To all members of genealogy groups:- I have been sending messages via provincial mailing lists, have covered all of Canada except British Columbia this afternoon. Reason: The LCCCC site will celebrate its FIRST birthday on July 1, 1999. Bryan Keddy and I started this site last year to celebrate the special day -- also we needed a genealogical site for all of Canada: Coast-to-coast-to-coast. While cruising around the site I noticed the Canadian GenWeb Site with click-on places for all provinces: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/genweb.html Hint: Lots of work to do in Quebec!! Only three MPs have answered. Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html

To all researchers:- H A P P Y B I R T H D A Y ! ! ! Within a few days, the LCCCC site (short for Lunenburg County's Canadian Census Campaign) will celebrate its FIRST birthday! Bryan Keddy worked long hours setting up this site, we know as http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html [It bookmarks as "Post-1901"] Date of birth: July 1, 1999 Reason for site: As yet the Canadian Census Committee did not have its own list -- something was needed as we looked forward to release of Post-1901 census records. Logo: A stylized Canadian flag -- have the speakers on -- music!!! This was done by Barney Kaufman, and appears on many linked pages, some of which are included at this site. One can read and print THE MYTHS OF CENSUS by Gordon Watts from this site -- copyrighted material has been removed. It is in English language -- a translation would be great and posted. Family Genealogy Sites: There are many -- all original research. Many more could be used for the COAST-TO-COAST-TO-COAST future Canadian genealogical site. How many users to date: ONLY 13,895 -- I had hoped for 15,000! Take a peek!!! Bookmark it -- it is one place to find all those elusive internet mailing lists and much, much more! See for yourself! Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> {A frequent user! - I have my computer set so it does not increase the numbering system!}

Greetings All. FYI. A French language post to residents of Quebec. Jeannine Ouellet sent this post to the QUEBEC-L and QC-ETANGLO-L mail lists in Quebec. It is to be hoped it will generate more interest in that province. I have asked Jeannine to provide a sample letter in French to send to the francophone MPs and this will be placed on the Post 1901 Census Project website. Gordon ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeannine Ouellet <jeannine.ouellet@sympatico.ca> Sent: Sunday, 25 June, 2000 8:10 AM Subject: Re: QUEBEC has a wonderful heritage -- but it may be lost! À tous les résidents du Québec: Les résidents du Québec ont reçu en héritage une passionnante et merveilleuse histoire-- lequel pourrait être perdu pour les générations actuelles et futures. Le dernier recensement du Québec accessible aux chercheurs est celui de 1901. Plusieurs Canadiens, d'un océan à l'autre, espèrent obtenir la possibilité d'effectuer des recherches dans les recensements ultérieurs à 1901, qui pourraient être accessibles en 1903. Toutefois, cela ne se produira pas sans que vous participiez à cette lutte. Comme dans les autres parties du canada, les résidents du Québec demandent aux députés du Parlement d'intervenir pour eux à Ottawa. S'ils sont membres d'un parti, il/elle sera tenu(e) de voter, peut-pêtre de la manière contraire à ce que vous souhaitez. N'aimeriez-vous pas savoir ce que votre député pense à ce sujet? Vérifiez la liste des membres du Parlement: - Tableau http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census/index6.htm Vous noterez maintenant ou plus tard, que seulement trois (3) souhaitent que les recensements deviennent accessibles, les autres ont répondu NON (1), ne peuvent pas se faire une idée (2) et (3) n'ont aucune réponse. Comme dans le reste du Canada, les chercheurs trouveront très difficile d'apprendre des renseignements relatifs aux membres de leur famille si les recensements ne sont pas accessibles. Les registres des paroisses religieuses sont importants mais ne contiennent pas de regroupement sur les familles. Nous demandons à tous les lecteurs de communiquer avec son/sa député, et expédier en copie conforme aux personnes suivantes: Jeannine Ouellette <jeannine.ouellet@sympatico.ca> Christine Joudrey <cjjoud@bserv.com> Muriel Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> Gordon Watts met le tableau à jour, afin qu'il soit publié avant les prochaines élections. Sa recherche «Les mythes des recensements» est sur ce site: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html Ce message peut être imprimé et transmis à tous les lecteurs. Travaillons tous ensemble sur ce projet-- nous avons besoin des recensements pour nos recherches. Jeannine Ouellet présidente de la Fédération québécoise des sociétés de généalogie

To all:- The following URL has been provided by Jacqueline Baral, posted to NOVA-SCOTIA-L@rootsweb.com. I opened several of the dates, from 1791 -- look great! Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> =========================================== http://www.familytreemaker.com/00000061.html Census abstracts are forms that you can fill out when you are doing research with census records. They allow you to copy information from the census records in an organized way, helping ensure that you don't miss any important information. If you want to print an abstract, go to the page containing that abstract........... Hope this helps someone. Jacquie (USA) Jacqueline Baral <jacquiebaral@earthlink.net>

