Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

He said, he said

by Aaron Wherry on Sunday, July 25, 2010 3:13pm - 0 Comments

Whatever Tony Clement has already said Statistics Canada officials said to him, he really can’t say what they said, except to say that they never said they had any misgivings about the new census. That Mr. Clement said anything about what Statistics Canada said is said to have led to Munir Sheik’s resignation. Which is all, you might say, ironic, because, as Jay Hill said, this is a government that believes ministers, and only ministers, are responsible for the policies, decisions and operations of government.

Tags: census, civil service, Jay Hill, ministerial accountability, public service, Statistics Canada, Tony Clement

More by Aaron Wherry

jarrid

OT – Aaron, I understand Tony Clement saved someone from drowning yesterday. Maybe you should check it out, there must be some way you can slime that story too!

BCer in Mtl

staged?
Emily

Well actually he didn't, but he bragged about it.

Very unCanadian of him.

jarrid

Said Clement “There was a whole bunch of us out there. It really was a community effort.”

But don't let the facts get in the way of your pre-set black and white view of the universe Em.

Patchouli

I heard the interview; actually his wife and father in law dove into the water to save the woman, who was doing okay on her own. Tony helped to calm her down back at the house, and may have suggested calling 911.

All good stuff. But most of us would hand the phone over to the wife to do the interview, since she was the true hero. But most of us aren't looking for positive PR.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

…Tony…may have suggested calling 911.

… and may also have suggested calling the media…all of them…immediately.

Bob

Sorry Jarrid, but I think Colby Cosh's tweet correctly interprets the stories about how Clement "saved" someone from drowning: "He dived in, went "Whoa! Dangerous!", turned back, & "helped" someone else who wasn't in danger?"
danby

I heard the woman was Helena Geurgis, and that Tony obeyed a tweet from the PMO telling him to return to shore.

jarrid

Danby wins the prize for the best riposte. His answer stands out amongst the otherwise decidedly humourless lot.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

Clement's a proven liar, so I'll believe his account of the event when I hear third-party corroboration.

jarrid

Familiar bile from Sir Francis. You wouldn't be related to Ti-G-y (ret'd*) by any chance?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

Heh. Familiar sceptical circumspection from Sir Francis. Familiar slavish, bovine fawning from Jarrid.

Ken Harber

Unless somebody besides the Minister speaks up about the rescue, Tony is already slimed without additional comment.,
chet

Ladies and gentlemen,

I present to you, today's "progressive left"

wishing death upon an innocent woman so that their political rivals (who showed extraordinary courage) could be maintained in a negative light.

…Sort of like pretending the plight of Aghanistan's women didn't exist to today's "progressive" leftist "feminists", who'd rather see the "correct" team lose, than tens of millions of women, escape the shackles of barbarism.

Emily

Hey look, it's a Con drama queen!

Who doesn't read the news!

Brian

Tony's actually a really good guy, for the most part.

On the other hand, that doesn't mean he can't be wrong on a public policy issue now and again.

And he's wrong on this one.

Those of us who aren't robots are capable of handling the implied complexities.

http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

Does. Not. Compute. No partisanship recognized. System mainframe in lockdown.

Sigh

Say again?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Tony+Clement+jum…

Sigh

Thanks Jenn, I did see the story. It was just my feeble attempt at a joke. Cheers.

Emily

Yep, only ministers. Temporary current ministers. Politicians.

Not the Supreme Court, not the public service, not ambassadors, or science or anyone who knows the topic, just ministers.

And of course Harper tells them what to say, anyway.
Dee

From the way Tony Clement's description of his interactions with Stats Canada on this issue has changed over the last week or so, and particularly in light of the Munir Sheikh resignation, I think it is fairly clear that Tony has lied. He should resign.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

When did he lie? And why should he resign, because some vested interests disagree with him?

Bob

Someone's been under a rock for the past week or two…

http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

That doesn't enlighten me at all.

Shiner

What a funny thing to say. I supposed we should listen to people who know nothing about statistics or policy since the census is of low vested interest to them? Certainly novel. Henceforth, only people with no interest at all in a policy shall have a say in it!

http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

An individuals knowledge of statistics (or lack thereof) shouldn't justify breaching their right to privacy.

And obviously vested interests are going to disagree with him. They're all going to have to start paying fair market price for access to the data that the government formerly subsidized. Should we ignore them? Of course not, they raise valid points. But it needs to be noted that they have a financial interest in continuing the current regime.

