Skip to main content

Conservative MP Maxime Bernier speaks during Question Period in the House of Commons on April 13, 2010.

Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press

Michael Ignatieff's team has produced a letter from 2006 in which then-industry minister Maxime Bernier provides a strong defence of the mandatory long-form census. And the Liberals are hailing it as proof the government's decision to scrap the form is based on ideology alone.

Ontario Liberal MP Bryon Wilfert received the letter from Mr. Bernier in August, 2006. It was in reply to letters Mr. Wilfert had sent from constituents, who were concerned about the length and detail of the 2006 census.

"Although I understand the concerns of your constituents about supplying what they view as personal information, I can assure you that all of the information collected by the census is needed and is used only for statistical purposes," Mr. Bernier says.

Story continues below advertisement

He goes on to explain that the questions are "essential for providing the information needed by governments, businesses, researchers and individual Canadians to shed light on issues of concern to all of us - employment, education, training, transportation, housing, immigration, income support, pensions for seniors, transfer payments, aboriginal issues and many more."

The Quebec Tory sounds like a Liberal. His support for the census mirrors the lines Canadians have heard from the opposition since the story broke in the summer. But Mr. Bernier has since changed his mind.

The release of this letter comes on the heels of reports refuting Mr. Bernier's claims that when he was minister he received about 1,000 complaints a day about the mandatory census. The CBC obtained documents showing that figure was exaggerated.

According to the documents, there were 882 total complaints about the 2006 long and short form census. On average, Statistics Canada received about 25 to 30 a year. Mr. Bernier has sinced backed off his claims.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter