mail: Harper’s census push months in the making
Prime Minister Stephen Harper waves to the crowd at a Calgary Stampede breakfast in on July 10, 2010. Scrapping the mandatory long form stems from libertarian convictions, insiders say.

Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami: Media Advisory Inuit to Address House of Commons Committee on Census Long Form

Globe and Mail: Retirees wary of Tory census move

National Statistical Council of Canada: Press Release

Post Media News:  Statistics council suggests compromise to end census battle

Government coercion in perspective: where does the long form of the census fit?

July 27, 2010 in Census, federal government, government, openmovement by Tracey | Permalink

Dr. Stanbury has been communicating with me over the past few weeks and has asked that I publish this Hill Times articled on Datalibre.ca.

Government coercion in perspective: where does the long form of the
census fit?: Filling out the long form census takes under 30 minutes, it does not ask about your sex life and no individual data have every been released. StatsCan officials know that their very existence depends on keeping individual data top secret.

By W.T. STANBURY <http://www.thehilltimes.ca/column/author/31> he is professor emeritus, University of British Columbia. Published July 26, 2010

The Hill Times

The core of the Harper government’s case for making the long form of the census voluntary (rather than mandatory for 20 per cent of households as it has been for 35 years) is that it is intrusive and coercive.

Here I examine the various types of coercion that are now or have been imposed by the federal government in an effort to put the mandatory long form into perspective.

The opponents of the government’s move to spend an additional $35-million to try to elicit one-third of households to volunteer to complete the long form (and I am one of them) need to deal directly and respectfully with the arguments for the change. Analysis can help here as in all policy issues.

The Government’s Arguments

The initial stated argument for the change in the census was as follows: “Our feeling was that the change was to make a reasonable limit on what most Canadians felt was an intrusion into their personal privacy in terms of answering the longer form,” Erik Waddell, spokesman for Industry Minister Tony Clement, said (Jennifer Ditchburn, Canadian Press, June 29, 2010).

Mr. Clement said the government’s decision (actually that of the PM personally, according to Jeffrey Simpson, The Globe and Mail, July 17, 2010) was “based on the fact that many Canadians had complained of the coercive and intrusive nature of the census, but Clement had not seen polling on the issue.”….According to Clement, “Every MP has had complaints like that so this year we decided to at least try another method that could be a sound method that would beat the issue of concern of degradation of data, and deal with the issue of coercion and too much intrusiveness,” (Ditchburn, Canadian Press, July 1,2010)

Mr. Clement said a week later that “Every four years, when the census is taken, Canadians flock to their local Member of Parliament to complain about being forced to answer ‘very intrusive questions,’” which cover everything from income to education level. “That’s the balance we’re trying to strike, between people who are concerned about that as opposed to the need for data,” (The Globe and Mail, July 7, 2010).

On July 13, 2010, Industry Canada issued a press release. “The government does not think it is appropriate to force Canadians to divulge detailed personal information under threat of prosecution.”

When told that the privacy commissioner had received less than a handful of complaints, Mr. Clement said that “If you’re concerned about government intrusion, you’re not likely to complain to another organ of government…. They would see it as compounding the issue if they complained,”(Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail, July 15, 2010).

Sen. Marjory LeBreton, who leads the Conservatives in the Senate, suggested nothing will be lost by moving to a voluntary long census. “There’s still going to be a long form,” she said in Ottawa. “The only difference is, this is voluntary. Canadians, I believe and we believe, will be very happy to fill in the long forms,” she said, (The Canadian Press, July 13,2010)

Maxime Bernier, a former minister of Industry, was quoted in a news story on July 18 saying that during the last census period in 2006, he received an average of 1,000 e-mail complaints a day while the survey was going on. (Heather Schofield, Canadian Press, July 18, 2010).

Treasury Board President Stockwell Day said “All we’re saying is, people shouldn’t be threatened with jail because they don’t want to tell some unknown bureaucrat how many bedrooms they’ve got in their house,” on Calgary radio station QR-77… “And you know, even prisoners of war only have to give their name, rank and serial number,” (quoted by Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail blog, July 23,2010).

Editorial Support

By July 24, only one newspaper editorial supported the government. (In contrast, The Globe and Mail has published five editorials opposing the change: July 12, 19, 21, 22, 24).

Here is the core of its argument of the Toronto Sun on July 20,2010: “Call us crazy, but we believe the less the government knows about our personal lives the better. Big Brother is so … well, so 1984.It’s also more reminiscent of the constraints of communism than the freedoms of democracy….We hope this bully-boy tactic—either fill it out or face prosecution—is forever down for the count…. If it [the state ] has no business in the bedroom, then it has absolutely no business knowing how many bedrooms are in our homes.”

