Guest Author - Betty Dobson

The Post-1901 Census Project began in 1998 as a result of Statistics Canada's refusal to release the 1911 Census to Library and Archives Canada. The decision meant denying public access to these historic records beyond the traditional 92-year waiting period.

The Canada Census Committee is co-chaired by Muriel Davidson and Gordon Watts. The committee has generated considerable publicity across the country, and Mr. Watts writes a column on the topic for Global Gazette. Members and interested parties circulate petitions demanding the release of the 1911 Census.

This article serves as the first of a three-part interview with Mr. Watts.

CC: How much progress do you think you've made since the project started? How much farther do you have to go?

GW: Progress has been slow, but not non-existent. After almost five years of lobbying the government finally acknowledged our efforts and released the 1906 Census of the North-Western Provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Shortly after they introduced a Bill to the Senate that they claimed was intended to give us the access that was sought by genealogists and historians. The problem was that the Bill was more concerned with increasing from 92 years to 112 years the period before full access was allowed, and adding conditions and restrictions to access in the intervening years, than it was in providing the access sought. Amendments were sought during hearings conducted by a Senate Committee but the Bill passed the Senate without amendment and was referred to the House of Commons where it received First Reading and some debate during Second Reading. Parliament was prorogued before Second Reading was completed and the Bill died on the order paper. Because of the conditions and restrictions on access contained in the Bill we did not seek to have it brought forward to the following Session of Parliament.

CC: Which political party, if any, do you find more open to supporting the project?

GW: That depends upon what criteria you use in determining which party is most supportive of public access to Historic Census records, and when you make the determination.

If you go by the percentage of Members in each Party that have voiced support for the access we seek, at a time prior to the June 28 Federal election and prior to the merger of the former Progressive Conservative and Canadian Alliance parties, then the two parties expressing almost 100% support were the Conservative and NDP parties. Unfortunately those two parties were those having the smallest number of Members in the House.

If you go by actual numbers of supportive members, the former Canadian Alliance party was the most supportive at that time.

Today, the new Conservative Party of Canada, which was formed by the merger of the former Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance, has the greatest number of Members that have expressed support for the access we seek.

The Liberal and Bloc Quebecois Members have shown the least support, based on numbers of Members and percentage of responses to our letters and emails seeking their position on the question of support. The Bloc Quebecois has the greatest number of Members who have neither answered our questions nor even acknowledged receipt of our correspondence. This may or may not be due to the difference in the French and English cultures. It also may or may not be due to the fact that the main purpose of the Bloc Quebecois participating in the Parliament of Canada is to see the removal of Quebec from Confederation.

So far as the Liberals are concerned, the greatest number of those who were in the Cabinet of the former government have either not responded to our questions, or have simply either acknowledged our correspondence or referred it to the Minister of Industry or Statistics Canada without having given a definitive answer to the question of support. In the case of Cabinet Members, past or present, this may be due to being told by the Prime Minister not to comment on the issue, or by the Member not feeling free to voice their own opinion. While a number of Liberal Members have voiced support for the access we seek, for the most part they have been the backbenchers rather than those in Cabinet.

At the dissolution of the previous government, overall there were 188 of 300 Members that were supportive, 2 were against access, 57 had given non-committal responses, and 53 Members had not responded to our questions.

With the formation of the new government 48 of those who were supportive lost their seats. 106 new Members were elected. The current standings are as follows: Out of 308 Members, 140 are FOR, one Member AGAINST, 39 have responded without giving a definitive position, and 128 have not yet responded to our questions. The 106 new Members are only now starting to get questioned on the issue and so far only a few have responded.

Read Part 2