[Dr Caleb]

[QUOTE BY= rearguard]<br /> BTW I'm "rearguard", not "double double", which is a forum designation assigned to my username based on perhaps the number of posts I've made or how long I've been a member - I'm not sure.<br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Number of posts - in the forums. I think with the next update, the username should be bigger than the 'rank'. The new guys always get that wrong.

[rearguard]

Here are a couple more interesting cenus related reports:<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.montrealmirror.com/ARCHIVES/2001/081601/news7.html">Census agents do whatever it takes to get you to give up that form</a><br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.nsnews.com/issues06/w081306/083206/news/083206nn1.html">3,500 N. Shore census forms not returned</a><br /> <br /> The census collection seems to have finally ended because Stats Can is no longer hiring according to a posting on its website. As of yesterday, the on-line census form was still active however.<br /> <br /> I suppose we'll soon see a first round of prosecutions designed to send a clear message that Stats Can means business in a final bid to get more forms sent in.<br /> <br /> This fight will be interesting to watch, since the publicity it will generate will be hard to ignore. So far the MSM has completely ignored the issues at hand, I suspect when prosecutions start, they won't report on why people have been refusing, but the blogs will.<br />

[Jacob]

It beats me why none of the newspaper articles (like the one from the North Shore News above) dares to quote the infamous name Lougheed Martin - which is the main reason many Canadians elect to opt out. When will they ever get it?

[Milton]

<img align="absmiddle" src='images/smilies/lol.gif'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/lol.gif' alt='Laughing Out Loud'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/lol.gif' alt='Laughing Out Loud'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/lol.gif' alt='Laughing Out Loud'>

[claytonrumley]

A week or so ago I posted a letter from a guy named Tom to Ivan "You Will Comply" Fellegi regarding the request by a StatsCan employee for Tom to leave his completed census form in an insecure rural mailbox over the weekend for pickup.<br /> <br /> Tom has received a reply from Anil Arora and has once again given me permission to post it (with the request that I remove his name from the posting). So here it is:<br /> <br /> [QUOTE] Dear Mr. XXXXXXXXX,<br /> <p>Firstly, please accept my apologies for not replying earlier. Following your e-mail, we contacted our regional management and informed them of your experience, which is clearly contrary to our field procedures on dealing with confidential census questionnaires. Immediately following this incident, the area supervisor re-iterated the proper procedures with the local field staff and provided the necessary assurance that this type of instruction to respondents had ceased immediately. We are also taking note of this incident and further strengthening our training and procedures for the next Census.<br /> <br /> <p>I very much appreciate you bringing your experience to my attention and apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you. Please be assured that we take the security and confidentiality of Census responses very seriously.<br /> <br /> <p>Thank You.<br /> <br /> <br /> <p>Anil Arora,<br><br /> Director General, 2006 Census Manager<br><br /> Statistics Canada<br /> [/QUOTE]

[Lisa Foggy]

I've decided not to complete my census form because I am outraged that the cost of rounding up the personal information of individual citizens is $567 million and counting. These tyrants want information to rationalize future redistributions and social schemes, and they want to maintain the illusion of nearly complete compliance because "we" all count and equality is the banner under which our future is engineered. Accuracy is secondary, and these rationalizations, and indeed their conclusions, are already anticipated and do not depend on the truth of the data -- which can be picked, classified, analyzed and induced into conclusions in a myriad of ways to support a claim in the social science field, later to be used as justification for government legislation, but simply on its existence as a supposedly objective and neutral dataset. That it is objective, neutral and true is simply supposed. If Bowel Awareness Week is on the agenda for the next five year plan, expect to be asked how much toilet paper your household uses per week next time around.<br /> <br /> Liars are more highly valued than people who want the government to butt out of their business. I pay taxes and file a yearly tax return, I have a "legal" job, I have a bank account, I have a SIN number, I have a birth certificate, I have a photo health card, I have a drivers licence and a registered license plate, and even a library card. My head has already been counted.<br /> <br /> I've been documenting my thoughts on the census and my experience with the census goons at The London Fog. <br /> <br /> <a href="http://thelondonfog.blogspot.com/2006/07/census-2006-headhunt-continues.html">July</a>, <a href="http://thelondonfog.blogspot.com/2006/05/census-2006-sealing-our-fate-for-next.html">May</a> and <a href="http://thelondonfog.blogspot.com/2006/04/determining-value-of-human-commodity.html">April</a><br /> <br /> The hound entrusted with my case has not been back since the end of July. I've yet to run into them, as they keep knocking on the wrong door. They have however left a series of threatening notices for me. Unlike other people I know who have decided to boycott the census, I've yet to receive my "final" notice.

