While I can’t help but sense a tinge of hyperbole in Paul Martin’s words regarding Harper’s government’s decision to drop our mandatory long-form census, I also tend to agree with the sentiment behind them.
“This is not the way to run a democracy,” Martin told reporters on Sunday, when he and Duncan appeared at a rally in his hometown of Windsor with Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff.
Martin says he sees the census decision as part of Stephen Harper’s larger attempt to clamp down on information and free discussion among Canadians.
“I think it’s quite conceivable that what we’re dealing with is a government that essentially wants to control the information flow,” he said.
Martin said that in all his years as finance minister, the long-form census data was crucial during his consultations with municipalities and a whole host of medical, hospital and non-governmental organizations.
As well, he said that Canada’s ability to collect and make policy surrounding census data was an object of international admiration.
I am, as I hope you’ve figured out by now, decidedly on the side of collecting as much information as possible for the purposes of finding our way through the world — whether scientific, political or economic. Nothing has ever been gained by humanity (but much has been gained by tin-pot dictators) by intentionally going out of our way to reduce the amount of information available with which to make informed decisions. Eliminating the long-form census is a good way to throw sand in the eyes of people who make decisions about budgets, and the people who put certain political parties into power.
While I feel Martin’s words are hyperbolic, I still wouldn’t put it past Harper’s government to be doing this cynically, as a way of ensuring that people are not provided with the information to know that their budgetary plans are not in everyone’s best interests. I’ve seen that sort of dirty pool one too many times from conservatives south of our border, so I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s exactly the sort of nonsense going on here.
I find this interesting because in the U.S. we just recently did our census and it was a shortish form. However the hyperbole was that it asked for to much information. Personally I found it to be a rather easy form to fill out and had the basic information needed for the census requirements. However, some people found it to be a ‘plot’ and refused to fill it out. Ahhh to be paranoid…..
Remember, the conservative ideal is that government is evil, and everything that is wrong with our society has government at the root of it. This is the self-fulfilling prophecy of the right-wing: the government only ruins everything, and to prove it, when the Cons are in power they will make sure that the government fails to perform its duty. What better way to ensure that government agencies won’t be able to function than to make sure they don’t have all the information they require?
The Galloping Beaver makes an interesting point that I hadn’t thought about. By eliminating the information gathering by the census, the Conservatives can outsource it to private companies. Best of all, they can ensure that they get the data results that they want to get (after all, conservatism is the “silent majority” in Canada, despite what all those loony liberal, left-wing polling companies tell us!), and the Cons won’t have to share the information they receive with anybody else.
Harper’s stubborn refusal to negotiate the issue and come to a reasonable compromise suggests to me that he is trying to make the opposition call an election while the polls still show his party is ahead… the fact that Canada has a much better economic outlook than our counterparts is what keeps them where they are. Never mind the glaring contradictions they present, like dumping billions into opening new prisons when STATISTICS show that crime has continually dropped this decade, and then scrapping the long form census because it threatens to put people in jail for not completing it (even though no one has every been jailed for failure to complete the census.)
This is Harper’s modus operandi, he is a bully that runs a minority government like it is a majority and is able to get away with it because the opposition doesn’t have the fortitude (or platform even) to stand against him. The moment that the opposition begins to get any sort of traction, he calls for proroguing of parliament, the conservatives take a few weeks to put their heads together, and then they start back up again with a new plan…
I’m guessing we will have a call for an election in the next three months and after we spend a few more million we will be right back where we were years ago..
Yeah, RY is spot-on. What’s worse is, this strategy will work, and no matter how much it cheapens Canadian politics, it will become a model for future retardery from their party.
The only way out of this, that I can see, is if the Liberals and NDP form an alliance the same way the PQ and Conservatives aligned. I absolutely hate this concentration of power. We’re turning our country’s politics into the same sort of smashmouth with-us-or-against-us two-party system the Americans have, and we’re doing it in an effort to stop the Conservatives from continuing to run roughshod over us and over the truth.
And the unwashed masses will almost certainly side with the side doing everything they can to frame the issue in a polarizing way. They’ll eat it up, with a spoon. Gads, this sucks.
I am going to side with RY on this issue. I don’t think that there is any long term plot to control information or privatize the census.
