français

EXTRACTS FROM HANSARD
-----
PROCEEDINGS OF CANADA'S SENATE

The following extracts have been taken from Hansard Records
of Canada's Senate for the 37th Parliament of Canada:

Debates of the Senate (Hansard)
2nd Session, 37th Parliament,
Volume 140, Issue 34
Tuesday, February 11, 2003
The Honourable Dan Hays, Speaker

---

Statistics Act

Bill to Amend-Second Reading

Hon. Lorna Milne moved the second reading of Bill S-13, to amend the Statistics Act. She said: Honourable senators, I am extremely proud to begin this afternoon by uttering the one sentence that I have been waiting for five years to say.

I rise, honourable senators, to speak at second reading as the sponsor of a government bill that will allow for the release of historic census records.

Hon. Senators: Hear, hear!

Senator Milne: As all but our newest contingent of senators are well aware, for the last five years I have been fighting an uphill battle with Statistics Canada to allow for the release of the nominal census returns for Canada's historic censuses. It is a battle I certainly did not seek out. On February 19 of last year, I told this place that this issue,

...deserves the leadership and the attention of the government. There is nothing I would like more than to have the government announce that it will take the necessary steps to balance the interests of all concerned. I still hope that this issue will be taken out of my hands.

Over the course of my speech that day, I was particularly harsh with Dr. Ivan Fellegi, maybe overly harsh, as Senator Murray pointed out at the time. Today, however, the Chief Statistician, the Minister of Industry and I all agree that this bill strikes an effective balance between all kinds of competing interests. It does so by providing a framework that allows wide-ranging research by historians, genealogists and others. It also specifically protects people's privacy in a number of ways. In addition, the bill clears the way for all Canadians to make an active and informed decision on whether or not to include themselves in Canadian history in the future. I am confident that we will all be there.

I will start, then, by outlining for our new colleagues, and I hope the rest of you will forgive me for this, what all of the fuss has been about over the last five years. I will move on to give honourable senators a quick update on what steps the government has already taken to release historic census information. I will provide you with probably more information than you really want to know about the bill, and then I will make my pitch for support of this bill by each and every one of us.

For hundreds of years Canadians have been using nominal census records, some dating as far back as 1666, to trace and research Canadian history. Up to 1993, the Canadian government had always made the 92-year-old census records available to the public through the National Archives. The pre-Confederation censuses of 1851 and 1861, and the national censuses 1871, 1881, 1891 and 1901 have been an invaluable resource for Canadian historians, genealogists and medical researchers, all of whom have found them to be the only primary source of information on Canadians in their family groups.

In 1998, as we approached the ninety-second anniversary of the 1906 special census that was taken for the West after it joined Confederation, when the Western provinces were formed out of the Northwest Territories, Statistics Canada was preparing to release the census when it hit a snag. The regulations had exactly the same confidentiality and disclosure regulations as all previous regulations had had, word for word. However, in 1905, the previous year, the government had passed a bill specifically giving those regulations the force of law. The regulations did make certain references to confidentiality, and they prevented the census takers of the time from disclosing any information that they collected in the course of their duties.

As a result of legal advice, Statistics Canada erred on the side of caution and announced it would not release the 1906 census as planned.

This upset historians and genealogists everywhere. They did agree that census takers were not allowed to go up and down the road gossiping about their neighbours. In fact, no genealogist or historian doubts that contemporary confidentiality was then and is now essential. They were adamant, however, that a different section in the same regulations was equally, if not more important. That section specifically stated that the nominal census returns would be stored in the Archives of the Dominion.

My response was fairly straightforward. I thought that this was a simple oversight the government could correct, and when the government did not correct it, I felt it was perfect for a private senator's bill. Little did I know that I would have to introduce that same bill twice and wait five years before getting to this day.

I worked closely with the genealogical and historical communities who collected petitions and pounded out e-mails to senators and to members of the other place to encourage government action. The progress was slow but steady. Over the course of the battle, I presented petitions with over 26,000 signatures to the Senate, all calling for action on this very important piece of Canadian history. While I was working in the grassroots, the government was doing its own homework on the issue.