To all:- Will someone forward this list to the British Columbia list, please? (Taken from the last update) We need to concentrate on those BLUE ?????, forget the GOLD tick marks, the RED Xs -- the GREEN Fences need a few letters. Any reader may write to ones listed -- not only committee members -- try not to mention POLITICAL PARTIES -- Census Records have no political affiliation! E-mail addresses at with a pop-up message waiting for you! <http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census/index6.htm> Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> ====================================== BRITISH COLUMBIA (34) QUESTION:- Are YOU in favor of release of Post-1901 census? ? - Mr. Abbott, Jim ..........Kootenay--Columbia ? - The Hon. Anderson, David...Victoria F - Mr. Cadman, Chuck ........Surrey North ? - The Hon. Chan, Raymond.....Richmond F - Mr. Cummins, John..........Delta--South Richmond ? - Ms. Davies, Libby..........Vancouver East ? - The Hon. Dhaliwal, Herb....Vancouver South--Burnaby G - Mr. Duncan, John..........Vancouver Island North G - Mr. Elley, Reed ...........Nanaimo--Cowichan ? - Mr. Forseth, Paul..........New Westminster- -Coquitlam--Burnaby F - The Hon. Fry, Hedy.........Vancouver Centre G - Mr. Gilmour, Bill.........Nanaimo--Alberni ? - Mr. Gouk, Jim..............Kootenay--Boundary--Okanagan G - Mr. Grewal, Gurmant........Surrey Central F - Mr. Harris, Richard........Prince George--Bulkley Valley G - Mr. Hart, Jim.............Okanagan--Coquihalla F - Mr. Hill, Jay..............Prince George--Peace River ? - Ms. Leung, Sophia..........Vancouver Kingsway ? - Mr. Lunn, Gary.............Saanich--Gulf Islands G - Mr. Martin, Keith..........Esquimalt--Juan de Fuca ? - Mr. Mayfield, Philip.......Cariboo--Chilcotin ? - Mr. McNally, Grant.........Dewdney--Alouette ? - Mr. McWhinney, Ted.........Vancouver Quadra G - Ms. Meredith, Val..........South Surrey--White Rock- -Langley G - Mr. Reynolds, John.........West Vancouver--Sunshine Coast G - Mr. Riis, Nelson...........Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys G - Mr. Robinson, Svend.......Burnaby--Douglas ? - Mr. Schmidt, Werner.......Kelowna ? - Mr. Scott, Mike............Skeena F - Mr. Sekora, Lou...........Port Moody--Coquitlam--Port Coquitlam G - Mr. Stinson, Darrel .......Okanagan--Shuswap G - Mr. Strahl, Chuck..........Fraser Valley ? - Mr. White, Randy...........Langley--Abbotsford F - Mr. White, Ted.............North Vancouver SUMMARY -- X - 1/F - 7/G - 11/ and ???? - 15....total 34 SUGGESTION:- Print each list, then go to the Scoreboard URL There's a handy little pop-up there to write your message. These may be copied to myself -- or when answer is received, please forward.

To all who wish to have the Post-1901 Census Released: QUESTION:- Will YOU, as an elected Member of Parliament, support any Bills and Motions for release of Post-1901 Canadian Census Records? The GOLD CLUB totals are better, but concentrate on BLUE ??? as we need to get more people of all parties supporting any Bill or Motion to obtain release of census records. Print the following - then find address and pop-up memo at http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census/index6.htm Let me know when you receive answers, please. Then changes will be sent to Gordon Watts so he can update the Scoreboard. Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html http://www.waynecook.com/simcoe.shtml Read: THE MYTHS OF CENSUS by Gordon Watts and MEMORANDUM OF LAW by Lois Sparling, Alberta barrister ========================================== NEW BRUNSWICK (10) ? - Mr. Bernier, Gilles..........Tobique--Mactaquac F - The Hon. Bradshaw, Claudette..... Moncton - Riverview - Dieppe ? - Mr. Dubé, Jean...............Madawaska--Restigouche F - Mr. Godin, Yvon..............Acadie--Bathurst G - Mr. Herron, John.............Fundy--Royal ? - Mr. Hubbard, Charles.........Miramichi G - The Hon. Scott, Andy.........Fredericton G - Mr. Thompson, Greg...........New Brunswick Southwest ? - Ms. Vautour, Angela.......... Beauséjour--Petitcodiac F - Mrs. Wayne, Elsie............Saint John Totals:- X - 0/F - 3/G - 3/? - 4 ================================= NEWFOUNDLAND (7) ? - The Hon. Baker, George S. ...Gander--Grand Falls ? - Mr. Byrne, Gerry.............Humber--St. Barbe--Baie Verte G - Mr. Doyle, Norman............St. John's East UNK-Mr. Hearn, Loyola............St. John's West ? - Mr. Matthews, Bill...........Burin--St. George's ? - The Hon. Mifflin, Fred.......Bonavista--Trinity--Conception ? - Mr. O'Brien, Lawrence........Labrador Totals:- X - 0/F - 0/G - 1/? - 5/unkown - 1 (has not answered)

To all who desire release of Post-1901 Canadian Census Records:- Below are listed Scoreboard Standings for four provinces and territories, giving present scoreboard standing, found at: http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census/index6.htm Print the following -- use the pop-up message place for your message to any or all below. We need to increase awareness of our elected representatives in Ottawa of the need and desire for release of census records. At present, duplicate bills are being presented: S-15, by Senator Lorna Milne in the Senate; Bill C-484 in House of Commons, by Mr. Murray Calder, MP. Jason Kenney has final hour of debate on his Motion M-160 on Sept. 20, 2000. [Either Gordon Watts or i will learn status of Bill C-484, but Senator Milne's has passed Second Reading] QUESTION:- Will YOU, as an elected Member of Parliament, support any Bills and Motions re census records release brought before the House of Commons? Please send answers to Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html http://www.waynecook.com/simcoe.shtml Read THE MYTHS OF CENSUS by Gordon Watts and MEMORANDUM OF LAW by Lois Sparling, Alberta barrister =========================================== PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND (4) F - Mr. Easter, Wayne.............Malpeque F - The Hon. MacAulay, Lawrence...Cardigan ? - Mr. McGuire, Joe..............Egmont ? - Mr. Proud, George.............Hillsborough ==================================== NUNAVUT (1) ? - Ms. Karetak-Lindell, Nancy....Nunavut =================================== NORTHWEST TERRITORIES (1) ? - The Hon. Blondin-Andrew, Ethel..Western Arctic =================================== YUKON (1) ? - Ms. Hardy, Louise...............Yukon =================================== More Census information available from http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> Canadian Census Committee member

