National Housing Survey: News From The Senate

In yesterday's QP, Leader of the Government Marjory  LeBreton admits that the voluntary NHS with replaced Stats Canad's mandatory long form census survey requires improvement, and suggests a possible way forward:

This was the first time, honourable senators, that there has been a voluntary long-form census. Clearly, there are some areas that require improvement and, obviously, by the time it is necessary to conduct the next census, the areas of concern will have been addressed.

And:

We have the mandatory short form as well. There have been suggestions by experts that a few more questions could be added to the short form.

This idea, that in future iterations some questions on the voluntary NHS might be transferred to the mandatory short-form, is developed a little more fully later on:

I did indicate that this was the first time there has been a voluntary long-form census. Some groups have indicated that they would like to see the data be more conclusive. These considerations will be taken into account when Statistics Canada and the government prepare the questions for the next long-form census. People will then be more used to the long form. Whatever questions they put on the mandatory form will address the concerns of the groups that feel this does not produce the data they require.

I don't know how much insider knowledge LeBreton has with respect to the thinking within the government's HOC caucus, but shuffling questions to the short form is an interesting option.  However, it is counterproductive according to the reasoning that has been employed on this issue to date.  Move a question to the short form and you are now invading the privacy of 100% of the population rather than the 25% required for the old long form. Which is to say that, in so far as the government wants accurate data it can't protect privacy, and vice versa.

Fool Me Once, Shame On You; Fool Me Twice, And I Must be Lorne Gunter

The latest tranche  of census information, like the material released back in February, is from the still mandatory short form.  It is the long form that was compromised by the government's decision.  Lorne Gunter, who also covers the global warming controversy and would, you would think, possess at least a single smidgen of  statistical knowledge, still cannot tell the difference between long and short forms.  Naturally, he writes for the Toronto Sun.

CHRC Against Census Changes

Not that this will change minds among the recalcitrants. But worth noting anyway.

Tony Clement Denies

Perhaps he mis-spoke. Perhaps he spoke too true. In any case, the minister is walking back his statement, made yesterday morning on The Hour, that Canada has a voluntary short form in its future.

As We Move To a Voluntary Short Form Census

...says Tony Clement on The House this morning towards the end of his interview here (about the 7 minute mark, I think). Don't know why fact that Tony Clement admitted this morning that the Gov. is moving towards a voluntary short form as well as a voluntary long-form didn't make the CBC story re his interview, unless they just assumed he was gibbering (which is plausible enough).

The Short Form Is Next

It isn' touched on here, but listening to Clement on The House this morning, it seems to me that he pretty clearly stated that the move to eliminate penalties on all StatsCan surveys was a step down the road to a voluntary short form. Again, the CBC's story on the interview doesn't mention this, but I am sure of what I heard.

Make of it what you will.