In order to find a way out of the legal log-jam, the then Minister of Industry, John Manley, appointed an expert panel to study the issue and to report back to him. The conclusions of the expert panel were fairly straightforward. The panel, led by former Senator Lorna Marsden and former Supreme Court Justice Gerard LaForest, found that there was no legal impediment to the release of census records created prior to 1918. In 1918, however, the Census Act itself was amended to include the same confidentiality provisions as had been included in the earlier regulations governing the 1906 through 1916 censuses.

Although there was no mention of the National Archives in the 1918 act itself, the regulations governing the 1921 and all subsequent censuses, which had and still have the force of law, all made specific reference to the fact that the nominal census returns would be turned over to the Archives of the Dominion.

The expert panel concluded that the placing of this reference in the regulations, rather than in the bill, was not a specific policy choice but an oversight. The panel recommended that "for greater certainty'' the Statistics Act be amended to allow for the release of post-1918 census returns.

Although the report of the expert panel cleared things up in the minds of many people, it was still not sufficient to deal with the qualms harboured by Statistics Canada. Legal niceties notwithstanding, the Chief Statistician was genuinely concerned that Statistics Canada would take a hit to its reputation if it were seen to go back on its word. In my opinion, the reputation of Statistics Canada is worth fighting for. Stats Can is a world leader in statistics methodology and integrity. It is seen as a model around the world, and it relies on that reputation in the international community, and indeed within Canada, when it asks for highly sensitive and private information from business, industry, government and individuals. It became necessary to ensure that the decisions regarding the release of historic census records would not affect the broader present day or future operations of Statistics Canada.

In November 2001, Statistics Canada announced further public consultations by way of focus groups and town hall meetings. The goal was to measure the reaction that Canadians would have to the release of these census records. After a lot of study and hundreds of submissions, Statistics Canada was able to conclude sometime this past summer that post-1901 censuses could be released. All that had to be worked out were the details. It took another seven months to hammer out those details. I freely admit to all honourable senators that at times I was part and parcel of that delay. There were certain things that I felt had to be done. Fortunately, the Minister of Industry agreed with me that we would not proceed until some conditions had been met.

I am thrilled to tell you that the details have been worked out. Much has been accomplished and Bill S-13 is the result. At this time, I want to take a moment to recognize the valuable input of one particular senator at just the right time. On March 7, 2002, Senator Murray spoke on my bill and implored everyone to reach a consensus. He appealed to the Senate to continue to work to find a compromise that would accommodate all of the different perspectives. I took many of his comments to heart, and I hope he will be able to support this solution. It is precisely the type of compromise he suggested almost a year ago.

Let me turn now to what the government has already done to open historic census records to researchers. On Friday, January 24, the government released the entire 1906 census on-line and without restriction. Although Stats Canada felt there may be some ambiguity in the law governing the 1906 census, the government agreed there was no longer any need to withhold it. Ninety-seven years were long enough to deal with any privacy concerns. Since the 1906 census was only an agricultural census of three provinces, it contained information that was not highly intrusive. Also, it was the first census taken of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Therefore, the government agreed that, as part of the compromise solution, the 1906 census would be released immediately.

What has been the response of the public, honourable senators might ask? I will let the numbers tell the story. The government put the 1906 census online on January 24. In the first 12 days the census was on-line, the site received 4,870,569 hits. You may want to know how widespread that access was. We can learn that from the number of Internet service providers that accessed the site. For those who do not know what exactly a service provider is, Sympatico is one service provider with millions of subscribers. The Senate is a service provider, as is AOL, America On Line, and Roger's Cable. If every single one of the people who use only those four Internet service providers accessed the historic census, the National Archives would have recorded only four visits. On average, in the first 10 days that the 1906 census was on-line, the archives averaged 3,972 visits per day by servers. Not only is there a lot of research being done, but clearly that huge number indicates that the servers must come from all corners of the world.

Honourable senators may not be aware that the 1901 census has been on-line since June of last year. In the first seven months that the 1901 census has been on-line, June to December, the National Archives received a staggering 51,704,325 hits. There is absolutely no doubt that Canadians consider this census information vitally important, as it is to people around the world.