[wasjod]

Thanks for posting Lisa, I have read your blog and Claytons as well, great stuff. I have heard nothing more from the census in the past week, perhaps they have found a brain. Hopefully as little of our tax dollars as possible will continue to be wasted by StupidCan. I am just waiting to hear how certain Canadians are "evil," and are moral reprebates for not writing on some paper. I will not tolerate a government telling me what I should/should not be doing. Oh the creeping facisim, I can smell it now, a StupidCan worker must be at my door, perhaps it is that scum bag responsible for the Western region, Jerry "SS" Paige. Perhaps it's the big boss man himself, Mr. Ivant Fellatio, Fellegi, sounds like the prick should be on the Sopranos, perhaps Tony could arrange a hit.

[rearguard]

Check this out from the USA<br /> <a href="http://www.free-market.net/towards-liberty/new-census.html">THE NEW CENSUS: An All-Out Assault On Your Privacy</a><br /> <br /> Funny because Canadians have been subjected to an intrusive questionnaire for years (even the short form asks too many questions that are not needed, such as your personal relationships with the people you live with), yet there's been little protest that I've seen here at home. I'm amazed at how much abuse most Canadian's seem to be willing to take without a fight.<br /> <br /> The next census will be comming around in a few years. The same LM software and hardware will be used, the same intrusive and unneccessary questions will be asked, the same threats for noncompliance will be issued, and so on. Will we protest again? <br />

[Brent Swain]

It's called "Bureucratic Empire Building " done for the financial benefit of the bureucrats on government payrolls who run them, like all government departments.Just like the gun registry.<br /> So who is Lockheed Martin paying under the table for the job , and how much?<br /> Brent

[paycheques]

<p>On the continuum between freedom to slavery and slavery to freedom, government is initially seen as a servant of the people. In the later stages, it becomes the master.</p><br /> <br /> <p>The current “War on Terror” is the newspeak that George Orwell warned us about.</p><br /> <br /> <p>In reality, it is a War OF Terror on the people. If one were to look for the antecedents of how people were conditioned to accept the “War on Terror” one need not go too far.</p><br /> <br /> <p>The CENSUS form and the filing of tax returns and the so-called “mandatory” vaccination of children in schools and the conditioned acceptance of fluoride in water systems to make people purposely docile and the “mandatory” participation in the educational system, plus the people’s belief that they cannot work without a Social Insurance Number; all were designed to squelch the antidote, that being the ability of the living, real flesh and blood men and women to learn with intelligence. Freedom depends upon intelligence whereas education is the offspring of vested agendas that are designed to manipulate people.</p><br /> <br /> <p>The penalty for participating in the slave-speak that conditions people to fill out the CENSUS forms is far more greater than being subjected to a 500 dollar fine or 3 months in jail. Can you, the reader, discern what it is?</p><br /> <br /> <p>Compare the elements that are inherent in the slave-speak and you will discover that the charge of failure to file a tax return and refusing to do the CENSUS are not that much different. Only the penalties are that much greater when it comes to the alleged Income Tax Act of Canada that was never passed into law. In both cases, it is just a piece of paper. The prosecutions reinforce fear and that in of itself, in most cases, is sufficient to keep people ignorant and intimidated.</p><br /> <br /> <p>If you examine the links below, the emerging common thread across the world is the same and it is called “Surveillance”.</p><br /> <br /> <p>The PowerPoint slides (below) illustrate the enormity of the surveillance.</p><br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.epic.org/events/id/facts/">EPIC Slides</a><br /> <br /> <p>Comparatively speaking, the protests against the CENSUS will be overshadowed by the emerging New World Order and global police state – unless, UNLESS, people wake up in the hundreds of thousands. Yes, that’s correct!</p><br /> <br /> <p>Unless people wake up in the hundreds of thousands and organize and commence marches more than just spending a weekend(s) to walk to end breast cancer and the margarine (Becel) Ride for the heart.</p><br /> <br /> <p>The margarine company is riding towards its success on the misfortune of people with heart problems and the cancer industry is no different in its approach. That’s why only the words “weekend” and “walks” are used while masquerading margarine as the saviour; and chemo, which incidentally, also contains rat poison. Despite all of their deliberately done propaganda, the cures have been around for years but they don’t want you to know about them!</p><br /> <br /> <p>CENSUS is to SURVEILLANCE as HEART DISEASE is to margarine and cut (surgery), burn (radiation) and poison (chemo) is to CANCER.</p><br /> <br /> <br /> <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/1765816.stm">School census 'is surveillance'</a><br /> Thursday, 17 January, 2002, 16:55 GMT <br /> <br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.fcw.com/article74046">The state of surveillance</a><br /> <br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.sydney.indymedia.org/node/37969">Con-Census 2006</a><br /> <br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/idcards/story/0,,1817559,00.html">Beware of card tricks</a><br /> <br /> <br /> <p>Government that seeks its own preservation looks upon the strength and bravery of the people as the root of its greatest danger; and desires to render them weak, base, corrupt and unfaithful to each other, that they may neither dare to attempt the breaking of the yoke laid upon them, nor trust one another in any generous design for the recovery of their liberty. –Sidney</p>

