Greetings All. I copy below FYI a message received this morning from the office of MP Paul Steckle and my reply to his assistant. This is the first response that I have received from my letter sent last month by Canada Post to all 308 MPs. Mr. Steckle supports our goal, at least in principle, and will retain his Gold Tick on the MP Scoreboard. Happy Hunting. Gordon ----- Original Message ----- From: Gordon A. Watts To: Steckle, Paul - Assistant 1 Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:39 PM Subject: Re: Your Correspondence RE: ''Historic Census Records'' 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 Co-chair Canada Census Committee Port Coquitlam, BC http://www.globalgenealogy.com/Census en francais http://www.globalgenealogy.com/Index_f ----- Original Message ----- From: Steckle, Paul - Assistant 1 To: gordon_watts@telus.net Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 9:27 AM Subject: Your Correspondence RE: ''Historic Census Records'' 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 Executive Assistant to / adjoint exécutif Paul Steckle, M.P. / député Huron-Bruce (Ontario) 484 Confederation / Confédération House of Commons / Chambre des communes Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0A6 (613) 995-9848 phone (613) 995-6350 fax www.psteckle.com