Between the 1901 and 1906 census, there are now over one half- million hits per day on the archives site. That is truly remarkable.

Honourable senators may ask what is the downside? Are there problems? After more that 56 million hits to the National Archives Web site, the exact number of complaints about the service lodged with the National Archives is zero. This speaks volumes about the value of this service and the importance that Canadians place on their history.

I will turn to the bill itself because it is the second and the most significant part of this compromise solution. The government has introduced this bill to govern the release of all censuses that have taken place after 1906, up to and including 2001, and all the censuses to be taken in the future, as well.

I believe, honourable senators, that you will find this framework both balanced and fair and, as it is quite a short bill, I want to take the time to walk you through it step-by-step, clause-by-clause. There are only three clauses.

The bulk of the bill adds to section 17 of the Statistics Act, which governs secrecy at Statistics Canada. The entire scheme that will govern the release of historic census records is set out at clause 1 of the bill, which adds new sections 17(4) through 17(10) to the Statistics Act. Clause 2 of the bill then adds section 17.1, which gives the Governor in Council certain regulatory powers. Clause 3, contains a penalty provision that applies solely to the disclosure of census information.

Proposed sections 17(4) to 17(10) govern the release of nominal records from censuses taken from 1911 to the present. Proposed section 17(4) gives genealogists and historians express but conditional permission to examine complete census records 92 years after the date of the census. The condition is that genealogists must sign an undertaking that will limit the information that they can publicly disclose. Historians must sign a similar undertaking as well, and must have their research proposal approved by an acceptable authority.

Under proposed section 17(5), those people who have the right to approve access to the census, must assess the scientific and public value of the research before allowing it to go forward. New section 17(6) goes on specifically to note that everyone who signs an undertaking under 17(4) must comply with the undertaking. Proposed section 17(7) states that everyone may freely examine and disclose census records 112 years after the date of the census. At that time, it is completely without restrictions.

There are a few key details to note regarding sections 17(4) through 17(7). These sections do not limit which parts of the nominal census returns a person can look at or even copy. It is the government's intention that the undertaking that genealogists and historians sign will limit the information that they can disclose to others, to what they call tombstone information. That includes name, address, age, date of birth where available, sex, marital status, origin, and occupation. This limitation on publication will last for 20 years. When those 20 years are up, 112 years after the date of the census, there will no longer be any limitations whatsoever on what can be published or who can access census material.

Proposed section 17(8) governs the release of census material from future censuses. The next census is scheduled for 2006. Section 17(8) limits the census data that can be examined to the returns of those people who consent to having their information released to the National Archives. In other words, on all future census forms, Canadians will be asked to give their prior informed consent to having their census returns stored in the National Archives. If a person withholds consent, their information shall forever remain private. These returns of future census results from now on will all be available, completely open, 92 years after the date of the census, as the ones 1901 and prior were available. No two-step procedure will be required for these census returns because each person will already have given their informed consent on the issue.

Proposed section 17(9) specifically allows those who examine the nominal census returns to publish the information that they find there. This will be limited by the undertaking that genealogists and historians have to sign for the period 92 to 112 years after each historic census.

Proposed section 17(10) is very important. It orders Statistics Canada to transfer the individual census returns to the National Archivist 92 years after each census date. The National Archivist will be responsible for regulating access to the records. I repeat. This fact is most important. Ninety-two years after a census is taken, the records will be transferred to the National Archives and the archivist will have care and keeping of those records.

Once the scheme for releasing historic census records is laid out in proposed section 17.1, the bill goes on to set out the regulatory powers of the Governor in Council in relation to the scheme in section 17. This is clause 2 of the bill, and it creates section 17.1, which allows the Governor in Council to make regulations, (a) prescribing the form and the content of the undertaking that must be signed by genealogists and historians; and (b) prescribing the categories of people who can approve a historian's research.

These regulations must be made on the recommendation of both the Minister of Industry, who is responsible for Statistics Canada, and the Minister of Canadian Heritage, who is responsible for the National Archives. These regulations, when they are drawn up, will have to be vetted by both ministers.

