<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/article/235929791-census-boycotters-being-taken-to-court" target="_blank">Census boycotters being taken to court!</a>
<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/topics/57-canadaus-relations" target="_blank">Canada-U.S. relations</a>
<strong>Written By: </strong> <a href="/profiles/Dancing" target="_blank">Dancing</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> Thursday, March 27 at 15:37<br><br>
<p>The Federal Government has commenced court action against people who boycotted the 2006 Census over the contracting-out by Statistics Canada to American weapons manufacturer Lockheed-Martin.</p><br><a href="/article/235929791-census-boycotters-being-taken-to-court">read more >></a>
This court case is the first I've heard about re the census boycott. We need to spread the word about it far and wide, because people need to know there was a boycott and that the government is prosecuting people over it now.
Vive should prob issue a press release, and start pulling together support and help and especially publicity for this case. The more people hear about it, the more people we can reach on this issue, and the better chance that boycotters don't end up in jail.
This is what Canada has become Susan, a nation being ruled over through coercion and fear. We have to stand up for all Canadians when they are treated with injustice, and that includes even those who you may dislike no matter having good justification for disliking them.
This is serious stuff, and the government does not play fair or by even their own unfair rules.
Well I wonder when I'll get my notice. I'm a sixty seven year old graduate of the school of hard knocks, and I'm just itching to get into a brawl with these turds. I did not comply for the same reason "LOCKHEED MARTIN". What I'd really like to know is why in hell would the Canadian government give this delicate job to one of the biggest partners in the global military industrial complex? Now I'll be waiting for the mailman every day because I'm praying these assholes come after me. I'll borrow a quote from another TURD GWB "bring em on"
Keep in mind that a household cannot be taken to court, so if they don't have a name behind a refusal I cannot imagine what they'll be able to do about it.
In a household with 2 or more occupants one can ask "Who failed to comply?" Did all of the occupants fail to comply despite the fact that only one census form was to be filled out by only one of the occupants?
A possible defense in a household of 2:
Occupant #1: He said that he filled it out.
Occupant #2: No she said that she she filled it out.
Occupant #1: Prove it!
Occupant #2: Yeah, prove it!
Also there appears to be a cut off point for prosecutions. Can someone who understands legalize decipher this gibberish?
"Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer which is why my advice is for free and therefore possibly worthless."
awk! awk!
Reverse discriminatiom towards non lawyer
I;m tellin' the CHRC on you!
and as there are "minorities" within the minority they too are being slaneres with hate speech
Dio, would it be too much to ask that you stay on topic with your posts? ie, comment on the topic at hand?
Everyone please note I posted the URLs for the Facebook groups dealing with this to the article, and you can also get further news at our Vive Facebook group if you join as it happens.
It may help Sandra to get signed affadavits from other census boycotters, so it you're willing to do that it's important to contact either her or me.
This court case and any others like it are a great chance to get publicity and to put the spotlight on the boycott, since StatsCan did everything it could to spin it as non-existent. So yeah, if they come after anyone else, please let me and Vive know!!
I am not posting this in support of StatsCan:
Clearly, the Privacy Commissioner has some legitimate concerns, too.
Statistics in the Age of Google
Statistics Canada in 2015: The future is here, are we ready?
January 31, 2006
Ottawa, Ontario
Address by Jennifer Stoddart
Privacy Commissioner of Canada
... snip
The Lockheed Martin Canada outsourcing arrangement highlights another area of privacy concern. In November 2004, Statistics Canada advised us that they agreed to change the scope of 2006 Census work to be done by a group of private companies, including Lockheed Martin. This was due to public perception that the privacy and confidentiality of Canadians’ information might be compromised under the original outsourcing arrangement.
Under the original plan, Lockheed Martin Canada would process personal data about Canadians. There was real concern that this personal information would be accessible by the U.S. parent company. As my Office has witnessed with the debate over the USA PATRIOT Act, which expands access by the FBI to information held by companies in the United States, Canadians are concerned, and rightly so, about having their personal information leave Canada. Once outside Canada, that information could lose protections offered by Canadian law.
The contractual arrangement between Statistics Canada and Lockheed Martin Canada has since been substantially revised. Lockheed Martin is no longer responsible for processing census data. This will now be done exclusively by Statistics Canada personnel on Statistics Canada premises. Lockheed Martin will be restricted to providing hardware, software, printing and support services.
With these changes, many of the concerns about the possible transfer of confidential census data outside Canada have been addressed. However, some privacy issues remained. My Office was concerned about the company’s personnel having access to confidential census data in the course of providing system maintenance and support services. In response, Statistics Canada undertook to introduce several amendments to the contract with Lockheed Martin.
In short, Statistics Canada revised its agreement with Lockheed Martin Canada and its sub-contractors to provide a more robust framework for the protection of the personal information of Canadians collected through the census project. In addition to this, our Audit Team will be carrying out an on-site review of the processes in place at Statistics Canada for the 2006 census, including the Lockheed Martin arrangement in particular. The discussions between representatives from Statistics Canada have produced significant results, and I am taking this opportunity publicly to thanking Dr. Fellegi and his team, namely Pamela White and Anil Arora, for their cooperation in addressing potential privacy risks to Canadians associated with the Census.
