Virtually alone in the growing outrage over the federal government's decision to scrap the long-form mandatory census, the Fraser Institute threw its support [1] behind the government's decision with its chief economist Niels Veldhuis arguing that "voluntary surveys will yield enough accurate information about the country and critics saying otherwise are members of 'vested interest groups."
The Fraser Institute's support for this policy stands in direct opposition to a virtual unanimous consensus among business groups, academics, policy analysts and statisticians who recognize that the demise of the mandatory long-form will so fundamentally skewer and distort statistical data to render it effectively useless.
With such venerable voices as former Chief StatsCan statistician Ivan Fellegi [2] remarking that the proposed changes will "seriously bias" data and Don Drummond [3], former chief economist for TD Bank and a member of the National Statistics Council, stating that these changes will leave Canada in a statistical "fog" for years to come, one might wonder how the Fraser Institute can possible defend the evisceration of social statistics that it also depends upon for its research.
That is until you realize that the Fraser Institute has been painfully allergic to evidence-based research since its inception. What does accurate data matter when you can simply manipulate it to suit your desired ends? Whether it's flawed content analysis [4], grossly inflated tax numbers [5], disregard for socio-economic indicators [6], misrepresenting the HST [7], rigged hospital [8]and school [9]"report cards," or bogus "Tax Freedom [10]" days, the Fraser has always been "fact-averse." The Fraser institute has never cared about the validity of social statistics before, so why should it start now?
With a voluntary long-form almost guaranteed to bias in favour of the affluent, the Fraser can end evidence of poverty, discrimination, and all the other social ills it has been trying to disappear from Canadians' view in one fell swoop. For the factually challenged Fraser, it's win-win.
Simon Enoch is Director of the Saskatchewan Office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. He holds a PhD in Communication and Culture from Ryerson University.
No corporate owner. No government money. No endowment. No cost to visit and use rabble.ca. Please become a member of the community that makes rabble happen and become a member today (www.rabble.ca/membership [11]).
Links:
[1] http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/Fraser+Institute+dismisses+need_mandatory+long+form+census/3289492/story.html
[2] http://www.ottawacitizen.com/sports/Statisticians+wild/3284799/story.html
[3] http://www.canada.com/news/Coalition+urges+Conservatives+reverse+census+stand/3273475/story.html
[4] http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/viewArticle/646/552
[5] http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/commentary/fraser-institutes-consumer-tax-index-grossly-misrepresents-reality
[6] http://www.educ.sfu.ca/documents/institutes_at_odds.pdf
[7] http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Duelling+reports+economists+back+analysis+done+Times+Colonist/3188262/story.html
[8] http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/library/publications/year/2008/Hospital_Report_Card_Comparison.pdf
[9] http://www.straight.com/article-70907/sfu-dean-paul-shaker-slams-fraser-institute
[10] http://www2.parl.gc.ca/content/lop/researchpublications/prb0632-e.htm
[11] http://www.rabble.ca/membership
[12] http://www.rabble.ca/news/2010/07/anti-information-information-society-brought-you-anti-government-government
[13] http://rabble.ca/print/news/2010/07/fraser-institute-supports-scrapping-long-form-census#comment-1167342
[14] http://rabble.ca/print/news/2010/07/fraser-institute-supports-scrapping-long-form-census#comment-1167390
[15] http://rabble.ca/print/news/2010/07/fraser-institute-supports-scrapping-long-form-census#comment-1167558
[16] http://rabble.ca/print/news/2010/07/fraser-institute-supports-scrapping-long-form-census#comment-1167595
[17] http://rabble.ca/user
[18] http://rabble.ca/user/register
Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden have scrapped their censuses emtirely, relying on data collated from already collected databases in government ministries and departments. In Finland's last 'census,' this system cost about twenty cents per head. Slovenia has adopted a similar system, with Britain and Germany following suit. For people who claim that this is somehow more intrusive than our "fill out the forms, or we'll throw the book at you" system (i.e., since there is a centralized database), consider the following information already collected:
*Records of pets (cat and dog licensing), property taxes, value of your house and square footage (assessments), how many windows, doors, outlets and toilets your house has (building permits), volumes of traffic (roadwork department monitoring) and transit useage (dispatch), businesses operating (licensing and permits), at the municipal level.
*Income (taxation), incorporations, births and deaths, medical and long term care useage (health authorities and medicare billing), education (tuition, school funding) and even religious affiliation (school property taxes), at the Provincial level.
*Income and types of employment (Canada Revenue), spending patterns (GST and customs), some business operations (incorporations), immigration and country of origin (immigration), unemployment (EI payments), retirement (OAS), funding for non-government groups (grant applications and funding), firearms ownership (Firearms Centre and customs), radio and telecommunications useage (CRTC and Industry Canada licensing and infrastructure permits).
In short, this data is already 'in the system' and merely needs to be collated. This is far more timely, accurate (big shocker--people lie on their census forms!) and far, far cheaper than the bloated bureaucracy that now collects a lot of redundant, junk data. The most strenuous protests over making the long-form census optional come from public sector unions like CUPE and PSAC, who fear for jobs being made redundant. Corporate users of Stats Can data are also annoyed that the state will no longer subsidize the coercive collection of data from taxpayers. Everyone else is cheering this politically-astute and populist move on the part of the government. And I'm frankly perplexed at the Doublethink of progressive people, who until recently talked of boycotting the census over Lockheed-Martin's involvment.
Absolutely, that the Fraser Institute agrees with Harper policy - yes - what's new? Surely it is a clear sign that when the Fraser Institute agrees it is a no brainer that something is big time amiss. These folks walk hand in hand with joy in their hearts :) - Harper and the F.I. Use your imagination re the initials F.I. - I thought of this as I was writing F.I. Couldn't help myself.
Surprise,surprise..The Fraser Institute agreeing with the Tories...Who woulda thunk it?
New leaked documents suggest the REAL story here.
http://www.themarknews.com/articles/1960-introducing-the-new-hire-and-ce...