Well I for one have quit buying PETRO-CANADA's gas and I do drive 260 kilometers round trip every day to work. So if the media care to ask me why I will tell them. Anybody else care to join this unofficial boycott. I thought the House of Commons ran this country not Stats Can, as far as I am concerned this poll should never have taken place. Their worried about this so called promise, technically the Treaty of Ghent is still in effect so maybe we should balk at the Governments involved for violating it, after all what's good for the goose is good for the gander. All the best Wayne Cook http://www.waynecook.com (A History Television Approved Site) and your Host for the Simcoe County Genweb page at http://www.waynecook.com/simcoe.shtml Wasaga Beach, Ontario, Canada 1. Historic Plaques of Ontario 557 Plaques online, part of the Historic Plaques of the World Project, Provincial & State Hosts neededl 2. The Canadian Query Boards at http://www.waynecook.com/bulletin.html

To all:- Please do not waste your time writing to anyone who already has one Red X -- it may only antagonize him further. I am being harrassed by one of our census committee members, a close friend of Ted White's -- sending tons of letters, e-mails, etc. will not do any good. However, my DELETE key is ready -- it is kept busy! All my life I have worked in a male environment -- even had five brothers -- my shoulders (and my spirit ) can take it. I would rather anyone who feels like writing a letter or e-mail (other than this MPs constituents) would check the scoreboard first: http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census/index6.htm There are many who still have a BLUE ?? which means he/she has not written -- last count over 185. Please concentrate on these people, hope for an answer, and let us know so Gordon can post it....we have to keep him busy! At present, Nova Scotia has 8 out of 11 GOLD -- good way to start the morning with a YES phone call from Peter Stoffer, MP. There are ONLY five (5) with RED X's -- they have made a choice! I hope to see only GOLD and RED before the census vote in the House of Commons. Please, it is my request -- Ted White has made his choice, forget it! However, the National Post story is very poor journalism -- there are always two sides to every story - I learned this back in 1942 when I started with Liverpool Advance, Cape Breton Post, Halifax Herald, Brampton Daily Times, finally women's editor of The Brampton Guardian. My age -- figure this out yourself!!! Let's have no further comments re this episode -- we have work to do! Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html Our coast-to-coast-to-coast Canadian Genealogical site!

Well, I live in this "turkeys" riding of North Vancouver. I have written him several times since last September and have received various messages with various answers.....and I helped vote him in in the last election but you can be assured that I won't be helping him this election if he keeps this up. I thought he had a change of heart when he sent me this last answer dated June 1, 2000. In it he stated in the next to last paragragh...."I expect to be voting in favour of this Motion if, or when, it comes to a final vote". So yet again, I get confirmation that you can't trust ANY elected officials to keep their "PROMISES" even if we have heard them with our own years or received them in written form. It makes me wonder, if the MP's can't keep a recent promise, what is the BIG DEAL of the supposed "promise" of 1911 Census having a right to Privacy Act attached to it and they can't release it. There isn't anyone left alive that can remember that far back. My aunt is 92 years old born in 1909 and can't remember th 1911 Census. Please see below for that famous North Vancouver MP Mr. Ted Whte's reply. (I will be visiting his office this summer, I can assure you.) AND I QUOTE: Memo Date : June 1, 2000 To : Ms. Adele Turner From : Ted White, MP (North Vancouver) Subject : Post 1901 Census Dear Ms.Turner: I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email message of May 28, 2000 regarding the release of post 1901 Census information. In your email message you ask if I am, "as an elected Member of the House of Commons of the Parliament of Canada, voting for or against a Bill supporting the release to the public, of Post 1901 Census records, 92 years after they were recorded?" Actually, at this time there is no legislation before Parliament to vote on with respect to this issue. There is, however, a Private Members Motion which has been put forward by a Canadian Alliance MP, Jason Kenney. M-160 urges the Government to do everything possible to ensure that the post 1901 Census records are released some time after 2003, and I expect to be voting in favour of this Motion if, or when, it comes to a final vote. Although I will be voting for M-160, I feel that it is important to point out that a Private Member's Motion should not be confused with a piece of legislation, or a Government Bill, because a motion does not automatically produce a law when passed. However, the fact is, tabling a Motion in the House is the only means by which the Official Opposition can encourage the Government to take action on a specific issue. For all practical purposes though, passage of M-160 is unlikely to have any effect whatsoever on the Government and I suspect that Minister Manley will simply continue to defer the making of any decision regarding census records until after the next election. Yours truly, Ted White, MP ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Carter <carter@unb.ca> To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: June 23, 2000 5:38 AM Subject: (Fwd) [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted White > What an ass. I can't believe we actually vote people like this into > office. I encourage everyone, and I mean EVERYONE to contact > this guy and put the pressure on him. Phone, e-mail, letter, > contact your friends and have them do it too. Especially pissed off > constituents of his riding should be flooding him with comments. > > Mike > > > ------- Forwarded message follows ------- > Date forwarded: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:54:15 -0700 > Date sent: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:59:49 -0400 > From: "Muriel M. Davidson" <davidson3542@home.com> > Organization: @Home Network > Subject: [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted White > To: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com > Forwarded by: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com > > To all:- > I agree - I am not one of Ted White's constituents - but > hope some researchers of that area read the following. > Mr. White must have thought pneumonia affected my > vision -- the memo was sent in 18 and 14 pt. print. > I feel certain he has just exchanged his green fence for > a red X -- meaning NO. > Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> > ===================================== > Email Memo > > Date : June 22, 2000 > > To : Muriel Davidson > > Subject : Census data > > Dear Ms. Davidson, > > I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email of June 21st, 2000 > in > > which you requested that I vote for ANY Bills and Motions that may > come before the House of Commons which would result in the release of > census records. I believe that I clearly outlined my position in my > June 13th email to you, and since you are not one of my constituents I > do not feel obliged to engage in further correspondence on this > subject. I have quite enough > > work to do handling issues of importance to the voters of North > Vancouver > without using my time to respond to lobbyists living in 300 other > ridings across Canada. > > The above having been said, attached to this email message is a > copy > > of a recent article reporting the results of a poll and study related > to your demands for the release of the census information. As you can > see for yourself, and in complete alignment with my prediction, the > MAJORITY of Canadians would not want MPs to vote for the retroactive > release of census records. Just as I stated in my earlier email > messages to hundreds of people who have been lobbying me, there would > be a public outcry if we voted to end a Government promise to keep the > census records confidential. > > Correspondence on this subject is now closed. > > Yours truly, > Ted White, MP > =================== > The supposedly ATTACHED article was not included, likely a copy of the > National Post article. > > Also, I am not a lobbyist -- just one hoping to help all of us! > Muriel > > > ------- End of forwarded message ------- > Michael Carter > University of New Brunswick > Department of Physical Plant > PO Box 4400 > Fredericton NB E3B 5A3 > > Phone: 506-453-4714 > Fax: 506-453-5183 > E-mail: carter@unb.ca > > ______________________________

