A very bad idea, the 2011 census long form will be voluntary
- Thread starter Tonington
- Start date
*sigh*
I am myopic to some extent because I have witnessed government acting on good information and seen first hand the damage it does.
But we'll have to pick this up some other time. I have to go.
There are a few cities in the U.S. which have the same population change phenomena like Detroit, such as Baltimore, St. Louis and Cleveland- a lot of the shift is merely from within the city boundaries of the old city to a newly formed suburb outside the city. The actual metropolitan population hasn't changed much.
Chicken. lol
Seriously, like I said, I think gov't makes mostly good decisions based on the info that it does get and it's the time between decision and result that screws things up.
Give it up Tonington - it don't fly. If say in 1990 someone needed information about AIDS, you don't need a census. Vital Statistics tells you about those who succumbed and Hospital records will tell you about those who didn't. I'm not in disagreement about a census per se, it just doesn't have to be done in the old traditional way of sending "bean counters" door to door asking questions. You just set up a data bank called census and have it so any gov't agency form that is filled out automatically feeds into the census bank. Right now on our income tax form we tick a box allowing the information to be transferred to the election officer. SAme thing. Of course there are going to unco operative people in this regard, probably the exact same people who are unco operative when filling out the census form.
How about...no? Respectfully, I don't think you're getting it
And it won't tell you anything about what part of the population they're from. Simply counting beans isn't what a census is. It's counting the beans, identifying the bean shape, colour, length, weight, cultivar, and how these variables change with time. You don't get that from hospital records...
How about a challenge JLM? This back and forth is tiring, I'd like to see you give some proof of this so-called available data.
I used the census to identify 5 districts in Canada which would have been favourable to my hypothetical ethnic restaurant.
Use any database you would like to identify the best 5 districts in Canada based on use of public transportation. We're not coercing anyone for an entrepeneur now, as you scoffed earlier. We're going to identify the top 5 of districts based on use of public transit (the % of that population using transit), and then we're going to look at those 5 districts to see what factors are common, and important to developing better public transportation policy.
I can get it in about 15 seconds with census data.
So, let's see what your alternative can do.
Proof is in the pudding, as they say.
Having lived through about 10 censuses, I have never once been asked about any medical conditions or use of transit, so you are not going to get very accurate information on the census about either. As far as me getting statistical information that is a moot point as I'm not one trained on how to go about getting it, but the people whose business it is to be "in the know" can. But if I really wanted a ball park figure about the five districts, I can look up the population and then phone the transit authority and inquire about the number of buses they have in operation and the number of the ridership and that will be close enough to make a comparison for the purpose of operating a restaurant and then when I have it boiled down to one I can go in depth further on that one. I'm not saying censuses are absolutely useless, just relatively useless when weighed against the cost to a country who is deep in debt and should be spending the money elsewhere, like recruiting new doctors and building new hospitals.
I think it's a dumb idea. The whole point of the census is that it's a statistically-valid government analysis of our populaton. Once you make it voluntary, it's doesn't have the same statistical value. It skews the whole thing.
It's an unfortunate mistake on the part of our government.
It's an unfortunate mistake on the part of our government.
How many long forms have you filled out?
So how do you have such solid faith that the information contained in the census is in other government departments and accessible already if you've never seen it?
They'll go to the census. Just like I did. Because it's high quality and available data.
So maybe you didn't understand the question. There's public transportation across the country. Some systems are much better than others, and their use by the public reflects that. If we are interested in promoting or developing a policy that increases the use in the poor systems, then we first need to identify the good ones. Are you going to call up every transit authority?
You haven't even given any evidence for the cost here. What is too expensive, and does the census break that threshold? You realize it will be more expensive to pay public servants to collect and collate this data?
Sure we should be recruiting more doctors. We should be doing a lot of things. But giving up high quality population data for poor quality, is not one of them.
I don't recall ever filling out a long form, but that doesn't mean I haven't. All I'm saying is you don't need thousands of "bean counters" going door to door to get this information. The information is already there and just has to be assimilated into a census data bank. The fact that the information isn't readily available in usable form for the public, doesn't mean we have to start at "square one" collecting data. I think most of us have had forms mailed to us from Govenment where we've had to fill in our address.......................ridiculous.
Why would I have to be 100 years old? I've probably lived through 13, but probably only participated in 10, the last one being in 2006.
Well the data on transportation is on the long form. If you haven't encountered that question it's because you haven't been mailed a long form to fill out.
Yes, you'll probably need at least three times that many to assemble all of the information in the government departments, federal, provincial, and municipal. Not efficient. Census is more efficient.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems medical experts disagree with JLM as well. I've added some emphasis to the article below.