Finally, clause 3 of the bill adds a section to the penalty provision of the Statistics Act, which states that any person who breaches an undertaking under section 17(6) will be guilty of an offence and liable for a fine of up to $1,000. This penalty is less substantial than those in the rest of the Statistics Act. I want to reassure genealogists that there is no possibility of jail time or a criminal record for an offence relating to the disclosure of census records. I am not sure of this fact. I will have to check, but it seems to me that no one has ever been convicted under the Statistics Act. That bodes well for historians and genealogists in the future.

Honourable senators, that gives you a solid foundation in the nuts and bolts of the bill. I want to spend some time now helping you all to understand the various policy trade-offs that have been made in this bill, and I want you to understand what steps are being undertaken to protect privacy. As well, I want you to understand why it is so important that this bill be passed.

When this whole debate started five years ago, genealogists and historians were told bluntly that there would be no future access to historic census records. The door was to be slammed shut. We were told that this had to happen in order to protect privacy.

In releasing the 1906 census and in introducing this bill, the government has made the ultimate concession. They have agreed that census records should generally be available with an absolute minimum of restrictions. Genealogists win. In fact, under this scheme, 100 per cent of past census records will be available for unrestricted research at some point in time - in 112 years. That concession alone is more than enough to warrant my support of this bill. The government has seen the historic value of census records and has decided to open the vault. Access to history will not be compromised.

I turn, then, to the limits that are being placed on access under this bill. I freely admit that I have struggled long and hard over what is set out here, and I have come to the conclusion that the temporary limits are justified. One simply cannot ignore the fact that, in 1918, the federal government wrote privacy provisions into the Statistics Act; nor can we ignore the fact that all of the regulations governing the 1911 and 1916 census had the force of law. Those regulations mentioned both release to the Archives of the Dominion and the need for privacy. Privacy rights are real rights and it would be totally improper for the federal government to disregard them.

One of the fundamental truisms of privacy law is that all information loses its sensitivity as time passes. Privacy theorists argue that one of the ways privacy issues can be resolved is just to let additional time pass in order for documents to lose more sensitivity. The censuses from 1851 through 1901 were all governed under a set of laws different from those taken after 1901. It stands to reason that because of the perceived lack of clarity in the legislation, the 1911 and subsequent censuses could be deemed more sensitive on their ninety-second birthday than earlier censuses. To cure this sensitivity, the censuses will be released, but some information within them will still be "unpublishable'' after 92 years, and all information will be released completely free of restrictions after 112 years.

I want to take this opportunity to assure any genealogists and historians who may be listening, or reading Hansard later, that the proposed undertaking is nothing to be concerned about. The government does not want to make it difficult to conduct historical and genealogical research. I am told that the forms to be signed will be short, simple and easy to understand. More important, I have been given the personal assurance from the National Archivist that any requirements that the waiver contains will not prevent the historic census records from being accessible through the National Archives Web site or through local libraries that will have both the microfilm and the ability to collect signed undertakings. At the same time, it is Statistics Canada's position that the use of the waiver will sufficiently protect any privacy interests that arise from the release of the records.

The principles governing the release of future censuses are, I believe, equally sound. Starting with the next census in 2006, Canadians will have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether their census returns will be turned over to the National Archives. If they decide that they do not want their information ever to be made public, it will not be disclosed.

I know that many genealogists and historians will not be happy with this measure, but I must stress that census information, particularly the information now asked for on the long form, is intensely personal. As such, each individual should have a great deal of control over how it is used. The principle of prior informed consent is the best way to handle this situation. Some have expressed the concern that if people are given the opportunity to opt out of the disclosure to the National Archives, serious damage will be done to the integrity of the record and to the statistical validity of the historic record.

I hope these worries will prove unfounded. To give an idea of why I think they may be unfounded, let me share a key piece of information. When Statistics Canada conducted the Canadian Communities Health Survey, it asked Canadians if they would be willing to release their health information to local authorities to increase the quality of health care in their community. We all know that personal health issues are extremely sensitive, but over 95 per cent answered that they would be willing to do so. That is a truly astonishing response rate, and I think it bodes well for the release of historic census records.

