| Name: | Mr. Jason Kenney |
| Political Party: | Conservative |
| Constituency: | Calgary Southeast |
| Province: | Alberta |
| Telephone: | (613) 992-2235 |
| Fax: | (613) 992-1920 |
| Email: | kennej@parl.gc.ca |
| Website: | http://www.jasonkenney.com |
| Address: | House of Commons, Ottawa K1A OA6 |
| Constituency Address: | #111 - 10325 Bonaventure Dr. SE Calgary, Alberta T2J 7E4 Tel. 403-225-3480 Fax. 403-225-3504 |
09/22/2000 - extract from Hansard. MP Jason Kenney speaks to his Motion M-160, during third hour of debate, subsequent to a motion to amend submitted by MP Mac Harb.
I note with some dismay the remarks of my itinerate colleague from South Shore who for some reason apparently supports the motion but saw some reason to criticize its mover for not having participated in the debate. I am here tonight to participate in the debate. I was here during the first hour and I was here at every stage in this debate. I think in private members' hour that kind of apparently petty partisanship is uncalled for. I am as partisan as anyone when it is called for, but certainly not when we are discussing matters of this nature. I found that regrettable. The hon. member for Ottawa Centre seeks to amend this motion by changing the words "the government should take" to "the government should consider taking". I object strenuously. Millions of Canadians have an interest in this matter although they may not yet realize it. Certainly tens of thousands have a very acute interest in the passage of the motion. Genealogists, archivists, librarians, researchers and historians through many personal and organized representations to their representatives and to this place have asked for the government to release the 1911 archives for the census of that year. It was principally as a result of those representations that I brought forward the motion. I thought these archivists, genealogists and so on had made a very reasonable case that the release of these documents would be well within what would be very conventional and would not violate privacy rights or undertakings on the part of the government. I brought a motion which would suggest that the government should take this action. Let us be honest and frank about it. This is how it works. Government members have been deluged with mail on the issue like all other members from people concerned about the issue asking for the release of these documents. It has become a political concern for them. I suspect that many of these members have received dozens of letters and communications asking for their support of this motion or action of this nature to be taken. It has become a small but not insignificant political concern for them. Undoubtedly many of these members intended to vote in favour of my motion that the government should take this action and release these census documents. I am sure this is what happened. The Minister of Industry is responsible for the oversight of Statistics Canada and the archives. Undoubtedly his office realized that the motion could be somewhat embarrassing for the government because he clearly had no intention of taking decisive action on the matter. Rather, the Minister of Industry appointed a committee to delay, a panel of experts, which is a typical government procedure, to study the issue into the ground probably at least until after the election so that my hon. colleagues opposite could tell all the genealogists and local historians in their ridings not to worry in that the government was considering the matter and in the fullness of time and at the earliest opportunity would release the archived documents. No doubt they were planning to do that with the committee to delay. This motion comes along and suddenly forces them, heaven forbid, to actually confront the issue, especially because it has been deemed votable. So the minister says that the government has to come up with some way to water this thing down so that it is not obliged to take any sort of action at all, but instead can continue to delay the release of these census documents and denude this as a political issue for the backbench government members. That is exactly what has happened. Let us be grown-ups about this. I strenuously object to the motion which would require that the government consider taking action. The government can consider taking action on anything, anytime. This amendment renders this motion meaningless. I want to clearly put on the record that this will not serve as an adequate loincloth, if you will, for government members who hope to go back to their ridings and tell their constituents interested in access to this important historical information that they voted in favour of this motion, that they voted in favour of the release of these census documents. That is not true. This is an disingenuous motion designed to cloud the issue for those with an interest in obtaining these records. It is a somewhat underhanded effort on the part of the government to prevent the House from actually reflecting the interests and concerns of their constituents. It is a very simple matter, but the government and the minister want to maintain a stranglehold on this information. He does not want the House, its members or, heaven forbid, his own members representing their constituents deciding that this archival information should be released from the 1911 census. He wants his department and his bureaucrats to be able to make this decision. That is why this amendment has come forward from a government member tonight. I just say to my colleagues opposite and everyone else that this completely dilutes the meaningfulness of the motion. I would ask members to please vote against the amendment and support the original motion which has stronger language and which creates at least a strong sense of the House. Even if my motion passes unamended, it will not force the government to take action. It will merely give a strong sense of the will of the House. That is what private members' motions are intended for. Let us use that procedure properly. We get very few votable private members' motions. Let us use this one to actually represent our constituents in a non-partisan fashion. Instead of protecting the minister's hide and his committee to delay, let us vote against the amendment and support the original motion, as no doubt most members would be inclined to do. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to move:
