Hello I actually think the Senators are hanging themselves in this S-13 debate series. In addition to all the "motherhood" talk about privacy rights for irrelevant issues, not one has gotten the facts straight, nor done their homework. First, the Justice Department legal opinion from last fall was a "real" opinion forced by the impending court case. The old "opinion" was informal and without examination of all of the law involved - out of context. The political complaints of the Senators in the debate are not likely to endear their cause to the Justice Department folks - especially since the Justice folks have an obligation to examine all of the law and the Senators do not seem to feel that they do. One telling aspect is the fact that so many of them have repeated Senator Milne's reference to the 25 year rule. She mentioned the number in an "I think" mode during the course of one discussion - illustrating one aspect of the principle of the existing laws to be considered. It is actually a "no more than 20 years after death" rule, but now these several Senators have repeated 25 years as though it IS the number - but completely out of context. It is such disregard for doing their homework, building cases on hyperbole, that actually weakens their case. In fact, it is almost amusing that these Senators also think that an amendment to the Statistics Act - with all the teeth hidden in the potential regulations - would stand up in court against the Charter, the Privacy, Information, Heritage et al Acts - the very foundations of the government. To openly say that these other laws "should" be changed, makes you wonder why they don't just get to that ... unless of course they know that such major law changes would make things really exciting. All of their talk about what the laws should be demonstrates that they know that they know better at some level. My question at this point is whether they actually know that the legal case is lost with or without S13, but perhaps view these debates as a way of presenting these "valiant" postures for "the good fight" - even if it is a Don Quixote windmill style. In any case, it appears that the Privacy Hawks are tearing S13 apart on the same issues - albeit for different reasons - flawed by who gets to make decisions on the future census forms and how to police the 20 year purgatory. I maintain my view of legal precedence in the existing law and for folks who haven't seen it yet, point to my brief slide presentation at http://bostonstates.rootsweb.com/S13ContravenesPrivacyAct.htm Curiously, the link I had for the S13 text is no longer working. Anyone have an update to http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/2/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/S-13/S-13_1/S-13_cover-E.html I'm not sure that civil disobedience is even necesary - although it has some appeal. I think that the same tens of thousands of folks who signed the petitions could file the information requests for every individual they think would be on the 1911 census and every individual that has died more than 20 years ago - put the job of filing the court case squarely where it belongs with the Privacy, Heritage and Information Ministers. I have a few hundred original issues of the Halifax newspapers from the 1870s and about 10 other newspapers from all over the provinces from the mid 1800s. I think I'll dig out a few choice examples of the every movement and activity of named individuals in those days. Unfortunately, I don't have 1911 Canada newspapers, but if any of you folks do, it might be worth copying off some clippings to illustrate exactly what folks thought was private in 1911 - not much :) They were worried about taxes and drafts! I did enjoy the Jedi statistics. However, one serious note on the idea of whether us US folks should be meddling in Canadian government issues (even if I do have about 3/4 Canadian ancestors over the last 400 years) - Dr Felligi has influenced the US and may in fact have had a strong hand in the 1978-1996 US Federal Model Bill that is being waved around these days by US federal agencies trying to influence state laws about vital records access. I always thought politics required a certain type of gene that I was missing - but like the weather, I could recognize the phenomena as part of nature. But somehow things do get done, so there have to be folks somewhere who actually know what they are doing. So I'll ask again if anyone knows who the legal beagles are in the legislative body and whether they are doing their homework. Off to Pittsburgh for the NGS conference in a few days. Sharon ===== Sharon Sergeant Ancestors and Ephemera http://GenealogyFair.com Bring Your Ancestors Home!