Honourable senators, this is a solid, non-partisan bill and it is a good compromise. It achieves the goal of historians and genealogists of gaining access to historic census records and of properly preserving them. It provides adequate safeguards for privacy that are entirely appropriate. It is a bill that strikes the balance that I have been seeking for a long time - the balance that Senator Murray asked for. I am proud that the government and, in particular, Minister Allan Rock already took the bold step of releasing the 1906 census. I am also proud that they cared enough to preserve and protect Canadian history and the privacy of Canadians for generations to come. I urge all honourable senators to support this bill.

Hon. Lowell Murray: Honourable senators, so as not to keep my honourable friend in suspense, I will announce right away that I intend to support this government bill. I opposed the two private members' bills on this subject that Senator Milne sponsored in the previous sessions of Parliament because, as she knows, in my opinion they went considerably beyond what was necessary for the stated purpose and what was desirable in terms of public policy. That said, I note that she has told us that the parties to this compromise, in addition to herself, were the Minister of Industry and the Chief Statistician. When we come to consider the details in committee, there are, of course, some matters that one would want some further information on.

Further, I note that she did not mention the Commissioner of Privacy as one of those who was party to this compromise. I would think the committee would want to hear from the Commissioner of Privacy on this bill. As first blush, it appears to me that the kind of compromise that he favoured when he appeared before the committee in respect of Senator Milne's private member's bills is indeed incorporated in this government bill, but he will have an opportunity to speak for himself, I hope, when the committee meets.

I congratulate the honourable senator on her achievement, and I am glad she regards it as an achievement. This is a government bill. She made it very clear when she brought in Bill S-15 in December of 1999 and when she brought in Bill S-12 in February of 2001, both private bills, that what she earnestly and ardently desired was a government bill. She made it clear that introducing the private bill was one way of exerting some pressure on the government to arrive at a new policy and bring in a bill of its own. She has succeeded in that effort, and I congratulate her without qualification on that.

This is a government bill. It meets the needs of the people on behalf of whom Senator Milne was speaking - in particular, people who want to trace their own family histories by consulting personal data collected in the course of census and scholars who want to do historical research. It meets the needs of those people, and it does so while, generally speaking, respecting the privacy of Canadians, living and dead.

I think it is fair to say that this bill - and the honourable senator acknowledged as much - resembles more closely the compromise that we were speaking about here. I do not take for myself or for members on this side authorship of the compromise. It had been suggested by the Commissioner of Privacy and was the subject of negotiations between him and the Chief Statistician and others for some considerable period of time. However, today's government bill resembles more the compromise that was being talked about than it does the wider-ranging bills that Senator Milne introduced. As I recall, her bill would have made this data public after 92 years, and there were no limitations or restrictions on what data might be released and to whom it might be released.

There was a provision that a person in respect of whom the personal data had been collected could object to its disclosure, and provided that that person satisfied the National Archivist that the objection was valid, and provided, again, that the objection was made in the 92nd year after its collection, then that person could succeed, perhaps, in preventing its disclosure. Therefore, a person had to be at least 92 years of age in order to make the objection in the first place. As our former colleague Senator DeWare said when she was speaking to Bill S-15, this was a form of negative option billing that Senator Milne was proposing for personal census data. Other than those who objected, all others, as Senator Milne said at the time, would be "deemed to have given irrevocable consent'' to public access to their personal information.

Objection was taken to this, and properly so, not just by Statistics Canada and the Privacy Commissioner, but also by some of us on this side of the house, because we felt it went far beyond what was necessary in order to meet the needs of people wanting to trace their own family history or the needs of history scholars.

My honourable friend has pretty thoroughly outlined the provisions of this bill. The personal census data will be released 92 years after it has been collected to people who want to trace their own family histories and to people who want to do historical research.

We do not have the draft regulations in front of us, but that does not really matter because the government has sent out, with the bill, sufficient background material as to clearly indicate what the regulations will contain. In the case of people tracing their own family histories, they, or a person with whom they have contracted to do so, will be permitted to disclose only the tombstone information to which Senator Milne referred. Those wishing to do historical research will need to have their project approved as having a public or scientific value. Those history researchers will be subject to the same limitations as regards the disclosure of information as apply to people searching for information on their own family.

