Beyond The Commons

 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

Send in the strategists and psychics

by Aaron Wherry on Monday, August 16, 2010 4:53pm - 0 Comments

Grant Burns considers the state of the census debate.

It’s worrying to see the way the media debate is evolving.  Isn’t the census debate more important than pollsters predicting elections, “for it” or “against it” polarizing, jaundiced speculation, and humour that inspires cynicism?

Tags: , , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • Crit_Reasoning

    Grant Burns seems to be doing a great job as a paid intern at Samara. He'll have a bright future in Canadian journalism if he can survive for the next few years in a tough industry.

  • Emily

    Everything in the country is 'read' by the polls anymore.

    Every govt decision, every comment by a politician, even by what they wear.

    It would be nice if we based our govt on knowledge rather than recorded whims in any given week.

  • tobyornotoby

    Okay hold the Interpresses: Grant Burns is worried that " satirizing politics has been linked to cynicism." (look up his reference, I didn't)

    Before we all start biting dogs could it be the other way round?

  • tedbetts

    "It’s worrying to see the way the media debate is evolving. Isn’t the census debate more important than pollsters predicting elections, “for it” or “against it” polarizing, jaundiced speculation, and humour that inspires cynicism?"

    I don't know the answer to that. Has anyone seen any polling numbers on this question yet? I can't form an opinion if I don't have a poll.

    • Emily

      Cons dropping in the polls has been discussed many times on here.

    • Holly Stick

      Okay, was that cynicism inspired by humour, or humour inspired by cynicism?

      • tedbetts

        Cynimour! Sarcacyn! Witticism! (or perhaps witlessness?)

        • Holly Stick

          cynthesis?

          • McC_

            point!

  • knick

    This essay is bang on. Is anybody in the news media paying attention besides present company plus a few others?

    • Dishin' it…

      Apparently not. Wells comes off as pretty defensive, and this from someone who's been known to complain, often at length, about the tendency of the media to focus on the horserace over substance.

      • McC_

        that Wells quote was completely out of context, Wells was talking about the mutually contradictory arguments (sometimes simultaneously) being used by supporters of the Government's decision to scrap the mandatory long form, that the decision means nothing (the voluntary census will work just as well, Canadians will happily participate, Canadians love their government, etc.) and means a lot (Canadians hate government meddling and this is a government responding, it's first shots in the battle to destroy the welfare state, victory for libertarianism, etc). Wells says no, the census change either means something or nothing.

  • chet

    Debate?

    The leftist media has not framed this issue as a debate, wherein there are two competing sides, coming from two different persectives. (Those generally being the statist on one side and libertarian on the other, with various incarnations in between).

    Rather the media has largely framed this as a being between legitimate and illigitimate, the illigitimate being the libertarian position (though they're framed as political manipulators absent bona fides of real libertarians).

    This is because the media has been for some time now a largely leftist statist institution.

    No debate, just right and wrong, with the..ahem …right, being wrong.

    • Emily

      That's because in the real world, people don't decide important things on their 'gut'.

      • Mark R

        Ahem!
        “I’m not looking for a fight,” Mr. Ignatieff said “I just know in my guts as I go across the country that we have an EI system that is not purpose-built for the most serious economic crisis since 1945. And we have to fix it and we have to fix it now with a temporary eligibility standard of 360 hours.”

        Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=15…

        • Emily

          Well in Iggy's case it's a manner of speaking…with Cons, it's a way of life.

          • wilson

            British or American mannerism?

          • Emily

            Since he's Canadian….and catering to the absurd proposition he has to appear in jeans and swig beer from a can….it would be Canadian

          • wilson

            Well, he could wear a flag that he thinks looks like a can of beer……….

          • Emily

            Well, it does look like the label on one….and Eugene Forsey dismissed it as a 'dish towel from Woolworth's'

    • Pat

      Seriously? Why is it conservatives resort to false claims of bias when the facts are not on their side?

      The media have presented the views of the experts – making the long form census voluntary is a waste of time and money, and the views of the government and their supporters – we don't think people should have to answer anonymous questions for the good of the country.

      It is not the media's fault the experts all say one thing.

      • hollinm

        Pat…..how many editorials have we seen in the Globe for example. How much time has been given to all of the anti voluntary census. This is not objective reporting and allowing the people to decide on which side of the issue they sit. Rather it is advocacy journalism where day after day the headlines are torqued and the columnists ensure that Canadians know on which side of the debate they sit. Advocacy journalism. Thats what its called. David Akin admitted it on the Rutherford Show the other day. The media is in perpetual opposition. No balance needed make sure that the government is maligned at every opportunity to ensure Canadians know the preferred party of the media.