This is about framing an election. It is about appealing to an uninformed public.
The Conservatives have been feeling around for an issue that could vault them to majority government territory, and I bet they have found it.
Election 2010: A referendum on whether Canadians want the Government to force them to complete paperwork on threat of jail time or fines. What is next, say the Conservatives, fining the poor for not voting?
Do you want to place bets on where the unwashed masses will side on this issue?
I am 100% against polarization. ( 😉 )
Also: If it is a political plot to frame an election, then the back-up plan was probably to destroy Tony Clement’s career. After all, he ran against Harper for leadership.
/conspiracy theory
The Harper Conservatives only strong suit is in framing issues with the public. Paul Martin looks like an inept “Mr. Dithers” after being the White Knight who sleighed the deficit. Why? Framing.
Stephan Dion looks like a gigantic weenie. Why?
Framing.
Ignatieff? Framing.
They are a party full of spin doctors who strive only to make the alternative look less palatable.
So the Conservatives want to abolish fines and jail time for offenders who don’t answer the long form census properly, and we have a huge backlash with everyone telling us why this is a mistake. All the conservatives talk about is fines and jail time, and opponents of this decision talk about everything except fines and jail time.
Nevertheless, there’s no way around it, keep in mind that proponents of maintaining a mandatory census are supporting the prosecution and jailing of offenders in theory, but no one, not even the most ardent mandatory census supporter, actually supports the actual, real prosecution and jailing of offenders who fail to fill out the census properly.
There are a multitude of reasons for not really prosecuting and jailing. It would be counterproductive, it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, appelate courts and human rights commisions could find it violates peoples rights, the list goes on, but ultimately it would probably start a backlash against the law itself, which would not accomplish what is desired in the first place, namely achieve a high and accurate compliance rate to get good, quality data for Statistics Canada.
Any political science professor or law professor or historian will tell you that people and governments and the courts follow and support good laws. Governments and the courts don’t have any problems following through and actually fining and jailing people for breaking the law if its a good and neccesary law.
People and governments and the courts will not follow through and really prosecute or support bad laws. When you have a law which the government and courts are unwilling to enforce, and which large numbers of a population do not obey, you must seriously question if this is because it is a bad law.
So everyone in support of the mandatory long form census is doing so with the belief and hope large numbers of the population will obey this law. It will be very inconvenient if a significant percentage of respondents to the long form mandatory census breaks this law by refusing to answer certain questions, or by purposely giving incorect answers. It will be even more inconvenient if statscan pushes for better data and increased compliance by actually prosecuting and fining and jailing offenders.
You want to follow what one set of “experts” say on the census? Well go to Wikipedia and look up Jedi Census phenomenon.
(Lets look at another country because, another set of “experts” has allready decided what’s best for Canda).
Over 53,000 people listed themselves as Jedi in New Zealand’s 2001 census. New Zealand had the highest per capita population of reported Jedi in the world that year, with 1.5% marking “Jedi” as their religion. Statistics New Zealand treated Jedi responses as “Answer understood, but will not be counted”. If Jedi were counted it would have been the second largest religion in New Zealand. The percentages of religious affiliations were:
Christian: 58.9%
No religion: 29.6%
Object to answering: 6.9%
Jedi: 1.5%
Buddhism: 1.2%
Hindu: 1.2%
If you look at the above data, you see that at least 8.4% of the respondents to this mandatory census broke the law. (Object to answering 6.9% plus Jedi 1.5%) .
So you have a law which the government and courts are unwilling to enforce, and which large numbers of the population did not obey. You should seriously question if this is not a bad law.
So a parent claims on the census their five year old son is a jedi knight, or a single mother objects to answering questions from the state that are unwanted and make her feel uncomfortable. Supporters of the mandatory census law hope no activist is really gets themselves charged, but isn’t it obvious well before it reaches this stage that this is a bad law?
Or maybe it’s a good law, as long as no one is really charged or prosecuted for breaking it, because if the law is actually enforced, it could come into desrepute and it becomes a bad law. It’s a good law in theory, but a bad law in reality.
Do you really think that this law accomplishes its purpose, and that the above census data from New Zealand is accurate? Are you really going to make important policy decisions based on the above data?
