# The Long-Form Census!



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

:rugby:


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

Yeah, the cons cutting that was a great example of their stupidity. canning it never made any sense besides ideological. Glad those guys got kicked out. They were knobs.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

It's kind of funny how many boxes the LPC ticked on my wishlist of policies. I sometimes wonder if they were spying on me online... I mean, their Senate proposal is basically verbatim what I suggested when Harper first started making noises about reforming the Senate (9 years of utter, total failure).


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As noted by the At Issue panel on CBC, the Liberals need to be careful how they are rolling out all the changes and new legislation they want to implement.

The long census is absolutely vital for government operations, and I have never figured out exactly why the Conservatives cancelled it, but the Liberals appear to have rushed the announcement without considering for example...........what would be the statutory penalties for failing to answer the census.

Perhaps the Liberals should hold off on their announcements, until the Ministers have a chance to settle in and become fully briefed.

A refreshing new tone and openness in government is a welcome change, but there is no need to rush.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I agree with most of the Liberal agenda, but the TPP is still a big concern.

I am not sure Canada has been a winner from past trade deals. Canada continues to lose companies and jobs at an alarming rate.

It doesn't feel like we have been watching the building of a new economy. More like watching the destruction of the previous one.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

jargey3000 said:


> They're bringing it back! Thank god !!!!


Really! Who cares about deficit ?! Let's fill out long-term Census! Usually my daughter fill out such important things, but now she's in high school and doesn't have time...
Oh... my mom gonna get new assignment  , at least will be some use of her multi-years ESL school


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> the Liberals appear to have rushed the announcement without considering for example...........what would be the statutory penalties for failing to answer the census.


This is the biggest non-issue ever (think niqab at citizenship ceremonies). It never came down to jail time previously, and it won't this time either.

Even the Conservatives (see Clement) admit that cancelling the long form census was a mistake.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> As noted by the At Issue panel on CBC, the Liberals need to be careful how they are rolling out all the changes and new legislation they want to implement.
> The long census is absolutely vital for government operations, and I have never figured out exactly why the Conservatives cancelled it.


They got pretty stupid with a lot of their ideas in Harper's second term. Just like bombing ISIS and the F35 fiasco, a fighter jet that we really couldn't afford and of course the TPP tentative free trade deal which could (if implemented) create another death blow to whatever resource industry we have left. Harper and his minions (Like Tony "Cement Head") did a lot of damage in certain areas,
but...as you mentioned...



> "but the Liberals appear to have rushed the announcement without considering for example...........*what would be the statutory penalties for failing to answer the census."*


The old penalties were fines AND/OR "possible" jail time.. very draconian! Although I remember reading about a senior citizen lady that refused to fill it out, and tested to see what would happen, and eventually was given a summons to appear in court.

Her sentence, after a lot of deliberation by the judge, was a CONDITIONAL discharge and 50 hrs of community service.



> A 79-year-old Toronto woman taken to court over her refusal to fill out the mandatory census declared she had no regrets Wednesday despite being found guilty of violating the Statistics Act.
> 
> Janet Churnin was handed a conditional discharge — which means she will have no permanent criminal record after she completes her sentence of 50 hours of community service within a year.
> 
> ...


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-of-violating-statistics-act/article16445109/

So Trudeau "Mr. NiceGuy"? should toss out the jail time threat and focus on a possible monetary fine, if you don't fill out the census and toss it in the mail. 

I remember years ago, I had filled mine out then forgot about it, didn't mail mine in right away. Got a call in 2-3 weeks from some gov't minion explaining that they hadn't received my return *and it was compulsory to fill it out and send it in. *
Dropped mine in the mail next day, not because of the veiled threat, but as my duty of being a good citizen, just like voting.




> Perhaps the Liberals should hold off on their announcements, until the Ministers have a chance to settle in and become fully briefed.
> A refreshing new tone and openness in government is a welcome change, but there is no need to rush.


Justin is like that. Remember his "off the cuff" press announcement at the last budget, that IF he became PM, he would scrap extending the TFSA to $10,000 (from $5500) because that change would only benefit the rich. 

Well I am not rich, but I need to get as much tax breaks as I can, (I am disabled now in a wheelchair) and every dollar saved, by not having to add interest earned
on my savings increasing my income tax payable to CRA is a dollar earned using the TFSA account.