For a wonderful deconstruction of the Sun’s editorial, see Robert Silver, Globe and Mail blog, July 20,2010

Legitimate Exercise of Coercion

In a democratic society, sovereignty rests with the people. They delegate to their elected representatives authority to make laws which are ultimately backed by coercion. Thus the people arrange to be coerced by the government they establish. The power to impose coercion is—properly—tightly circumscribed. First, both Houses of Parliament must approve the laws under which coercion can be exercised. Second, the civil right of individuals are protected in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the 1982 Constitution. Third, in almost every case, coercion on the form of monetary penalties or imprisonment cannot be imposed until after a trial has been held before a court or court-like tribunal. In all cases, there are rights of appeal, usually in two stages. Fourth, in some cases, individuals can appeal to one or more specialized bodies which have a measure of independence to investigate allegations of improper action by a government department or agency.

Coercion in Perspective

Coercion by the state is always a matter of degree. Clearly the most coercive act by the state is the imposition of the death penalty after due process of law. (Canada eliminated the death penalty for murder on July 14,1976. The last execution was in 1962). Next might come the imposition of the draft for military service in time of war. (Note that the death rate varies greatly by branch of service and particular types of assignment.) Somewhat less coercive is imprisonment for a long tern (up to life) after due process of law. (But we know that the actual sentence may be far less than the one handed down at trial.) Then would come a large fine—by large I mean large relative to the person’s ability to pay—and which also ensures that there are no ill-gotten gains from the crime. And then we come to fines for parking tickets (at the local level) and civil monetary penalties (for example, the Ethics Commissioner can impose a penalty of up to $500 for failure to file the required information.)

Taxes are by definition compulsory levies, and in Canada the overall tax burden is high because we have a welfare state. People understand that if they fail to pay the taxes levied by government, they could be fined ,hit with penalties exceeding the unpaid taxes, and—just possibly—be put in jail.

Long Form as Coercion

So how coercive was the mandatory long form of the Census? Every five years a random sample of 20 per cent of households were selected to complete the 53-question long form. This task–done only by an adult for the entire household–usually took less than 30 minutes. The questions may probe what some define as intimate matters, but the responses are not just confidential—they are treated as top secret by Statistics Canada. The agency takes great pride in keeping individual files secret, and in preventing inferences about small groups of individuals from published information.

How many people would be required to respond to the long form? About 1.1 million persons out of a total population of some 34.2 million as of July 1,2010. Here is the calculation. The average size of households is 2.5 persons, based on the 2006 census—so that means 13.7 million households. A 20 per cent random sample equals 2.74 million households. But only one adult in each household answers the questions—so divide by 2.5 to get a total of 1.1 million..

Despite the possible use of coercion, StatsCan relies—as do the income tax authorities—on voluntary compliance. They are prepared to make several call backs and/or telephone calls to urge compliance. Officials know that the maximum fine that can be imposed if a case is taken to court is $500. In theory ,a judge could jail a person for non-compliance, but there is no record of this ever being done. Section 31 of the Statistics Act provides for these penalties: “fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both.”

Prosecution can take years to reach a resolution. For example, Saskatoon-based activist Sandra Finley continues to fight the federal government in court over her refusal to return the 2006 census, (Ditchburn, Canadian Press, July 1, 2010).

In summary terms, the average Canadian adult will be chosen to fill out the long form once in a lifetime. The task will take under 30 minutes. Some of the questions may be puzzling, but they do not ask about anyone’s sex life. (That is left to Oprah and some other talk show hosts.) Finally, no individual’s data have ever been released. StatsCan officials know that their very existence depends on keeping individual data top secret.

Conclusion

When compared to the full range of coercion exercised by the federal government, that related to the long form of the census is the most mild. And there are very good reasons why it is mandatory. A random sample (in this case 20 per cent of households, not individuals) is the only scientific way (short of a 100 per cent count) of assuring that the data will not be biased in ways that are impossible to determine precisely.

W.T. Stanbury is professor emeritus, University of British Columbia.

news@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times

Canadian Census Compromise and New Chief

July 26, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, openmovement, policy, politics by Tracey | 3 comments

Here is a proposal that is on the table by the National Statistics Council of Canada:

The issue of the long form census has to be settled first. The outlines for a compromise solution were contained in a statement, issued yesterday, by the National Statistics Council. I fully endorse their ideas: :

  1. Restore the compulsory long form or make the equivalent National Household Survey compulsory;
  2. Repeal from the Statistics Act any mention of jail as a penalty for not completing the long form or an equivalent compulsory National Household Survey.
  3. For all future censuses introduce a series of explicit tests that would determine whether a proposed census question passes an appropriate balance between critical need for information and privacy.
  4. Instruct Statistics Canada to run tests, in time for recommendations about the 2016 census, concerning the possible impacts of a voluntary long form census.

a separate source is recommending the following regarding the appointment of a New Chief Statistician:

A new Chief Statistician has to be found with impeccable credentials and high credibility. Furthermore, the process should be, and should be seen as being totally transparent.[ It is] suggest[ed] the appointment of a search committee of eminent persons (such as the chair of the National Statistics Council, President of the Statistical Society of Canada, Chief Justice of Canada, President of the Royal Society of Canada, retired clerks of the Privy Council or others of similar credibility and profile). The committee would submit to the government a short list from which the Chief Statistician would be selected. It is utterly essential that in the midst of this crisis the next Chief Statistician be a person who is, and who was selected by a process, that is visibly above partisan fray.