To all:- I received a very welcome GOLDEN Good Morning from Nova Scotia, bringing the provincial total to 8 out of 11. Two others have cute little pieces of fence, one has not answered (Peter Mancini). The telephone call was similar to the following:- Good Morning, Muriel:- Hi, this is Peter Stoffer --- I have talked to you previously and hate to send e-mails -- prefer to phone instead. YES, I support the release of any post-1901 census release bills and motions to make the census records available to researchers. We are looking forward to the time when this matter is resolved as it should be. (Peter Stoffer - M.P. ---Sackville - Musquodoboit Valley - Eastern Shore) ============ Peter also told me the weather was beautiful Down Home!!! He also asked me to make one correction re the following: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html I have always mentioned this is a coast to coast genealogy site. CORRECTION:- It should be "coast to coast to coast" Reason:- Canada is also in the Far North!!! Very good point! Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com>

Hi Donna. It is a nice thought but I think something like you suggest could just backfire on us. It could give credence to the ideas of Senator Murray and Privacy Commissioner Bruce Phillips that we want access to census records so that we can pry into information of theirs rather than seeking only information on our own families. Other than Mr. White's own constituents, I think we should just give him up as a lost cause. We have 235 other MPs that we can probably spend our time on more profitably. Happy Hunting. Gordon ----- Original Message ----- From: Donna McMillan-Kjorsvik <kjorsvik@sprint.ca> To: Gordon A. WATTS <gordon_watts@telus.net> Sent: Friday, 23 June, 2000 11:43 AM Subject: here's a novel idea Here's a thought, maybe someone should take a break from their own research, and do a search on Mr. Ted Whites family, giving him all of the information dating back to oh let's see about the early 1500's, all nicely bound with articulate print, pictures and certificates, then tell him the majority of this information was brought to you by researchers looking for their ancestors and the majority of the information was compiled via Census reports that are 92 ++++ years old. Think he would then see why we want the census released, maybe he just doesn't understand what the whole concept is, perhaps he thinks we care more about how much money he has hidden away, or perhaps he's afraid someone will find out what his role in politics really consisted of:) Donna ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gordon A. WATTS" <gordon_watts@telus.net> To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 11:04 AM Subject: Re: (Fwd) [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted White > Well said Stella. Your thoughts parallel my own. Better to try to > convince those sitting on the fence than to try to change those > whose minds are not open to new information. Happy Hunting. > > Gordon > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stella Stanger <sstanger@coord2.ucs.sfu.ca> > To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, 23 June, 2000 7:31 AM > Subject: Re: (Fwd) [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP > Ted White > > > Hi Mike, I do agree with your first comment. But, We Do Vote These > People > In ( as our representatives )- We All Know What To Do Next Time. > I don't think contacting Ted White and trying to pressure him > will do > any good - he has made his stand - his roots in cement - I don't > think he > will change his mind, reading his letter - I think he will only dig > in deeper. > He obviously hasn't the need that we do - to find family. and > family > history. > At Least we do know where he stands on the subject - that is > something. A > big black cross through his name - and we should not waste further > time > there - but should concentrate on the ones who are on the fence - > undecided. Of course his own constituents - if they are aware of the > issue > - should write a non confrontational letters, perhaps stating their > issues > and concerns. There are still the majority of Canadians I am sure - > who are > not aware of the issue as well. This has not been covered well by > media. > Many letters - to Many Editors - of Many Newspapers - T.V. and radio > stations - may be what is needed. Unfortunately, my attempts have > been > totally ignored - without even a response. > Stella > > > > >

