Layton: Census jail time a bogus threat

I watched the Layton interview, and I particularly thought he was right on when he suggested that Harper wants to dumb down the census because the census shows inequality, meaning more soocial programs will have to be introduced to deal with that fact. The Cons want the census dumbed down to such an extent that it doesn't show real inequalities in society, thus no need for more social programming. Harper and his gang of thugs are such frigging pricks.

NorthReport wrote:

Census ain't broke, doesn't need fixing, so just leave it alone

Not everyone gets a long form census -- Statistics Canada extrapolates social trends from the more detailed data. To make those extrapolations statistical valid, useful and accurate, Stats Can needs to get back as many completed forms as possible, from the greatest range of people. The data aren't meaningful if only the most dutiful citizens complete the form. Statistics Canada needs data from students and seniors, from homeless people and busy billionaires, from aboriginal Canadians, brand-new Canadians, all kinds of Canadians. Some of the questions on the form may seem weirdly intrusive. But the identities of the people who answer are kept confidential. And information is essential to schools boards and health authorities, municipalities and government departments. It helps to plan roads and schools and sewers and electoral boundaries, to track employment and health trends, to build our future.

Accurate census data are particularly essential for Alberta, and for metro Edmonton. Our population has changed so dramatically since the last census. We need to know just who's living here, and what their social needs might be. We need to know how many aboriginal people are leaving reserves and moving to the city. We need to know how many new Canadians have moved here, where they're from, what languages they speak. We need to know, not so we can round up minorities or oppress them, but so we can be sure they getting the public services they need. If that's a "conspiracy," it's a pretty beneficent one.

 

How many people know the difference between the civil service and our elected representatives/elected government?

Our elected government/representatives make the policy. The civil servants are just that. Their job is to carry out the government's instructions. In Canada, the civil service is not elected and is supposed to be politically neutral. It's not the civil service's job to make the government do anything.

How can the information provided by Stats Can (an agency that's part of the civil service) make a government do anything, then? It can't.

But here's a hint, fellow babblers:

If you feel strongly enough about this issue, why don't you get off your ass and demonstrate about it in the streets?

As I said, our government is our elected representatives. All Herr Harper and his fellow Cons. give a f_ck about is their party's popularity and where their next votes are coming from.

If you feel strongly enough about this issue, then show up in the streets and let the Cons. know that enough people are angry enough about this issue that they're going to lose too many votes to make it worthwhile to cling to this policy.

That is, unless you got any better ideas or would rather just blog on what one babbler referred to as this "echochamber".

Well, the government has even lost L. Ian MacDonald on this issue, who's calling out Harper's failure to communicate, and saying they should be looking for a compromise that restores a mandatory census, in his column for the Gazette this morning.  Sun columnists are also writing that Harper's hammering himself, and the census decision was denounced again in editorials in no less than the Calgary Herald and National Post (its second one criticizing the decision).

So, not only is there a Premiers' meeting next week, but an international conference of statisticians in Vancouver, and the Conservatives' National Caucus meeting (not sure where).  The PM has managed to assemble a pretty impressive coalition against himself (the dancing fool of a leader of the opposition notwithstanding).

I'm wondering just how much further he wants to drag this out.

There was an exceptionally good analysis piece last night from the two women at Canadian Press who first broke the story and then continued to break new developments in it: Jennifer Ditchburn and Heather Scoffield.  Well worth the read.

Just finished OO's linked to article and it noted this:

Quote:

Making the long form voluntary, they said, would lead to lower quality data at a far higher cost. Vulnerable groups, such as aboriginals and low-income people, would be lost in the new survey, while middle-class white people would be over-represented.

And I suspect the majority of white Canadians will now back off on complaints, after they read this and go right along with it, as it puts us front and centre!