Weekend Census Media Roundup

July 26, 2010 in canada, Census, federal government, government, openmovement, policy, politics by Tracey | Permalink

NJN Network: Scrapped mandatory census cuts even deeper for disability advocacy group – Disability advocacy groups have major challenge ahead following cuts to the census and StatsCan’s disability survey

The Hill Times: Census uproar impacts ‘broader narrative’ of PM’s relationship with public service. Some say the issue will remind voters of a string of incidents in which the government has interfered with the federal public service.

Cyberpresse: Quand Stephen Harper aimait le recensement

Hill Times: Shine a light census blow-back

Globe and Mail: Scrapped mandatory census cuts even deeper for disability advocacy group Disability advocacy groups have major challenge ahead following cuts to the census and StatsCan’s disability survey

Globe and Mail: Why the census matters just about everywhere

Globe and Mail: Flaherty defends Tory census plan Finance Minister says Canadians will fill in voluntary census for ‘the good of the country’

Yahoo News: Political firestorm rages over Canadian census

Worthwhile Canadian Initiative: Why a Mandatory Census is Necessary

Toronto Star: Why the long census matters

105 Creations: Why we need to keep the long-form Census.

Le Devoir: Recensement – Ottawa doit faire marche arrière
Seul le quart des Canadiens jugent que le gouvernement Harper doit maintenir sa décision de retirer le formulaire long obligatoire

Globe and Mail: Harper’s census push months in the making Scrapping the mandatory long form stems from libertarian convictions, insiders say

Right of Centre: My Census Email to Peter Braid (CPC – KW)

CBC: Clement to face MPs on census

Vancouver Sun: Six things you should know about the Tories’ census change

Macleans: What time do you leave for work? Ottawa’s never actually asked

Why the Census Matters UIA and Jewish Federation. This is a great summary of the Issues. I am not in favour of the make due approach that is discussed, however, the speaker does qualify the statement with the fact that analysis can be done but not longitudinally. Meaning the new baseline for social analysis in Canada would become 2011 – we start over at ground zero.

Friday Media Round-Up

July 24, 2010 in Uncategorized by Tracey | Permalink

I am not a Liberal, and find the partisan jibes unnecessary in this video, yet, all the key points about the census are in here:

Fun Stuff:

Postcard from the Edge: Do you enjoy filling out surveys?

Une Chanson: Trente-quatre millions de gens

2006 Long Form Question and 2006 & 2011 Short Form Questions

July 24, 2010 in Uncategorized by Tracey | Permalink

Here are the questions of the 2006 Long Form.  Currently only the 2011 short form questions are available because:

  1. there is no long form of the census for 2011, and
  2. a new survey called the National Household Survey is purported to be its replacement.  Do read other posts in this blog to understand why this is not a replacement, and is in fact a degradation of what was collected. Also see Census Watch.

Here is a link to the 2006 short form and here is some General information about the 2006 census which explains the questions and provides reasoning as to why these are asked.

Contentious issues:

  • Here is the Statistics Act of Canada. Item 31 – False or unlawful information is clause  in the Act that is causing an uproar, yet, there are no records of these sanctions being ever being imposed.  It does speak to the mandatory nature of filling out the census.  Also, this is not a long form issues, this is an Act issue.
  • Questions #53 (long form); #8 for 2006 (Short Form), and F1 for 2011 (Short Form) also also hotly debated and is framed as a privacy issue in the media by the Government.  However, it remains for the 2011 short form, which somehow does not seem to cause an uproar. People do not have to click this option.
  • It was purported by the Government in the papers that the time people left for work was too much to ask, yet, that question does not appear in 2006.  How people commute to work is however asked.
  • The number of bedrooms is asked in the context of the dwellings dimension, and again I am not sure why this is problematic.  These questions are asked to inform the housing market in a region, and if people are concerned, they should look at their Housing Registries to see how much is available publicly there!  Way more than what the Census is asking.
  • People were also concerned about the Income Questions. Yet, how do we know income gaps, average incomes and so on without asking these.  However, this concern is mute because, this same information is available in Tax-Filer Small Area Administrative Data (SAAD) aggregated into postal code geography.  The benefit of getting the same information in the census is the demographic component, which of course CRA does not collect.  Also the Census geographies are not the same as the CRA geographies which makes cross-tabbing impossible.