Now that I have it, I would fight "tooth and nail" to have it rescinded by Justin. IMO, He tends to open his mouth before being aware of all the facts surrounding the issue.
I'm sure once the "honeymoon is over" and the Liberals get down to business, there will be some decisions made that perhaps may not be thought out completely..similar to
Harper's CONS.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

andrewf said:


> This is the biggest non-issue ever (think niqab at citizenship ceremonies). It never came down to jail time previously, and it won't this time either.
> 
> *Even the Conservatives (see Clement) admit that cancelling the long form census was a mistake.*


 Just like his pork barrel politics and spending money in his riding. 



> In the summer of 2010, Clement introduced changes to the 2011 Census. *On this issue, he said, "The government will retain the mandatory short form that will collect basic demographic information.* To meet the need for additional information, and to *respect the privacy wishes of Canadians, the government has introduced the voluntary National Household Survey (NHS)." The change sparked significant criticism, including the resignation of Statistics Canada's Chief Statistician (see Voluntary long-form survey controversy).* Other changes included the addition of questions about the languages spoken by Canadians.


 Tony CLement Head held many posts in Harper's gov't....including Treasury. He was hated in almost every ministerial appointment. Wonder why?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

It was an incredibly dumb policy. They spent a huge amount of political capital on what was an issue to perhaps a handful of curmudgeons who didn't like the government asking how many toilets they had (not that that was even a question on the census). I suppose it will be a mystery to all of us regular people what drove the government to do this. Clement is hinting that it was not his idea--maybe it was cooked up in caucus.


----------



## LBCfan (Jan 13, 2011)

andrewf said:


> This is the biggest non-issue ever (think niqab at citizenship ceremonies). *It never came down to jail time previously, and it won't this time either.*
> 
> Even the Conservatives (see Clement) admit that cancelling the long form census was a mistake.


See:
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/01/13/16876121.html
or
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/the-long-form-census-is-back-in-time-for-2016


> The Statistics Act includes a $500 fine or up to three months in prison for refusing to fill out the survey or providing false information.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Thanks for providing evidence to support my point, LBC. No one went to jail. That woman received a suspended sentence and 50 hours of community service.



> Some Canadians have previously refused to fill out the census, but no one has ever been jailed for the offence.


Arguing about the hypothetical threat of jail time is just people being obtuse. The threat of jail time is still in place for people who do not complete the short form census. Nothing is changing.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

andrewf said:


> This is the biggest non-issue ever (think niqab at citizenship ceremonies). It never came down to jail time previously, and it won't this time either.


They have the old penalties to give them an idea so it seems a tempest in a teapot to complain about it, IMO.


Cheers


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Eclectic12 said:


> They have the old penalties to give them an idea so it seems a tempest in a teapot to complain about it, IMO.
> 
> 
> Cheers


 it's criminal, I tell you. A left over bit from the WWII...'insorbordination?...you are under arrest and will be shot at dawn for treason....fast forward....to modern times.
Not filling out and sending in your census forms? Why that's a criminal act! Fine of $500-$1000 if convicted, and jail time...of up to 3 to 6 months....no wait, we will just take your money as the jails are already overcrowded with real criminals..and for us it's a bit embarrassing if a 79 year old grandmother died in jail serving her time.




> Did anyone ever get in trouble for not filling out the mandatory form? No one has ever been jailed for ignoring a compulsory census questionnaire, but a few have come close. Janet Churnin was 79 when she was found guilty in 2014 of violating the Statistics Act for ignoring her census forms, but the judge granted her a conditional discharge, ensuring she would have no criminal record after completing 50 hours of community service. Churnin, who had faced the possibility of a $500 fine and three months in jail, objected to the fact the software Statistics Canada used to gather its information was *designed by U.S. weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin*.


Lockheed Martin, weapons manufacturer and designers of the F35 that the Cons wanted to buy for us. Hmmm..is there more to this than what Janet Churns was objecting to?

Possible punishment according to the Statistics ACT, 
1970-71-72, c. 15, s. 29.
paragraph 32

Warning to you offenders out there, if you do not fill out the long form next year and send it in. 



> 32. Every person
> (a) who, having the custody or charge of any documents or records that are maintained in any department or in any municipal office, corporation, business or organization, from which information sought in respect of the objects of this Act can be obtained or that would aid in the completion or correction of the information, refuses or neglects to grant access to the information to any person authorized for the purpose by the Chief Statistician, or
> (b) who otherwise in any way wilfully obstructs or seeks to obstruct any person employed in the execution of any duty under this Act
> *is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to both.*
> 1970-71-72, c. 15, s. 30.