On a more general note, let me suggest that Statistics Canada has an additional role to play in privacy matters. The world beyond your agency can learn from you. How can we take the confidentiality mechanisms in the Statistics Act and in departmental procedures and apply them to the world, both governmental and private sector, outside the Department? What lessons can the strong confidentiality protections in the Department give to those operating in the world of electronic health records and telephone records? What can you teach them?
source: http://www.privcom.gc.ca/speech/2006/sp-d_060131_e.asp
Judge plays ‘guess who?’ in 2006 Canadian Census court case
Accused reluctantly reveals himself after judge threatens to release arrest warrant to the police
The News
NEW GLASGOW – A Thorburn area man will be tried in July for failing to fill in a 2006 Canada Census form.
Brian Stewart, 379 Park Falls Rd., appeared in New Glasgow provincial court Monday morning but initially refused to identify himself.
When his name was read out, three men in business suits approached the front of the courtroom, one of them carrying a box of documents.
One of the men indicated they were there to "present" Stewart. None of them admitted to being Stewart.
When Judge Clyde Macdonald asked if one or more of them were representing Stewart, they declined to answer the question.
After repeatedly asking the men to take a seat in the courtroom, Macdonald suggested federal Crown prosecutor Ed Patterson speak to the trio in an attempt to understand their position.
Patterson later told the court he had some difficulty communicating with the men.
When Macdonald again called Stewart to appear before the court one of the men came forward but declined to identify himself.
"If the person required to come here to speak identified himself as Brian Stewart, would that be considered contracting with the court?" he asked.
He added he might sometimes be called Brian, Friend or Joseph or sometimes be called by derogatory names.
He asked to see the name on the court documents.
The judge ordered the court reporter to show the documents to the man in an adjacent room during a brief recess.
"This is under duress and intimidation," the man told the court as a sheriff escorted him into the adjacent room.
When court resumed the man continued to be reluctant to identify himself as Stewart. He pointed to one of the men with him and said he needed his interpreter.
"He's deaf – somewhat," the other man called out.
Judge Macdonald ignored the request and noted an arrest warrant had been drawn up last week when Stewart failed to appear in provincial court. He added if Stewart was not in the courtroom, the warrant would immediately be turned over to police.
The man then acknowledged Brian Stewart was "a name given to me at birth" and told the court his Charter of Rights was being violated.
He asked whether he could fight the charge under the British North America Act of 1867.
The judge told Stewart he was free to enter a not guilty plea to violating the federal Statistics Act but advised him to save his arguments for trial which was set for July 17 and 18.
One of Stewart's companions activated a large tape recorder as soon as Stewart began speaking but he was eventually ordered by a sheriff to turn off the recorder and escorted from the courtroom.
http://www.ngnews.ca/index.cfm?sid=118122&sc=49
Many thanks for your help! I'll try to contact the man from New Glasgow to learn from his experience.
Ive received great information about representing myself in court. There's a website where, in a couple of seconds, you can get the case law for a particular topic.
Regarding the issue of selective prosecution: "Equality before the law is a principle that must be defended. In other words, a law applied inconsistently is not a law but a breach of the law. Any time the judiciary condones such a practise it violates a sacred duty and must be called to account."
Hopefully I'll be able to prepare documents and circulate them to you - for suggestions for improvement.
However, I am more concerned about having an excellent information sheet which sets out the step-by-step integration of the Canadian military with the American. Working backwards:
- the Troop Exchange Agreement signed on Feb 14, 2008
- contracting out of the Canadian census to Lockheed-Martin 2004 (date?)(dollars?)
- the health records for the Canadian military contracted out to Lockheed Martin (2003?)(Dollars?)
- I don't know the details, but Northcom, changes to the way NATO operates, etc. (the Canadian Action Party has pointed these out - will go to them to get the info.)
Problem is time. Too much on my plate. Among other things, I am currently the leader of the Green Party of Saskatchewan. Annual Meeting next weekend.
You will understand that your input is doubly appreciated!
Current need:
- as Susan pointed out, affidavits from people who did not comply AND who aren't being prosecuted will be helpful in court.
- if anyone has the makings for "the information sheet", it will be welcome, too!
This is an opportunity for people to learn. But have to have the material in hand to take advantage of the opportunity.
Best to All. Sandra
Could you post the website that you found Sandra?
You may also want to visit/contact www.countmeout.ca . We worked with that site to get info out re Lockheed, and they have a lot of info up.
I wrote up a timeline of what happened during the census boycott that has some information on Lockheed's involvement, replies from Stats Can etc. Some of the links are broken, so I'll see if I can retrieve them from the old site or not. Meanwhile, it should give a general idea of what happened.
See our FAQ under Actions.
"These people should be in jail. They have done far more harm than jailed people have done."