I encourage others to post their responses!

Note: Religion was asked in the 2001 Census, this question is only asked every 10 years – It was questions #22. You can read information about the 2001 Questionnaire here. That information includes the reasoning behind the questions. The 2001 questionnaire is available here. You can access some data here.

2006 Long Form Questions

Including yourself, how many persons usually live here, at this address, as of May 16, 2006?

Including yourself, list below, using CAPITAL LETTERS, all persons who usually live here.

Did you leave anyone out of Step B because you were not sure the person should be listed?

Is anyone listed in Step B a farm operator who produces at least one agricultural product intended for sale? (crops, livestock, milk, poultry, eggs, greenhouse or nursery products,  Christmas trees,sod, honey, bees, maple syrup products, furs, etc.)

1. Name

2. Sex

  • Male
  • Female

3. Date of Birth

4. Marital Status

  • Never Legally Married (Single);
  • Legally Married (and not seperated);
    Seprarated, but still legally married;
  • Divorced
  • Widowed

5. Is this person living with a common-law partner?

6. Relationship to person 1

  • Husband or wife of Person 1
  • Opposite-sex common-law partner of Person 1
  • Same-sex common-law partner of Person 1
  • Son or daughter of Person 1
  • Son-in-law or daughter-in-law of Person 1
  • Grandchild of Person 1
  • Father or mother of Person 1
  • Father-in-law or mother-in-law of Person 1
  • Grandparent of Person 1
  • Brother or sister of Person 1
  • Brother-in-law or sister-in-law of Person 1
  • Lodger or boarder
  • Room-mate
  • Other — Specify

7. Does this person have any difficulty hearing, seeing, communicating, walking, climbing stairs, bending, learning or doing any similar activities?

8. Does a physical condition or mental condition or health problem reduce the amount or the kind of activity this person can do:

  • a) at home,
  • b) at work or school?
  • c) in other activities, for example, transportation or leisure?

9.Where was this person born?

  • Born in Canada w/Provinces and Territories listed as options,
  • Born Outside Canada, specify Country.

10. Of what country is this person a citizen? Indicate more than one citizenship, if applicable. “Canada, by naturalizatio ” refers to the process by which an immigrant is granted citizenship of Canada, under the Citizenship Act.

  • Canada, by birth
  • Canada, by naturalization
  • Other country — Specify

11. Is this person now, or has this person ever been, a landed immigrant? A “ landedimmigrant ” (permanent resident) is a person who has been granted the right to live inCanada permanently by immigration authorities.

12. In what year did this person first become a landed immigrant?

13. Can this person speak English or French well enough to conduct a conversation?

  • English only
  • French only
  • Both English and French
  • Neither English nor French

14. What language(s), other than English or French, can this person speak well enough to conduct a conversation?

  • None
  • Specify Other Language

15.
a) What language does this person speak most often at home?

  • English,
  • French,
  • Other

b) Does this person speak any other languages on a regular basis at home?

  • No, Yes English,
  • Yes French,
  • Yes Other

16. What is the language that this person first learned at home in childhood and  still understands? If this person no longer understands the first language learned, indicate the second language learned.

  • English,
  • French,
  • Other-Specify

17. What were the ethnic or cultural origins of this person’s ancestors? An ancestor isusually more distant than a grandparent. For example, Canadian, English, French, Chinese, Italian, German, Scottish, East Indian, Irish, Cree, Mi’kmaq (Micmac), Métis, Inuit (Eskimo), Ukrainian, Dutch, Filipino, Polish, Portuguese, Jewish, Greek, Jamaican, Vietnamese, Lebanese, Chilean, Salvadorean, Somali, etc.

18. Is this person an Aboriginal person, that is, North American Indian, Métis or Inuit (Eskimo)?

19. Is this person:

  • White
  • Chinese
  • South Asian (e.g., East Indian,
  • Pakistani, Sri Lankan, etc.)
  • Black
  • Filipino
  • Latin American
  • Southeast Asian (e.g., Vietnamese,
  • Cambodian, Malaysian, Laotian, etc.)
  • Arab
  • West Asian (e.g., Iranian, Afghan, etc.)
  • Korean
  • Japanese
  • Other — Specify

This information is collected to support programs that promote equal opportunity for everyone to share in the social, cultural and economic life of Canada.