Emily

When Cons show up it's like it's all news to them. They've never heard of this before, and expect you to explain it to them over and over every time.
Jan

It's one of their traditional ways to disrupt discussions. But you're not supposed to notice.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

"It's one of their traditional ways to disrupt discussions"…
–I'm not disrupting any discussion, I'm actually involved in the discussion. It just so happens not on the side that you advocate.

"But you're not supposed to notice."
–By posting something on the internet, in reply to a comment, I'm actually trying to make sure that everybody notices.

As the kids say…. "next?"
Robert

The problem with buying your information – means that the information you buy can be biased to fit the purpose and is difficult to check. Any policy discusion based on this data risks becoming like many of these message boards, partisan babble.
Emily

You've never bought information, have you
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

I'd agree with you, except that census data is so old by the time it's published, that it's inherently inaccurate. And the fact that so few are actually prosecuted for not filling it out makes it effectively voluntary, if not legally.
Robert

You are definately right that the information will not be perfectly accurate, but it provides a snapshot that can provide a basis to check the validity of additional more detailed data from other sources, if necessary.

You are also right about it being essentailly voluntary. So why change it. For me, main issue is that it appears a topdown decision was made on a seemingly minor issue without having consulted those who should be responsible for it. Making this simple decision without the support of statistics canada, esentially has made their job more difficult.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

1) I'm not a "Con" as in Convict, Contortionist, Conservative, Con-Artist, Conduit, Conversationist. So if that was meant as slander, chalk it up to a "whoops".

2) When you suggest that I've never heard of "this" before, and I want you to explain to it to me. Ya, you're right. What the f-bomb is "this" that needs to be explained to me? I mean, I understand what "this is" when I'm holding a beer in my hand. What is the "this" that I don't understand, which you don't describe?

3) The day I need you to explain something to me, is the day that I don't know what "this" is, and when the "they" are angry at me.

Thanks for educating me.
Emily

Con is an abbreviation, just like Lib. Hey, you guys chose the name, not me.

Something else Cons do is pretend confusion. They especially like to do it over simple English words like 'this.'

Thank you for admitting you know very well what's being discussed, and have simply been wasting our time.
practical mom

Without a mandatory census that encompasses the questions asked on the long form, the data that is currently used will not be available at any price. A voluntary survey will never have the same validity.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

I must respectfully disagree. Most of the data from the long form could be acquired by other means (ie. tax returns, department data, commerce surveys, etc). And there are many large polling companies out there that are more than capable of getting a random sample of a community on any subject.

As far voluntary surveys vs. legally binding surveys, there is no evidence to suggest that the threat of some penalty encourages people to answer questions truthfully. There is evidence that perhaps people distort the data to their personal preference though.
Emily

And again, you recite everything that's already been debunked.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

What, exactly did I "recite" that has been debunked? That data can be compiled from gov't depts that compile data? Or that polling companies compile polling data? Or that laws compel people to accurately fill out a survey?

1) Governments have more data on us, without a quinquennial survey. These government departments run themselves just fine without relying on census data.

2) Polling companies have been successful for generations, polling people. And yes, it's funny that people answer personal questions when not threatened with jail time.

3) Voluntarily filling our a survey suggests that the filler-outer is not being coerced.

Now, you could easily disagree with this premise if you believe that the government is supreme to individuals, private enterprise should be controlled by government, and individual liberty should be suppressed in the interests of "the greater good".
Emily

Again, you ask for information that's already been posted many times, and has been media news for over a week now.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Being the patient sort, I will again explain the problem with your theory.

1) Governments have more data on us, without a quinquennial survey. These government departments run themselves just fine without relying on census data.

In other words, you would like to disregard the privacy legislation we currently have in place in order that when you fill out your tax return and want to justify a reduction in taxes due to the enormous money you spend on prescription medications (including Viagra), medical supplies (including Depends) and elective surgery (including a boob job) you can relax in the security of knowing that information isn't going anywhere. No, instead you would like to have that *truly intrusive* information pored over by various people instead of collecting less intrusive details if only you weren't insulted by someone requiring you not be so goddamn lazy and fill out a form!

Okay, please understand that this is about the fifth time I've said something similar in the last two days. Patience does run thin after awhile.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

Oh for goodness sake. I didn't even mention taxes! My point was that the government has more data on us already than the long form would give them anyway, so why not use it?

And why are you such a Viagra/Depends/boob job junkie anyway? IMHO that should be paid for with your own damn dollars, and why the hell should I subsidize your husbands non-functioning penis/bunghole or your non-appealing breasts.
Emily

Yes, the dept should spend a fortune going around gathering data from hundreds of sources, rather than just asking you…on one form…maybe twice in your lifetime.

