Long-form Census - Festive Edition

A random thought occurred to me today, as I take my first day off for Christmas vacation. The biblical-era Roman census, which required that Mary and Joseph return to his hometown of Bethlehem to be counted - finding no room at the inn, spending the night in a stable, etc. - certainly puts the inconvenience and intrusiveness into one's daily life of taking a couple of hours in the comfort of one's own home to answer questions about one's language skills, ethnic origin, income level, and other Canadian long-form census topics into perspective, doesn't it?

A pity I didn't think of that argument several months ago. Ah well.

Merry Christmas all!

Recommend this Post

Election 2011: Thoughts on "Truthiness" and Evidence-Based Policy

Just a quick post today to link to a blogpost I was invited to contribute to canada.com's Decision Canada election website. In it, I reflect on recent Conservative changes to programs such as the long-form census and the court challenges program which have undermined evidence-based policy-making and a rigorous democratic culture.

I'm marking exams at the moment, which explains the lack of new posts since the weekend, but I shall return!

Recommend this Post

The "War on Experts"

Much of my research deals with the development of public policy in Canada in the post-World War II era. A key theme that crops up regularly, particularly in the 1950s through to the 1970s, is the "rise of the expert" as governments and citizens increasingly turned to professionals who were considered "expert" in their fields to guide the development of policy.

In recent years, it seems that just the opposite is taking place. Conservative governments and movements have been taking aim at the "pointy-headed eggheads" and dismissing evidence and analysis, relying instead on "gut", "common sense" and just plain old "because-I-said-so"ism. It's extremely troubling for anyone who advocated a rational approach to the development of our society.

With that in mind, take a gander at Andrew Coyne's latest column. He seems to see a silver lining in the relative failure of these anti-expertise politics to take hold. I'm less convinced that we aren't just seeing the tip of the iceberg, and that worse is yet to come. If you're not feeling depressed yet, check out this piece by Paul Wells.

They used to say that when the revolution comes, first they'll round up all the historians. Perhaps what we weren't informed is that the statisticians will be pre-emptively undermined.

Recommend this Post

Censuses, Bedrooms and Bathrooms

Could a journalist or two please start pointing out the absurdity of the Conservatives' "bedrooms and bathrooms" talking point in their articles about the census fiasco?

To wit: at least one level of government ALREADY KNOWS how many bedrooms and bathrooms are in your home. They know, because the plans for having your dwelling built and/or renovated were submitted to a government authority for approval and/or inspection at some point in the past.

The nice thing about providing this information again in the census is that this information can then be cross-referenced en masse with other anonymized data collected by StatsCan and stored in the same place to allow for public policy planning. The manuscript census data of individual records is not released outside of the government for at least 91 years, so in many respects the census data is more secure than the data that is already on record.

Recommend this Post

Munir Sheikh resigns. Plus a bit of perspective about the historical evolution of the long-form census.

If anyone had any doubts about what Statistics Canada thinks of the decision to get rid of the mandatory long-form census, then today's resignation of the head of that institution should leave no more doubt.

The announcement is here, but I'm reposting it verbatim in case it gets removed:
ETA 22 July 1:30 PM: It's been removed.

--------

Media advisory: 2011 Census

July 21, 2010

OTTAWA — There has been considerable discussion in the media regarding the 2011 Census of Population.

There has also been commentary on the advice that Statistics Canada and I gave the government on this subject.

I cannot reveal and comment on this advice because this information is protected under the law. However, the government can make this information public if it so wishes.

I have always honoured my oath and responsibilities as a public servant as well as those specific to the Statistics Act.

I want to take this opportunity to comment on a technical statistical issue which has become the subject of media discussion. This relates to the question of whether a voluntary survey can become a substitute for a mandatory census.

It can not.

Under the circumstances, I have tendered my resignation to the Prime Minister.

I want to thank him for giving me the opportunity of serving him as the Chief Statistician of Canada, heading an agency that is a symbol of pride for our country.

To you, the men and women of Statistics Canada – thank you for giving me your full support and your dedication in serving Canadians. Without your contribution, day in and day out, in producing data of the highest quality, Canada would not have this institution that is our pride.

I also want to thank Canadians. We do remember, every single day, that it is because of you providing us with your information, we can function as a statistical agency. I am attaching an earlier message that I sent to Canadians in this regard.

In closing, I wish the best to my successor. I promise not to comment on how he/she should do the job. I do sincerely hope that my successor’s professionalism will help run this great organization while defending its reputation.

Munir A. Sheikh

----

Now would be a very good time for the Conservatives to back off of this ill-advised policy, and refuse to accept this resignation.

ETA: So much for that faint hope. It looks like Tony Clement is digging in.

Among the many things that really bug me about this entire process is the fact that the "how many bathrooms" talking point is being beaten to death. The actual questions on the long form census are frequently changed or modified from census to census, with new ones added, and old ones removed or altered. For example, it's only recently that the census started asking about gay partnerships. The option of "Canadian" was added as a possible response for the ethnicity question a couple of decades ago. Questions about language usage have been tweaked over the years. Many of my colleagues in the Canadian historical profession could provide other examples. It would have been a simple matter for the government to remove a number of the questions that they find more egregious. Instead, they are using a couple of questions that they think an uneducated cohort of voters will find particularly intrusive as an excuse to kill the entire mandatory census form. It's extremely duplicitous.