[rearguard]

How about we keep this simple and sensible?<br /> <br /> a) The Canadian census is mandatory, giving the people no legal option to refuse to answer questions that they may feel uncomfortable in answering - that's fundamentally WRONG, and it allows Stats Can to abuse their position of power over us, asking for more details than can be considered reasonable and neccessary. Canadians should NOT have to break the law in order to maintain their privacy. Canadians should feel comfortable and secure when answering a census questionaire. Unfortuantely, many Canadians DO NOT feel comfortable with how the 2006 census was conducted. Those that took a stand to preserve their rights now live in fear of prosecution which includes fines, prison time, and a criminal record. <br /> <br /> b) The 2006 Census, and I expect those that will be following, have been contracted partially out to Lockheed Martin, a US based weapons manufacturer. Many Canadians legitimately feel very uncomfortable with a US based weapons manufacturer having ANYTHING to do with a Canadian Census. There's at least two very real concerns: 1) Our highly personal information may end up across the border despite StatsCan's assurances, and 2) Many people don't want to have anything to do with companies that assist with and profit from warefare.<br /> <br /> There no doubt are other concerns I have not listed, but all of them flow from the first item I mentioned - that the census is mandatory with no legal means for Canadians to opt out should they feel uncomfortable for any reason with answering the questions.<br />

[paycheques]

