Technical report on changes for the 2021 Census
Minority language educational rights: Technical report on changes for the 2021 Census

Release date: July 20, 2020

Skip to text

Text begins

1. Introduction

The census is the country’s storyteller. Through good and difficult times, the census has been providing a detailed picture of Canada’s changing mosaic—giving Canadians facts on where we came from, to where we are, and guiding decisions on where we want to be. To respond to the country’s needs and write the next chapter of Canadians’ data foundation, Statistics Canada conducted country-wide engagements. We also conducted a census test with over 135,000 households to determine whether new or revised questions under consideration can be easily understood and correctly answered. We listened to Canadians, because we know that this is about your census, your community, your future.

This series of technical reports provides an in-depth view of the changes in content for the 2021 Census of Population, as the census process is ever changing to reflect changes in the Canadian population and its demographic characteristics.

The availability of quality statistical evidence plays a key role in planning public services in Canada, such as school infrastructures and teaching services in the minority official language. In late 2016, various representatives of associations, school boards and official language minority communities (OLMCs) asked the Government of Canada and Statistics Canada to add questions to the 2021 Census to assess the minority language education needs for OLMCs, and particularly to enumerate the children of rights-holders as per section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In addition, in accordance with a motion adopted on January 31, 2017, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages (the Committee) undertook a study in February of the same year on the issues related to enumerating rights-holders. In May 2017, the Committee tabled its report, which included six recommendations to the government.Note 1

In its report, the Committee recommends:

That the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development ask Statistics Canada, as part of its preparation for the 2021 Census, to establish an advisory committee specifically mandated to examine the enumeration of rights-holders under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” (Recommendation 3).

That the Government of Canada require Statistics Canada to include questions in the 2021 Census that would allow for the enumeration of all rights-holders under the broadest interpretation of paragraphs 23 (1) (a) and (b) and subsection 23 (2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” (Recommendation 4).

In September 2017, the government, in its response to the Committee’s recommendations, asked Statistics Canada to identify the best ways to collect quality data on rights-holders and their children.

At the same time, as per a practice that occurs before every census, Statistics Canada launched an official public consultation process on the content of the 2021 Census questionnaire. During this process, a number of organizations and representatives of minority language communities expressed the need for a better way to enumerate rights-holders in Canada.Note 2

Statistics Canada fully committed to use all its scientific expertise to find the most appropriate method to collect these data based on scientific and professional considerations, including an in-depth evaluation of the potential and limitations of the different collection methods. The agency also committed to adequately and quickly respond to the need for accurate, high-quality data on children of rights-holders under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In light of this commitment and the need for data on rights-holders expressed during the official consultation process on the Census of Population, Statistics Canada initiated a number of activities and projects that are described and analyzed in this technical report.

Of these projects, Statistics Canada created the Advisory Committee on Language Statistics, comprised of language experts. Its role is to advise Statistics Canada on the concepts, methods, issues and challenges related to the agency’s Language Statistics Program, including enumerating rights-holders and their children in Canada. The committee members met a number of times in 2018 and 2019 to support Statistics Canada and provide advice on this complex issue.

Statistics Canada also set up a working group made up of experts in language statistics and census methodology at the agency to pinpoint the challenges, options and solutions related to collecting data on the population of children of rights-holders.Note 3 This working group explored a number of collection options, including the 2021 Census of Population.

After defining specific needs with the Advisory Committee on Language Statistics, Statistics Canada began work to ensure that quality data would be produced on the children of rights-holders under section 23 of the Charter. The result was a three-point strategy. First, a collection strategy for the 2021 Census was developed, and questions were formulated in collaboration with the advisory committee members. These questions underwent qualitative testing to assess their quality (e.g., to ensure that they accurately capture the reality in question). Second, quantitative analyses were conducted to determine the influence of the placement and order of the questions in the census questionnaire, and to evaluate the quality of the results on the number of children of rights-holders. The results of the quantitative test were also compared with data from administrative sources on enrolments in minority language school programs. Third, the possibility of combining census data with additional data sources (e.g., postcensal survey, administrative data) was examined to determine whether the information and portrait on rights-holders and their children, based on the needs identified, would be more detailed and complete.

The first part of this technical report defines the rights-holder population in Canada and their children, the data needs identified, and the data sources currently available on this population.