Thousand dollars and 6 months of hard time at the Kingston Pen...that'll teach you to follow the rules. Sharpen your pencils and answer truthfully please!


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Instead of a draconian penalty for not filling out the census, why not offer a reward? Send it out to every household. Then offer a $10 tax credit for a completed form. Or maybe they could just mail the household owner a thank you card with a signed picture of our new PM


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

agent99 said:


> Instead of a draconian penalty for not filling out the census, why not offer a reward? Send it out to every household. Then offer a $10 tax credit for a completed form. Or maybe they could just mail the household owner a thank you card with a signed picture of our new PM


Now that's a novel idea..run that by Justin please. Tax credits for doing the gov't a favour, instead of veiled threats of crime and punishment...


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

agent99 said:


> Instead of a draconian penalty for not filling out the census, why not offer a reward? Send it out to every household. Then offer a $10 tax credit for a completed form. Or maybe they could just mail the household owner a thank you card with a signed picture of our new PM


I like this idea 



> Not filling out and sending in your census forms? Why that's a criminal act!


 This is ridiculous! Even in CCCP we didn't have such prosecution for not-filing Census .... 
btw, what about privacy?! What if i don't want to disclose my nationality, religion or languages I speak home?!


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

(from the OP)........geez, what a serious bunch in here! I think at least gibor (#6 above) kinda ? got it?....like I've said before it's kinda hard to write a post in a "sarcastic tone". C'mon people, who really gave a hoot about the census form - before they saw this post??!! I only stuck it in here because mansbridge said last night it was one of the first actions taken by young justin's bunch! I just found it ......I dunno .... what's the word I'm looking for????? like, an absolute non-issue..sheesh!
How many of us couldn't sleep at night - worried about the long-form???? ( or the kneecap, or gay rights, for that matter - not that there's anything wrong with that!):apathy:


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> C'mon people, who really gave a hoot about the census form - before they saw this post??!


 before this thread I didn't even remeber that there is short and long form  and that we have some "census" at all 
imo, government has enough data about everyone in this country w/o censuses


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Not that I quibble with those saying the penalties for not filling out a census form aren't a big issue, but it misses the point.

If a new government wants to look competent............they need to look prepared.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I appreciate Mr. Trudeau's zeal for transparency and open government, but he may find that giving too much latitude to his Ministers will be like herding cats.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

Governments should make policy based on evidence, instead of ideology as the former government did. Without good information, the decisions governments make will be even crappier than the ones they make with information. 

I'm sure that senior who objected to the long-form census didn't object to getting OAS and CPP and medicare and police services and fire protection and so on and so on. It wasn't the most important decision for the new government, but it had to be made quickly since 2016 is almost here. 

Getting all excited about the penalties that were never imposed and looking to the Soviet Union as a model of governance is a big waste of time. It's just a census get over it.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

gibor said:


> before this thread I didn't even remeber that there is short and long form  and that we have some "census" at all
> imo, *government has enough data about everyone in this country w/o censuses*


No they don't. The Liberal gov't needs to plan for the large influx of Syrians refugees and others being admitted into this country as well as use the data in the long form for all the oldsters retiring soon, (baby boomers whatever), the health support services and pension benefits...it's not just smoke and mirrors, real data is needed. 

I believe that these census used to be conducted every 5 years before the Harper gov't abolished it..(Tony "Clement/"cement head") , and now there isn't enough data that helps the federal gov't find out about the demographics to plan for future needs of the population of Canada as it continues to grow. Actual census data is required for Federal funding for hospitals and other infrastructure. 

Without it, it's hard to plan 5 to 10 years ahead. Population is what now? 35.16 million. 

Ten years from now (2015) the projected poulation of Canada is projected to be around 39.184 million. That's another 5 million people using gov't benefits that are not
yet born yet, or immigrants that haven't come yet.


here is an example of the data old LONG FORM...done in 2011.

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-rece...earchPR=01&B1=All&GeoLevel=PR&GeoCode=3520005


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> The Liberal gov't needs to plan for the large influx of Syrians refugees and others being admitted into this country as well as use the data in the long form for all the oldsters retiring soon


than don't bringe those "refugees"  
Number of "oldsters retiring soon" and other essential information government knows very well without any census ....


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> I appreciate Mr. Trudeau's zeal for transparency and open government, but he may find that giving* too much latitude to his Ministers will be like herding cats*.


or mating elephants...