20. Is this person a member of an Indian Band / First Nation? Specify Indian Band / First Nation (for example, Musqueam)

21. Is this person a Treaty Indian or a Registered Indian as defined by the Indian Act of Canada?

22. Answer Questions 23 to 52 for each person aged 15 and over.

23. Mobility – Where did this person live 1 year ago, that is, on May 16, 2005?

  • Lived at the same address as now
  • Lived at a different address in the same city, town, village, township, municipality or Indian reserve
  • Lived in a different city, town, village, township, municipality or Indian reserve in Canada
  • Specify name of: City, town, village, township, municipality or Indian reserve

24. Mobility – Where did this person live 5 years ago, that is, on May 16, 2001?

  • Lived at the same address as now
  • Lived at a different address in the same city, town, village, township, municipality or Indian reserve
  • Lived in a different city, town, village, township, municipality or Indian reserve in Canada
  • Specify name of: City, town, village, township, municipality or Indian reserve

25. Place of Birth of Parents – Where was each of this person’s parents born?

  • Mother – Born in Canada or Born outside Canada Specify country
  • Father – Born in Canada or Born outside Canada Specify country

26. Education – Has this person completed a secondary (high) school diploma or equivalent? Examples of secondary (high) school equivalency certificates are General Educational Development (GED) and Adult Basic Education (ABE).

  • Secondary (high) school diploma or certificate
  • Yes, secondary (high) school diploma
  • Yes, secondary (high) school equivalency certificate
  • No

27. Has this person completed a Registered Apprenticeship or other trades certificate or diploma?

  • Registered Apprenticeship or trades certificate or diploma
  • Yes, Registered Apprenticeship certificate
  • Yes, other trades certificate or diploma
  • No

28. Has this person completed a college, CEGEP, or other non-university certificate or diploma?

  • Yes, certificate or diploma from a program of less than 3 months
  • Yes, certificate or diploma from a program of 3 months to less than 1 year
  • Yes, certificate or diploma from a program of 1 to 2 years
  • Yes, certificate or diploma from a program of more than 2 years
  • No

29. Has this person completed a university degree, certificate or diploma?

  • Yes, certificate or diploma below bachelor level
  • Yes, bachelor’s degree (including LL.B.)
  • Yes, certificate or diploma above bachelor level
  • Yes, master’s degree
  • Yes, degree in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine or optometry
  • Yes, earned doctorate
  • No

30. What was the major field of study of the highest degree, certificate or diploma that this person completed? Please be specific. For example:
• automobile mechanics
• civil engineering
• dental technology
• aircraft mechanics
• medical laboratory technology
• day-care
• agricultural economics

31. In what province, territory or country did this person complete his / her highest degree, certificate or diploma?

  • In Canada Specify province or territory
  • Outside Canada Specify country

32. Has this person attended a school, college, CEGEP or university at any time since September 2005?

  • Yes, attended elementary, junior high school or high school
  • Yes, attended trade school, college, CEGEP or other non-university institution
  • Yes, attended university
  • No, did not attend school at any time since September 2005

33. Last week, how many hours did this person spend doing the following activities:

(a) doing unpaid housework, yard work or home maintenance for members of this household, or others? Some examples include: preparing meals, washing the car, doing laundry, cutting the grass, shopping, household planning, etc.

  • None
  • Less than 5 hours
  • 5 to 14 hours
  • 15 to 29 hours
  • 30 to 59 hours
  • 60 hours or more

(b) looking after one or more of this person’s own children, or the children of others, without pay? Some examples include: bathing or playing with young children, driving children to sports activities or helping them with homework, talking with teens about their problems, etc.

  • None
  • Less than 5 hours
  • 5 to 14 hours
  • 15 to 29 hours
  • 30 to 59 hours
  • 60 hours or more

(c) providing unpaid care or assistance to one or more seniors? Some examples include: providing personal care to a senior family member, visiting seniors, talking with them on the telephone, helping them with shopping, banking or with taking medication, etc.

  • None
  • Less than 5 hours
  • 5 to 9 hours
  • 10 to 19 hours
  • 20 hours or more

34. Last week, how many hours did this person spend working for pay or in self-employment? Please enter the total number of hours worked for pay or in self-employment at all jobs held last week.
Include:

  • working for wages, salary, tips or commission;
  • working in his / her own business, farm or professional practice, alone or in partnership;
  • working directly towards the operation of a family farm or business without formal pay arrangements (e.g., assisting in seeding, doing accounts).

35. Last week, was this person on temporary lay-off or absent from his / her job or business?

  • No
  • Yes, on temporary lay-off from a job to which this person expects to return
  • Yes, on vacation, ill, on strike or locked out, or absent for other reasons

36. Last week, did this person have definite arrangements to start a new job within the next four weeks?

37. Did this person look for paid work during the past four weeks? For example, did thisperson contact an employment centre, check with employers, place or answer newspaper ads,etc.?

