Census changes will deal a blow to public services

Every five years I dutifully fill out our country’s census and I look forward to the results. They tell us where we are as a country and allow governments, stakeholders and average citizens to form opinions and make decisions based on reliable data about our current situation.

Since the federal government announced their intention to scrap the long-form census, statisticians across the country and across the world are up in arms about a move that they say will render our once-revered statistical data extremely unreliable.

But Minister Tony Clement says that the long form is too intrusive and that Canadians should not be threatened with jail time for not wanting to divulge things like how long they spend doing housework or when they leave for work in the morning. In reality, no one has ever gone to jail for not filling out the census. And the data that is collected, as unnecessarily detailed as some of it may seem, is used for important policy decisions at all levels of government.

This decision is clearly ideologically based. While trying to pander to a small group of right-wingers, Harper is striking a critical blow towards policymakers’ ability to develop and deliver effective social programs.

At the same time, the loss of reliable statistical data will make it much more difficult for stakeholders, like unions and non-profits, to participate in policy discussions in a meaningful way.

The new voluntary survey that the Conservatives have proposed to replace the long-form census does not include questions that previously existed about home care. This undermines the ability of governments to adequately plan for the delivery of home support services.

Worst of all, statisticians argue that replacing the long-form census with an optional survey will mean that key groups, mostly groups that are already marginalized like poor people, new immigrants and people living with disabilities, will be less likely to fill it out and will therefore be even more underrepresented than they already are.

Many BCGEU members work in programs devoted to these underrepresented groups and I worry that without reliable data that lets us know which programs are needed where, all programs and the people they serve will suffer.