        • Emily

          It's a news story. Just one you don't like

          It's not a question 'for the people to decide'

          Like someone else said here today, this isn't a burger order at Harveys

          • wilson

            'It's not a question 'for the people to decide'
            Emily, are you serious?

          • Emily

            Yes, quite serious.

            Lots of things aren't 'for the people to decide'

            Evolution, relativity, gravity….or the need for a valid census.

          • Richard

            Gravity is a perfect example of media bias. The media on this whole planet has been run by a bunch of pinko Gallileists for far too long. In order for media coverage to be fear, their must be one gravity denier for every gravity believer in every published story. Otherwise it's pinko bias.

          • Emily

            AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

            Thank you…cracked me right up!

          • Mark
          • Lord Kitchener's Own

            Well, you can't really argue with her on this one.

            I mean, I don't remember the Tories letting the people decide anything on this one. It wasn't in any election platform of the Tories. Last time there was a census, it was under the Tories, and no body said anything. The Tories did a whole REVIEW of StatsCan and the census and didn't find any reason to make this change. They just quietly snuck this in on the Friday before a long weekend and hoped no one would notice.

          • Jan

            Let's have a referendum on Statscan's sampling methodology then, shall we?

        • E_B_

          We are up to something like 300+ organizations who have opposed this arbitrary move by the government, compared to somewhere around a half a dozen who support it. And, of the ones who support the government move, the significant one uses Census data itself.

          Considering the scope of the response to the issue, I would say it is getting very appropriate coverage. Compound that with Clement's lame and witless defense of the move, and the inability of the government to mount a legitimate response, don't blame the media for a problem that the Conservatives made for themselves.

          • wilson

            300 organizations say…..
            so you agree with Emily, there are somethings that people just should not be given a voice, organizations should rule the day?

          • Lord Kitchener's Own

            And the Tories gave the people a voice on this how exactly?

            By never ever bringing it up in public and then sneaking it in to the order papers on the Friday before a long weekend and hoping no one would notice???

          • wilson

            You have a voice thru your elected representative.
            When Lib MPs won't show up to vote….?

          • Emily

            When was the vote held on this?

          • wilson

            Would the Liberals show up if there was a vote?

          • Emily

            I said when was the vote?

          • wilson

            Sounds like Jack is organizing one as soon as Parliament resumes.
            First Jack and Gilles and Iffy will debate amongst themselves,
            and then ….who knows, maybe the Liberal Express will get another 5 week run.

          • Emily

            Oh I doubt it will ever come up for a vote with the Cons.

            It will just be reinstated later when the Libs return to power.

          • wilson

            It was in wherry's Grant Burns piece above, Emily:

            ''…The musings forced the election issue into questions put to opposition representatives, specifically NDP leader Jack Layton and senior Liberal Bob Rae, essentially forcing a response. In this way, the census debate has been reduced to a popularity contest. Who’s winning the census debate and will that sway votes?…''

            Burns linked to this article http://www2.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=…

          • Emily

            Not what it says, but thanks for trying.

          • E_B_

            Those organizations are made up of people are they not? Are you saying that organizations like the many church groups who are opposed don't speak for their people?

            And, clearly, all the polls are saying that the Conservatives are wrong on this issue. The majority clearly feels that the Census is a civic duty that is a responsibility required to ensure that our government has the knowledge to properly run this country.

            Why are you ignoring the very clear reaction? Why is the opinion of one Prime Minister and a very small number of followers more important (an organization) than the overwhelming numbers who oppose this?

          • Richard

            Because organizations don't contain "people". A more accurate reflection of society's wishes can be found in Tony Clement's list of imaginary Twitter followers, both of whom have been given media validation here, the Globe and elsewhere.

        • wilson

          Advocacy poll taking too, this is the torqued headline:

          "Hostility Towards Census Changes Remains the Norm in Canada"

          And this is a leading question:

          "As you may know, some provincial premiers have criticized the federal government’s decision to eliminate the mandatory long form census, and the head of Statistics Canada has quit his post. Thinking about this, what do you think the federal government should do?"

          (5 weeks of non-stop census bashing:)
          government should stick with decision/ don't know
          Cons voters 59%
          Lib voters 21%
          NDP voters 39%
          Bloc voters 29%
          Green voters 37% http://www.visioncritical.com/wp-content/uploads/…

          So who's winning?

          • Holly Stick

            Once again you are dishonestly conflating 'should stick' with 'don't know' and once again wilson, you have proven that you Harperites are liars.

          • wilson

            the voters that are NOT 'Hostile Towards Census Changes' would include the 'don't knows'

            Surprises that 39% of Dippers and 37% of Greens are not 'hostile', or swayed by the 'experts and organizations'??

