| Name: | Mr. Chuck Cadman |
| Political Party: | Independent |
| Constituency: | Surrey North |
| Province: | British Columbia |
| Telephone: | (613) 992-2922 |
| Fax: | (613) 992-0252 |
| Email: | Cadman.C@parl.gc.ca |
| Address: | House of Commons, Ottawa K1A OA6 |
| Constituency Address: | 10070 King George Hwy Suite 114 Surrey, British Columbia V3T2W4 |
|
05/15/2001 - Posting by Mary to Ontario mail list. Hello List, I received a very favorable letter from my MP Mr. Chuck Cadman (Surrey North)reply from letter I sent to him in March, he agrees with our stand. Mr Cadman states "in principle the Canadian Alliance Party is in favour of the historical census being released." He also enclosed a 22 page report from the Expert Panel on Access to Historical Census Records. Which I will take to my next genealogy meeting. I was so pleased to get this. Just wanted to pass this on that some of our ideas are getting through. I got the Long Form & have attached the protest letter. Kind regards, Mary from Surrey BC Canada 02/09/2001 - email from MP Chuck Cadman to Muriel M. Davidson.
Date: Friday, 09 February, 2001 To: Muriel M. Davidson Subject: RE: Welcome Back to Ottawa Dear Ms. Davidson Thank you for your e-mail. My position on post 1901 census records, as indicated to you in my e-mail of September 29, 2000, has not changed. As far as supporting all Private Members Bills that deal with this issue I will consider each Bill individually before determining my position. Sincerely, Chuck Cadman, M.P. Surrey North 09/29/2000 - email from MP Chuck Cadman to Muriel M. Davidson and copied to Melville Andress and Gordon A. WATTS. This message removes Mr. Cadman from the "fence" and gives him a gold tick of support.
Date: Friday, 29 September, 2000 To: Muriel M. Davidson Cc: Melville Andress; Gordon A. WATTS Subject: Post 1901 Census Record Dear Ms. Davidson Further to our e-mails regarding post 1901 census records, I am writing to inform you of my support to release these records to the public. Census data is important for historical and family history research. Without releasing post 1901 census this research would be seriously hampered. Not allowing release of census records for 92 years, I believe, establishes a reasonable balance between protecting personal privacy and the need for access to census records for research purposes. Jason Kenney, Official Opposition Finance Critic, introduced in the House of Commons a Private Members' Motion, M-160. The Motion reads as follows:
Also, a federally appointed panel has recommended that the government introduce legislation making census records available to the public 92 years after it is collected. It is time for the government to take action on this issue. Sincerely, Chuck Cadman, M.P.
I understand that you have yet to decide on the position you will take when it comes time to vote "yes" or "no" on the release of Census Statistics after 92 years to the Public? Perhaps your reluctance to "come on aboard" has been influenced by misinformation which has been prevailing about the "confidentiality issue guaranteed by a previous Government"? Mr. Gordon A. Watts, in his 36 page research document, "The Myths of Census" and which I think, he sent you a copy has adequately shown the fallacy of such a claim. During our short conversation in Vancouver (PM rally), I am sorry that we did not have time to explore further your negative feelings in regard to the release of these records. Perhaps, at this time after further study, you are prepared to say, "Yes"? I am, Sincerely Melville R. Andress. #110- 33110 Nelson Avenue, Abbotsford,B.C.V2S 2L5.
Thank you for our short conversation June 21 at the Waterfront Centre Hotel, Vancouver B.C. I would be receptive to hearing further from you as regards : 'fence sitting on the matter of unequivocally making these records available to the Public after 92 years.' I believe in our conversation, you mentioned 'promised' confidentiality given to the respondents a century ago? Mr. Gordon Watts effectively destroys this myth in his well documented research which he has made available through: http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census . Surely as a member of the opposition in the House of Commons, you will have made yourself conversant with the aforementioned document? Sincerely, Melville R. Andress
Thank you for your e-mail regarding census records. The Minister responsible for Statistics Canada, the Honourable John Manley, asked Statistics Canada to develop options for changing the current legislation to allow access to census records. As it stands, there are two possibilities;
the second option is to retroactively change the confidentiality provisions of the Statistics Act to allow the 1911 and all censuses taken thereafter to be eventually placed in the public domain. When the Minister introduces legislation in the House of Commons I will take a close look at the Bill to determine if there is a balance between the need to protect personal privacy and the demands of genealogists and historians for access to census records. Again, thank you for writing. Sincerely, Chuck Cadman, M.P. Surrey North
Thank you for your letter regarding the 1911 Census records. The confidentiality provisions found in the Statistics Act of 1906 override the section of the Privacy Act that permits the transfer of records to the public domain 92 years after the taking of a census or survey. Thus, no legal authority exists to undertake the transfer of post-1901 census records to the National Archives. While it might be possible to effect a retroactive amendment to the legislation, careful consideration would have to be given to the impact such a measure could have on the suppliers of data to Statistics Canada. Statistical data collection is often perceived to be intrusive. One of the most effective ways of securing the co-operation of Canadians is to unconditionally guarantee the confidentiality of the information supplied and that is what Statistics Canada is now able to do. A retroactive amendment of the legislation to permit disclosure of historical census records could be viewed as a betrayal of past statutory guarantees and would undoubtedly impact on respondents' willingness to participate in future surveys. Carefull consideration, therefore, would have to be given to the effect this would have on the national statistical system. As for your questions: 1) Private Member's Bill Procedurally, due to the lottery system of selection, it is extremely difficult to get a private member's bill before the House, let alone have it deemed votable. I have been successful only once in two years. Therefore, I am sure that you can appreciate that I must prioritize issues. 2) Voting Intention We must remember that census data is not provided freely, it is mandatory under threat of penalty. At face value I would find it difficult to support your suggested legislation primarily because it would breach a statutory commitment made to Canadians now deceased that their census data would remain confidential in perpetuity. However, if legislation with adequate safegueard and restrictions comes befor the House, I will approach it with an open mind. Sincerely, Chuck Cadman, M.P., Surrey North
A web site has been posted at http://globalgenealogy.com/census to record MP's responses, so that those who are interested, will know the position that their elected representative has (or has not expressed) on the issue. Also included on the web site, is a correspondence log for each Member of Parliament, which will contain responses to this e-mail plus any other correspondence from the MP. The Question: "Would you, as an elected Member of the House of Commons of the Parliament of Canada, vote FOR or AGAINST a Bill supporting release to the Public, of Post 1901 Census Records, 92 years after they were recorded. ( 1911 census information available in 2003, 1921 in 2013 etc)" If you would like to expand on your position, your entire response will be posted to your individual correspondence log. The Post 1901 Census web site is sponsored by Global Genealogy & History Bookstore. A vast number of e-mails and calls from subscribers and web site visitors, clearly demonstrates that this issue is extremely important to them. Many readers have expressed that their current MP's position on this issue will weigh heavily in their decision process during the next election. |
|
|