Statistics New Zealand treated Jedi responses as “Answer understood, but will not be counted”. Why? If its mandatory I thought this was the gold standard. How many other purposely wrong answers were given that were were actually counted as the truth?
I picked New Zealand because if I picked Canada’s census data, everyone has allready taken a stand, and I don’t think people are looking at the other side of the story on this issue.
It’s not just New Zealand with this problem. All democratic governments are trying to deal with the same types of problems.
So how do non democratic government deal with these types of “problems”? They actually enforce the fines and jail time. They will get their data one way or another. What does that tell all of us? We want to go half way, have the law on the books, but not actually prosecute people with it.
It’s no surprise this has come up in Canada. Many democratic nations have debated this issue. The only thing that is surprising is how in Canada we’re not capable of having a balanced debate, and Harper refuses to talk about the need for acurate census data, and defenders of the census refuse to talk about fines and jail time.
If you don’t like Harper, that’s your right. There can only be a meaningful debate if both sides decide to address both aspects of this issue seriously. I am seriously wondering if Harper hasn’t tricked the Liberals into defaulting into a position that could seriously hurt them in the next election, when the Conservatives start participating in this debate and unleash the attack ads (accusing the Liberals of being in support of fines and jail time for not answering the states mandatory questions on your life). I think Jack Layton senses the risks here, and is talking compromise (no jail time).
Social scientitists might be right about the data but wrong about the law and the politics of this situation. I don’t think the Liberals should allow themselves to be painted as for fines and jail time, but that’s exactly the position they are setting themselves up for.
Here’s what we could do. A stick to go with the carrot, if you will.
Instead of fines and prosecution, threats of auditing. Not just threats, but follows-up. Auditing can turn up all sorts of violations that can be taxed, to make up the cost of having to do it.
That way, we get our information that benefits those less likely to fill the census out (e.g. how better to serve the poor and disadvantaged), and the government has a very good stick with which to whack people who refuse to fill the census.
One way or another, we NEED this information. This is the kind of shit government’s ACTUALLY GOOD AT. Harper’s taking the conservative tack of trying to outsource it to private companies that you have to pay to do the job, so that the political party in power can get that information by paying for the study, but the other guys are out in the cold. What’s worse, you’ll have gross duplication of efforts, which while it would be good to have multiple sources for the same information, there’s a law of diminishing returns in play where people will burn out on actually providing that information to the ten different census bureaus asking.
And do you think people will volunteer for multiple censuses from random third-party companies, when you can barely get them to accurately fill one for the government?
Maybe Elections Canada can be dissolved because, ya know, Canadians shouldn’t have to be forced to state a preference as to who they vote for.
Considering Clement is still all for the long form census requesting agricultural information, I’d say it’s a good bet that they want to ruin his career because he’s not toeing the ultimately successful reframing-the-census-as-evil line that Harper has managed to draw.
There’s less conspiracy there than there is good explanation for otherwise inscrutable actions on Harper’s government’s part.
By the by, thanks for the card! It’s lovely! 🙂
WINNAR!!!
If 5% of our population were going to indicate that they were Jedi, I don’t particularly see how making the census optional is going to help the matter.
The issue that every one is taking with the canceling of the compulsory long form census is that it takes away what little power the government has to impel people to complete a census.
The people most likely to fill out a census with no arm-twisting are the elderly and university educated professionals. These groups are among the least likely to benefit from long term policy decisions made as a result of census data.
The people most likely to benefit, the new Canadians and the poor, also happen to be the least likely to complete a census. No-one is suggesting that these people should be jailed or fined for not completing a census form, only that the government have some reasonable threat beyond moral suasion to impel them to act in their best interests.
I am ashamed to say that I skipped out on jury duty a few years back, an action that could have carried a fine. I was never charged or fined as a result. I also do not argue that the law in that case is overly intrusive. It is a necessity of a fair trial judicial system. Just as a mandatory census is a necessity of a government looking to make sound policy decisions.
The only thing with which everyone can agree is that Harper has likely found his wedge issue. He has forced the opposition to take a black or white stand on an issue that is as gray as is possible. He is forcing them to take a principled stand on the false teeth of a good policy as if they were a predator’s jaws.
It will work. Expect a lot of Jedi talk during the upcoming election. That would normally excite me, and yet…..