<p> <br /> </p><br /> The word “mandatory” and the idea that there exists “no legal means for Canadians to opt out..” is the language of slave-speak. It is an admission that reinforces the notion that everybody is a slave and therefore, slaves cannot find any exit to freedom. Yet the history of slavery and freedom tells us that such a belief is not true. Slaves do find their freedom but it largely depends upon the utilization of their chief resources, namely ingenuity and intelligence that are always at their command.<br /> <br /> If legal means do not exist for Canadians to opt out, then why are they protesting? This raises another more fundamental question. Is vive being used as a pretext for goading people into being the cannon fodder of the unscrupulous element or perhaps, the powers that be? <br /> <br /> If Canadians do not feel comfortable with answering the questions, they ought to know that the law does not care about people’s feelings. <br /> <br /> I urge the readers to read the Statutes of Canada and see if you could find any reference to people’s feelings. This parallels the fact that “Taxpayers don’t have human rights” – an article I posted on vive at: <a href="http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20040930122412248">Taxpayer don't have human rights</a><br /> <br /> Laws are written in such a way that people’s feelings are never enumerated therein. If people’s feelings were taken into account, then each individual’s property right would have been expressly stated in each statute. <br /> <br /> For example, the alleged Income Tax of Canada would never hide the fact that the right to one’s labour is a property right and can never be violated. They rely upon deception and condition people into thinking that income tax is mandatory when it actually always was, voluntary. The same applies to C.P.P and Employment Insurance deductions.<br /> <br /> This may also explain why the right to one’s labour and the right to contract (originally termed as the natural liberty to contract) is not taught in the curriculum of our public schools from kindergarten to high school. If it were taught, then most of the manipulation being done by corporations and the government through its educational curriculum would be exposed to the light of day. The right to contract is the single most powerful tool for an individual to assert his property right. <br /> <br /> The reader should ask him/herself, when was the last time those charged with the duty to sit on parlimentary meetings on the formation of the census questions, ever consult the people? Why did they sit through the parliamentary meetings without alerting the people to how their property rights were being trampled via the census questions? Who was the watchdog to alert Canadians about the intrusiveness of the questions used in the census forms from day one? On the other hand, what have people done to raise the alarm over their property rights being ignored? If people weren’t taught about their property rights in school, then how would they know anything about them? How can you use something you know nothing about?<br /> <br /> Does the keeping of one’s privacy and upholding of one’s property rights depend upon the need for a privacy commissioner? If there was a purpose which justified the need for a privacy commissioner, that purpose has now been obliterated. If people rely upon a government appointed officer to safeguard their property rights (privacy is a property right) when they don’t know what those are, then it comes as no surprise that such an officer can be ruled over. See excerpts from a speech made by the privacy commissioner, below.<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.statcan.ca/english/census96/return.htm">Quote from Privacy Commissioner</a> “Privacy protection is based on the notion that people have a right to control their personal information: to know why it is being collected, how it will be used, how long it will be kept, and who will have access to it. Use of information for purposes other than those for which it was collected should be subject to consent.<br /> <br /> What is being proposed would violate these fundamental principles. Information collected for one purpose, which should have been disposed of after its statistical purpose was fulfilled, would be used for another, and disclosed to third parties, without consent.<br /> <br /> Census information can be extremely personal, including genetic and other health information about respondents and their families. We should not decide for other people what constitutes an acceptable disclosure of such information. <br /> <br /> Census response has rested on a balance between coercion and confidentiality. Respondents agree to answer intrusive questions, on an understanding that the information will be used for specific purposes, and no other. The instructions that the census returns were to be confidential and only for statistical purposes are unambiguous.