Hi Harold. I thank you for your kind words for our efforts to obtain public access to Historic Census Records. Like you I have connections in England, specifically in the Ramsbury Parish, Wiltshire area. As I have stated a number of times, our problem is because of a misinterpretation of legislation going back as far as 1905. In regards to your suggestion that we might get a better response if we limited the information we seek, this is something that has been suggested a number of times. The problem is that most of the records have been transferred to microfiche and the paper originals have been destroyed. Because of this it would be next to impossible to separate part of the information for release, while withholding the rest of it, and Statistics Canada has rejected this idea out of hand. The information contained in the 1901 Census of Canada (which has been released and is available) is essentially that which you indicate was contained in the English censuses for 1881 and 1891. Up until about the 1970s, questions on census were relatively unobtrusive, however since then the long form of census has asked things that many would find intrusive, at least in the present time. For your information I copy here a few paragraphs from a letter that I have just completed to be sent to the newly appointed Privacy Commissioner, George Radwanski. "The few people that have expressed opposition to allowing public access to Historic Census have all been politicians or bureaucrats. Your predecessor Mr. Phillips, and Senator Lowell Murray have both made statements that, in my humble opinion, border on paranoia. Their statements give the impression that there are millions of people, for various nefarious reasons, just waiting to get their hands on their "personal" information. They further give the impression that these millions of villains seek current information on them, rather than 92 year old information on their own ancestors. Nothing could be further from the truth. These opponents to public access of Historic Census records point to the "increasingly intrusive nature of questions asked in Census". No matter how "intrusive" the questions might be in the present time, it is impossible to visualize how these questions could be harmful to someone 92 years in the future. Rather than attempt the permanent suppression of Census records because of these supposedly "intrusive" questions, one might ask why it is necessary to ask them at all, at least in connection with Census. Statistics Canada conducts hundreds of surveys each year, almost all of which respondents are required by law to answer. Questions currently asked on the "long form" of Census distributed to twenty percent of respondents could easily be asked on a separate survey, if necessary, at the same time that Census is conducted.. Indications are that in the United States, following the Census of 2000, the long form of Census will be discontinued. Their Census will be returned to the purpose for which it was originally intended - an enumeration of the population. Canada would do well, as they have done many times in the past, to follow suit." If Statistics Canada returned the Census to it's original purpose, an enumeration of the population of the country, in my opinion we would have little or no problems with it's release. Rather than attempt to suppress Census, other countries of the Western World are making every effort to make their Census records more easily available to the public. Australia, who Statistics Canada have held up as a Nation that destroyed their Census, now has a policy of retention and release to the Public after 100 years. The United States releases their Census, with great public fanfare, after 72 years, and there are at least two commercial enterprises currently digitizing all past US Census records for access via the Internet. In England, rather than using commercial enterprises, the Public Records Office itself is taking steps to digitize the 1901 Census of England and Wales, and will allow access to it via the Internet starting 1 January 2002." See my latest column for the Global Gazette, currently on line at http://globalgazette.com for further information on this. Once again I thank you for your interest and support in our efforts, and I hope that I have answered your questions. Gordon A. WATTS gordon_watts@telus.net Port Coquitlam, BC 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 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harold Tuthill" <tuthill@amtelecom.net> To: <gordon_watts@telus.net> Sent: Monday, 04 December, 2000 12:27 PM Subject: The Canadian Census Hello Mr. Watts, I have been following the census question with great interest. I must confess that it probably won't make much difference to me because my research is in England, but I hope that you succeed for the benefit of others. You are to be commended for the effort you are putting forth in this respect. Permit me to make a few short observations. I can understand why parliament decided that a confidentiality provision was required. I don't know what is in the 1901 census, but certainly much of the information in the recent census questionnaires should not be released. It would be my opinion that you might get a better response if you requested release of a very limited amount of information for each address. For example, the information that is contained in the English censuses for 1881 and 1891 would suffice - names, ages, place of birth, occupation, relationship to principle householder. That's all that is required. Perhaps you have already limited your request to that, but if so, make it clear to us all. Respectfully, Harold Tuthill