| Name: | Mr. Paul Steckle |
| Political Party: | Liberal Party of Canada |
| Constituency: | Huron--Bruce |
| Province: | Ontario |
| Telephone: | (613) 992-8234 |
| Fax: | (613) 995-6350 |
| Email: | Steckle.P@parl.gc.ca |
| Address: | House of Commons, Ottawa K1A OA6 |
| Constituency Address: | 30 Victoria Street North Goderich, Ontario N7A 2R6 Tel: (519) 524-6938 Toll-free 1-800-465-1726 Fax: (519) 524-9374 |
|
09/10/2004 - email sent to the office of MP Paul Steckle by Gordon A. Watts From: Gordon A. Watts Good Morning Greg. Thank you for your prompt response to my letter of 29 August 2004. In seeking support of our parliamentary representatives we do not expect, nor would we ask them to support 'all future, and as yet unseen, Bills or Motions regarding the release of historic Census documentation'. Indeed, if any such future Bills or Motions contained conditions and restrictions similar to those contained in the now defunct Bill S-13, we would hope that our representatives would vote AGAINST them. Government Bill S-13 was less concerned with providing the access we seek to see returned than it was in placing conditions and restrictions on that access, and in extending by twenty years (to 112 years) the period before 'unrestricted' access would be available. By far the worst provision of Bill S-13 was the so-called 'informed consent' clause that would forever destroy the 'completeness' of future Censuses thus diminishing their value for genealogical and historical research. In responding to our questions of support for the access we seek some MPs and Senators refer to the need to achieve a balance between individual privacy and the need to provide information to legitimate researchers. We believe that 'balance' has already been achieved and has been legislatively prescribed through clauses in the Access to Information and Privacy Acts, and Privacy Regulations. Those clauses make specific provision for access of 'personal information' collected through Census or Survey, to any person or body for purposes of research, 92 years after collection. The 'balance' provided therein is that in return for providing information to Census that information will remain confidential for a period of 92 years. We find it difficult to believe that legislators who debated and passed the Bill that gave birth to the Access to Information and Privacy Acts would include specific provision for access to 92-year-old Census records if they felt those provisions could be circumvented simply by a government bureaucrat refusing to return control of the records in question to the National Archivist. The intent of those legislators is clear -- they intended public access to 92-year-old Census records to be permitted. Why else would they have included the clauses referred to? As indicated in my letter we seek nothing new. We seek nothing other than that which existing legislation states we are entitled to. When 240 years of Census records are currently accessible after 92 years without restriction we see no reason why subsequent records should not be accessible in the same manner. We do not believe legislative change should be necessary to achieve this, however should Parliament believe otherwise we have suggested a single clause to be added to the Statistics Act that would accomplish what we seek without adding any unnecessary and unwanted conditions or restrictions. Please thank Mr. Steckle for his support (at least in principle) for the access we seek to Historic Census records. He will retain his Gold Tick on the MPs Scoreboard of the Post 1901 Census Project website. Have a great day! Gordon A. Watts gordon_watts@telus.net http://www.globalgenealogy.com/Census 09/10/2004 - email sent by the office of MP Paul Steckle to Gordon A. Watts From: Steckle, Paul - Assistant 1 Mr. Watts: I am writing in response to your letter, received by this office on September 8th, 2004, in which you ask for Mr. Steckle's views regarding the release of historic Census records. I thank you for your continuing interest on this issue. As you will recall, on June 13th, 2000, we spoke at length on the telephone concerning this matter. Consistent with the information that I relayed to you during that conversation, please note that Mr. Steckle remains steadfast with respect to the said release. In plain terms, he is prepared to vote in favour of measures designed to provide access to historic Census records however, he is not prepared to state that he will support all future, and as yet unseen, Bills or Motions regarding the release of historic Census documentation. That determination will be made on a case by case basis and will be cognisant of legal factors such as individual privacy. Mr. Steckle acknowledges the potential research value of materials contained within historical Census records and supports the release of said information so long as it does not compromise an individuals right to privacy and does not set certain legal precedents. I would invite you to maintain contact with this office in the future so that proper evaluation of related legislative measures can be conducted. Your input will be valuable if and when the House of Commons, and Mr. Steckle, are considering legislative measures pertaining to the release of historic Census records. Greg McClinchey 08/29/2004 - letter sent to MP Paul Steckle from Gordon A. Watts 29 August 2004 Mr. Paul Steckle Dear Mr. Steckle Congratulations on your recent election as a Member of Parliament. To have the trust and respect of those who voted for you is a great honour. Members who have been re-elected will be aware of an issue affecting a great many Canadians that seek their personal ancestry through research of Historic