<br /> <br /> The proposal to change the law retroactively eliminates this balance. This is an issue for all Canadians, with implications for all of their relations with government.”<br /> <br /> Take special note of the paragraph:<br /> <br /> "What is being proposed would violate these fundamental principles. Information collected for one purpose, which should have been disposed of after its statistical purpose was fulfilled, would be used for another, and disclosed to third parties, without consent."<br /> <br /> Statistics Canada and other parties that were instrumental to the deliberate and wilful violation have violated the fundamental principles referred to by the commissoner. However, he is not going far enough. What he refers to as the “fundamental principles” ignores the most important question: Why were intrusive questions incorporated into the census in the first place? <br /> <br /> The violation that he refers to did occur but have you read about any penalty assigned to the parties that were responsible? Were any people charged? On the other hand, look at the amount of prodding the census folks go to, to instill the fear of a 500-dollar fine and 3 months in jail!<br /> <br /> It was “mandatory” as we are led to believe, then how is it that Ivan P. Fellegi, Chief Statistician of Canada refers to the “voluntary nature” below?<br /> <br /> 1. Equally important from a privacy perspective is the voluntary nature of most of Statistics Canada's personal or household surveys. (<a href="http://www.statscan.ca/english/recrdlink/editorial.htm">"Voluntary nature"</a>)<br /> <br /> One could infer that the penalty section of the Statistics Act does not have the teeth we think it has. Or, this interpretation could be a trap. If they want, people to VOLUNTEER their personal information but do not want them to know that this is all they can ask them to do; perhaps, this may explain why they resort to tactics of threats, fear and intimidation. But how does one volunteer? Is there a definition about that in the Act? No, there is not. <br /> <br /> Statistics Act Chapters S-19<br /> 8. The Minister may, by order, authorize the obtaining, for a particular purpose, of information, other than information for a census of population or agriculture, on a voluntary basis, but where such information is requested section 31 does not apply in respect of a refusal or neglect to furnish the information.<br /> <br /> Though there is no definition of “voluntary basis”, the plain meaning of such words translates into not answering any question or providing any personal information. It could also mean that the census form must be done on a voluntary basis. It is only mandatory for Statistics Canada to send it out and probably, that is all it is.<br /> <br /> If you read at vive, my article <a href="http://www.vivelecanada.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?forum=14&showtopic=17020">“Census – Hidden Deception”</a> in combination with the Occult world of Commerce (below), the ulterior motives of the Statistics Act become that much more transparent. <br /> <br /> Though a slave may be in captivity, he or she always has the capacity to think and ask questions and reflect with one’s intelligence to find the exit to freedom. The following questions are a step in that direction.<br /> <br /> 1) What is the law?<br /> 2) What is the meaning of the key words used therein?<br /> 3) Is there a difference between the legal and lawful meanings of words?<br /> 4) Does the law apply to the living, real flesh and blood men or women, i.e., the people or to some other entity defined by the statute(s)?<br /> 5) All law is contract and only contracts make the law. <br /> 6) Canada is a corporation registered in Washington DC and perhaps elsewhere. Doing business with a corporation and its corporate policies all depends upon one’s right to contract. <br /> 7) What covert processes and mechanisms have been put into places that are used to facilitate the application of the law?<br /> 8) Is it possible that private knowledge exists and the legal system and its lawyers have deliberately kept it hidden so as to ensnare the living, real flesh and blood men and women into doing business with them in the Occult world of commerce? (See 9 minute intro at: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osw_2Uvyvlk">9 min intro</a> or the 1hr 6 min full length version at: <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3648930131443936554">Occult world of Commerce</a>)<br />