Hi Jacquie and All. One thing that must be understood is what the purpose of the Focus groups was. Their purpose was to test questions that were to be used in the wider scope poll of the public. As a result of the focus groups, Statistics Canada modified some of the original questions, and added some others. What I want to know is what were the questions asked of the participants in the focus group, and in what order were they asked. I wish to know the same of the public opinion poll which, I understand contacted 2000 people across Canada. There may have been two sessions of the public opinion poll which, totalling 4000 people is still thousands less than have written letters and signed petitions urging access to Historic Census records. Questions asked, and the manner in which they are asked, can greatly influence the answers of respondents. This is evidenced in the opening questions in the report indicating that most participants in the focus groups had never heard of the census issue, and that to start they thought it acceptable that their personal information might be released after a time delay of about 100 years. By the end of the report, however, after being fed mis-information regarding mis-interpreted legislation and unproved "promises" of confidentiality and moral issues the survey reports that "most" participants were giving answers that basically supported the position of Statistics Canada. There is no question that the way focus groups are handled, in the questions asked and the manner in which they are asked, the participants can be manipulated to give a desired response. The participants in these focus groups knew nothing about the mis-interpreted legislation or of any supposed "promises" until those handling the focus groups told them about it. On another subject. On my return home this afternoon the was a message on my service from the National Post. They were seeking confirmation of my letter to the editor so that they could print it. Please let me know if it shows up in the next several days. Happy Hunting Gordon ----- Original Message ----- From: jacquie <jacnex@home.com> To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, 23 June, 2000 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [CCC-L] Report of Census Survey Focus Groups Hi Everyone, I may be mistaken, but for statisical purposes don't you need at least 1 000 people polled. 72 people means nothing. I think we must, as Gordon has said, be polite at all times and with a smile on our faces quietly and with firmness demand that the debate on the census be with FACTS and not illogic and fear. We have facts and logic on our side let us continue to use them. At the very least guys the politicians may just decide to shut us up and release the census, with the promise that we will leave them alone : ))) Well I am off to do more research as we all await the Expert Panel Report. Jacquie Nex

Hi Everyone, I may be mistaken, but for statisical purposes don't you need at least 1 000 people polled. 72 people means nothing. I think we must, as Gordon has said, be polite at all times and with a smile on our faces quietly and with firmness demand that the debate on the census be with FACTS and not illogic and fear. We have facts and logic on our side let us continue to use them. At the very least guys the politicians may just decide to shut us up and release the census, with the promise that we will leave them alone : ))) Well I am off to do more research as we all await the Expert Panel Report Jacquie Nex > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Frank McKERRY <mckerry@home.com> > To: Gordon A. WATTS <gordon_watts@telus.net> > Sent: Friday, 23 June, 2000 9:51 AM > Subject: Re: [CCC-L] Report of Census Survey Focus Groups > > > Gordon: 72 people will be the one's that say we cannot access the > census ? I > don't even think the full senate and the house of Commons have that > right. > HOW DO WE GET THROUGH TO PEOPLE ? These sessions are a > farce and a disgrace ! > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gordon A. WATTS" <gordon_watts@telus.net> > To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 10:40 PM > Subject: [CCC-L] Report of Census Survey Focus Groups > > > > Greetings All. > > > > I have heard from Dr. Pamela White regarding the report of the > > census Focus Group summary. While Dr. White suggested I might > want > > to wait until the final report was released to the public, she did > > not restrict me from posting this report now. She stated: > > > > "The final report brings together the results of the focus groups > > with the public opinion results. This interim report provides the > > results of a limited number of focus groups involving about 10 - > 12 > > people at each session." > > > > This indicates that in the six focus groups held there were a > total > > of 60 to 72 people involved. Not a lot of people to generate the > > headlines that accompanied Mr. Bronskill's National Post article > of > > 20 June 2000. In reading the report copied below, I would not > have > > come to the conclusions indicated by those headlines. The public > > opinion survey, yet to be released to the public, could have > > completely different results. I look forward to seeing that > report > > which should be posted to Statistics Canada's website near the end > > of June or early in July (according to Dr. White.) > > >

