The Canadian census debate—a background

By: Pulat Yunusov · July 20, 2010 · Filed Under Administrative Law · 1 Comment

On June 26, 2010, Canada Gazette published an Order in Council dated June 17, 2010. The order contained questions for the 2011 Canadian census. The short document that would normally be of interest only to statisticians caused a national debate—not because of what it contained, but because of what it lacked. 53 detailed questions sent to 20% of the population in the past were not in the government’s order. Only seven or so questions previously put on the short form will be sent to Canadians next year.

The Canadian government runs a census of the population every fives years on the authority of the federal Statistics Act (s. 19(1)). Under this statute, it is the job specifically of Statistics Canada to “take the census of population of Canada” (s. 3(c)). The Statistics Act gives the federal cabinet the power and discretion to appoint and remove the Chief Statistician of Canada (s. 4(1)). He and his office are not independent. The Chief Statistician must carry out his duties “under the direction” of the designated minister, which is currently Minister of Industry Tony Clement. Section 7 of the Act empowers the minister to set “rules, instructions, schedules and forms” for Statistics Canada, including for taking a census. Section 21(1) requires the federal cabinet to prescribe census questions by order in council. That is exactly what the cabinet did on June 17 causing the Statistical Society of Canada to criticize the scrapping of the long form.

The Act also empowers the minister to authorize voluntary surveys (s. 8). The Minister of Industry apparently used this power to introduce the voluntary National Household Survey to be taken at the same time as the census. According to Statistics Canada, the Survey will contain questions from the scrapped long census form, but precise questions are not yet available.

Answering statistical questions asked on the authority of the Act is mandatory (s. 31) unless they are specifically voluntary under s. 8. Not answering, lying, or not filling out a form are summary offences punishable by a fine of up to $500 or up to three months in jail. Census questions are always mandatory under the Statistics Act, regardless of any additional voluntary surveys the minister may initiate (s. 8). The minister cannot make the census voluntary, but he can manipulate the number of questions. The Act does not require the census to contain more than one question. Presumably, zero questions would make the census impossible and would therefore be unlawful.

Background documents

Statistics Act
The 2011 census order in council (includes the census form)
The letter from the Statistical Society of Canada to Minister Clement (July 9, 2010) [pdf]
Minister Clement’s statement on 2011 census (July 13, 2010)
The 2006 census long form [pdf]
The 2006 census short form [pdf]

Pulat Yunusov

(Post sponsored by AdviceScene)

Post tags: 2011 census, Canada Gazette, census, Chief Statistician, Order in Council, Pulat Yunusov, Statistics Act, Statistics Canada, Tony Clement

More Aboriginals Shouldn’t Mean More Problems

By: Law is Cool · January 15, 2008 · Filed Under Aboriginal Law, Civil Rights · 13 Comments

The Globe and Mail reported today a 45% increase in Aboriginal populations over the past decade.

Nunavut has the highest birthrate in the country, and also the highest proportion of Aboriginals at 85%.

But many claim these figures are still underrepresented,

Thousands more people weren’t specifically noted as aboriginal because they had no permanent address or were behind bars.

Others simply refused to be counted. Chief Clarence Simon of Kanesatake said,

We are not Canadian citizens, we are North American Indians. And that is something they have to understand.

They already know how many native people are registered.

Kanesatake is the Mohawk community that was involved in the 1990 Oka crisis. But 22 other reserves also refused the census.

As Aboriginal populations rise, they will slowly approach the levels they were prior to drastic reductions after the arrival of European settlers.

David Stannard said in his book, American Holocaust, that this process was the most massive genocide in the history of the world, conducted through a deliberate “string of genocide campaigns.”

He claims that over 100 million people were lost, resulting in declines of 95% of some populations.

David Cesarini, a Jewish expert on the Holocaust that has campaigned against Holocaust deniers like David Irving, has quoted Stannard,

…in terms of the sheer number of deaths and the proportion of the. population killed, the Native American genocide exceeded that of the Holocaust.(1)

Canadians still live under the shadow of Oka, especially after the findings last year that exonerated Dudley George in the Ipperwash Inquiry.

The report found that the Aboriginals were unarmed, and claims by authorities of gunshots were falsified.

We haven’t figured out how to amend for the crimes of our past, including the residential schools, and Aboriginal issues continue to challenge policy writers.

But there is some good news.

The recent cabinet appointment of Michael Bryant, former Attorney General for Ontario, to the newly created position of Minister of Aboriginal Affairs does demonstrate some willingness by the government to take these issues seriously.

(LawIsCool did an interview with Michael Bryant last year, where he gave law students some tips).

Malthusian calculations of high birth rates transforming the demographics of Canada should be quickly dismissed in this context as racist jargon. These were nations and peoples that we destroyed, almost to the point of extinction. It is our responsibility to help restore their glory.

Updates