Census records. Newly elected Members may not yet be aware of this issue. It has been estimated that in excess of 7.5 million Canadians have an interest in genealogy and family history. These individuals seek to regain the same public access, with no added conditions or restrictions, to 92-year-old records of Census after 1906 that is currently available for 240 years of Census records up to that time. Access to Census records after 1906 is prevented at this time because of the (believed illegal) policy of a federal civil servant - Dr. Ivan P. Fellegi - Chief Statistician of Canada. The Library and Archives of Canada Act (and it's predecessor) has designated to the Librarian and Archivist the authority to determine what records of government are of archival or historical value and that shall be deposited in the National Library and Archives. Librarian and Archivist Ian E. Wilson determined that schedules of Census have archival and historical value. He declared them to be a National Treasure. He requested the Chief Statistician to return care and control of the records in question to his authority. Dr. Fellegi denied that request. The Access to Information and Privacy Acts, and Privacy Regulations, make specific provision for personal information collected through Census or Survey to be made available to any person or body for purposes of research, 92 years following collection. The legislation assumes these records to be under the care and control of the National Archivist. By refusing to return care and control of the records in question to the Librarian and Archivist for subsequent public access the Chief Statistician has acted in deliberate contravention of the Library and Archives of Canada Act, the Access to Information Act, and the Privacy Act. He has usurped the authority of the Librarian and Archivist to determine what governmental records are of archival or historical value and that shall be deposited in the Library and Archives of Canada. In dictating policy instead of following policy determined through legislation passed by Parliament he has usurped the authority of that body. Do you believe that any Federal bureaucrat, regardless of how highly placed or regarded, is above the Laws of Canada? Do you believe that a civil servant has the power to dictate policy that contravenes legislation passed by the Parliament of Canada? The Access to Information and Privacy Acts are complementary Acts born of the same Bill debated and passed by Parliament. Do you believe the parliamentarians who passed this legislation would knowingly include clauses in one Act, the effect of which would be to totally nullify clauses in the other? If your answer to any of these questions is 'NO' we ask that you support our efforts to regain the same public access - with no added restrictions or conditions - to Historic Census records after 1906 that is currently available for 240 years of Census records up to that time. We seek nothing new. We seek only that which current legislation states we are entitled to - access that we have had in the past but is currently (believed illegally) withheld from us by the Chief Statistician of Canada. We ask that you call upon the Government of Canada to immediately direct the Chief Statistician of Canada to obey the Laws of Canada. We ask that he be directed to return care and control of schedules of Historic Census to the Librarian and Archivist of Canada for subsequent public access in accordance with the Access to Information and Privacy Acts. We ask further that you ensure continued public access to Historic Census records by seeking a government Bill that would add to the Statistics Act a single clause, similar to the following: "Original schedules of Census or authentic copies thereof shall, not later than thirty (30) years following collection, be transferred to the care and control of the National Archivist for subsequent public access in accordance with provisions of the Access to Information and Privacy Acts, and Regulations attached thereto." In reading my letter you may not feel any obligation to respond to someone living outside your electoral riding. The votes you cast in Parliament, however, affect all people living in Canada and in that respect your constituency is all of Canada. Considering this, even though I do not reside in your riding I would greatly appreciate your personal response to my letter. Your response, stating your support (or otherwise) of the access we seek, will be posted to your Correspondence Log on the Post 1901 Census Project website. It will be available for viewing by your constituents on the MPs Scoreboard at www.globalgenealogy.com/Census Thank you for taking the time to read my letter, and for your consideration of this very important issue. Respectfully Gordon A. Watts 04/14/2001 - email to MP Paul Steckle from Muriel M. Davidson. From: Muriel M. Davidson To: Paul Steckle, MP Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2001 10:04 PM Subject: Happy Easter Wishes Dear Mr. P. Steckle:- I checked the Canada Census Member of Parliament Scoreboard at http://www.globalgenealogy.com/Census/Score3.htm I notice the last memo posted was to 05/13/2000 to Gordon Watts., it was prior to this last Session of Parliament and before the Nov. 27 election. Your GOLD tick shines brightly -- we are hoping for your continued support re Senator Lorna Milne's Bill S-12 Na Mr. Murray Calder's C-312, identical in wording with Senator Milne's past the Second Reading and Mr. Calder has recently had First Reading. Looking for your continued support, Muriel M. Davidson Co-Chair, Canada Census Committee 06/13/2000 - Posting of Gordon A. WATTS to the Canada-Census-Campaign mail list.