----- Original Message ----- From: Frank McKERRY <mckerry@home.com> To: Gordon A. WATTS <gordon_watts@telus.net> Sent: Friday, 23 June, 2000 9:51 AM Subject: Re: [CCC-L] Report of Census Survey Focus Groups Gordon: 72 people will be the one's that say we cannot access the census ? I don't even think the full senate and the house of Commons have that right. HOW DO WE GET THROUGH TO PEOPLE ? These sessions are a farce and a disgrace ! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gordon A. WATTS" <gordon_watts@telus.net> To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 10:40 PM Subject: [CCC-L] Report of Census Survey Focus Groups > Greetings All. > > I have heard from Dr. Pamela White regarding the report of the > census Focus Group summary. While Dr. White suggested I might want > to wait until the final report was released to the public, she did > not restrict me from posting this report now. She stated: > > "The final report brings together the results of the focus groups > with the public opinion results. This interim report provides the > results of a limited number of focus groups involving about 10 - 12 > people at each session." > > This indicates that in the six focus groups held there were a total > of 60 to 72 people involved. Not a lot of people to generate the > headlines that accompanied Mr. Bronskill's National Post article of > 20 June 2000. In reading the report copied below, I would not have > come to the conclusions indicated by those headlines. The public > opinion survey, yet to be released to the public, could have > completely different results. I look forward to seeing that report > which should be posted to Statistics Canada's website near the end > of June or early in July (according to Dr. White.) > > My apologies for the length of this posting. Happy Hunting. > > Gordon A. WATTS gordon_watts@telus.net > Port Coquitlam, BC > ICQ # 9183352 > > Keep up to date on Post 1901 Census information at > http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census and > http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Farm/7843/poll.html > Download and circulate Post 1901 Census Petitions now from > http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census/petition.htm > > This message has been posted to Alberta-L, British Columbia, > Census-Chat-L, Colchester, Lunen-Links-L, Nova-Scotia-L, Ontario-L, > PictouRoots, Roots-L, Watts-L, and Wiltshire-EMI-L mail lists. > Permission to forward without notification is granted. > --------------------------------------------- > > Focus Group Research Regarding > Options for Release of Census Records > Summary of Findings > > PN4588 > > Prepared for: > Expert Panel on Access to Historical Census Records > > Prepared by: > Environics Research Group Limited > > February 2000 > > Introduction > > In November 1999, Environics Research Group Limited was retained by > Statistics Canada and the Expert Panel on Access to Historical > Census Records to conduct a series of six focus groups to test > public opinion regarding options to amend the confidentiality > provisions of the Statistics Act. The purpose of the focus groups > was to test versions of a draft questionnaire and to probe opinion > about the release of individual-level census data for future > censuses and for past censuses. Participants were asked about their > awareness of the topic of the release of individual-level census > data, about how they would respond if individual data from the next > census or other future censuses were released after a time delay of > about 100 years, and about how they would respond if legislation > were changed to allow the release of individual-level data from past > censuses, particularly the 1911 census. > > Six focus group sessions were conducted. The pilot phase of the > research consisted of two focus groups conducted held in Ottawa on > December 7, 1999. The second phase of the research consisted of > four focus groups, including two in Toronto and two in Montreal. > The two groups in Toronto were held on January 27, 2000 and the two > in Montreal were held on January 31. In each city, one focus group > included those with high education (a university degree) and the > other those with mid-level education. All sessions included > participants from a mix of age groups (18 years of age and over), > occupations and genders and also included some representation of > foreign-born. > > This report summarizes the results of the research on the > substantive topics. > > General Awareness of Topic > > Almost no participants had heard about the topic of releasing > individual-level census data for future or past censuses. A total > of one or two participants in the Ottawa groups said they had heard > of the topic. > > Future Release > > Most participants thought it acceptable that their personal census > information might be released after a time delay of about 100 years. > However, a few participants strongly objected to the release of this > information. > > A variety of issues emerged in the focus groups: > > * Many questioned the usefulness of such data - why would anyone be > interested in personal answers after 100 years? > > * A number of participants could not understand why anyone would > need to know individual names. > > > Among the few who were opposed to the release of these data, the > most common concerns were: > > * Would this lead to more government control of individuals? > > * Would the information be used against them at some point in the > future? > > * Would there be long-term consequences of disclosure for future > family members in areas such as ethnicity, race, and health? > > Many participants said that they were not aware of the content of > the questions in the census. When, in some of the sessions, the > moderator described to them the questions contained in the 1996 > census, the description raised several reactions: > > * Most felt it would be non-problematic for them if this type of > information were released 100 years after a census was taken. > > * Some participants felt that the type of questions asked were basic > ones and would be of little value for future historians or > genealogists. > > * Some said that there are other richer data sources for individuals > available in both the public and private sectors. > > * A few voiced a concern that in future censuses, once the principle > of disclosing information is accepted, a series of new questions, > more personal or intrusive, would progressively be added. > > Participants were presented with a number of arguments supporting > the release of the individual-level data from future censuses after > a time delay of about 100 years. > > When participants were presented with the argument that historians > would find the information extremely valuable, most participants > reaffirmed their scepticism concerning the validity or usefulness of > the information for historians. > > Participants were more receptive to the argument that their > information might be useful for their descendants. However, some > felt that their own personal interest in knowing about their family > origins was low and this would probably be the same for their > descendants. > > Although many were fairly open to releasing this information for > "medical" purposes, some were sceptical as to whether the kind of > information available in the census would be of any value. They > felt that hospital or doctor's records would be much more useful as > a source of medical information. > > Most participants were open to the idea of changing the existing law > to allow future census data on individuals to be released after 100 > years. However, some felt that people participating in future > censuses should be given an option, such as a check-off box, to > indicate consent. Others felt there should be conditions placed on > the release of this information. > > A few participants expressed concern about this issue. They felt > that if the government is ready to rescind an existing law, what > would stop the government from modifying a future one and reducing > the 100 year prescription for future censuses? They were also > fearful of who would have access to the data in the future and that > it might be used against them in some undefined way, or against > their descendants. > > Release of Historical Data > > The vast majority of participants responded negatively to the > prospect of allowing the release of individual answers from earlier > censuses including the 1911 census, after a time delay of about 100 > years. The response was negative toward the principle of release as > well as to changing legislation to allow the release. > > Most participants felt that the government made a promise of > confidentiality and that this should be respected. People who > answered those censuses believed their answers would be > confidential, and thus it would be a breach to release the > information. > > In some of the focus group sessions, as soon as the notion of > "breaking a promise" emerged, the idea was seized upon by other > participants who then expressed their opposition to release. > Keeping these data as confidential came to be seen as the "right" or > moral thing to do. > > Historical and genealogical reasons for releasing historical data > were not powerful or even helpful in changing opinion, and > participants reiterated many of the same doubts expressed earlier. > When informed that historical census data were a unique data source > for historians, some participants stated that there are other > sources, such as local churches and schools, for historical > information, so these data are not so critical. Some also felt that > the information contained in the 1911 census would really be of > little interest to historians. But even among those who accepted > the idea that the data may be valuable for these purposes, this was > not enough justification, in their opinion, to warrant the release > of the data. > > However, a number of participants suggested that the information > could be made available to specialists (historians, genealogists) > under special request and/or that the access to an individual record > should be limited to the close family or descendants of that person. > > Some participants were moved by the argument that this kind of data > release has already occurred in the United States, the United > Kingdom and Australia, but others felt this was not relevant and > that Canada should develop its own approach to the issue. > > > Impact of Change > > Most participants said that a change in the law to allow the release > of future census data at the individual level would not affect their > participation in the next census or the truthfulness of their > answers on that census or other future censuses. However, some > people expressed the view that others would be more inclined to be > untruthful. Only a very small number said that they themselves > might be more inclined to give untruthful answers. > > The vast majority of participants said that this change would not > affect their opinion of Statistics Canada. >