The second part discusses measuring the population of children of rights-holders in the 2021 Census of Population. To start, it presents the results of the qualitative tests conducted in 2018, as well as the changes that were made after these tests to the wording of the questions on rights-holders to make them more accurate and understandable. It also presents the results of the quantitative tests conducted during the 2019 Census Test. Lastly, it provides the results of statistical analyses and the additional considerations in determining the potential and limitations of the census to collect statistical information on the population of interest.

The third and last part examines the data “ecosystem” that Statistics Canada intends to begin developing. The purpose of this ecosystem is to go beyond the census to complementary data sources to meet the need for data for on the children of right holders.

2. Definitions, data needs and existing data sources

2.1 What is a rights-holder?

Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms defines rights-holders and sets out the application of their rights to education in the minority official language as follows:

CONSTITUTION ACT, 1982

PART I

CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

“Minority language educational rights

Language of instruction

23. (1) Citizens of Canada

(a) whose first language learned and still understood is that of the English or French linguistic minority population of the province in which they reside, or

(b) who have received their primary school instruction in Canada in English or French and reside in a province where the language in which they received that instruction is the language of the English or French linguistic minority population of the province,

have the right to have their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in that language in that province.

Continuity of language of instruction

(2) Citizens of Canada of whom any child has received or is receiving primary or secondary school instruction in English or French in Canada, have the right to have all their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in the same language.

Application where numbers warrant

(3) The right of citizens of Canada under sections (1) and (2) to have their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in the language of the English or French linguistic minority population of a province;

(a) applies wherever in the province the number of children of citizens who have such a right is sufficient to warrant the provision to them out of public funds of minority language instruction; and

(b) includes, where the number of those children so warrants, the right to have them receive that instruction in minority language educational facilities provided out of public funds.”

2.1.1 Uniqueness of Quebec

In accordance with section 59 of the Constitution Act, 1982, paragraph 23(1)(a) of the Charter (the criteria that define “the first language learned and still understood”) does not apply to Quebec. It can only come into force with authorization from the National Assembly or the Government of Quebec. To date, this authorization has not been granted.

As per section 73 of Quebec’s Charter of the French Language, “the following children, at the request of one of their parents, may receive instruction in English:

(1) a child whose father or mother is a Canadian citizen and received elementary instruction in English in Canada, provided that that instruction constitutes the major part of the elementary instruction he or she received in Canada;

(2) a child whose father or mother is a Canadian citizen and who has received or is receiving elementary or secondary instruction in English in Canada, and the brothers and sisters of that child, provided that that instruction constitutes the major part of the elementary or secondary instruction received by the child in Canada.”

Furthermore, section 73.1 stipulates that:

“73.1. The Government may determine by regulation the analytical framework that a person designated under section 75 must use in assessing the major part of the instruction received, invoked in support of an eligibility request under section 73. The analytical framework may, among other things, establish rules, assessment criteria, a weighting system, a cutoff or a passing score and interpretive principles.

The regulation may specify the cases and conditions in which a child is presumed or deemed to have satisfied the requirement of having received the major part of his instruction in English within the meaning of section 73.”

2.1.2 Exceptions

As the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages states on page 2 of its May 2017 report, “provinces and territories can expand the criteria for admission to minority language schools and, as a result, create other categories to grant access to minority language schools to a larger number of children.” For example, in Ontario, anglophone families can enrol their children in a French school by submitting an application for admission, which could include an exam. Similarly, the children of parents with a mother tongue other than English or French can, by the authority of the school boards in a number of provinces and territories, be enrolled in the French-language public school network even if neither parent received instruction in French in Canada. “Grandfather” clauses are also taken into consideration. Stakeholders suggest that the number of exceptions is increasing.Note 4

2.2 Data needs

As mentioned at the beginning of this report, the need for data is such that Statistics Canada is required “to include questions in the 2021 Census that would allow for the enumeration of all rights-holders under the broadest interpretation of paragraphs 23(1)(a) and (b) and subsection 23(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

In addition, the expressed needs include making data on rights-holders accessible at the local level, particularly for non-standard geographic regions, such as school catchment areas. Moreover, since the need for data is linked to planning educational services for children, such as building schools, the main purpose of the recommended method of enumeration is not to get data on rights-holders, but rather on the children of rights-holders, in accordance with section 23 of the Charter. This interpretation of the recommendations of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages was discussed with Statistics Canada’s Advisory Committee on Language Statistics.