If you are interested, those who may approve such a history project - and this may be the subject of some questions in committee - will include, according to the background document that was sent out by the government, the Chief Statistician, who is presumed to be a history scholar, the National Archivist, ditto, members of Parliament and senators, a mayor, a chief of a First Nations community or a band council, the dean of a university, and senior clergy, whoever they may be. All of those people are presumed to have some qualifications in the field of historical scholarship, and I or someone else may want to ask when the matter goes to the committee how this can be so, or why the government has arrived at this list of people who could sign off on historical research.

Most important in this bill, in my view - and Senator Milne has referred to this - is that for all future censuses, respondents will have the opportunity to authorize or not the release, 92 years later, of their personal census data. This was a matter that Senator Comeau and I referred to in the debate on Bill S-12. As I pointed out at the time, Australia has just such a provision on its census form. The respondent is asked whether everybody living under the roof of that house authorizes the eventual release of the data referring to that person.

Honourable senators, there are some wrinkles in the government policy on this matter that remain to be explained. I hope that we will have an opportunity in committee to look into them. I am somewhat puzzled as to why the restrictions are lifted with regard to disclosure of personal data after 110 years. The restrictions come into force 92 years after collection of the data, but then 20 years later, no restrictions will apply.

I looked up the questions and answers sent out by the government to see the explanation for this. I will read one. Question 20: "Why 112 years?'' Answer: "First, the 92-year release, subject to some conditions, coincides with the Privacy Act and its regulations which set out that information obtained from a census may be released 92 years later. In addition, there is a provision in the Privacy Act that permits the release of personal information 20 years after the death of an individual or 110 years after a person's birth. An increase in proportion of Canadians survive to 92 years but few do beyond 112 years. The 112-year restriction is, therefore, more stringent than the requirement of the Privacy Act and its regulations.'' They have given us much information in that answer but they have not really answered the question of why it is 112 years. Perhaps someone will appear before the committee to provide that explanation.

I am also puzzled by the government's decision to overtake this bill by releasing, holus-bolus, the 1906 census. There is a question and answer about that which I will not read, but I think Senator Milne referred to it. In a nutshell, they released the 1906 census without any restriction, first, because the personal data therein is all tombstone information anyway - name, address, occupation, et cetera - and, second, because it was only taken in three provinces in Western Canada. That means that I will be able to look up Senator Chalifoux's ancestors, but she will not be able to look up mine.

It seems odd to me that they proceeded and released that data. Surely the 1906 census was covered. We know that it had not been released in 1998 because the legal opinions of the Department of Justice stated that it ought not to be released. This is covered by a euphemism in the material that the government sent out with this bill wherein they talked about lack of clarity and about ambiguity. Senator Milne today referred to what she would have thought was an excess of caution on Dr. Fellegi's part and qualms on the part of Statistics Canada concerning this matter.

There is an article in the current issue of The Hill Times that is much along the same lines. It is as if the failure to disclose this data before now was simply a whim on the part of the Chief Statistician of Canada, Dr. Ivan Fellegi. For the record, there were regulations in force under the 1905 and 1906 Census and Statistics Act. I read those regulations into the record when I spoke on March 27, 2001. I will not do so again. In addition, as Senator Milne pointed out, provisions were enacted in the law of 1918, the Statistics Act, and subsequent legislation in 1948, 1970, 1971 and 1972 all prohibiting the disclosure of personal census information.

Against that, Senator Milne and others have argued that there is a provision stating that the material should be sent to the archivist. Yes, there is; and, yes, there is an apparent conflict. However, we must bear in mind that this data has not been released before now and the government feels it is necessary to bring in the bill because the Department of Justice interpreted those regulations and that law in a certain way until fairly recently, when they have done a 360 degree flip-flop on the issue. I suppose that lawyers in the Department of Justice have a right to change their minds just like anyone else.

There was also the question of whether these regulations from the past and from the 1918 and subsequent legislative provisions were trumped by the 1983 Privacy Act, which provides for disclosure of government information after 92 years. Senator Milne and others argued that the Privacy Act trumped it. As a layman, I would have thought that if the Privacy Act were to trump existing legislation, it would say so. Notwithstanding the information in this or that other statute, this is the disclosure regime that would apply.