I was roused out of a sound (?) sleep this morning with a phone call from Greg, an administrative assistant for Paul Steckle. We had an interesting conversation for about 25 minutes in which he made a number of points. I think the most important thing that came out the conversation was that while Mr. Steckle might be prepared to vote in favour of a Bill to obtain access to Historic Census, he was not prepared to state that he would vote for any and all Bills or Motions regarding Census that might come up in the future. He was not going to state he would support any and all future Bills or Motions without being aware of the wording and content of them. I suspect that many MPs might be of similar mind and in asking MPs for support you might want to consider wording the question to ask if they would support specific Bills and Motions, i.e. C-484, M-160, S-15. When we first started campaigning we had no specific Bills or Motions to cite, but now we do. One thing that Greg stated was a concern of Mr. Steckle was the possibility of a precedent being set that could be used in a detrimental manner for something unrelated to our concerns and he would want to study any proposed Bill or Motion to ensure that this would not be a problem. Greg indicated that Mr. Steckle thought Jason Kenney's Motion M-160 was a good motion and that he would likely vote in favour of it. Based on my conversation this morning with Greg, I am inclined to give Mr. Steckle a gold tick on the Scoreboard. Happy Hunting. Gordon NOTE: Further to the above, Greg indicated that the letter sent to Muriel M. Davidson (printed below) had not been represented as being current, but had been sent inviting comment on it's content. Those of us who saw the letter - myself included - without being fully aware of what was said during the earlier telephone call may have been a little hasty in responding with strong words. G.A.W.
Huron-Bruce (Ontario) Dear Sir: This afternoon (12 June 2000) you had a telephone conversation with Mrs. Muriel M. Davidson of Brampton, Ontario. You followed up this conversation with an e-mail, the text of which is included at the end of this message. In the above-mentioned e-mail, you invited comments regarding it’s contents. The purpose of my writing at this time then is to respond to your invitation. To begin with I might suggest that when constituents and others request your position on how you would vote on a Bill to allow access of Post 1901 Census records, they want to know your opinion. You would do well to respond with your own thoughts rather than recycling outdated information sheets circulated by Statistics Canada. By far the largest portion of your letter to Mrs. Davidson was quoted verbatim from information sheets produced by Dr. Ivan Fellegi and Statistics Canada at least a year ago. Much has changed since then. It is obvious from your letter that you have relied on, and accepted verbatim, virtually all statements issued by Statistics Canada, and have done little or no investigation of your own regarding the matter of Post 1901 Census. I would sincerely urge you to do some of your own investigation on this matter. You might be surprized at what you find. You began your letter by stating that "release of individual census records is explicitly prohibited, by law, for all censuses following 1901". I must inform you sir, that while this statement has been widely circulated by Statistics Canada and Privacy Commissioner Bruce Phillips, it is incorrect. Statistics Canada bases their position of non-disclosure on a number of legal opinions received from the Justice Department in 1985 or earlier. I would stress that these are only opinions and have not been tested in a court of law. I would stress also that these opinions were based on only one clause (Secrecy) contained in Instructions to Enumerators for the Census of 1906 and others. The legislation in 1905/1906 stated that the Instructions to Enumerators, as made up by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher) and approved by Order in Council, had "the force of law". There is every indication that the Secrecy clause was intended only to prevent Officers and Enumerators from disclosing, at the time of Census, contemporary name identified information. It did not state, nor did it imply, that information from Census would never be accessible by the Public. I would point out that the Instructions to Enumerators had other clauses that also had "the force of law". These included statements that Census "will have value as a record for historical use in tracing the origin and rise of future towns in the country", and would be used "for the purpose of future reference and comparison". Also "The Census is intended to be a permanent record, and it’s schedules will be stored in the Archives