“Your papers, please!”

We’ve all seen the movies in which uniformed government officials demand that citizens produce identity cards and other documents.

Implied in those often nerve-wracking scenes is that the protagonist has to somehow escape detection in order to defuse the bomb, stop the war, save the day.

But carrying anything more than a driver’s license in Canada is never necessary, and even if you do have to turn yours over to a police officer who stops you, it reveals nothing more than the fact that you need glasses to drive and that you have unpaid parking tickets.

Which is why Canadians can go about their business confident that nobody’s minding it.

Not so in many other countries, including Nordic European nations where census taking has been abandoned for the collection of personal information through “administrative data.” In Finland, everybody gets an ID code and electronic chip card. Not only does its national Population Registry require citizens to inform the government of every change of address, the card must be used in bank transactions and the payment of wages.

In Sweden, it’s the tax authorities who maintain population data which include marital and family relationships as well as other personal data.

That’s far more invasive of citizen privacy than Canada’s mandatory long-form census which, until 2006, was sent to one in five households.

But the minority Conservative government intends to do away with it, claiming that its 53 questions are too “intrusive” because, among them, are queries on how many bedrooms your dwelling has and who pays the hydro bill.

That despite how no census form can be linked to any citizen — unlike how, in Finland and Sweden, a person’s identity code reveals everything.

“The census cannot track who has given what answer,” says Armine Yalnizyan, senior economist with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, one of hundreds of organizations, including business, non-profits and provincial and municipal governments, who object to the elimination of the long-form mandatory questionnaire. “Talk about Big Brother: Administrative data are way more invasive of your privacy than anything that currently exists with the census.

“It’s deadly easy to figure out what a person’s personal history is—not only every five years but every month on some things. An administrative database has your education history, your health history, all sorts of data that can be cross tabulated in a deadly way. You can go from utilities to all sorts of other things. .”

What’s more, there’s never been a breach of privacy or security at StatsCan.

The proposed replacement, which will cost taxpayers an additional $5 million for distribution and $25 million for advertising, will be voluntary, and will, according to statisticians, result in inaccurate and biased data. So it’s not as if the government’s move will cut costs or result in better data.

“Any administrative data base is all about you, the individual,” explains Yalnizyan. “The census is about us, people like us and our educational background or ethno racial background. It tells stories about the people.

“In a country that is as large as Canada is geographically, and as small as Canada in terms of population, it is incredibly important to make sure that everybody’s story is getting captured, which is what the census does by census tract.”

The far-outnumbered supporters of the mandatory long-form’s elimination, including the conservative Fraser Institute and the National Citizens Coalition, once headed by PM Stephen Harper himself, insist that census-taking is obsolete, pointing to Denmark, Sweden and Finland as examples of the way to go.

Said the Fraser Institute in a statement: “While some of these (census) questions are justified, much of the information is already collected through other methods such as annual income tax returns, passports, driver licenses, social insurance numbers, and birth certificates. For instance, every year 90% of Canadians over 20 years of age complete income tax returns.”

The National Citizens Coalition’s statement said, “This issue is not about statistics — this is about privacy, democracy, and the use of coercion in a free-society . . . . There are many ways for our government to accurately collect information without the mandatory long-form census — and without invading your privacy.”

But if it’s necessary for good social policy and business decision-making to measure neighbourhood wealth, household crowding, immigration and ethnicity, and even utility usage, how does government go about gathering and compiling the data? What would that mean in practice — aside from a bureaucratic nightmare?

Here a slightly tongue-in-cheek look at how the government might soon stick its nose in your business to gather crucial data that now comes from questions on the 2006 mandatory long-form census.

Q. 1—6 ask you to fill out the names, relationships and ages of those living in your household.

These are essentially the same questions on the mandatory short-form census. However there is a crucial appendix, about the dwelling itself.

Section H is all about your dwelling, including its size, age, type, condition as well as the mortgage payments or rent paid. There are questions about taxes, condo fees and utility costs.

In order to include this information, the database would have to incorporate information from municipal tax rolls, real estate transactions and listings, building permits, property deeds, leases, mortgage contracts and gather information from hydro, gas and phone companies — all data linked to you.

Q. 7 and 8 relate to the form-filler’s physical and mental condition, including hearing, sight, mobility, learning and emotional health, and whether they affect his or her ability to work, study, travel around and participate in leisure activities.

The other way to obtain that information is through a person’s medical records, personnel files at work, disability payments or benefits, insurance pay-outs and/or usage of private or public transit. Hand it over!

Q. 9-16 ask about place of birth, citizenship, immigration status and language spoken.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

To obtain this information, a registry of birth certificates, naturalizations and even border arrivals would likely have to be plugged into a database.

Q. 17 asks about “ethnic or cultural” ancestry.

This one’s tough, especially if one’s citizenship goes back generations, and is multi-cultural. It’s possible that this information could be gathered through schools and colleges, and in the workplace, and then filed with government.

Q. 19 wants to know about race. Are you white, black, southeast Asian, south Asian, Arab, etc.

See Question 17, and smile for the camera.

Q. 23 and 24 are about where one has lived in Canada, in the previous year and five years prior to that.

Either do what is done in some Nordic countries, which involves mandatory registering of every move with the population registries, or have the phone and cable companies send government a copy of your bills.

Q. 26-32 get into education, what level you attained, what you studied, and where you studied or apprenticed.

This one is simple. All schools must file annual report cards on students with government.

Q. 33 seeks to measure unpaid work performed in doing domestic chores, or caring for children, or elderly or disabled family members.

Not an issue. That’s because it is the only question that the government has eliminated from the next census, a move that has resulted in criticism from economists and feminists because it will result in no consideration of women’s productivity or the volunteer sector.

Q. 34-50 focus on employment, including the length, place and nature of work, languages spoken, mode of commute as well as the type of enterprise, family-owned, farm, self-employment and so on.

All employers must submit detailed personnel files to government, including each worker’s main activities. Needless to say, if you collect UI the government already knows much of this.

Q. 51 and 52 are all about income, including salary, pension, alimony and investments.

Well this one’s obvious. Your tax return. There’s already an option to check off a box that allows StatsCan to go into your tax files if you prefer to save time and skip this section.

Q. 53 relates to privacy, asking if you would consent to having your information made public in 92 years.

You are now free to say no, and be guaranteed that the information will die with you. In Europe, there is no such assurance that your information will remain private. Indeed, in Finland for instance, much of your personal data is available to anybody who asks for it.

All of this is why Yalnizyan says “This joined-up European approach would be difficult to attempt here, and probably unsellable politically once people realize what reliance on administrative data means. In fact it is likely the Conservatives and most particularly the libertarian base that supports their current position on the census who would most resist such a move.”