Of the three criteria set out in section 23, the Census of Population only collects information on the criterion of first language learned in childhood and still understood (mother tongue).Note 5 As a result, the Committee and various stakeholders and OLMC representatives expressed a need for Statistics Canada to collect data on the two other criteria: parents’ language of instruction, and language of instruction of the child’s brothers and sisters.

That being said, the Committee adds in its report that the number of individuals with French as their mother tongue living in Canada outside Quebec may also be underestimated. This may be because “the formulation of question 9 on mother tongue, the response options for that question, and the context created by the other language questions all communicate to the respondent that the census is expecting the respondent to identify a single language in response to the mother tongue question.”Note 6

Appendix B of the Standing Committee on Official Languages’ report proposes, among others, modifications to the question on mother tongue in the census. Although paragraph 23(1)(a) of the Charter refers specifically to “the first language learned and still understood [which] is that of the English or French linguistic minority population of the province in which they reside,” the Committee report states that the current wording of the question in the Census of Population does not consider the fact that a number of respondents learned more than one language at home in childhood, mostly because of the number of linguistic exogamous families (linguistically mixed couples). According to the report, “[t]he question in no way suggests that a twofold response will be accepted (although the questionnaire allows double or even multiple responses).”Note 7

2.2.1 Jurisprudence and details about the data needs

In its decision in Mahe v. Alberta (1990),Note 8 and especially with reference to paragraphs 23(3)(a) and (b) cited above, the Supreme Court of Canada pointed out that the number of children of rights-holders in a given area does not correspond to the number of children currently enrolled in minority language schools, or to the maximum potential number (virtual demand) of children of rights-holders. It is instead somewhere between the two, meaning that it must reflect “the number of persons who will eventually take advantage of the contemplated programme or facility.”

Similarly, in Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia (Education) (2016),Note 9 the British Columbia Supreme Court stated that “[t]he relevant number for s. 23 is the number of children of rightsholders who could reasonably be expected to take advantage of a service, which will fall somewhere between the known demand and the total number of rightsholders in an area. […]The total population of students eligible for the service can be difficult to estimate. Since the Court is concerned with arriving at a rough estimate of the number of children likely to attend a programme, the outer boundaries of the range need not be precise; they may be estimated based on the best available evidence.” It added that “[t]he court requires some evidence that allows it to estimate or forecast future enrolment based on the present situation, the total population of rightsholders (as best it can be estimated) and broad contextual factors. The court’s task is to anticipate what proportion of the total number of potential children are likely to enrol in the programme: a participation rate.”

2.3 Current data and their limitations

The census content determination frameworkNote 10 includes three key steps to establish the level of priority of requests to add questions to the Census of Population: (1) evaluating the needs of census data users (legislative basis, intended use, etc.); (2) considering the Canadian context (response burden, societal privacy concerns, etc.); (3) evaluating the operational factors associated with the request (costs, collection-related constraints, etc.). The content is evaluated based on the specific dimensions in each step.

In this framework, one of the dimensions considered in the needs evaluation step has to do with the availability of data sources that provide the desired statistics. In this particular case, there is no source that provides all the information to meet the need expressed for data on the population of children eligible for educational services in the official language of the minority at lower geographic levels, in accordance with paragraphs 23(1)(a) and (b) and subsection 23(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Every five years, the census does provide detailed data on the population’s linguistic characteristics, including mother tongue (paragraph 23(1)(a)), at lower geographic levels. However, the census has specific limitations when it comes to enumerating the children of rights-holders, as the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages indicated. One such limitation stems from the fact that the census does not comprise questions that would help to enumerate rights-holders as per paragraph 23(1)(b) and subsection 23(2) of the Charter. However, even if questions on language of instruction were added to the census, it still has some limitations related to its capacity to meet the needs for data on children of rights-holders. These limitations will be discussed later.

There are other data sources, aside from the Census of Population, that provide information on the children of rights-holders.