"Getting things done around here (gov'ts) is like mating elephants!!

It's done at high level

Its accomplished by a great deal of bickering and arguing, screaming and roaring.
It Takes Two years to Produce results!!


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

carverman said:


> here is an example of the data old LONG FORM...done in 2011.
> 
> http://www12.statcan.ca/census-rece...earchPR=01&B1=All&GeoLevel=PR&GeoCode=3520005


For fun I've attached a link to a table that has the differences between the last long-form census (2006) and the National Household Survey (2011).

http://datalibre.ca/2010/10/12/2006...sed-national-household-survey/comment-page-1/

On the whole, there's not a lot of difference, though it is interesting that they took out the question about unpaid household work and added questions about cost of babysitting and child or spousal support payments.

The main issue was it being mandatory, and I can see why statistically it would be an issue. If a "random" sample was already picked to fill it, you do need that sample to respond to draw conclusions. Otherwise, you add in a bias based on the fact that some people choose to participate. Kind of like the uselessness of a voluntary online poll versus a on-line poll that you have to complete before you can read the website.

Maybe the punishment was a little extreme, but was probably one of those archaic things that was never updated or enforced. After all, the response rate of the mandatory was about 94%, so it wasn't like everyone responded and I don't think you see a lot of people in jail for not filling it out.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Also....why not to have option to fill it online?


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

gibor said:


> Also....why not to have option to fill it online?


Good idea.

Maybe have a free draw for a nice prize for those who complete the form. Banks do it, so why not GOC?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Not surprising that gibor if anti census, seeing as he thinks self selected opinion polls on forum websites are representative of public opinion.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

gibor said:


> Also....why not to have option to fill it online?


From the website you have the option to fill it online.

Http://www.census.gc.ca/ccr16_r000-eng.html


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Liberals are moving so fast, the Sun media can't type fast enough to criticize it all.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> The Liberals are moving so fast, the Sun media can't type fast enough to criticize it all.


The press will eventually have their field day, when someone in the new govt really screws up with something they said to the media, or doing things that they are not supposed to as backbenchers, 
or ministers announce their decisions on new policy or refurbishing some of Hasrper's old policies.

After his 'walk in the park" at Rideau Hall on the 4th, after opening of Parliament on the 6th of December, ( they go home for Christmas break and resume in January), there
could be some interesting developments.

Right now, they just got assigned their posts, so nothing has been done. ..it's all so new and the honeymoon is still on.
Once they start to dismantle some of the things and policies that Harper set up (PTT and other things), the fur may start to fly. After all the CONs are still the "loyal
opposition", weak as they are now. 

But for now.."Trudeau Mania" is still going strong. This hHappened after Justin's father was elected too.then the 'fit hit the shan" as the Liberal gov't got into the task of governing.

"..and the people cried "Ding Dong the old king and supreme dictator (Harper) is gone...long live the new king!"


----------



## LBCfan (Jan 13, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Thanks for providing evidence to support my point, LBC. No one went to jail. That woman received a suspended sentence and 50 hours of community service.
> 
> 
> 
> Arguing about the hypothetical threat of jail time is just people being obtuse. The threat of jail time is still in place for people who do not complete the short form census. Nothing is changing.


Ah, you are SO right. If the government has no intention of jailing someone why not remove that penalty from legislation. Sorry, sooner or later some prosecutor will argue that "If the government didn't want people to serve time for this, it wouldn't be a option" and some judge will agree. While the threat is there the threat is real.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

No one is arguing in favour of jail time for census objectors. People are arguing against it as an inane excuse for cancelling the census in the first place, because it was a penalty that was not ever applied. The previous government had it totally within their power to remove prison time as a penalty for non-compliance, but they instead pursued an alternate, idiotic tack which they now acknowledge was a mistake.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

andrewf said:


> No one is arguing in favour of jail time for census objectors. People are arguing against it as an inane excuse for cancelling the census in the first place, because it was a penalty that was not ever applied. The previous government had it totally within their power to remove prison time as a penalty for non-compliance, but they instead pursued an alternate, idiotic tack which they now acknowledge was a mistake.


You mean another decision made by Minister of Industry... Tony "Cementhead"?