[rearguard]

You may not know this, but I understand the point you are trying to make, and I do agree with some aspects of what your are saying. However, it is unlikely to be practical to live in a pure anarchistic society - none exist probably because they cannot exist - therefore a certain minimal set of rules are required, and to enforce those rules consistently a government of some kind is required.<br /> <br /> I do agree with your claim that we are slaves in a sense, meaning that as individuals we are being restricted and controlled to a degree that much more than is absolutely necessary. I say this because no one can be 100% free considering that we have many neighbours and finite resources. Someone will always oppose your free will at some point or another to varying degrees - that is simply a fact of life that we must all have to live with (for example, we have to live with gravity no matter what - same thing). <br /> <br /> In my view, the controls and limits imposed on us has gone much too far, but we have to take baby steps to get out of the mess we're in. People who propose highly radical reform tend to be viewed as nutters even when they are perfectly sane and reasonable, and as a result the radicals tend to be ignored or worse.<br /> <br /> You wrote:<br /> <br /> "One could infer that the penalty section of the Statistics Act does not have the teeth we think it has. Or, this interpretation could be a trap. If they want, people to VOLUNTEER their personal information but do not want them to know that this is all they can ask them to do; perhaps, this may explain why they resort to tactics of threats, fear and intimidation. But how does one volunteer? Is there a definition about that in the Act? No, there is not."<br /> <br /> From the Act:<br /> <br /> <i><br /> Voluntary surveys<br /> <br /> 8. The Minister may, by order, authorize the obtaining, for a particular purpose, of information, other than information for a census of population or agriculture, on a voluntary basis, but where such information is requested section 31 does not apply in respect of a refusal or neglect to furnish the information.<br /> <br /> 1980-81-82-83, c. 47, s. 41.</i><br /> <br /> From the above, it seems to be rather clear that the census of population and agriculture are NOT voluntary, since section 31 applies. Section 31 outlines penalties for refusal and/or for intentionally answering questions incorrectly.<br /> <br /> Having said that I know that the way laws are written makes the law very difficult to understand. Definitions of the law are often written in a way that is misleading and/or ambiguous, and when you throw in the many interconnections between definitions, you end up with gibberish. For example, I've spent hours studying the sentence that redefines "person" in a way that includes corporations. How can a corporation be anything like a person, and why did they HAVE to merge the word person with corporation in the first place (etc)?<br /> <br /> So, could it be that we MUST answer by law questions that pertain to knowing ONLY what the population of Canada is, rather than the extended questions that ask much more, for example: your full name, your phone number, your birth date, your relationships with other people, etc, OR are these questions considered part of a population census even when arguably some of them do not appear to be logically connected with a population census? For example, asking for your age seems perfectly reasonable, however asking for your exact birthdate, your phone number, and your personal relationships do not seem logically connected with a population census.<br /> <br /> As I said, we're far better off keeping things simple and clear so that just about everyone who is reasonable and sane will be able to understand what's going wrong, why it's wrong, AND also agree that it's worth the risk to take a stand and do something about it.<br /> <br /> Now, if ONLY the government were to keep things simple and clear!!!!<br /> <br /> I hope that those of you who are reading my words can see that I'm not actually asking for much, or asking for anything that's radical or "nutty". I just want to have the right to be left alone so that I may mind my own business.<br /> <br /> If the census were voluntary, I would NOT have a problem with filling out most of the questions found on the "short form". I may even volunteer to answer some of the extended questions on the long form. However, I would NOT answer ANY census when US weapons manufacturers are employed to process the data! For Stas Can to hire LM is much more than outrageous, it's stupid, callous and an abuse of the power that Stats Can should NOT have in the first place.<br /> <br /> If we don't take a stand on issues such as having the right to boycott an amoral and intrusive census, then the abusive grip the government has over us will keep on getting worse. All the fence sitting we've been doing is the reason why we're in the mess we are in today.<br />

