We are committed to sharing news, stories, events and opinions that ensures our province stays free, united and independent from the overreach of the Federal government.
All are welcome and respectful debate is encouraged. Please join with the intention of participating. Proceeds are donated.
Maybe this should become a class-action suit.
Copied ⬇️
An Alberta couple has filed an application for judicial review over the compulsory long-form census, and is asking federal court to strike down portions of the census relating to health, sexual orientation, and gender identity that it says infringe on constitutional privacy rights.
Households that received the 2026 census in early May were required to provide accurate and full information or face a fine of up to $500 on summary conviction, with Statistics Canada saying that failure to complete the questionnaire could lead to further penalties.
In addition to questions about employment, income, languages spoken, and education contained on the short-form census, the long-form census asked a number of questions on personal health, disabilities, living arrangements, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
Filing
The application was filed June 10 by lawyers funded by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) on behalf of Bradley and Linda Osborne of Foothills County, Alta.
Specifically, the Osbornes say that questions on the census about health conditions, daily activities, commuting patterns, housing circumstances, sexual orientation, and gender identity violate their constitutional rights to privacy under Sections 7 and 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
These two sections of the Charter provide protections for personal liberty and privacy.
The filing says that while Canada’s Constitution does require a census to ensure democratic representation, various questions overstep that and are beyond the authority granted in Canada’s Statistics Act.
“A constitutional requirement to count people does not automatically authorize the state to compel disclosure of intimate details about health, personal identity, daily routines, and private life,” constitutional lawyer Hatim Kheir said in a June 11 statement released by the JCCF.
Kheir added that privacy is a key protection under the Charter and the courts must resolve whether questions such as those on the census are actually necessary.
“Privacy is not a minor administrative concern. The Charter recognizes that personal information goes to individual dignity and liberty,” he said.
“When government compels disclosure of sensitive information under threat of penalty, courts must ask whether that intrusion is actually necessary and proportionate.”
The Osbornes say they do not want damages or legal costs but instead are seeking clarification from the courts on the constitutional limits of questions on a mandatory census.
For its part, Statistics Canada said it conducts a census every five years under authority granted to it by the Statistics Act, and that all information gathered in the process is kept completely confidential.
It says the information collected in the census is useful to governments, business, and community organizations in determining what services are needed in communities as well as key infrastructure like hospitals, public transport, and employment programs.
StatCan says the new questions such as on health conditions and sexual orientation are required to fill gaps in data that cannot be answered by other statistical programs to help governments and other organizations develop effective policies, programs, and services where they are needed.
“Census data on sexual orientation will fill data gaps on the LGB+ population that other existing statistical programs cannot address at the level of detail required,” the agency wrote last year in explaining why the 2026 census would be different from previous ones that didn’t include such questions.
“The Census of Population is the best source of information for small geographic areas and the only source of information for many socioeconomic characteristics that allow for intersectional analysis,” StatCan added.
The application from the Osbornes has been filed in federal court and supporting affidavit evidence is expected to be submitted within the next 30 days, according to the JCCF.
Use these discount codes to get 1/2 price subscription.
Monthly FREEALBERTA -$1
Annual GWDISCOUNT- $12
Renewing subscription to pay direct and take advantage of the discount. Go to "contact us" the option to pay by credit card shows up and you can renew using the codes.
Very well said. I wish I could think of all these responses whenever there’s a hint of an opportunity to discuss.
Copied⬇️
This past week, I was dropping door hangers which extolled the virtues of Alberta independence. One young man, incensed by his house being littered with such incendiary information (note: I didn’t drop where there was a “no flyers” sign), searched his neighbourhood until he found me and then explained in graphic and vulgar detail how little he thought of my mother and how my questionable upbringing had resulted in me being an odious person. Attempts at a more balanced conversation were rebuffed. What struck me was the depth of his unbalanced anger.
I also met a young mother who graciously and thoughtfully explained why she thought what I was doing was wrong, and it didn’t matter if I thought I had answers to her concerns. She didn’t think I had answers to her concerns. Why the rigid hesitation? She also was afraid of the impact on her family due to what she felt were the precipitous ...