For example, every year Statistics Canada conducts the Elementary–Secondary Education Survey to collect and publish administrative data from each province and territory on enrolments in public minority language schools across the country. These data provide information that corresponds to the lower limit of the number of children of rights-holders in Canada, as stipulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Mahe v. Alberta (1990). However, they do not provide any information on rights-holders whose children do not attend a minority school and who would like to or intend to exercise their constitutional right.

The Survey on the Vitality of Official-Language Minorities (SVOLM), conducted by Statistics Canada in 2006 in partnership with 10 federal departments and agencies, is another key source of data on rights-holders and their children.Note 11 One of the key objectives of this survey was to measure the number of children of rights-holders in Canada for the first time and the proportion of parents who were exercising their right in accordance with section 23 of the Charter. In addition to collecting these data, the SVOLM collected a wealth of information on the reasons why parents decided to enrol their children in a minority language school or not. However, in 2021, this survey will have been conducted 15 years ago. Furthermore, it was limited in terms of geographic levels for which it could provide information.

3. Using the Census of Population to measure the number of children of rights-holders

The need for data on children of rights-holders was assessed by Statistics Canada in its work (testing and statistical analyses) to add new questions to the 2021 Census. This evaluation considered elements including the criteria from the census content determination framework (target population coverage, quality of the statistical information, operational considerations, among others). This section presents the results of these tests and the additional analyses completed.

3.1 Implementation of the collection strategy and new questions

As previously mentioned, Statistics Canada developed the collection strategy and the new module with questions on language of instruction in cooperation with the Advisory Committee on Language Statistics.

Among the questions first developed, there was a two-question block for Quebec residents and a three-question block for residents of Canada outside Quebec. Quebec residents had to answer a first question about whether they had taken an English-language education program in Quebec or attended an English-language school in Canada either at the elementary or secondary level. If so, they had to answer a second two-part question on the number of years of instruction at the elementary or secondary level. Residents in the rest of the country had to answer an initial question on whether they did French-language studies at the elementary or secondary level in Canada, and if so, whether it was an immersion or regular program. Those who studied in a regular program had to provide the number of years of instruction at the elementary and secondary level.

In addition to providing the information sought on the population defined in paragraph 23(1)(b) and subsection 23(2) of the Charter, this module considered the fact that, according to jurisprudence, individuals who studied in a French immersion program in Canada are not considered to have received instruction in the official language of the minority.Note 12 In addition, since the Charter does not specify the number of years of study required to determine a person’s rights-holder status, a question on this number was also necessary. For Quebec residents, because of the above-mentioned particularities associated with admission criteria for English-language programs, it was also important to find out the respondent’s language of instruction at the elementary and secondary levels and the number of years of study in English at those levels because of the point on “the major part of the elementary and secondary instruction he or she received in Canada,” stipulated in section 73 of Quebec’s Charte de la langue française.Note 13

Based on the strategy for the 2019 Census Test and in order to reduce response burden, this new question module was only supposed to be administered to a subset of households—households with at least one child and that meet certain linguistic criteria.Note 14 The strategy involved asking the new questions to each person in the selected households, determining the relationships among household members, and determining whether the children in the household are children of rights-holder parents.

In response to the recommendations from the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages’ report, variants of the question on mother tongue were also developed with the Advisory Committee on Language Statistics. The purpose of these variants was to convey to respondents that they could provide more than one “first language learned and still understood,” and an explanation of when more than one response should be provided (i.e., when the languages were learned at the same time). Since the Committee report implies that the current question on mother tongue may underestimate the size of the French-mother-tongue population in Canada outside Quebec, the data obtained were used to examine to what extent different variants of the question produce different estimates of this population.

The questions developed on language of instruction and mother tongue first underwent qualitative testing in the summer of 2018. The tests consisted of personal interviews with individuals who had to answer all the census questions, give their first impressions, provide clarification when needed, and answer related questions from the moderator.

The general purpose of this series of tests was to evaluate whether respondents understood the questions and their underlying concepts, and to ensure that respondents were able to follow the questionnaire flow (which included question “skips,” including in a preliminary instruction at the beginning of the module with questions on language of instruction).

While respondents generally understood the module with questions on language of instruction well, some changes were made based on the results of the qualitative tests:

Moreover, in the qualitative testing, respondents generally understood the test versions of the question on mother tongue. Consequently, few adjustments to the questions were required.