[rolls eyes].
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

Do you really think it's more expensive for the government to reorganize existing data, than it is to go out and do an entirely new survey and organize that data? Or were you intentionally trying to not make any sense?

[does a back flip just for fun while rolling eyes and waving hands in air like just don't care]
Brian

YES! OF COURSE IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE!!!

Obviously you know nothing about:

1) How governments collect and store data
2) Problems with matching legacy systems
3) Privacy rules which specify that information taken by individual departments can only be used for the purpose for which it's originally collected

Sorry, pal. Give up. No shame in not knowing everything.

Signed,

- A Tory who thinks dumping the mandatory long form is dumb policy.
McC

thanks Brian, so few can express this so concisely.

cheers.
practical mom

Well, I doubt there is any evidence to suggest that people are absolutely truthful when volunteering answers. If you have any evidence I really would appreciate a link. Personally, if someone interrupts my family's dinner, I find the option of giving silly answers very enticing. I don't follow through, though, but I'm sure someone, somewhere has done so.

It would be necessary to change many laws which prohibit these other collectors of data from disseminating their data. It could be done but the government has not mentioned any plans to do so. Also, several posters have noted that the different data bases are not compatible and it would take time and money to make them so. Others have suggested that this method would be more expensive for smaller municipalites and actually increase Canadians overall tax burden. As well, this would not allow the same ability to correlate data. You could establish how many households earn $X but could not link that to education, house size, or any other piece of data.

These arguments have been mentioned several times in many threads so maybe you just aren't interested in factual discussion.
Shiner

We're not talking about "any subject", we're talking about determining the profile of the community itself. And no, no polling company exists that can gather this information because of self-selection bias. Period. This isn't something you can disagree with, respectfully or otherwise. It is a fact. You cannot generate an accurate demographic profile without a mandatory survey.

Your second point is entirely valid if we start from the premise that a significant part of the Canadian population consists of paranoid nutters.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

Self selection bias is an inherent problem with all surveys, and it is a problem with the way the census has been done for years. We say it's mandatory, but most people who refuse it don't get punished. So it's effectively been voluntary, but not legally voluntary (ie, why did Warren Kinsella not have to fill out the long form?) By making the law reflect reality, nothing is being damaged.

And according to recent polls, 49% of Canadians are "paranoid nutters" according to you.
Emily

When it's voluntary, the very rich, and the very poor don't answer it.

So we get a portrait of the middle class, and not even all of them.

Because a few people are paranoid nutters.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

So poor people and rich people are all paranoid nutters. Gotcha.

Personally, I'd take as evidence the fact that large tracts of society find it intrusive to be evidence of the fact that the thing is intrusive, and therefore shouldn't be forced on people.

Or we can write everybody off as paranoid nutters, only if they're rich. Or poor.

Scott G

whatever, Tony is a good guy. If your a liberal and want to kick someone, kick your own party. Maybe its time for you to switch. There is too much hate in the liberal party, too much loss, theft and back stabbing.
—
So let Tony alone, he is working for the people. What else could you ask for. (no that wasn't a question.)

Emily

Please be serious.
Jan

You don't own the Deerhurst Lodge, by any chance? How's the sale going?

Jenn_

Nope, I still can't get past the 'entitled' bit. Maybe because he said it twice.

"I am entitled to assume that they are comfortable with those options… "

"and I am entitled to believe that when a deputy minister — in this case the chief statistician — gives me a set of options, he is comfortable with those options."

Is a Minister of the Crown entitled to ask questions of his staff in such a way that he gets answers to specifics, without an overall recommendation? I would guess that this must happen fairly regularly, so I would say yes. (i.e., "I want you to order only the cheap pencil leads. Please give me a list of options on where such leads could be purchased.")

Is a Minister of the Crown entitled to believe that the staff approves of his plan when he does so? I would think not. (i.e., the staff member thinks, "Oh, great, the cheap pencil leads do nothing but break, plus they make an annoying scratching sound which will have our people intentionally breaking them even faster. We will be going through twice as many leads if we do that. Sigh, but he's the Minister and what he says goes")

Anon 001

Tony Clement will be gone in the next Cabinet shuffle, probably off to Vet Affairs or Revenue or something like that.

Emily

I dunno. This is shaping up to be The Summer Of Tony Clement.

It's a cinch everyone in Canada has heard of him by now.