ETA @ 8:42: From Kady O'Malley of CBC (in the comments), here's Tony Clement's pitiful reply - you'll note that he admits that the voluntary form was never the option that Statistics Canada wanted:

I acknowledge with regret the resignation of Munir A. Sheikh the Chief
Statistician of Canada.

There has been considerable commentary about the federal government's
decision to replace the 2011 mandatory census long form with the
voluntary National Household Survey.

The Government took this decision because we do not believe Canadians
should be forced, under threat of fines, jail, or both, to divulge
extensive private and personal information. We believe it is not
appropriate to compel citizens to divulge how many bedrooms they have in
their houses, or what time they leave for work in the morning. The
Government's approach is about finding a better balance between
collecting necessary data and protecting the privacy rights of
Canadians.

As I have noted previously, Statistics Canada's preferred approach would
have been to maintain the mandatory long form census.

However, after the Government's decision to replace the mandatory long
form census Statistics Canada was asked to provide options for
conducting a voluntary survey of households. One of the options provided
- the voluntary National Household Survey - was chosen.

A voluntary long form survey offers challenges that do not exist in the
case of a census that uses coercion to compel completion. Nonetheless,
by working together with the professionals at Statistics Canada I
believe we can compensate for these challenges and offer data-users
high quality and accurate information.

I have relied throughout this process on the frank and open advice of
Statistics Canada and the Chief Statistician. I would like to take this
opportunity to thank all employees of Statistics Canada for the hard
work and dedication that has made Statistics Canada one of the best
national statistical organizations in the world.

Until a permanent successor can be found Wayne Smith, Assistant Chief
Statistician, Business and Trade Statistics, will act on an interim
basis.

Recommend this Post

The "voluntary census". Lies, damn lies. Now over to the statisticians...

Amidst the howls of outrage at the Harper government's arbitrary decision to axe the mandatory long form census, condemnded by virtually every major association in Canada except the Fraser Institute (but including the National Post and the C.D. Howe Institute) there has been virtual silence from Statistics Canada. The most recently retired head statistician, Ivan Fellegi, decried the decision, but the current one has been silent. This is not a surprise. Good bureaucrats aren't permitted to speak to the public without government authorization, and they're certainly not allowed to voice opinions contrary to government policy in an official capacity.

So this announcement is interesting. There will be an internal departmental town hall held on Wednesday by chief statistician Munir Sheikh to respond to questions from Statistics Canada employees. The town hall will also be broadcast internally over the departmental intranet to accomodate the large number of employees that are anticipated to have concerns.

I am hoping against hope that this portends well. The chief statistician is completely within his rights and his job description to communicate with his employees. I can't imagine that many of them are happy at the Harper government's attempt to sabotage the quality of the data that they work with, and that most policy-makers rely upon to make decisions and plan for the future. So... he's going to communicate with them.

And who wants to place bets on how many reporters will find themselves with access to a StatsCan employee's intranet feed on Wednesday? I certainly hope that the answer is "a heck of a lot", and I hope that Sheikh is up front with his staff about having major concerns about the wisdom of this decision. If he spouts platitudes or blindly defends the decision, he will lose all credibility within the department.

And if Harper forces Sheikh to axe the meeting, then the press should rightly jump all over him for being an authoritarian dictator who won't even allow a department head to meet with his staff.

UPDATE 21 July 1:15 PM: The town hall has been cancelled by Statistics Canada. No explanation has been given as to why. Presumably this Globe story or this Canadian Press story will have updates today.

Recommend this Post

Tidbits of interest for Canadian gays

Just over three years ago, my husband and I signed the necessary paperwork to make our marriage legal in Canada. We had held a ceremony with friends and family a year earlier, just before the Canadian court rulings started to come down, but had been waiting until Parliament had passed legislation before we took the steps to make it legal. During the 2004 election campaign, we decided it might be best to go ahead anyways, just in case the Conservatives won.

According to Statistics Canada's report on the census that was released today, our decision has put us in an elite group (or at least so I'd like to think - grin!) of 0.6% of the country's population that declared that they were in a same-sex married couple. We like to think that we're doing our little part to reinvigorate and perhaps rework the institution of marriage. Mind you, with less than 50% of the Canadian adult population listing their status as married, the first time this has been the case since the census was first held, I'm sure that someone will soon be arguing that it's "us gays" who have undermined the institution.

There has also been much hubbub about the decision of Stephen Harper to prorogue Parliament, and speculation about whether this will lead to a new election. Frankly, I'm more interested in the pieces of legislation that were effectively killed (click the link for "Government says it won't reintroduce Clean Air Act"), left to die on the order paper. If an election is called, Alberta, BC and Ontario won't get those extra seats they were hoping for with Bill C-56 (Expanding House Seats Bill) dead. But on a brighter note, Vic Toews' regressive Bill C-22, the Age of Sexual Protection Bill, is also dead. I found this bill particularly objectionable as it did nothing to eliminate the blatant discrimination against gay sex from Canada's Criminal Code, leaving the age of consent for anal sex at age 18 (despite court rulings in Ontario that this is unconstitutional), while raising the age of consent for other sexual acts to 16.

Now that my courses are back in swing, and an Ontario election is in the offing, I'll try to post a bit more often. I've been a bad blogger this summer, but I like to think that it's been in a good cause.

Recommend this Post