[Kevan Taylor]

I have to agree with Rearguard. There are a lot of different motivations for boycotting the census but to me it all comes down to trying to in put into the governments mind that we do not want to be even more integrated into the american sphere.<br /> <br /> The thought that an arms dealer has signed an agreement with my government for any reason makes me angry. <br /> <br /> If through our actions some one person in government or the civil service understands the growing contempt we have for this country and causes a step back from fortress america it will have been a success.<br /> <br /> We have to build a wall and hopefully we laid the first brick.<br />

[Dancing]

When I "preview" this, the text is centred. It should not be. I don't know how to change it. Sorry - you'll have to live with it!<br /> <br /> I sent this email today to Ivan Felligi.<br /> Attached to it is a letter sent in 2004 by the Quakers in Halifax. It contains the amounts of money being paid to Lockheed.<br /> <br /> SUBJECT: Census Data<br /> <br /> October 13, 2006<br /> <br /> TO:<br /> Ivan Felligi<br /> Chief Statistician of Canada<br /> [email protected]<br /> <br /> CC:<br /> Industry Canada<br /> Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada<br /> Maxime Bernier<br /> [email protected]<br /> 613-995-9001<br /> <br /> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]<br /> <br /> CC: Lockheed-Martin<br /> President (Canadian operations)<br /> Martin Munro <br /> [email protected] (NOTE: this address was given to me by LM but it bounced back.)<br /> 613-599-3270 ext 3498 (Martin's exec asst, Diane Grandy)<br /> <br /> <br /> Dear Ivan,<br /> <br /> I am in receipt of your registered letter dated October 3, 2006.<br /> <br /> It does not address my reason for non-compliance with the census, communicated to you consistently and beginning back in 2003.<br /> <br /> The reason you provide for the necessity of compliance with the census is not truth. I presume that if your reason is an untruth, it is because you do not have a truthful reason to offer.<br /> <br /> I would be failing my responsibilities as a citizen were I to bow in cowardice to anyone, civil servant or otherwise, who attempts to intimidate me with the threat of the judicial system - jail time and fines - when there is no reasonable basis.<br /> <br /> Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. I will not, through complicity, add to their financial profits. I communicated this to you more than two years before the census, as did many other Canadians.<br /> <br /> If I am to be treated equally before the Law, then you must equally refer the thousands of other Canadians who have not complied with the census to the Judicial system. I presume you are doing this.<br /> <br /> The reason you have provided for the necessity of my compliance, quoting from your letter of October 3, 2006 is:<br /> "A compulsory response is required of all respondents because the census is essential for providing the information needed by governments, businesses, researchers and individual Canadians to shed light on issues that are critical to virtually every sector of society. If respondents were to arbitrarily choose whether or not they would answer the census questions, the result would not accurately reflect the characteristics of the population and would therefore not be considered useful or reliable."<br /> <br /> I am sorry to say, but that is a load of bull. Most people off the street know it's not the way statistics work. I find it offensive that citizens are treated as though they are ignorant. In my particular case, I am a graduate of the College of Commerce, University of Saskatchewan. I majored in Quantitative Analysis (Statistics) and graduated with Honours. Every day we are provided with reliable statistical information not based on 100% sampling.<br /> <br /> I repeat my point: if you must resort to blatant untruths I presume it is because you don't have a valid argument to offer.<br /> <br /> Another point I would like to make: you chose to define the Canadian census in a way that necessitated the out-sourcing. <br /> <br /> On your website you record that the first census in Canada was conducted in 1666, the first national census in 1871. For centuries and decades the Government has defined the census in a way that civil servants had the capability of doing the work. To me, quite frankly, it is prudent to keep one's work within the limits you are capable of managing. <br /> <br /> If the Government is not capable of doing that which has been successfully managed by civil servants for decades and centuries, then the answer is to fire those responsible for the mismanagement. The answer is not to knowingly create some over-sized census monster which weakens one's capabilities and then dictates an attitude of "I am so weakened I must rely on Big Daddy LM to help me out." <br /> <br /> Statistics Canada and its employees are to serve the interests of the citizens of Canada. Previous administrations have done that very well. If not, there would have been problems in the past. I am not aware of any. So I suggest that you need to re-think what you are doing.<br /> <br /> Third and final point: in the last paragraph of your letter you say, "I would like to assure you that the information you provide on your census questionnaire will be kept strictly confidential, ...". <br /> <br /> I reassure children so they may feel safe and secure. I think you mis-read the situation: I am secure, I am an adult. I do not need to be reassured by you. I will arrive at my own conclusions by observing your actions and by reading what you write. <br /> <br /> Furthermore, not once in my communications with the Government have I mentioned concerns about the confidentiality of information. I have been clear and explicit in the reason for my non-compliance. You repeat this mantra about confidentiality. Not once have you addressed or attempted to address my explicitly-stated reason for non-compliance: the Statistics Canada contract with Lockheed-Martin enriches a corporation that plays a very large role in the American killing machine. <br /> <br /> I am not being snooty. I am not "radical". I come from rural Saskatchewan which is small "c" conservative country. I am "mature", a Mother of 2 children. I do not believe in increasing the hatred in the world through killing other people and their children. Lockheed-Martin profits from the killing. <br /> <br /> I don't know into which pigeon hole you have slotted me. I am able to think. I can connect the dots between my actions and wider outcomes. I was a member of and benefited from the Girl Guides of Canada for many years. I learned service to community. That community and sisterhood extends to women in all countries of the world. I had the privilege of attending an international camp. I slept in the same tent, cooked, laughed and danced with these women when they and I were young. I really don't like seeing them killed, as in Iraq. That's killed, as in dead. Why would I participate in, or be a collaborator with Lockheed-Martin? Perhaps you have not read the Washington Post, October 11? 