> Ahead of the 2011 Census, the Conservative government announced that the *long-form questionnaire will no longer be mandatory*. This decision was made by the June 17, 2010, *Order in Council created by the Minister of Industry defining the questions for the 2011 Census as including only the short-form questions*;
> 
> this was published in the Canada Gazette on June 26, 2010,[31] however a news release was not issued by Minister of Industry Tony Clement until July 13, 2010. This release stated in part "The government will retain the mandatory short form that will collect basic demographic information. To meet the need for additional information, and to respect the privacy wishes of Canadians, the *government has introduced the voluntary National Household Survey"*[32] On July 30, 2010, Statistics Canada published a description of the National Household Survey, intended to be sent to about 4.5 million households. Industry minister Tony Clement stated that the *change to voluntary forms was made because of privacy-related complaints*, though he acknowledged that *the decision was made without consulting organizations and governments that work closely with Statistics Canada. *
> 
> Clement had previously said that *this change was made on the advice of Statistics Canada*.[33]


A case of politicians LYING to cover their butts. The chief statistician resigned after that decision was made by Clement. 



> the former Chief Statistician of Canada originally appointed in 1985 by the Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney, said that he would have quit his job if the government had taken this change during his tenure. He claims that those who are most vulnerable (such as the poor, new immigrants, and aboriginals) are least likely to respond to a voluntary form, which weakens information about their demographic.[35] *Munir Sheikh, Fellegi's successor as Chief Statistician appointed by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper on February 15, 2008,[36] resigned on July 21, 2010, in protest of the Conservative government's change in policy.*[37] In a public letter, Sheikh wrote that he could not legally comment on what advice he had given the government regarding the census, but he did comment against the government's decision,


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

bgc_fan said:


> From the website you have the option to fill it online.
> 
> Http://www.census.gc.ca/ccr16_r000-eng.html


Interesting! They say they are sending it to *ALL *Canadian households. Isn't that also a change?


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

agent99 said:


> Interesting! They say they are sending it to *ALL *Canadian households. Isn't that also a change?


No change. All households received census packages, but only a percentage had to do the long form. The others did the short form census.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Many of the immigrants/refugees families cannot even read English or French , for example my mom won't understand half of the question even though she lives in Canada 4+ years and my mother-in-law doesn't know English at all  , as I said this census is waste of our taxes...
Government offices has All really essential info


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

gibor said:


> Many of the immigrants/refugees families cannot even read English or French , f*or example my mom won't understand half of the question even though she lives in Canada 4+ years and my mother-in-law doesn't know English at all * , *as I said this census is waste of our taxes..*.
> Government offices has All really essential info


That still is no excuse. A family member that does understand English (or French) can fill it out for her. The long census form was around 40 pages, but not all pages were applicable.
You had to read and interpret the question first, and then tick off the boxes or circles where appropriate. 

Unless your mother is head of the household, she isn't obligated to fill out the form, some one else can do it for her..LIKE YOU. I don't believe that any court or judge would fine her or throw her in jail for that matter...but someone has to take the responsibility of filling out the census form to the best of their knowledge. Especially if she is using gov't benefits of any kind.

If someone doesn't, the address that the long form was sent to will be marked for further personal or telephone follow-up, especially if that household had sent in a previous census form, and included their name and telephone number. ( see Question 3)

In most cases it is a question with the empty boxes you tick off..such as:
How many languages are spoken in your household....box 1 [english[ box 2 [french] box 3 [other]

Now; some questions that are pertinent to TOTAL INCOME EARNED and Income taxes paid, *may be a bit more sensitive to those that don't like to report all of the income they received*, other than what they had to declare on their income tax return (T4s/T5s and retirement T4P) . 
That is understandable as one doesn't want the gov't PRYING into their life (privacy matters) when it comes to income and taxes, and may object to filling out that portion of the long form, or "fudge" their income in some cases.

Basically there are 40 pages and 53 or so multiple choice questions to fill out (if applicable to the household). Such as:

1. Family name, 2. How many persons living at address, 3. specifics for each person, (name,sex, DOB, marital status); 4. Activities of daily living,5. what country is or was the person a citizen of; 6. is this person a landed immigrant? and if so, what year? 7. what languages are spoken at home; 8. ethnic origins of people living in this household, 
9. Member of an First nations band? 10. What country did the person live before, 11. Birth place of parents; 12. Education; 13. Job Status or 14. Looking for specific kinds of work; Full time or part time or retired, 15. Total income earned; income taxes paid; 16. Who pays the mortgages, property taxes and household utilities and..so on...
*
PDF example of a 2006 long form census:*
http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/instrument/3901_Q2_V3-eng.pdf