In fairness to Statistics Canada and Dr. Fellegi, I am glad that Senator Milne has acknowledged the eminence of Dr. Fellegi and the agency and the esteem in which they are held both internationally and in Canada. However, they were acting in respect of an opinion that was provided to them by the law officers of the Crown. That opinion has changed. When the Department of Justice changes its opinion, everything changes.

For greater clarity, we now have Bill S-13, which is an honourable compromise. It meets the needs of the people for whom Senator Milne was speaking so effectively. We all know that for a number of years much public pressure has been brought to bear on the government to disclose this information. I believe that those people could not have made such an achievement without such a persistent and tenacious spokesperson and champion as Senator Milne. I congratulate her on that.

Honourable senators, I am eager to see this bill go to committee because there are matters that we, on this side, wish to explore further. As to the principle of the bill and to sending it to committee now, I think I can speak for those in Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition and say that we are prepared to see that happen now.

Senator Milne: Would the honourable Senator Murray accept one brief question?

Senator Murray: Yes.

Senator Milne: My question is to ensure that the record is absolutely straight. The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Mr. George Radwanski, was consulted, and I believe that question No. 6 has been consulted on the issue of the release of historic census. We are grateful for his helpful advice in respect of the safeguarding of personal information.

Honourable senators are now aware that the Privacy Commissioner has been consulted, and I am certain that he will be asked to appear before the committee. Are my honourable colleagues also aware that I am beginning to call myself either Senator Lorna "Bulldog'' Milne or Senator "Power-to-the- People'' Milne?

Senator Murray: Again, the question and answer in respect of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada states that he was consulted; I certainly hope that he was. They did not state, as they would have stated in respect of Senator Milne, of the Minister of Industry and of the Chief Statistician, that he is in support of Bill S-13.

I would not want to indulge in a canine metaphor in respect of the honourable senator or any other honourable senator. I am happy to congratulate her on her tenacity and let it go at that.

Hon. Tommy Banks: Honourable senators, I ask permission of the house to revert to a question to Senator Milne. I rose earlier but sat as soon as Senator Murray stood.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, is leave granted?

[Translation]

Hon. Fernand Robichaud (Deputy Leader of the Government): Honourable senators, I would agree to one question, but this must not turn into a question period.

[English]

Senator Banks: Honourable senators, my question is much more mundane and simple, but no less important, than those raised by Senator Murray. In my previous life, in a roundabout way, I had to do with and became concerned about, not the moral integrity of the records, such as the ones to which you referred, but the physical integrity of them.

That issue has also been raised here by Senator Corbin, specifically with regard to the National Library. The same questions sometimes arises with respect to the National Archives. Some of the contents of these records have, from time to time, been subjected to damage or materials have been irrevocably lost.

I do not know whether the honourable senator can answer my questions immediately, and, if not, I would draw these matters to the attention of committee members who will be studying this bill.

It was mentioned that after 92 years the data is transferred to the care of the National Archives. In what form and in what protective containment is it transferred? Are we satisfied that the place in which these materials will be stored is, in fact, safe from burst pipes and leaking roofs, which have already cost us the irrevocable loss of some very valuable Canadian Heritage materials?

Senator Milne: I would thank the honourable senator for his question. Although I cannot answer it right now, I can tell him that many of the early census returns no longer exist on paper. They have already been microfilmed, which makes them much easier to store since they take much less room.

The 1991 census was at one point being stored in paper form in the archives and under the control of Statistics Canada. It was in paper form, wrapped in plastic and stored in climate-controlled areas in the new archives in Gatineau. It took up an enormous amount of room.

The Hon. the Speaker: Are honourable senators ready for the question?

Hon. Senators: Question!

The Hon. the Speaker: It was moved by the Honourable Senator Milne, seconded by the honourable Senator Finnerty that this bill be read a second time.

Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

Motion agreed to and bill read second time.

Referred to Committee

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, when shall this bill be read a third time? On motion of Senator Milne, bill referred to Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.