The federal government’s decision to drop the mandatory compliance requirement behind the 61-question long-form census one in five Canadians was set to receive next year for the census – making it instead a voluntary household survey – is a ridiculous example of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s narrow ideology trumping sound public policy.

And for Industry Minister Tony Clement to say last week he won't change his mind about scrapping the mandatory long-form census, despite mounting criticism, is rich coming from a minister, who reportedly along with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, wrote to the Prime Minister, underscoring the importance of the mandatory long-form census to compile the most accurate statistics on which so much public policy and private-sector decision-making depends. Flaherty’s spokesman, Mike Storeshaw, now says, “No such letter exists.”

Clement, who’s responsible for Statistics Canada, which administers the census, now says Canadians complained to them about the intrusiveness of the questions on the long-form census and the threat of fines or jail time if they don't complete it.

Having the best statistical information that can be gathered is of national importance. Is there an intrusive element to that? Of course there is. Unless one wants to adopt a consistently libertarian position (an argument we’re open to hearing) then we live with tradeoffs between citizens and government on the cost-benefits of privacy versus intrusiveness for what ends.

The long-form census is an odd place for the Harper government to get religion when it comes to intrusiveness and privacy issues. This wouldn’t be the same government that enthusiastically helped turn Toronto into a $1 billion police and surveillance state last month for the international G20 summit by any chance? Thought so.

Thanks for protecting our census sensibilities now, Prime Minister. Here’s a suggestion: First, scrap the First World War “temporary” federal income tax of 1917, and the Bank of Canada Act of 1934, and then come back and we’ll talk about the long-form census.

Clement, too, is being disingenuous at best. The maximum penalty under the federal Statistics Act for not completing the census is a $500 fine and three months in jail. In 2006, there were 64 people charged with census non-compliance under the act. But failure to complete the short-form eight-question census in 2011 will still result in prosecution. As well, farmers will still have to complete the mandatory 2011 Census of Agriculture, which asks questions about fields irrigated, the number of live honeybee colonies hosted and the incurred cost of veterinary services, to name three.

Who the “them” is that Clement says are receiving complaints about intrusiveness over the long-form census isn’t entirely clear. Opposition MPs say they have not heard such complaints and the privacy commissioner has said complaints about the census have actually declined over the years with the office receiving only three complaints about the census in the last decade.
The 2011 census, to be conducted next May, will consist of the same eight questions that appeared on the 2006 census short-form questionnaire.

The information previously collected by the long-form census questionnaire will be collected as part of the new voluntary National Household Survey (NHS).

One in three households will be sent the new household survey as well. Previously, one in five households were sent the mandatory long-form census.

Statisticians are unanimous: No matter how many extra long-form household surveys the government sends out, voluntary completion skews the sample because certain segments of the population are more likely to respond than others.

The census data going forward won’t be comparable to data from prior to 2011. Ivan Fellegi, who served for 23 years as Statistics Canada’s chief statistician, called the Harper government’s move to quash the mandatory long-form census "indefensible."

Ever since the move was announced June 28, aside from statisticians, other researchers and academics, as well as municipalities, religious groups and others have argued – to no avail with the tone-deaf Harper government – the change will result in skewed and unreliable data.

On July 15, the Canadian Medical Association Journal joined the protest with a sharply worded editorial accusing accuses the Tories of putting ideology ahead of “evidence-based decision making” and charging that the government is taking an “uninformed approach to public policy.”

“Without this information, Canada is stripped of an important resource to guide social interventions and investments to improve the health and well-being of Canadians,” wrote Dr. Paul Hebert, editor-in-chief of the journal, and his co-author Dr. Marsha Cohen.

Don Drummond, an economics adviser to TD Bank Financial Group and a member of the national advisory council for Statistics Canada, said white middle class people will be over-represented in the voluntary National Household Survey (NHS) and the valuable information gained from studying census data as it changes every five years would be lost.

“We'll have this break in the data,” Drummond said. “I think we're going to be in a fog.”

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) says it relies on the census information to decide where to target services and charitable efforts. The fellowship noted the federal government never mentioned it was considering the change when it recently consulted with the organization and others about the 2011 census.

The fellowship had actually asked that an additional question on religious participation – not just affiliation – be included in the long form.

"The census in recent years has become very important for churches and religious charities ... in understanding their neighbourhoods, and how to intelligently do more outreach within their neighbourhoods," said Rick Hiemstra, director of the Centre for Research on Canadian Evangelicalism.