  • no
  • Yes, looked for full-time work
  • Yes, looked for part-time work (less than 30 hours per week)

38. Could this person have started a job last week had one been available?

  • Yes, could have started a job
  • No, already had a job
  • No, because of temporary illness or disability
  • No, because of personal or family responsibilities
  • No, going to school
  • No, other reasons

39. When did this person last work for pay or in self-employment, even for a few days?

  • In 2006
  • In 2005
  • Before 2005
  • Never

Note: Questions 40 to 48 refer to this person’s job or business last week. If this person held no job last week, answer for the job of longest duration since January 1, 2005. If this person held more than one job last week, answer for the job at which he / she worked the most hours.

40. For whom did this person work? For self-employed persons, enter the name of their business. If the business does not have a name, enter the person’s name.

  • Name of firm, government agency, etc.

41. What kind of business, industry or service was this? Please give details. For example:

• new home construction
• primary school
• municipal police
• wheat farm
• shoe store
• food wholesale
• car parts factory

42. What was this person’s work or occupation? Please be specific. For example:

• legal secretary
• plumber
• fishing guide
• wood furniture assembler
• secondary school teacher
(If in the Armed Forces, give rank.)

43. In this work, what were this person’s main activities? Please give details. For example:

• prepared legal documents
• installed residential plumbing
• guided fishing parties
• made wood furniture products
• taught mathematics

44. In this job or business, was this person mainly:

  • working for wages, salary, tips or commission?
  • working without pay for his / her spouse
    or another relative in a family farm or business?
  • self-employed without paid help (alone or in partnership)?
  • self-employed with paid help (alone or in partnership)?

45. If self-employed, was this person’s farm or business incorporated?

46. At what address did this person usually work most of the time?

  • Worked at home (including farms)
  • Worked outside Canada
  • No fixed workplace address
  • Worked at the address specified below:
  • Specify complete address Street address

47. How did this person usually get to work? If this person used more than one method of transportation, mark the one used for most of the travel distance.

  • Car, truck or van — as driver
  • Car, truck or van — as passenger
  • Public transit (e.g., bus, streetcar, subway,
  • light-rail transit, commuter train, ferry)
  • Walked to work
  • Bicycle
  • Motorcycle
  • Taxicab
  • Other method

48.
(a) In this job, what language did this person use most often?

  • English
  • French
  • Other — Specify

(b) Did this person use any other languages on a regular basis in this job?

  • No
  • Yes, English
  • Yes, French
  • Yes, Other — Specify

49. In how many weeks did this person work in 2005? Please enter the total number of weeks worked for pay or in self-employment at all jobs held in 2005. Include those weeks in which this person:

  • was on vacation or sick leave with pay;
  • worked full time or part time;
  • worked for wages, salary, tips or commission;
  • was self-employed;
  • worked directly towards the operation of a family farm or business without formal pay arrangements.

50. During most of those weeks, did this person work full time or part time?

  • Full time (30 hours or more per week)
  • Part time (less than 30 hours per week)

51. To save time, each person can give Statistics Canada permission to use the income information already available in his / her income tax files instead of answering Question

52. This option is only available for persons who filed a tax return for the year ending December 31, 2005.
• Please note that your income tax information will be used for statistical purposes only.

Does this person give Statistics Canada permission to use the income information already available in his / her income tax files for the year ending December 31, 2005?

52. During the year ending December 31, 2005, did this person receive any income from the sources listed below? Answer “ Yes ” or “No” for all sources. If “ Yes ”, also enter the amount; in case of a loss, also mark “ Loss ”.

PAID EMPLOYMENT:

(a) Total wages and salaries, including commissions, bonuses, tips, taxable benefits, research grants, royalties, etc., before any deductions

SELF-EMPLOYMENT:

(b) Net farm income (gross receipts minus expenses), including grants and subsidies under farm-support programs, marketing board payments, gross insurance proceeds

(c) Net non-farm income from unincorporated business, professional practice, etc. (gross receipts minus expenses)

INCOME FROM GOVERNMENT:

(d) Child benefits, such as child tax benefits, family allowances (federal, provincial and territorial)

(e) Old Age Security Pension, Guaranteed Income Supplement, Allowance and Allowance for the Survivor from federal government only (provincial income supplements should be reported in

(f) Benefits from Canada or Quebec Pension Plan

(g) Benefits from Employment Insurance (total benefits before tax deductions)

(h) Other income from government sources, such as provincial income supplements and grants, the GST/QST/ HST credit, provincial tax credits, workers’ compensation, veterans’ pensions, welfare payments

OTHER INCOME:

(i) Dividends, interest on bonds, deposits and savings certificates, and other investment income,such as net rents from real estate, interest from mortgages. Do not include capital gains / losses.

(j) Retirement pensions, superannuation and annuities, including those from RRSPs and RRIFs. Do not include withdrawals from a pension plan or RRSP.