Of course, under the new Trudeau gov't, these forms, will no doubt be changed, as the ethnic community has grown in the last few years and most have a hard time understanding the Citizenship test questions, never mind a long census form, especially if they have not been educated in this country. 
Some allowance has to be made for these new immigrants. Perhaps a community centre where they can take the long form to to have it filled out by volunteers, (similar to the election) where the volunteer will ask the recipient of the form, specific questions, and tick off the appropriate boxes.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Unless your mother is head of the household,


 She is  as well as my mother-in-law.... And there are tens thousands similar cases .... and what about refugees families? I bet that from 25K Syrian that Liberals want to bring here, vast majority doesn't know English at all ....
And again, government offices already know answers on practically all essential questions you listed above


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

gibor said:


> She is  as well as my mother-in-law.... And there are tens thousands similar cases .... and what about refugees families? I bet that from 25K Syrian that Liberals want to bring here, vast majority doesn't know English at all ....
> And again, government offices already know answers on practically all essential questions you listed above


You raised a good point about immigrants, especially from the ME. Interesting though, most of the Syrian refugees already here do speak some English, and the ones from French speaking African nations can speak French as a second language. 

Unfortunately neither Russian nor Ukrainian qualifies as a primary second language here. Somehow, I don't believe any newcomers (refugees) will be mailed these forms within months of arrival in Canada. They have a lot of issues here just to get settled first. Most will have to learn English or French to get a drivers licence and there will be lots of
gov't application forms to fill out besides the drivers' licence applications. 

Eventually as they get immersed in English training, maybe, but I'm sure that the federal gov't is not heartless and fines newcomers because they can't understand the census forms in either official language. All they would have to do is to fill out their name, address and telephone number and return the forms in the prepaid envelope..just drop it in the mailbox.
A census "volunteer" would follow up and Stats Can would need to send over somebody to assist these new immigrants (or refugees) as the case may be.

Most Ethnic Community churches/mosques, and other organizations that help refugees could help them fill out the forms, the long one, or the short National household survey.

I'm sure it will take some time ( possibly even years) before the new revised long forms are issued, and probably not every address will get one. 

Certainly ,retire-ees, such as myself will get one, as I got one back a few years ago (2006?)..don't remember what year. So did my mother (born in the Ukraine, but
living and working in Canada since 1950 and eventually a citizen in 1962.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> You raised a good point about immigrants, especially from the ME. Interesting though, most of the Syrian refugees already here do speak some English,


 No, they don't  You just see on TV those few who speaks a little bit 


> Most will have to learn English or French to get a drivers licence


 Not true! My mother-in-law got driving license few months ago and written test was in Russian (you can write test in one of many different languages)


> Eventually as they get immersed in English training, maybe


 When senior 70 y.o arrives to Canada, I doubt they will be able to learn English good enough to fill out long-form 
I actually met, not only Russian, but many old people from Poland, Greece, Serbia etc who hardly understand English at all...and live in Canada many years,,,


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

gibor said:


> I actually met, not only Russian, but many old people from Poland, Greece, Serbia etc who hardly understand English at all...and live in Canada many years,,,


Then they are dependent on family/friends around them for many things, not just filling out a census form. It is simply not a valid argument about not filling out a census form in one of Canada's official languages.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Altared, not always ....


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> Then they are dependent on family/friends around them for many things, not just filling out a census form. It is simply not a valid argument about not filling out a census form in one of Canada's official languages.


Gibor likes to argue for the sake of arguing. 

My mother (Ukrainian by birth), still alive at 91 and living in Toronto with my brother, has lived in Canada since 1948. She was a refugee when she came to Canada
from Germany, where she was basically held prisoner on a state farm during the war. I was born in 1946, after the war, and came to Canada when she arrived. 

Although we lived on a farm around Ottawa, right up to 1962 (when we left the farm and came to Ottawa), I was already well versed in the English language in grade school and high school. 
My mother then, in her early 30s at the time , worked odd jobs to support her 3 sons (very nasty divorce with no support from the 'old man", learned to speak the English language. While she may have had some problems interpreting the long census form, she still had her 3 boys that could, and we helped her.

So what Gibor is arguing about is no excuse.

Immigrants that can speak English a bit, but may not have the comprehension skills of interpreting the questions asked on the Long Census form, can get help from others.

it is NOT a clear cut case of ....."well, we are immigrants, we don't know the official languages, so we will claim that we don't know how to fill out the form" and not send it in...

but of course, we will always take advantage of any pensions or other gov't support/assistance in the meantime. "


----------

