- Jun 11, 2003Hello Everyone:
Gordon Watts has responded to my e-mail to dist-gen this morning. His
comments are reproduced below, for your information.
Just a couple of short comments regarding your posting. You have
obviously downloaded the PDF version of Bill S-13 and have misread at
least one thing.
In your reference to historians having " . . . their research project
approved by a person who is a member of a category of 20 persons
prescribed by regulation, and . . . sign an undertaking . . . " -- if
you have another look at the PDF document you will find that the 20 is,
in fact a line number for the document. The clause actually reads:
" . . . their research project approved by a person who is a member of a
category of persons prescribed by regulation, and . . . sign an
undertaking . . . "
My understanding is that you are correct in the assumption that a mayor
of a city could be one of those giving the approval. The National
Archivist, and the Chief Statistician are also included in those who
could give approval.
You are also correct in stating that the wording of the "undertaking"
has not been officially published. It was, however, read to me over the
telephone by Jeff Paul, Administrative Assistant to Senator Lorna
Milne. My recollection of what it stated is provided on a link of the
Post 1901 Census Project Website at
Follow the link for information relating to Bill S-13. Don't take my
recollection as 100% accurate as I did not record the conversation with
Jeff Paul, but it will be reasonably close.
While we are advised that the chances of our seeing complete removal of
the 'informed consent' clause is remote we must continue to press our
parliamentary representatives to do just that. It certainly will not be
removed if we just accept the assumption that efforts in that direction
will be doomed and we do not continue to try.
Thanks for keeping your list of people informed.
- << Previous post in topic