(k) Other money income, such as alimony, child support, scholarships

TOTAL INCOME in 2005 from all sources

INCOME TAX PAID on 2005 income (federal, provincial and territorial)

The following question is for all persons who usually live here including those less than 15 years old. If you are answering on behalf of other people, please consult each person.

53. The Statistics Act guarantees the confidentiality of your census information. Only if you mark “YES” to this question will your personal information be made public, 92 years after the 2006 Census. If you mark “NO” or leave the answer blank, your personal information will never be made publicly available.

  • Does this person agree to make his / her 2006 Census information available for public release in 2098 (92 years after the census)?

Dwellings:

h1. Who pays the rent or mortgage, taxes, electricity, etc., for this dwelling?

h2. Is this dwelling:

  • owned by you or a member of this
  • household (even if it is still being paid for)?
  • rented (even if no cash rent is paid)?

h3.

(a) How many rooms are there in this dwelling? Include kitchen, bedrooms, finished rooms in attic or basement, etc. Do not count bathrooms, halls, vestibules and rooms used solely for business purposes.

(b) How many of these rooms are bedrooms?

h4. When was this dwelling originally built? Mark the period in which the building was completed, not the time of any later remodelling, additions or conversions. If year is not known, give best estimate.

  • 1920 or before
  • 1921-1945
  • 1946-1960
  • 1961-1970
  • 1971-1980
  • 1981-1985
  • 1986-1990
  • 1991-1995
  • 1996-2000
  • 2001-2006

h5. Is this dwelling in need of any repairs? Do not include desirable remodelling or additions.

  • No, only regular maintenance is needed (painting, furnace cleaning, etc.)
  • Yes, minor repairs are needed (missing or loose floor tiles, bricks or shingles, defectivesteps, railing or siding, etc.)
  • Yes, major repairs are needed (defective plumbing or electrical wiring, structural repairsto walls, floors or ceilings, etc.)

Answer Questions H6 to H8 for only the dwelling that you now occupy, even if you own or rent more than one dwelling. If the exact amount is not known, please give best estimate.

H6. For this dwelling, what are the YEARLY payments (last 12 months) for:

(a) electricity?
(b) oil, gas, coal, wood or other fuels?
(c) water and other municipal services?

h7. For RENTERS only: What is the monthly rent paid for this dwelling?

h8. For OWNERS only, answer parts (a) through (f):

(a) What are the total regular monthly mortgage or loan payments for this dwelling?
(b) Are the property taxes (municipal and school) included in the amount shown in part (a)?
(c) What are the estimated yearly property taxes (municipal and school) for this dwelling?
(d) If you were to sell this dwelling now, for how much would you expect to sell it?
(e) Is this dwelling part of a registered condominium?
(f) What are the monthly condominium fees?

Community groups, businesses and governments develop programs and services such as education, health and other social and economic programs based on census data. The information is widely used in our schools to teach children about our country. Information may also be used by Statistics Canada for selecting samples or following up respondents for some of our surveys.

By law, Statistics Canada must take a census every five years and every household must fill in a census form. Statistics Canada protects absolutely the confidentiality of your information. No one outside Statistics Canada has access to your personal information without your consent.

In question 53, your consent is sought to make your census information available in 92 years for important historical and genealogical research. It’s important for you and your community that you count yourself in by May 16.

 2006 and 2011 Short Form Questions

Including yourself, how many persons usually live here, at this address, as of May 16, 2006?

Including yourself, list below, using CAPITAL LETTERS, all persons who usually live here.

Did you leave anyone out of Step B because you were not sure the person should be listed?

Is anyone listed in Step B a farm operator who produces at least one agricultural product intended for sale? (crops, livestock, milk, poultry, eggs, greenhouse or nursery products,  Christmas trees,sod, honey, bees, maple syrup products, furs, etc.)

1. Name

2. Sex

  • Male
  • Female

3. Date of Birth

4. Marital Status

  • Never Legally Married (Single);
  • Legally Married (and not seperated);
    Seprarated, but still legally married;
  • Divorced
  • Widowed

5. Is this person living with a common-law partner?

6. Relationship to person 1

  • Husband or wife of Person 1 (2011 add Opposite Sex and Same Sex)
  • Opposite-sex common-law partner of Person 1
  • Same-sex common-law partner of Person 1
  • Son or daughter of Person 1
  • Son-in-law or daughter-in-law of Person 1
  • Grandchild of Person 1
  • Father or mother of Person 1
  • Father-in-law or mother-in-law of Person 1
  • Grandparent of Person 1
  • Brother or sister of Person 1
  • Foster Child (2011 Only)
  • Brother-in-law or sister-in-law of Person 1 (2006 only Not in 2011)
  • Lodger or boarder (2006 only not in 2011)
  • Room-mate
  • Other — Specify

7. (Q. 16 in 2006 long-form) 16. What is the language that this person first learned at home in childhood and  still understands? If this person no longer understands the first language learned, indicate the second language learned.