Well said Stella. Your thoughts parallel my own. Better to try to convince those sitting on the fence than to try to change those whose minds are not open to new information. Happy Hunting. Gordon ----- Original Message ----- From: Stella Stanger <sstanger@coord2.ucs.sfu.ca> To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, 23 June, 2000 7:31 AM Subject: Re: (Fwd) [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted White Hi Mike, I do agree with your first comment. But, We Do Vote These People In ( as our representatives )- We All Know What To Do Next Time. I don't think contacting Ted White and trying to pressure him will do any good - he has made his stand - his roots in cement - I don't think he will change his mind, reading his letter - I think he will only dig in deeper. He obviously hasn't the need that we do - to find family. and family history. At Least we do know where he stands on the subject - that is something. A big black cross through his name - and we should not waste further time there - but should concentrate on the ones who are on the fence - undecided. Of course his own constituents - if they are aware of the issue - should write a non confrontational letters, perhaps stating their issues and concerns. There are still the majority of Canadians I am sure - who are not aware of the issue as well. This has not been covered well by media. Many letters - to Many Editors - of Many Newspapers - T.V. and radio stations - may be what is needed. Unfortunately, my attempts have been totally ignored - without even a response. Stella

Greetings Mike and All. Although not for awhile, I have had considerable correspondence with Ted White. He recently indicated that he would vote in favour of M-160 and I had been considering giving him a gold tick on the Scoreboard, although with some misgivings. Except for stating he would vote for M-160, his position on everything else deserves the red cross he currently shows. The only ones that Mr. White has any interest in hearing from are those who are actually in his constituency. I give him credit for one thing, he has replied to those outside his constituency, up to the point where possibly the truth hurts. Many other MPs refuse to respond to anyone outside their constituency. Mr. White has remained relatively consistent in his base position, which is that he will vote the way the majority of his own constituents indicate the way they want him to. Mr. White's mind is made up, and he does not wish to be confused with the truth. He mentions "hundreds of people who have been lobbying me" -- it is to be hoped that at least some of them were from his consituency. It is time for me to once again contact Mr. White. When I do so I will attach a copy of the Environics Research report on the focus groups so that he might be better informed than what he has been from only the newspaper reports. A word of caution. When writing Mr. White, or any other MPs, please make your comments polite and factual. Being abusive because you do not agree with remarks made by the MP will likely not tend to win him/her over. It would likely work the other way and make them more entrenched in their opposition to our cause. Like the old saying goes, "You attract more bees with honey than you do with vinegar." Happy Hunting Gordon ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Carter <carter@unb.ca> To: <CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, 23 June, 2000 5:38 AM Subject: (Fwd) [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted White What an ass. I can't believe we actually vote people like this into office. I encourage everyone, and I mean EVERYONE to contact this guy and put the pressure on him. Phone, e-mail, letter, contact your friends and have them do it too. Especially pissed off constituents of his riding should be flooding him with comments. Mike ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date forwarded: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:54:15 -0700 Date sent: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:59:49 -0400 From: "Muriel M. Davidson" <davidson3542@home.com> Organization: @Home Network Subject: [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted White To: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com Forwarded by: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com To all:- I agree - I am not one of Ted White's constituents - but hope some researchers of that area read the following. Mr. White must have thought pneumonia affected my vision -- the memo was sent in 18 and 14 pt. print. I feel certain he has just exchanged his green fence for a red X -- meaning NO. Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> ===================================== Email Memo Date : June 22, 2000 To : Muriel Davidson Subject : Census data Dear Ms. Davidson, I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email of June 21st, 2000 in which you requested that I vote for ANY Bills and Motions that may come before the House of Commons which would result in the release of census records. I believe that I clearly outlined my position in my June 13th email to you, and since you are not one of my constituents I do not feel obliged to engage in further correspondence on this subject. I have quite enough work to do handling issues of importance to the voters of North Vancouver without using my time to respond to lobbyists living in 300 other ridings across Canada. The above having been said, attached to this email message is a copy of a recent article reporting the results of a poll and study related to your demands for the release of the census information. As you can see for yourself, and in complete alignment with my prediction, the MAJORITY of Canadians would not want MPs to vote for the retroactive release of census records. Just as I stated in my earlier email messages to hundreds of people who have been lobbying me, there would be a public outcry if we voted to end a Government promise to keep the census records confidential. Correspondence on this subject is now closed. Yours truly, Ted White, MP =================== The supposedly ATTACHED article was not included, likely a copy of the National Post article. Also, I am not a lobbyist -- just one hoping to help all of us! Muriel ------- End of forwarded message ------- Michael Carter University of New Brunswick Department of Physical Plant PO Box 4400 Fredericton NB E3B 5A3 Phone: 506-453-4714 Fax: 506-453-5183 E-mail: carter@unb.ca