          • Gayle

            No. don't knows don't know.

            Silly wilson.

        • Holly Stick

          That is the same argument AGW deniers make, in effect: 'Why don't the ill-informed opinions of of dishonest blogging amateurs with ideological political agendas get as much media attention as real scientists talking about real scientific results?'

          Stupid is stupid, and it deserves less attention. You want attention? First become less stupid.

          • wilson

            liberals debating the census

          • Emily

            'liberals' aren't debating it at all.

            It's not debatable.

        • tobyornotoby

          Yes, media should be giving equal time to stupidity and sense. Otherwise it is evidence of bias

        • Gayle

          Come on. The media are advocating for maintaining the mandatory long form census because ALL the evidence shows that it is necessary for the integrity of the census, and contains information that is important for the welfare of the country.

          If the media reported, and editorialized, that we need a government instead of anarchy, does that mean it is biased against anarchists?

          Get a grip. The evidence is against you guys. Deal with it and stop whining because the media are reporting the facts.

        • burlivespipe

          Funny, when it was Chretien's gov't getting the 'advocacy journalism' treatment ad hollowm was fine and dandy, altho we know he will deny the media did its job against the Liberals. Now shoe on other foot and hollowhead can't see what he stepped in.
          faux surprise.

  • Wascally Wabbit

    Grant Burns makes some excellent points – but surely – he is only cataloguing what has been said before – in fact – isn’t he the ultimate in Census Takers?
    I want my government to be making decisions based upon well rounded facts – not the hysteria that has accompanied both the Census issue and now the Sri Lakan immigrant issue!
    Conversely, I don’t want a government making decisions based upon idoelogical bias and unsupported conclusions. More than that – I don’t want my government being run by what more and more appear to be racists catering to any racist undertones they attempt to bring to the surface within our population!

    • Mike514

      government being run by what more and more appear to be racists catering to any racist undertones

      Any particular examples? Are you referring to the Sri Lankan immigrant issue?

      • wilson

        'racists catering to any racist undertones'
        that's the Liberal immigration debate

        • Holly Stick

          It's the observed behaviour of rightwing ideologues. Incidently, why did CTV have a white supremacist on giving his opinion without identifying his racist bias? http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2010/08/your-daily…

          • wilson

            How am I supposed to know, ask CTV news, they're the 'experts'?

      • Jan

        The veil issue. They've done it twice now – singling out Moslem women. Both times they didn't even know what the law was.

  • wilson

    Debate?
    Does this sound like there will be a debate in the House that 'includes' the views of citizens who find the census intrusive?

    ''Layton said he plans to be in touch with Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe to try and find a "common approach" on how the House of Commons can deal with the census. (do you see the Prime Minister included in this 'common touch'?)

    ''Rae said it shows that the government isn't concerned about the living conditions of Canadians, homelessness, housing, public institutions such as universities and hospitals and other public services.

    "Mr. Harper doesn't believe in government action so he would prefer not to see the facts about what's going on in Canada," the NDP leader said. "I think that's the more sinister dimension of this pigheaded approach they're taking."…….

    It's just like trying to have a debate over needed changes to immigration……
    debate… what are the chances of debate, really

    • Emily

      The census doesn't require 'debate'.

      Neither does immigration for that matter.

      • Holly Stick

        Not that Harper is capable of rational discussion on this matter. wilson, why didn't he invite their input BEFORE he made the stupid decision to wreck the census?

        • wilson

          ''…why didn't he invite their input BEFORE he made the stupid decision to wreck the census?''

          I don't know,
          but I doubt that would have changed a thing, from either side.

          • Gayle

            Well I agree with you there. See teh opposition has clearly demonstrated they make their decisions on what is good for the country, and the government…does not.

            Why would Harper change now?

          • Jan

            There can't be a debate unless Harper is honest about what is he is doing. You don't really think he's worried about coercion and intrusiveness, do you? Nobody can be that naiive.

    • Lord Kitchener's Own

      So, the Tories have decided that most debates will go against them, and THAT's why they don't want to debate anything???

      Ahhhh.

      So it was the DEMOCRATIC thing to do to say nothing about the census for years and years, never mention it in public, never mention it in a election platform and then sneak in a major change on the Friday before a long weekend and hope that no one would notice?

      Someone was CLEARLY scared of a debate on this issue, but I'd say that someone is a TORY.

      • wilson

        I haven't been afraid of debate LKO, even with the 'progressive hospitality' that Emily and Holly extend.
        But it's hardly a debate when the other side insists that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid.