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred (research overseen by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health). The killing, once started, does not stop.<br /> <br /> You were told by thousands of Canadians that Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. You made a bad decision to "out-source". <br /> <br /> Your letter of October 3 is an attempt to coerce me through the threat of jail time and fines. Were my plate not full at the moment, did I not have more important priorities, I would be researching the avenues through which to lay charges, to "turn the matter over to the Department of Justice", as you say. So that you might be tried for your tactics vis-a-vis me.<br /> <br /> Yours truly,<br /> Sandra Finley<br /> Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1<br /> 306-373-8078<br /> ============================<br /> HALIFAX MONTHLY MEETING <br /> <br /> of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)<br /> <br /> comprising Halifax Friends Meeting, Antigonish Worship Group, Dartmouth Worship Group and South Shore Worship Group<br /> <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> <br /> Lucienne Robillard<br /> Minister of Industry<br /> House of Commons <br /> Ottawa ON K1A 0A6<br /> <br /> February 15, 2004<br /> <br /> Dear Lucienne Robillard, <br /> <br /> The Halifax Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) is very concerned about the Canadian government’s decision to award a $20.5 million dollar contract to a unit of the U.S. weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT). <br /> <br /> The $20.5 million dollars is the amount to be spent to contract out work of Statistics Canada on the 2006 National Census. Lockheed Martin Canada Inc. is to lead a consortium that includes IBM Canada, Transcontinental Printing Inc. Canada and ADECCO Employment Services Ltd. Canada.<br /> <br /> In February 2003, Lockheed Martin Canada Inc. was also awarded a multi-year contract by the Canadian Department of National Defence to provide a health care information system on Canadian Forces personnel. That contract is worth approximately $17 million and covers only the first 14 months of the project. The contract has the potential to exceed an estimated value of $56 million, however, if all four phases are delivered over the anticipated 10-year period.<br /> <br /> These decisions were made while Alan Rock was serving on Jean Chrétien’s Cabinet as Minister of Industry. We are writing to you, the new Minister of Industry, to make you aware of our continuing objections.<br /> <br /> While Quakers realize that, under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and World Trade Organization Agreement regulations, non-Canadian firms are eligible to bid on contracts to provide essential public services, we are loathe to see the Canadian public’s tax dollars flow to a military contractor that benefits richly from the development (and deployment) of weapons of mass destruction. <br /> <br /> We are also loathe to assist a principal member of the U.S. military-industrial complex to further develop its capacity to collect, store, analyze, and retrieve sensitive information on citizens of any country. <br /> <br /> We have read that a spokesperson for former Public Works Minister Ralph Goodale has stated that under the obligations of the NAFTA, Canada cannot alter contracts with Lockheed Martin and if we were to do so we could be sued for millions of dollars. (Toronto Star, October 15, 2003) <br /> <br /> We ask you, in your capacity as Industry Minister and in conjunction with other members of Cabinet, to find a way forward that would best extricate our country from these contracts.<br /> <br /> While many would welcome an outcome in which Statistics Canada would be allotted the funding and capacity to fully carry out an activity as important as the Canadian census, it is of particular importance to Quakers — because of our Peace Testimony* — that contracts not be let to a subsidiary of a trans-national corporation that sold almost $27 billion dollars worth of weapons in 2002. <br /> <br /> We therefore ask: <br /> <br /> 1. that your government cancel all its contracts with Lockheed Martin and <br /> 2. that you pledge not to grant millions more to Lockheed Martin in the future. <br /> <br /> We would appreciate hearing from you soon in regards to this important matter.<br /> <br /> <br /> Sylvia Mangalam<br /> <br /> Clerk of the Halifax Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)<br /> 1388 Bedford Highway<br /> Bedford NS B4A 1E2<br /> <br /> * George Fox’s declaration of 1661 to Charles II is referred to as the Friends Historic Peace Testimony: “We utterly deny all outward wars and strife and fightings with outward weapons, for any ends or under any pretence whatsoever. And this is our testimony to the whole world.”<br /> <br /> cc: Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada; Stephen Owen, Minister of Public Works; Jim Peterson, Minister of International Trade; Bill Graham, Minister of Foreign Affairs; David Pratt, Minister of National Defence; Ivan P. Fellegi, Chief Statistician of Canada<br /> <br /> Our Monthly Meeting will also be sharing this letter with other Friends’ Meetings, as well as the general public.<br /> <br /> ============================<br /> (sent at end of May 2006 by Sandra Finley)<br /> <br /> Dear Ivan,<br /> <br /> In your response you defend the tendering process.<br /> The tendering PROCESS is of little concern to me. <br /> <br /> The OUTCOME is. <br /> <br /> I am vehemently opposed to actions that enrich corporations that are part of the American war machine. <br /> <br /> I doubt it is possible for you to address my fundamental objection, communicated to you beginning in 2003 or 2004.<br /> <br /> Best wishes,<br /> Sandra Finley<br /> <BR><P></P>