What an ass. I can't believe we actually vote people like this into office. I encourage everyone, and I mean EVERYONE to contact this guy and put the pressure on him. Phone, e-mail, letter, contact your friends and have them do it too. Especially pissed off constituents of his riding should be flooding him with comments. Mike ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date forwarded: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:54:15 -0700 Date sent: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:59:49 -0400 From: "Muriel M. Davidson" <davidson3542@home.com> Organization: @Home Network Subject: [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted White To: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com Forwarded by: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com To all:- I agree - I am not one of Ted White's constituents - but hope some researchers of that area read the following. Mr. White must have thought pneumonia affected my vision -- the memo was sent in 18 and 14 pt. print. I feel certain he has just exchanged his green fence for a red X -- meaning NO. Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> ===================================== Email Memo Date : June 22, 2000 To : Muriel Davidson Subject : Census data Dear Ms. Davidson, I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email of June 21st, 2000 in which you requested that I vote for ANY Bills and Motions that may come before the House of Commons which would result in the release of census records. I believe that I clearly outlined my position in my June 13th email to you, and since you are not one of my constituents I do not feel obliged to engage in further correspondence on this subject. I have quite enough work to do handling issues of importance to the voters of North Vancouver without using my time to respond to lobbyists living in 300 other ridings across Canada. The above having been said, attached to this email message is a copy of a recent article reporting the results of a poll and study related to your demands for the release of the census information. As you can see for yourself, and in complete alignment with my prediction, the MAJORITY of Canadians would not want MPs to vote for the retroactive release of census records. Just as I stated in my earlier email messages to hundreds of people who have been lobbying me, there would be a public outcry if we voted to end a Government promise to keep the census records confidential. Correspondence on this subject is now closed. Yours truly, Ted White, MP =================== The supposedly ATTACHED article was not included, likely a copy of the National Post article. Also, I am not a lobbyist -- just one hoping to help all of us! Muriel ------- End of forwarded message ------- Michael Carter University of New Brunswick Department of Physical Plant PO Box 4400 Fredericton NB E3B 5A3 Phone: 506-453-4714 Fax: 506-453-5183 E-mail: carter@unb.ca

Hi Mike, I do agree with your first comment. But, We Do Vote These People In ( as our representatives )- We All Know What To Do Next Time. I don't think contacting Ted White and trying to pressure him will do any good - he has made his stand - his roots in cement - I don't think he will change his mind, reading his letter - I think he will only dig in deeper. He obviously hasn't the need that we do - to find family. and family history. At Least we do know where he stands on the subject - that is something. A big black cross through his name - and we should not waste further time there - but should concentrate on the ones who are on the fence - undecided. Of course his own constituents - if they are aware of the issue - should write a non confrontational letters, perhaps stating their issues and concerns. There are still the majority of Canadians I am sure - who are not aware of the issue as well. This has not been covered well by media. Many letters - to Many Editors - of Many Newspapers - T.V. and radio stations - may be what is needed. Unfortunately, my attempts have been totally ignored - without even a response. Stella At 09:38 AM 6/23/00 -0300, you wrote: >What an ass. I can't believe we actually vote people like this into >office. I encourage everyone, and I mean EVERYONE to contact >this guy and put the pressure on him. Phone, e-mail, letter, >contact your friends and have them do it too. Especially pissed off >constituents of his riding should be flooding him with comments. > >Mike > > >------- Forwarded message follows ------- >Date forwarded: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 11:54:15 -0700 >Date sent: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 14:59:49 -0400 >From: "Muriel M. Davidson" <davidson3542@home.com> >Organization: @Home Network >Subject: [CCC-L] Special: Reply from North Vancouver MP Ted >White >To: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com >Forwarded by: CANADA-CENSUS-CAMPAIGN-L@rootsweb.com > >To all:- >I agree - I am not one of Ted White's constituents - but >hope some researchers of that area read the following. >Mr. White must have thought pneumonia affected my >vision -- the memo was sent in 18 and 14 pt. print. >I feel certain he has just exchanged his green fence for >a red X -- meaning NO. >Muriel M. Davidson <davidson3542@home.com> >===================================== > Email Memo > >Date : June 22, 2000 > >To : Muriel Davidson > >Subject : Census data > >Dear Ms. Davidson, > > I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email of June 21st, 2000 > in > >which you requested that I vote for ANY Bills and Motions that may >come before the House of Commons which would result in the release of >census records. I believe that I clearly outlined my position in my >June 13th email to you, and since you are not one of my constituents I >do not feel obliged to engage in further correspondence on this >subject. I have quite enough > >work to do handling issues of importance to the voters of North >Vancouver >without using my time to respond to lobbyists living in 300 other >ridings across Canada. > > The above having been said, attached to this email message is a > copy > >of a recent article reporting the results of a poll and study related >to your demands for the release of the census information. As you can >see for yourself, and in complete alignment with my prediction, the >MAJORITY of Canadians would not want MPs to vote for the retroactive >release of census records. Just as I stated in my earlier email >messages to hundreds of people who have been lobbying me, there would >be a public outcry if we voted to end a Government promise to keep the >census records confidential. > >Correspondence on this subject is now closed. > >Yours truly, >Ted White, MP > =================== >The supposedly ATTACHED article was not included, likely a copy of the >National Post article. > >Also, I am not a lobbyist -- just one hoping to help all of us! >Muriel > > >------- End of forwarded message ------- >Michael Carter >University of New Brunswick >Department of Physical Plant >PO Box 4400 >Fredericton NB E3B 5A3 > >Phone: 506-453-4714 >Fax: 506-453-5183 >E-mail: carter@unb.ca

I gave the incorrect ending to the Scoreboard URL: http://www.globalgenealogy.com/census/index6.htm You will not receive an Error 404 with above Muriel