Maybe he's making a bid for the leadership again?

Richard

He is entitled to his entitlements.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

This whole thing was bad enough when they were doing it in large part as an unrequested soother for the dizzy edge of the Reform wing. But now they're digging their heels in because they can't bear to lose face, which is an even more insulting reason to trash the continuity and reputation of Statistics Canada, with all the collateral damage that goes along with it.

I dearly hope we have an effective opposition soon.

Jan

Well, Flaherty has just come out in support of cancelling the long form. Looks like we can assume Harper is not backing down.

http://intensedebate.com/people/BGLong BGLong

His cabinet would be the last to know. If any change were to come it would all
be revealed via Dimitri's tweet.

Jan

Sorry – I forgot about rhe chain of command. Why would the Finance Minister need to know about changes in data collection anyway?

http://intensedebate.com/people/DerekPearce DerekPearce

Not in advance of the rest of us he wouldn't– the PMO has a habit of not keeping it's own Ministers apprised of changes coming down the pipe. They get to find out at the same time as the rest of us, with the added bonus of having to defend these decisions while surprised.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SirJohn_Eh SirJohn_Eh

It is too important to Harper that the long form goes. He isn't backing down. The summer of (another) weak opposition, with higher potential for election anouncement next sitting means he has to do it now. His idealogical policy directions require that the data opposing it is weak or non-existent.

Don

I find it rather fascinating that some would object to providing the information requested in the census document, yet are willing to bare the most intimate details of their lives through the "Air Miles" programme, in hopes of a "free" plane ride.

Emily

Personally I think it's fear of tax knowledge.

What they say in the census may not tally with what they say in their tax return.

chet

So,

Clement has been in the spotlight for, what, the last three, weeks.

He performs the most heroic act in our political lifetimes, and…that's right…it's like it never happened in "leftosphere".

Too funny!

Emily

Well hon, he admitted he did nothing.

I really wish you guys would keep up.
Dee

Heroic: Tony Clement and his family and friends helping a woman who was drowning.

Non-heroic: Tony Clement lying about the effectiveness of a voluntary long-form census, and his interactions with Statistics Canada, leading to the unfortunate resignation of its' head statistician, Munir Sheikh.

What is being discussed is the latter issue. The former issue, no matter how heartwarming it may be, has no bearing on the latter issue. Thus the call for Mr. Clement's resignation.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok Sean

Seriously, are you drunk?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Ricard_S_Argent Richard_S_Argent

"He performs the most heroic act in our political lifetimes"

My word, somebody's been hitting the sauce on a lazy Sunday huh?

chet

Could there be a more startling example of leftist propaganda?

A genuine news story that dares cast a conservative in a heroic light, and….birds chirping.

Today's "progessive" media would make socialist Pravda proud.

Emily

He admitted himself he did nothing. Stop babbling about last century newspapers.
Blues Clair

The story has been reported in the CBC, Toronto Star, CTV…

Good for Tony Clement and family, happy ending.

Lucky it wasn't Harper, poor lady would have had to wait for his official photographer to show up.

chet

Sooo, Macleans Blog is expempt? Is this an outriight admission that this place is nothing but a leftist social gathering place designed to trash all things conservative…like say…"journolist"?

I wonder what the inherently apolitical shareholders would think about thier assets being coopeted by a bunch of letsists intent on utilizing corporate assets for purely partisan political gains?

Emily

Actually Macleans is considered right wing.

And since Tony actually did nothing, there isn't anything to report.

Holly Stick

Ooh, good shot, Blues Clair!

http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

Ladies and gentlemen, I hereby nominate chet as the Baghdad Bob of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Emily

I'll second that.

Calgary Junkie

Former Chief Statistician, Dr. Ivan Fellegi, speaking on CBC's "The House", Sat. July 24th … excerpt:

"… the law places Statistics Canada under the direction of the Minister responsible. But it's been a VERY strong tradition, and I've served MANY governments since I was appointed by the Mulroney gov't .
And it's been VERY clear, MORE than an unwritten rule.

The first time I met a Minister I always clarify that there is an arms-length relationship between the Minister and Statistics Canada. …

I thought we had the best of both worlds, because there ARE advantages to being a deputy Minister … we WERE plugged in to the dputy minister community., But it was clearly undestood by VERY strong tradition, that we had an arms-length relationship…"

So that probably explains a lot of the friction between StatsCan and Tony Clement, The new boss Harper probably didn't accept this "very strong tradition" of an "unwritten rule" about an "arms-length" relationship.