This entire issue will continue to haunt the Conservatives in the same way as the “alarming rise in unreported crime” is bound to. If people took the time to write (paper, pen, stamp, envelope) to their MP expressing their profound opposition (or support) for proposed legislation issues such as these would be resolved very quickly. As long as politicians frame the issues and not the people we will get the governments we deserve . . . and will we be an undeserving lot!
PS: I have been a life-long conservative.
I strongly suspect that Harper and his Conservatives are well aware of, and have tapped into, all the other sources of information about our citizens that is readily available through credit reporting agencies, financial institutions, medical records, income tax forms, GST rebate applications, retirement information, etc., etc.
I doubt that having us fill out census forms of ANY kind is even necessary. This is another one of those stupid “non-issues” that politicians of all stripes love to use as a red-herring so as to keep our attention focused away from their malfeasance. Who the “F” cares about this issue? We all know that the govt. has access to all of our records anyway. If it wants more info on our likes/dislikes, habits and doings, its plethora of “security” cameras, mounted almost everywhere these days, will surely fill in anything else about us that they want to know.
Contrary to the obvious Liberal bias that I see expressed here (and other places), Harper never expected this to become an issue of any note. The media, in the dog-days-of-summer, have made this seem “important”. It isn’t. Not to Joe Lunchpails like me. The govt. already has an accurate count of every pimple on my bum. Census? give me a break!!
And another thing or two:
I am a volunteer worker with a group that tries to help those in Canadian jails and prisons. (Do you know the difference?)
Those obvious Liberal sympathizers here who mock Harper for building new prisons while doing away with one of the more stupid reasons to send folks to prison (even though not actually doing so), ought to look into the present prison/jail populations. Our aging facilities are stuffed to the gills with up to three times the number of prisoners they were intended for. The conditions in local jails where people are held while awaiting trial are so bad that some innocent people are pleading guilty just to get sent to other institutions where they hope to be treated humanely instead of stacked like cord-wood for months on end while crown attorneys try to keep them there until they do just that. Cheap convictions.
Before you dump all over me for “sympathizing” with prisoners, keep in mind that those awaiting trial have not been found guilty of anything yet. Or are you satisfied with the police making that determination? And the issue of us “having proper concern” for prisoners “instead of victims” has always been a red herring issue usually used by police as an excuse for brutalizing those they suspect of committing a crime. The way society treats victims and accused is not an either/or situation. We need, to be civilized, to do justice to both.
I suspect you don’t know much about my actual political views other than to smear me and my fellow readers, repeatedly, as know-nothing “lefties”. Do you think I like all the stupid reasons people are being sent to prison? Reasons like possession of cannabis, which hurts how many people as compared to say alcohol? And why are you erecting strawmen to knock them down, like “having concern for prisoners instead of victims”, exactly? Did you want to have a dialog, or rant about some other people who happen to be lefties that piss you off?
Yes, I’m liberal in my political views, but I don’t truck with one party or another. I’m no “damn dirty hippie”. My allegiance is with the truth, the objective observation thereof, and with collecting the best data possible in order to make the most informed decisions possible. My allegiance is with knowledge, over obfuscation and obscurity. Whatever the hell you’re going on about, has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Just because you swear fealty to Harper’s conservatives doesn’t mean you have any right coming in here screaming about completely unrelated nonsense.
Jthibeault,
NOWHERE did I smear you
NOWHERE did I smear your readers
NOWHERE did I refer to you as a “know nothing lefty”
NOWHERE did I call you a “damn dirty hippie
NOWHERE did I “swear fealty to Harpers’ (or anyone else’s) conservatives”
NOWHERE did I “come in here and scream about” anything
And yet your, a) “allegiance is with the truth”, & b) “allegiance is with knowledge, over obfuscation and obscurity.” ???!!
Is this “truth” you speak of an invention of yours requiring complete agreement on my part so that “we can have a dialog”?
Go fly a kite junior. You are too weak minded to bother with…….
“the obvious Liberal bias that I see expressed here”
“obvious Liberal sympathizers here who mock Harper”
“You lefties kill me!”
If none of these appear to you to be accusing me and my readers of being liberals, and therefore (as you’ve implied) out of tune with reality, then you need to step back and get your rage meter checked.
