Hello again folks: I called the Halifax Herald earlier today, and they advised me that since James P. Barnaby is a freelance writer, and not on their staff, that I would have to get permission from him directly before I could reprint his article for the list. They advised that it could be Monday before I hear back from him. I feel almost tempted to go ahead and do the reprint anyway, but am a little leery of doing so without his blessing. I will wait until I hear from him before reprinting, but to paraphrase (which I believe is OK), he explained the process that has been used up to now, i.e. releasing census information after 92 years. He then advised that through the efforts of the Canada Census Committee the 1906 census had been released, and explained it's importance because of the migration of people to Western Canada at that time. He then reported that a bill was presently in the House that will add amendments to restrict people's rights to all of the information contained in the 1911 and future censuses. He explained how the U.S. and Great Britain release their census records and noted the time periods for each (75 and 100 years respectively). He called these two countries "bastions of individual rights and privacy", and stated that they have no problem releasing their census records to the public. He questioned why StatsCan finds it necessary to make changes to a system that has worked well for 200 years with no problems. He then pointed out that there were some members of both the upper and lower houses that question the necessity to release any records at all, and advocate closing the records to the public and even destroying them after StatsCan has had their fill of them. He outlined the importance of the census records to family historians and genealogists, and said that they were historical doc! uments that belong to the people of Canada. He said that the people of Canada want access to these records in the form that they have always been made available, and questioned the right of the elected representatives to deny or curtail this access. His final sentence was "The 92 year waiting period worked just fine and I see no reason why it needed change." I have the article typed and ready to go (my scanner isn't working) :( I'll send it as soon as I get the green light, but the above is pretty much what he had to say. Regards, Wayne MacKellar

Thanks, Wayne -- James may send the article directly to the Canada-Census-Campaign mail list -- but you have definitely covered the highlights. We need more publicity in ALL newspapers. For some extra reading by others, go to http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~downhome/post1901census.htm There are a number of timeless articles. My son-in-law even sent his password, but that did not work! Muriel M. Davidson [email protected] Co-Chair, Canada Census Committee ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wayne & Brenda MacKellar" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 2:26 PM Subject: [CCC] Article by James P. Barnaby Hello again folks: I called the Halifax Herald earlier today, and they advised me that since James P. Barnaby is a freelance writer, and not on their staff, that I would have to get permission from him directly before I could reprint his article for the list. They advised that it could be Monday before I hear back from him. I feel almost tempted to go ahead and do the reprint anyway, but am a little leery of doing so without his blessing. I will wait until I hear from him before reprinting, but to paraphrase (which I believe is OK), he explained the process that has been used up to now, i.e. releasing census information after 92 years. He then advised that through the efforts of the Canada Census Committee the 1906 census had been released, and explained it's importance because of the migration of people to Western Canada at that time. He then reported that a bill was presently in the House that will add amendments to restrict people's rights to all of the information contained in the 1911 and future censuses. He explained how the U.S. and Great Britain release their census records and noted the time periods for each (75 and 100 years respectively). He called these two countries "bastions of individual rights and privacy", and stated that they have no problem releasing their census records to the public. He questioned why StatsCan finds it necessary to make changes to a system that has worked well for 200 years with no problems. He then pointed out that there were some members of both the upper and lower houses that question the necessity to release any records at all, and advocate closing the records to the public and even destroying them after StatsCan has had their fill of them. He outlined the importance of the census records to family historians and genealogists, and said that they were historical documents that belong to the people of Canada. He said that the people of Canada want access to these records in the form that they have always been made available, and questioned the right of the elected representatives to deny or curtail this access. His final sentence was "The 92 year waiting period worked just fine and I see no reason why it needed change." I have the article typed and ready to go (my scanner isn't working) :( I'll send it as soon as I get the green light, but the above is pretty much what he had to say. Regards, Wayne MacKellar --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.495 / Virus Database: 294 - Release Date: 6/30/03