  • English,
  • French,
  • Other-Specify

8. (Q. 53. in 2006 long form) The Statistics Act guarantees the confidentiality of your census information. Only if you mark “YES” to this question will your personal information be made public, 92 years after the 2006 Census. If you mark “NO” or leave the answer blank, your personal information will never be made publicly available.

  • Does this person agree to make his / her 2006 Census information available for public release in 2098 (92 years after the census)?

F1.  (2011) This question is for all persons listed on the questionnaire.

Only if you mark “YES” to this question will your census responses and family history be part of the historical record of Canada. A “YES” means your census responses will be available to family members and historical researchers, 92 years after the 2011 Census, in 2103.

If you mark “NO” or leave the answer blank, your census responses will never be made available to future generations.

  • Does this person agree to make his or her 2011 Census information available in 2103 (92 years after the census)?

My Responses to the 2006 Long Form Census

July 24, 2010 in Uncategorized by Tracey | Permalink

Here are my responses to the 2006 Long Form.  Here is a link to the 2006 short form and here is some General information about the 2006 census. I will post the questions in a subsequent post.  I still for the life of me do not understand what the fuss is about, there is nothing nefarious in this questionnaire? Also, here is the Statistics Act of Canada.  Item 31 is the item in the Act that seems to be causing an uproar, yet, there are no records of these sanctions being imposed.

Note: The contentious question #53 is both on the long and short form!

I encourage others to post their responses!

Note: Religion was asked in the 2001 Census, this question is only asked every 10 years – It was questions #22. You can read information about the 2001 Questionnaire here.  That information includes the reasoning behind the questions.  The 2001 questionnaire is available here.  You can access some data here.

My Responses:

2 people (Long & Short form)

no (Long & Short form)

no (Long & Short form)

1. Tracey P. Lauriault, Son (Long & Short form)

2. F (Long & Short form)

3. DOB – ladies do not share their age on the Internet! (Long & Short form)

4. Never Legally Married (I have lots of paper & cracker jack rings though and do wear the occasional white dress!) (Long & Short form)

5. No (Long & Short form)

6. Son of Person 1 (Long & Short form)

7. No (Long Form only)

8. No (Long Form only)

9. Canada, Ontario (Long Form only)

10. Canada by birth (Long Form only)

11. No (Long Form only)

12. Not Applicable (Long Form only)

13. Both English and French (Long Form only)

14. Japanese (Long Form only)

15. a) Eglish, b) not (Long Form only)

16. French and English (Long & Short form)

17. Scottish, Irish, French, Aboriginal and well maybe one or two I do not know about! (Long Form only)

18. No (Long Form only)

19. White (beige in the summer!) (Long Form only)

20. No (Long Form only)

21. No (Long Form only)

23. Same Address as Now (Long Form only)

24. Lived at a different address in the same city (Long Form only)

25. Mother – Canada, Father – Canada (Long Form only)

26. Yes (Long Form only)

27. No (Long Form only)

28. Yes, certificate or diploma from a program of 1 to 2 years (Long Form only)

29. Yes, master’s degree (Phd In progress) (Long Form only)

30. Geography (Long Form only)

31. Canada, Ontario (Long Form only)

32. No (Long Form only)

33. a) 15-19, b) 5-14 c) none (Long Form only)

34. 35 (Long Form only)

35. No (Long Form only)

36. Not Applicable (Long Form only)

37. Not Applicable (Long Form only)

38. Not Applicable (Long Form only)

39. Not Applicable (Long Form only)

40. Carleton University, Acacia Consulting and Research (Long Form only)

41. University, Consulting and Research (Long Form only)

42. Researcher (Long Form only)

43. Research (Long Form only)

44. Working for Wages and Self Employed (Long Form only)

45. No (Long Form only)

46. Carleton University 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S5B6 and at worked at home (Long Form only)

47. Public Transit and Bicycle (Long Form only)

48. a) English and b) French (Long Form only)

49. 50 (Long Form only)

50. Part-Time (Long Form only)

51. I gave Statistics Canada permission to use the income information already available in his / her income tax files for the year ending December 31, 2005. (Long Form only)

52. see answer to 51. (Long Form only)

53. I agreed to make his / her 2006 Census information available for public  release in 2098 (92 years after the census)? (Short and Long Form only)

h1. Me (Long Form only)

h2. Rent (Long Form only)

h3. 5, 2 (Long Form only)

h4. 1971-1980 (Long Form only)

h5. No (Long Form only)

h6. a) Electricity 555$ b) 1230$ c) N/A (Long Form only)

h7. You could find out by looking on the Internet (Long Form only)

h8. Not Applicable (Long Form only)

« Older entries