Listen to the whole interview here: http://www.cbc.ca/thehouse/index.html

Emily

Much of Canadian govt is not written down and instead relies on tradition, and 'gentlemen's agreements'.

Of course that only works if the PM is a gentleman.

Standing By

And if the government of the day isn't on a mission to wreck government.

Emily

Very true. We've never needed all this in writing before, but apparently we should rethink that.

A sort of 'in the event of thuggery' clause.

wilson

'the law places Statistics Canada under the direction of the Minister responsible'

In this case, it is written down Emily.
Dr. Ivan Fellegi is the problem.

Emily

Again I see you aren't paying attention.

Just being paid.

Anon 001

Ivan Fellegi clearly is a Taliban supporter.
wilson

'And it's been VERY clear, MORE than an unwritten rule.'

What's very clear is Fellegi thinks he STILL runs the show and suffers from a superiority complex.
The unwritten rule just happens to be in writting,
the Minister responsible is the boss, not the unelected civil servant.

And the 2011 long form census will be voluntary.

Emily

Dream on.

chet

Wherry whistles while the conservative heroism tanks roll by,

and I'm "Bagdad Bob" for daring to point out the A1 Abrams.

Again, welcome to today's impartial news "analysis".

Emily

Go sober up, chet.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Sir_Francis Sir_Francis

Hey Dimitri! Where are you, buddy? The bailiff's got a delivery for you…

wilson

Wherry didn't cut and paste this Khadr story.?
Here is another example, similar to Fellegi and the StatsCan brawl, of an appointed servant of the Canadian taxpayer,
talking way too big for their britches,
and being told so.

Judge Zinn demanded Harper keep trying to fix things up nice with Khadr, until she was happy.
The federal court of appeal:

He (Judge C.J. Blais) agreed with the government’s contention that the judge was overstepping his boundaries.

“For a member of the judiciary to give himself the power to ‘supervise’ the exercise of the Crown’s prerogative … could be seen, in itself, as an affront to the division of powers that would cause irreparable harm.”

The judge said the perceived violation of the government’s authority would do it more harm than halting the decision would do Khadr

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Court+ruling+cle…

Emily

Is there some reason Cons want to discuss everything but the census?

Orson Bean

Probably the same reason Wherry and his Liberal chorus want to discuss nothing but the census. It's called partisan hackery.

http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

This is getting mighty tiresome Wherry.The usual anti Harper crowd continues to express their vitriol for all things Harper. I hope it helps get the frustration off their chests. Can you imagine the comments after Harper gets his majority?

http://intensedebate.com/people/DerekPearce DerekPearce

Keep imagining, because that majority just ain't gonna happen.
http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

I know its one of the first things I'll think about when I wake up in my mansion.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

To be honest, at the start of this, I thought Tony was a guy… about my age who was pretty cool about his musical tastes but had different starting points about political stuff.

How, now, is this guy any less than a lying scumbag?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

A couple of months ago, there was some panel or committee or something that the government was assembling — I don't recall now what the purpose was — and after the names were released it was noted and pointed out that they were all men.

As one would fairly expect, questions were asked about why this was the case. And it fell to Tony Clement to explain. He said that they had a process that produced this list, and while there was no effort to keep women off it, there was also no part of the process dedicated to checking for such extreme imbalance. He basically admitted that it wasn't looked at, and that he wasn't sure why, and he acknowledged that it was obviously a issue that needed to be addressed.

I have no idea what the follow-up was, or whether they really did anything real with it or not, but I was impressed with how Clement handled the issue when it arose. He was sincere and straightforward (at least what I saw of him at that time). He basically said "this looks like a mistake, we're going to find out if it is in fact a mistake, and then we're going to do whatever needs doing", and seemed to mean it.

Compare and contrast with the census crisis.

mstedu

Gotta love those politicians they know what's best , right tony… not

Statistics Canada has won plaudits from the world's top statisticians for the rigorous checks and balances it employs to keep its data from being tainted by political whims.

One need only look to Europe to see the pitfalls of politicians meddling with data.

The European Union blamed government interference and shoddy accounting practices for serious errors in Greek deficit data last year.

Fudged deficit projections by Greece's statistics agency helped bring on Europe's debt crisis, which shook world markets as well as confidence in the euro.

A condition of Greece's bailout package was that the country to create an independent statistics agency before it received any rescue loans.

Other European officials have called for greater autonomy for national statistical agencies. The chair of Italy's statistics institute has said agencies like his should have the same independence as central banks.