Some hon. members: Agreed. The Deputy Speaker: The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Some hon. members: Agreed. (Motion agreed to)
Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Ref.) moved:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government should take all necessary steps to release the 1911 census records once they have been deposited in the National Archives in 2003. On its face the motion may appear to be a rather technical and arcane matter of concern only to a small community of genealogists and amateur historians, but in fact the motion speaks to a very important matter about access to our shared history as a country. All members of this place will know, having been contacted undoubtedly by members of genealogical organizations, historical associations, archivists and others, that the rules respecting the normal release of the census data collected from the 1911 census have been interpreted in such as way as to prevent their public release and access. Hence, for the first time in Canadian history, historians will not have access to the data collected in the 1911 census. Up to and including the 1901 census in Canada, the census records were transferred to the National Archives and were subsequently made available to the public 92 years after collection. This was possible because clauses in the Privacy Act allowed for the release of certain pieces of information to the National Archives subject to certain aspects of the Privacy Act. However, in 1906 the Government of Canada passed an act respecting the census and statistics in which section 68 empowered the governor in council, the cabinet, to make regulations respecting confidentiality. The government of Sir Wilfrid Laurier in 1906 did in fact promulgate certain orders in council which restricted access to the census of 1911. Apparently it did this because at that time there was concern among the public that the data collected could be used in the assessment of taxation and perhaps for the conscription of Canadians in a future wartime conflict. There was some political sensitivity and a feeling at that time that the public should be assured the information it was obliged to surrender to the government would be kept in confidence and not used for other public purposes. However, no commitment was made by the government either in statute or regulation at that time that this information would be kept secret in perpetuity. It was clear to all concerned, according to many of the historians who have examined this matter, that the regulation applied in the context of the day. People understandably did not want to have bureaucrats, politicians or others having access to personal information which they were required to surrender under the Statistics Act. It is a long and much honoured convention both in this country and in similar jurisdictions that such information eventually after a reasonable time, roughly the maximum period of an average lifespan, ought eventually to become publicly accessible for research and academic purposes. In 1985 the justice department arrived at a legal opinion, an interpretation of the statutory and regulatory decisions in 1906, in which it decided the census data had to remain in secret in perpetuity following the 1911 census. Thus today we find ourselves in the position where in the last couple of years archivists, genealogists and historians have suddenly discovered that the huge treasure trove of historical data which they anticipated would be deposited at the National Archives in 2003, the data obtained in the 1911 census of Canadian subjects and citizens, would not be made available. All across the country there are tens of thousands of concerned Canadians who take a deep interest in the history of the country. They began to express their concern about the secret nature of the census records. This is important because as we all know, in the first decade of the 20th century, there was an enormous wave of immigration into Canada. Many people today can trace their ancestors' arrival to Canada to that period between 1901 and 1911. Many millions of Canadian families have some ancestors who arrived, acquired land and began their lives in this great country during those early years of development, immigration and settlement. The 1911 census represents a critical link to the past for historians and genealogists. For us it is a window which allows us to find who arrived generally from Europe at the time, where they settled, how many people were in their families, their birth dates, their relatives, the location of their land and their occupations. I do not think the release of this very basic genealogical data would in any way violate the privacy of those who lived in the country between 1901 and 1911. It goes without saying that the vast majority of those people who were subject to the 1911 census are today posthumous