Ideology trumps evidence with new voluntary survey
On June 26, citing privacy concerns, Cabinet announced that one in five Canadians would no longer be required to complete the long version of Canada’s census. Instead, it proposes that a new voluntary National Household Survey be sent to 30% of households.1 CMAJ is lending its voice to the chorus of complaints over this change.
With no consultation, the Harper government has undermined evidence-based decision-making in Canada. For a government that made accountability a key priority, this policy choice is perplexing. Information from the long-form census frequently guides program planning and evaluation for federal departments as well as other levels of government. In health care, it is an essential tool in the planning and delivery of services. It provides accurate and reliable data on social trends and issues, including the determinants of health, such as the relationships among income, gender, education, region, work and other factors that influence access to care and health outcomes. In fact, the long-form census is the only source that brings all these variables together and enables researchers to investigate new ways of understanding the determinants of health.
The census information allows us to relate the health and well-being of populations, even down to neighbourhoods. Without it, regional institutions will lose the only accurate information about the populations they serve. The census’s reliability and accuracy has ensured its widespread use as a research and evaluation tool.2 A search through the National Library of Medicine’s database using the term “Canadian census” retrieved 7060 articles that examined the relationship between demographic characteristics of our population and the health and well-being of Canadians.
Information from the long-form census has been integral to numerous studies that have shaped our view on how new and emerging health challenges may be related to place of residence, socio-economic status and ethnicity. 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.
The introduction of a new voluntary approach to collecting detailed information will make evaluations over time impossible— and unacceptable as a research tool. Changes from previous censuses will not be sufficiently reliable to be trusted by government, businesses or others, let alone peer-reviewed journals. With so much at stake, why would the Harper government jeopardize such an important federal program? Minister of Industry Tony Clement indicated that cabinet was concerned about privacy and the intrusiveness of government. However, he did not produce letters of complaint or evidence of public outcry about intrusiveness.
What about privacy concerns? Again, no evidence was provided. To the contrary, Statistics Canada must abide by strict privacy laws and regulations. Only Statistics Canada has access to personal data, which are the only government data exempt from access by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. In fact, it is enshrined in the CSIS Act.3 With these protections in place, there has never been a serious breach of privacy.
Some might argue that filling out the long form is timeconsuming. Given the benefits, it does not seem much to ask Canadians to spare an estimated one hour of each household’s time every 25 years. The Harper government has indicated that Statistics Canada will increase the random sampling from 20% to 30% at an estimated additional cost of $30 million. However, uneven response rates will fatally undermine the quality of the data collected.4 With a voluntary survey, aboriginal communities, poorer neighbourhoods, new immigrants and very wealthy households will have lower response rates than those for middle-class Canadians. This means that some communities will be underrepresented or hardly represented at all. Adding more survey respondents will only result in a larger amount of biased, largely unusable data.
Statistics Canada may have an even greater problem. The long-form census is used to guide the development of and provide population descriptors for many other surveys, including those undertaken by the private sector. Other data sources are often linked to the census to provide further context. A voluntary survey will not be usable for these purposes. As a consequence, Statistics Canada will almost certainly lose its reputation as the “world’s most respected census agency.”5
If this decision is not reversed, Canada will stand alone among developed nations in not having detailed information about its population. The Harper government will appear to have made a decision based on ideology rather than evidence. Worse yet, it has imposed an uninformed approach to public policy on all other levels of government, health authorities and institutions. The Harper government will have signalled that it is no longer committed to accountability.
Marsha Cohen MD MHSc
Associate Editor, Research
Paul C. Hébert MD MHSc
Editor-in Chief
CMAJ
With the editorial advisory team members,
Ken Flegel MDCM MSc and Noni MacDonald MD MSc
REFERENCES
1. 2011 Census questionnaire. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 2010. Available: www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/gazette-eng.cfm (accessed 2010 July 12).
2. 2006 Census technical report: coverage. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 2010. Available: www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2006/ref/rp-guides/rp/coverage-couverture/cov-couv_index-eng.cfm (accessed 2010 July 12).
3. The CSIS Act: Warning note [section 21, subsection 3]. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Security Intelligence Service; 2004. Available: www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/pblctns /ct/cssct -eng .asp (accessed 2010 July 12).
4. Burns KE, Duffett M, Kuo ME, et al. A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians. CMAJ 2008;179:245-52.
5. Siddiqui H. Gutting of census stirs opposition to Stephen Harper. Toronto Star 2010; July 10.
You would need bean counters every year. There is not one computer system that links municipal, provincial, and federal data.
You could potentially replace the short form, but not the long form. So, you want us to spend more money to get a lower quality end product...
That's insane.
You could potentially replace the short form, but not the long form. So, you want us to spend more money to get a lower quality end product...
That's insane.