of the Dominion", and "The Census is a permanent record, and it’s schedules will be carefully preserved for future reference." Had the various legal advisors in the Justice Department considered all of the pertinent clauses in formulating their legal opinions on this matter, I have no doubt that the campaign to obtain access to Post 1901 Census records would never have been necessary. If all pertinent clauses had been considered, Census records would have continued to be released after 92 years as allowed in Regulations attached to the Privacy Act. Lawyers involved in our research have expressed the opinion that a court challenge to the position of Statistics Canada would very likely result in the release of Historic Census, at least up to the Census of 1916, and perhaps later as well. The first Statute pertaining to Census that had a clause relating to Secrecy was passed in 1918. The clauses of that Statute contained nothing that would prevent the transfer of Historic Census to the control of the National Archives. No statute up to the present day contains any clause that states Historic Census cannot be transferred to the National Archivist. The only thing that prevents the transfer of Historic Census to the control of the National Archivist is a policy of Statistics Canada based on a legal opinion - an opinion based on a mis-interpretation of only one clause of several, contained in Instructions to Enumerators, that should have been considered. Much has been made by Statistics Canada and the Privacy Commissioner regarding a "promise" or "explicit guarantee of indefinite confidentiality" supposedly made to the people of Canada by the government of Sir Wilfred Laurier in 1906. I have asked both Statistics Canada and Privacy Commissioner Bruce Phillips to "show me the promise". To date, neither has been able to do so. After a great deal of research by myself, and others, I can state unequivocally that the promise does not exist. A promise never made cannot be broken. I could go further here but it would only be repeating much of what was contained in my Submission to the Expert Panel on Access to Historic Census appointed by Industry Minister John Manley on 12 November 1999. I have attached to this message the files containing my written submission to the Expert Panel. Although I sent them to you, and all other MPs, attached to an email on 14 April 2000, it is obvious that you did not read them. I would encourage you to do so at this time. Should you so wish, I can send you a CD that accompanied my written submission. This CD contains a great deal more support documentation than was included within the written submission. If you can prove me wrong in anything that I have stated in my submission I invite you to do so. I would welcome any comments you might have regarding my submission. I can be reached by e-mail, by telephone at (604) 942-6889, by Fax at (604) 942-6843, or by mail at 1455 Delia Drive Port Coquitlam, BC V3C 2V9 Sincerely, Gordon A. WATTS gordon_watts@telus.net
Mrs. Davidson: I am writing further to our telephone conversation (in response to your e-mails), regarding the release of 1911 and subsequent census records to the National Archives of Canada. Please accept my appreciation for taking the time to write on this issue, and for providing me with the opportunity to comment. Before I begin, I should point out that the release of individual census records is explicitly prohibited, by law, for all censuses following 1901. Understandably, this has angered the many genealogists and researchers who had expected that the 1911 census records would be publicly available in 2003 (92 years after the taking of the census). Regrettably, there is a public perception that Statistics Canada has taken an arbitrary position in this matter and is circumventing the "standard 92 year rule" by its decision not to transfer the records. This is not the case. In fact, legislatively speaking, the agency's hands are tied. The Privacy Act is the legislation that provides for the transfer of records to the National Archives of Canada. It permits such transfers only if there are no other acts with a different or a stronger legislative protection. In other words, records can be transferred to the National Archives only if there are no provisions in another piece of legislation that prevents the said transfer. The records of censuses taken in 1901 and in prior years have been transferred to the National Archives of Canada for public access. This was possible (legal) because the legislation that was used to collect these census records did not contain any specific provisions that prohibited their transfer. In short, up to 1901, Census-takers were instructed to protect the confidentiality of the information (while collecting it), but these