I don’t honestly know why you showed up here to spit invective and try to troll up some anger about being called a “leftie”. Again, reality is reality regardless of what you want to say. If you want to change my, or anyone’s, opinions, how about some hard facts? Everything you’ve gotten upset over, I’ve provided links and corollary information. What have you shown, other than that I’m not one of Harper’s bigger fans?
Hey Jason,
Yet another poster who knows more than you because they volunteer in the jails and prisons. Does this raise the specter of another of our favorite people? I’ll give you a hint….starts with a Z and rhymes with Z-penny.
Listen “Scribblerlarry”,
I doubt that the changes to the laws regarding the long form census was “never meant to be an issue”. The timing seems all too convenient. The Harper government is “framing” the next session of parliament. They are “framing” what they hope to run an election on. Governments may have a track record of being inept, but they are not stupid.
I think you would find at least a few nodding heads around here if you wish to advocate for prisoner’s rights and justice reform. How that ties into your previous diatribe about the census is beyond me. I hope you can “school” all of us here as to exactly how many people currently or in the past were jailed for not completing the long form census. To the best of my knowledge, one can count them on the fingers of a double arm amputee.
You are just another run of the mill neo-con squawk-box. I don’t personally expect you to agree with Jason, I don’t think he does either. What Jason and the rest of us would appreciate is you not throwing around invective and instead arguing your case. You will find you will always be treated in kind around here.
ScribblerLarry:
I’ll ignore your trolling comments about Liberals and “lefties” for now. But don’t worry, I’ll call you an idiot at the end of this post to make up for not immediately fulfilling your martyrdom complex.
Perhaps you’re right, and our prison system could use an extra injection of cash in order to build more spacious prisons and jails in order to make prisoners more comfortable and prevent them from being stacked up “like cordwood”. However, when confronted with the fact that crime rates are dropping, the Conservatives essentially framed (there’s that evil word again) the issue as “but crimes are going underreported, and if we’re gonna get tough on crime, we’re gonna need more prisons!” The Cons don’t care about cons (or the accused), they care about looking tough on criminals.
I’m reminded of the words of the American Patriot, Sideshow Bob, “Your guilty conscience may force you to vote [Liberal], but deep down inside you secretly long for a cold-hearted [Conservative] to lower taxes, brutalize criminals, and rule you like a king!”
Absolutely nowhere in any of the Conservative talking points will you find anything even remotely close to referring to “prisoners’ rights”, unless they’re talking about free speech for gay-bashing preachers or big-mouthed racists. Conservatives in general are about punishment, not rehabilitation. The right-wing contains a deep strain of authoritarianism, where they desire to lock criminals up and throw away the key, and they don’t generally concern themselves with innocence. I ought to know, I was a member of the Reform youth movement, and I voted Reform/Alliance/CPC for 15 years. I don’t need to work (or be incarcerated) in the prison system to know how bad it is, because we’re not talking about that. We’re discussing Conservative policy, and I spent a lot of time at “grassroots” political meetings, watching the groundwork for their policies being made. You can’t accuse the Liberal party of crafting horrible policy, since they don’t have any policies.
So please forgive me for being leery of our government dumping an extra nine billion dollars into our jails and prisons, even as they gaze longingly at the way the Americans run their vast prison system.
Now, can we start the friendly dialogue, you moron?
Hey sinned, I don’t want to sound gay or nothing….
but will you marry me?
Well, despite protestations and warnings of the immediate collapse of Canadian society from the Conservative base, gay marriage is still legal in Canada. That said, polygamy is not legal (but don’t tell that to the members of Bountiful near Creston, BC), and since I’m already married to a lovely woman, I’ll have to politely decline. Oh, and ummm… I’m certain that totally didn’t sound gay. At all!
That said, wouldn’t two heterosexual men (or women, for that matter) getting married in order to take advantage of various tax breaks that couples get be rather amusing? I wonder if homosexual marriages of convenience (for example, to get a green card for a non-Canadian citizen) will become as common as the heterosexual version? I suppose that’s a subject for a new thread!
[…] fuss is about, you clearly need a Stephen Harper history lesson. Start with this post over at Lousy Canuck regarding Little Stevie’s plan to make our long form census […]