Canadians and indeed have no living interest in the release of this information, but there are some. I can say with some pride that next week my grandfather, Mart Kenney, a great Canadian musician, will be celebrating his 90th birthday. He was born in 1910 in Vancouver. I asked him if he would be concerned if I and his other descendants could have access to census information concerning his family in 1910. He said of course not, that is ridiculous. If we could consult those who lived at the time of the 1911 census and ask them whether they would object to their grandchildren and great grandchildren, and academic and professional historians, looking at the information to find out where they settled, where they lived, how many people were in their families and other data of this nature, I am sure we would find that they would not raise any objection. I am sure they would be intrigued to learn that there are so many thousands of Canadians who are deeply concerned about their familial past, their regional past and national past and hope they will have access to this information. Virtually every other jurisdiction in the developed democracies recognize the principle that we must respect the privacy rights of citizens when the government or state requires people to surrender information under sanction of law. That ought to be managed with great discretion. Information should for a lengthy period of time be kept secret. However, these jurisdictions also recognize that a time comes when such information no longer poses a privacy interest for individuals but rather poses a public interest for access by historians and others. I can give examples of such jurisdictions. Australia releases its census data after 100 years. France releases its census data a century after collection. Denmark releases such data 65 years after collection, well within a normal lifespan. In the United Kingdom efforts are being made to release data after 100 years. Surely the 92 year rule which we have respected in Canada until today is an adequate period of time to ensure and protect the privacy interests of those who filled out census forms in 1911. The legal status quo is interpreted by the justice department and applied by Statistics Canada. It does not only affect the 1911 census. It affects all censuses taken since then. If we maintain the legal status quo in this regard, never again will Canadian historians, archivists or genealogists be able to reach back in time and research the important information which gives us clues to the past from whence we came.
Wednesday, 29 Septemeber 1999 Dear Ms. Morrow, Thank you for forwarding me your correspondence of September 7, 1999 to Senator Lorna Milne regarding your desire to have post 1901 census data available to the public. I too find it hard to believe that restrictions would be put on access to information regarding the 1901 and 1911 census. Surely after so many years, it is doubtful that anyone's privacy would be risked. Last year, I introduced a Motion (M-571) in the House of Commons calling on Parliament to release such information. Unfortunately, the government prorogued Parliament meaning that all outstanding bills and motions were wiped off the list for debate. Please be assured that I intend to re-introduce this motion as soon as possible. Once again, thank you for writing. Sincerely, Jason Kenney, MP Calgary Southeast
Thursday, 07 October 1999 Dear Ms. Davidson, Thank you for your correspondence of September 1, 1999 regarding your desire to have post 1901 census data available to the public. I too find it hard to believe that restrictions would be put on access to information regarding the 1901 and 1911 census. Surely after so many years, it is doubtful that anyone's privacy would be reisked. Last year, I introduced a Motion (M-571) in the House of Commons calling on Parliament to release such information. Unfortunately, the government proroqued Parliament meaning that all outstanding bills and motions were wiped off the list for debate. Please be assured that I indend to re-intoduce this motion as soon as possible. Once again, thank you for writing. Sincerely, [Signature] Jason Kenney, MP Calgary Southeast
Thank you for your email correspondence of May 30, 1999 regarding my initiative to release post 1901 census data. I am hoping that my Private Member's motion, M-571, will be up for debate in the fall. Hopefully, it will also be deemed voteable. As of yet, I have not recieved any news as to its progress. Please be assured that I will keep in touch with you with any updates. Below, please find the wording of the motion to be presented. Sincerely, Jason Kenney, MP Calgary Southeast jtk/mab M-571 - January 28, 1999 - Mr. Kenney (Calgary Southeast) - On or after Thursday, February 11, 1999 - That, in the opinion of this House, the government should take all necessary steps to release the 1911 census records once they have been deposited in the National Archives in 2003
Thu, 6 May 1999 11:57:54 -0400 O T T A W A Wednesday, 21 April 1999 Dear Sir/Madam, Thank you for your email correspondence regarding your concern over the release of the 1911 census data. Please be assured that I take your concerns seriously and also question the decision of withholding the 1911 data. In fact, I have recently presented a Private Member's Motion that would overturn the decision to withhold the census information. I will be sure to provide you with any updates I have on the progress of this project. Once again, thank you for writing. Sincerely, Jason Kenney, MP Calgary Southeast" 04/30/99- e-mail from The Global Gazette to MP
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. |
|
|