instructions did not have the force of law. Thus the information contained in these records is protected only by the Privacy Act which stipulates that National Archives of Canada can make these records available to the public 92 years after the taking of the census. Starting in 1906, (and in subsequent censuses) the legislation that gave the authority to collect census information contained statutory confidentiality provisions. These provisions are such that only the person named in the particular record may have access to his/her information. There is also no time limitation on the access. Essentially, even when the person is deceased, the provisions are still legally in effect. As a result of this, Statistics Canada cannot, without breaching the Statistics Act, transfer any census records taken under the authority of the 1906 and subsequent Statistics Acts to the National Archives of Canada. The fact that the United States and Britain both release census records is an issue of different legislation and, perhaps, of historical culture when it comes to the taking of a census. Statistics Canada continues to hold all individual returns of census questionnaires collected between 1906 and 1986. These records have now been transferred from the actual questionnaires, to microfilm, and are available for access by the individual respondents who need to confirm birth dates for pension and passport purposes. The destruction of the 1911 and later census records held on microfilm was never a consideration by Statistics Canada (although the paper questionnaires themselves have been destroyed in accordance with approvals given by the National Archives of Canada). As a result, Statistics Canada does not have the option, as has been suggested by some genealogists and researchers, of being able to filter out the more sensitive information from early census records since microfilm technology, unlike newer technology such as optical imaging, does not lend itself to severance. The original paper questionnaires would have been required for this. Like any law, the Statistics Act can also be amended to permit the release of individual records after 92 years. But, this is where an important principle of privacy protection comes into play: is it right to alter retroactively the conditions under which information was provided by Canadians? Should Parliament declare, in effect, as invalid the explicit guarantee of indefinite confidentiality that was promised to Canadians when the data in question were collected? Or should it perhaps consider the 92-year release rule for future censuses only? This issue, although seemingly cut-and-dry, is very complex. While there is undeniably great value attached to nominative historical census records, there is also great value attached to the information that can be produced from current and future censuses. That information is and will be used for a multiplicity of purposes, many of which are requirements contained in various pieces of legislation to meet specific needs (for example; transfer payments to provinces and the determination of electoral boundaries). Canadian citizens have always demonstrated co-operation in providing personal information about themselves when asked to participate in a census, or in other surveys conducted by Statistics Canada. Some might say that the most important factor contributing to this co-operation is the unconditional guarantee given to respondents that the information they supply will be protected. Canada, for almost 100 years has been able to unconditionally guarantee the confidentiality of the information supplied in the census. Changes to the commitments made to respondents in the past could have a negative impact on the level of co-operation given to future censuses and surveys. A substantial decrease in such co-operation could seriously jeopardize Statistics Canada's ability to carry out its national mandate of producing reliable, timely information on which many users depend. This information is also a fundamental pillar of our democratic system, because it is one of the measures that electors use to evaluate the performance of their governments. With the aforementioned being said, I would respectfully request that you provide your comments on the above. I don't pretend to have all of the answers and, as such, I am interested in hearing any additional thoughts that you may have on this potentially precedent-setting matter. Please accept my appreciation, in advance, for your co-operation. Sincerely, Paul Steckle, M.P. / député Huron-Bruce (Ontario) 251 Confederation / Confédération House of Commons / Chambre des communes Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0A6 (613) 995-9848 phone (613) 995-6350 fax
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. |
|
|