------
The criminal records of some of the corporations that the Govt of Canada is contracting with (sending our money to) is appalling. I am more familiar with the record of Monsanto and the other chemical companies. Many thanks to Susan and Vive for the goods on Lockheed Martin.
Re: "The U.S. Department of Defense is Lockheed's biggest customer, accounting for more than half of the company’s yearly revenue, and the U.S. government itself accounts for roughly 80% of Lockheed’s business."
Lockheed now has a subsidiary in Canada. The Quaker Society from Halifax, in its 2004 submission to Statistics Canada said:
(1) " The Halifax Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) is very concerned about the Canadian government's decision to award a $20.5 million dollar contract to a unit of the U.S. weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT). ...
(2) In February 2003, Lockheed Martin Canada Inc. was also awarded a multi-year contract by the Canadian Department of National Defence to provide a health care information system on Canadian Forces personnel. That contract is worth approximately $17 million and covers only the first 14 months of the project. The contract has the potential to exceed an estimated value of $56 million, however, if all four phases are delivered over the anticipated 10-year period."
It would be good to determine the percentage of Lockheed's Canadian subsidiary business that comes from the Government of Canada. The following part of Vive's record on Lockheed - alone - states that we should not be supporting this company. I also believe that if this is a list of convictions, the list of deeds done without being caught is longer. They wouldn't have continuing convictions if it wasn't profitable to break the laws.
Without our tax dollars they would likely close up shop in Canada. They should be run out of this country.
"Lockheed claims to have changed its corporate culture. But this doesn’t appear to have stopped instances of corruption or law-breaking. As just one example, the U.S. Project on Government Oversite reports that:
• In 2002, Lockheed Martin had the second highest number of instances of misconduct and alleged misconduct of any US government contractor and pay outs of just over $426 million US in fines.
• In 2000, Lockheed Martin was charged with 30 violations of the US Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Lockheed Martin paid a civil penalty of $13 million.
• In 1997, Lockheed Martin exported material to South Korea that can be used in missile delivery/reentry systems. Lockheed did not obtain the export license required for national security and nuclear nonproliferation considerations. The company paid a $45,000 civil penalty.
• In 1995, Lockheed Martin pleaded guilty to violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act for paying bribes to officials of the Egyptian Government. The company paid a criminal fine of $24.8 million. From: The US Project on Government Oversight"
"For a company like Lockheed Martin, war is good for business. So it’s no surprise the company and people formerly connected with the company spend so much time lobbying for aggressive U.S. public policy. ...
The national security reporter for the New York Times was quoted by Common Dreams.org saying: “Men who have worked, lobbied and lawyered for Lockheed hold the posts of secretary of the Navy, secretary of transportation, director of the national nuclear weapons complex, and director of the national spy satellite agency.”
Lockheed is also the defense industry's top political donor.
...So in truth, Lockheed doesn’t only benefit from war-centric U.S. policy—the company helps set it." (from Vive)
(Now it's me writing again:)
Lockheed is not a single example.
Read the track-record on the chemical/pharmaceutical/biotech companies. It's long. These people should be in jail. They have done far more harm than jailed people have done. It is well documented. A few years ago I wrote the following which could have been written about Lockheed.
"When you read below the appalling record of the corruption of these companies, you will understand how abhorrent and completely unacceptable it is that even one penny of tax-payer money should go to these companies, whether through Government Fronts or through "matched funding", or "out-sourcing". For a Government official to say that the amounts of money are small, is simply not true. Nor is it a reasonable defence. The record of corruption demonstrates that these companies need to be POLICED, with no leaway.
When Connie from the PMRA (Pest Management Regulatory Agency - Health Canada) asked how the public might be convinced that the PMRA is doing its job, after you read the record, you will understand that having "Industry Scientists" on panels that make any decisions related to governance or policy or regulation is to undermine public trust in the PMRA. Call a spade, a spade: you judge a person (the PMRA, Statistics Canada, the Dept of Defence) by the company they not only keep, but act as pimps for, with our money.
The University is part of this collaborative effort (to get rid of pesticides, for health): the history of corruption will be of interest to them. I remember picking up a brochure years ago, at the College of Agriculture. Monsanto contributed $11 million to the construction of the new College. And they fund research. The undermining of "science" is well documented ("Science Under Siege").
At the National Farmers Union (NFU) meeting in Saskatoon Nov. 2004, in the question period following David Suzuki's presentation, Tom Wolf placed the case for the scientists before the audience: the chemical corporations fund the research. David shrugged his shoulders, was forthright and unapologetic: the University sells its soul to the devil."
If you don't know the public record on the corruption of Monsanto, BASF, etc. it's under "Health" on www.sandrafinley.ca
See "Corruption of the companies, public record. May 02-06 #9."
Now the record on Lockheed Martin.
Who are we that we remain silent?
Wow these corporations are almost as bad as the Liberals......
they ARE the Liberals, and Conservatives and every other politicain that's for sale. and YES even you