Barnsey said: "Surely I am not the only one to protest such invasive irrelevant questions?"

The two sides of this debate are talking at each other rather than listening and compromising.

The one side is talking about feeling violated by the state, the other is talking about statistical viability.

The one side sees freedom above information, the other sees information more important, quite rightly perhaps pointing out one's information is so confidential freedom is never compromised.

One side however feels like it has heard all this before. Does anyone else remember the debate surrounding social insurance numbers? How they were supposed to be totally private, and no one had the right to ask it of you, aside from the Canada Pension plan... then that changed into Revenue Canada, and now it is required for everything from Bank loans to provincial institutions.

It is this sort of background that fuels the suspicion. Many have grown up seeing that information, and identification as a given... given to whomever wants it, without realizing from whence it came.
So it is easy to accept what ever is required to have a good census.

People who's education gives them a good understanding of statistics and how particularly Stats Can's handling of data don't feel as threatened. But there are others who dislike globalism, world banks, fiat currency, Bilderburg,the Illuminati etc, that find this but one more thing to add to the list.

The one thing I think has come out of this, is an important discussion.
Whether we go back to the old way of doing things or try something different, may not be as important as the process of finding our way here.