        There is nothing stupid about having the opinion that my government, and all these self interested organizations are NOT 'entitled' to my personal information, against my will.

        • Emily

          You have a very odd idea of 'personal information'

        • Gayle

          It is hardly a debate when one side makes stuff up.

          Try relying on facts for a change.

        • Loraine Lamontagne

          A strange thing happened at home yesterday. My husband, now a retiree, had to complete some forms regarding private health coverage. One of the questions was about his drinking habits – has anyone, your spouse for example, ever suggested to you that you should drink less, he was asked.

          Now I know you are going to tell me that I don't have to get private health coverage – that it's my choice, etc. But I would disagree. Why would he (hubby) have to answer something like this to get coverage?

          What is sad about the census debate is that those who oppose the intrusion of privacy specifically oppose it because government is involved. Intrusion of privacy is everywhere – you can't walk downtown without being filmed, I read yesterday that somewhere in Asia they have distributing machines that take pictures of passerbys to better target their customers. But because it is Canada, your country, that asks you something then it's bad, just because it is your country.

    • danby

      wilson, don't forget this is a minority government and minority governments run on debate and conciliation.

      • wilson

        haven't forgot danby,
        and the opposition parties shouldn't forget that they answer to the people, not the experts

        And I am very pleased, that my government understands that.

        • Emily

          Um, actually they do answer to experts.

          Should they forget that, and put one of the 'people' in charge of a nuclear plant and it blows up….they'll know that within 5 seconds.

    • Richard

      Wilson – I don't see how you can compare the census with immigration. There is plenty of room for debate about immigration policies, about all kinds of issues related to the number of immigrants Canada accepts, the approval process, citizenship, compassion, economics, etc. I'm a Liberal and I am all for debating those issues. I've read a number of thought provoking pieces on why we should get rid of dual citizenship, why we should allow more immigrants, or fewer, whether "multiculturalism" means "ghettoization", questions about identity and Canadian nationalism, about importing foreign conflicts to our own communities. Those issues are up for debate in every newspaper and in every magazine in this country. There are plenty of diverse opinions on a number of issues, and none of them are empirically right or wrong – nor do many of them claim to be.

      The census debate – to the extent it is a debate – has at its heart a very simple mathematical fact about the accuracy of mandatory vs. voluntary sampling of data. Clement got it wrong. The he lied about it. Then he found nobody credible to back him up. Then the government trotted out the "going to jail argument", a red herring if there ever was one. You can't change the rules of math and statistical probability. That isn't a matter for debate. Nor can you suggest that Canadians are being thrown in jail over the census. It simply isn't the case.

      If you want to have a debate about whether or not the census is a violation of privacy, then go mad. That's a matter of opinion, albeit one that seems to have been soundly and overwhelmingly rejected by civil society. But go on. Keep talking,

      • Richard

        On a side note, without census data, where would you get the figures to justify your arguments against immigration…

    • Remain Calm

      Does this sound like there will be a debate in the House that 'includes' the views of citizens who find the census intrusive?

      How many people found the census intrusive before Harper decided it was? There seems to have been little support for this idea in the past.

      I would venture that many of the people who now state that the census is a violation of privacy are doing so out of loyalty to the Conservative party.

    • John D

      You can't include the citizens in the debate. Asking citizens things is intrusive.

  • wilson

    'Census debate is nothing new'

    'Discussion about the intrusiveness of the survey, as well as its cost and utility, has been around for decades, records reveal'
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/cens…

    • Emily

      Yeah, all Cons.

      • wilson

        Did you read the article, or just look at the picture?

        'Liberal Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent’s cabinet debated whether the provinces were freeloading off of Ottawa’s research, a suspicion voiced by Industry Minister Tony Clement during the current controversy.'

        • Emily

          But we kept the census, dearie.

          • Orson Bean

            But I guess St. Laurent's cabinet forgot that the census was not debatable.

            However, those unfortunate rubes in St. Laurent's cabinet didn't have Emily advising them, so I guess that was the problem.

  • wascally wabbit

    @Jane – you've done your stint of good work for today dear. Here, pass this to someone like Bill Curry – he can pile it on deeper and thicker – talk soon – Dimitri!

  • Calgary Junkie

    I wonder if Dion used census data when he created the greenthift ?

    • Calgary Junkie

      ooops … greenshift

      • Crit_Reasoning

        I thought you were lisping.

  • Emily

    It's not debatable at all, sorry.

  • Richard

    Shorter Grant Burns:

    Isn't it sad how a debate about the importance of statistical analysis has devolved into mere statistical analysis…

  • tobyornotoby

    I have to say I wish I was still as earnest as Grant Burns. I tried, I really did.

Previous

Next

From Macleans