3.2 Modules and wording of questions in the 2019 Census Test

The questions adjusted to improve comprehension were submitted for the 2019 Census Test. They included the following:

Figure 1 The questions on language of instruction that were tested in the 2019 Census Test (paper questionnaire)

Description for Figure 1

This figure is a screen shot of Questions 30 to 35 of version 2 of the 2019 Census Test (paper questionnaire).

The following questions collect information in accordance with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to support education programs in English and French in Canada.

  • Question 30: Is this dwelling located in Quebec?
    This question is followed by two radio buttons:
    • “No” (if this is selected, the respondent is directed to continue with question 31)
    • “Yes” (if this is selected, the respondent is directed to go to question 34).
  • Question 31: Did this person do any of their primary or secondary schooling in French in Canada (including immersion)?
    Mark one circle only.
    This question is followed by two radio buttons:
    • “Yes (previously or currently attending)”
    • “No” (if this is selected, the respondent is instructed to go to question 36).
  • Question 32: In which type of program was this schooling in French done?
    This question is followed by three radio buttons:
    • “A regular French program in a French-language school”
    • “A French immersion program in an English-language school (including intensive and extended French programs)” (if this is selected, the respondent is directed to go to question 36)
    • “Both types of programs.”
    There is an edit field under the three radio button that reads, “Other program – specify”.
  • Question 33: For how many years did this person attend a regular French program in a French-language school?
    Two edit fields are provided:
    • “Number of years in primary schooling (including kindergarten and middle school)” (the respondent can enter the number of years and is then directed to go to question 36)
    • “Number of years in secondary schooling” (the respondent can enter the number of years and is then directed to go to question 36). 
  • Question 34: Did this person do any of their primary or secondary schooling in an English-language school in Canada (including immersion)?
    This question is followed by two radio buttons:
    • “Yes (previously or currently attending)”   
    • “No” (if selected, the respondent is directed to go to question 36).
  • Question 35: For how many years did this person do their schooling in an English-language school in Canada (including immersion)?
    There are two edit fields:
    •  “Number of years in primary schooling (including kindergarten)” (the respondent can enter the number of years)
    • “Number of years in secondary schooling” (the respondent can enter the number of years).

Variants of the question on mother tongue tested in the 2019 Census Test (paper questionnaire)

a) Version 1 (one-part question): The only difference between this question and past questions is the first note, which only appeared in the census guide of previous census cycles (Indicate more…)

Figure 2 The question on mother tongue that was tested in version 1 of the 2019 census Test (paper questionnaire)

Description for Figure 2

This figure is a screenshot of question 10 from version 1 of the 2019 Census Test (paper questionnaire).

  • Question 10: What is the language that this person first learned at home in childhood and still understands?
    Please report two languages or more only if those languages were learned at the same time at home before the person started school.
    If the person no longer understands the first language learned, indicate the second language learned.
    • There are two radio buttons where the respondent can select “English” or “French”.
    • There is an edit field under the radio buttons that reads, “Other language – specify.”  

b) Version 2 (two-part question): mother tongue is determined by combining the responses to both parts.

Figure 2.1 Version 2 of the 2019 Census Test (paper questionnaire), where mother tongue is obtained by combining responses from two sections

Description for Figure 2.1

This figure is a screenshot of version 2 of the 2019 Census Test (paper questionnaire) and contains questions 10 a) and 10 b).

  • Question 10 a): What language(s) did this person learn at home in childhood and still understands?
    • There are two radio buttons where the respondent can select “English” or “French.”
    • There is an edit field under the radio buttons that reads, “Other language – specify.”
  • Question 10 b): Of these languages, which one did this person first learn at home in childhood and still understands?
    Please report two languages or more only if those languages were learned at the same time at home before the person started school.
    If the person no longer understands the first language learned, indicate the second language learned.
    If this person indicates only one language in question 10 a), go to question 11.
    • There are two radio buttons where the respondent can select “English” or “French.”
    • There is an edit field under the radio buttons that reads, “Other language – specify.”

3.3 Quantitative testing of questions and additional analyses

The purpose of the 2019 Census Test, or quantitative test, was to evaluate two versions of the census questionnaire and to compare them with a control version of the potential 2021 Census if its content was the same as in 2016. These two variants of the status quo included various changes, not only to the language modules, but also to several other places in the questionnaire. Each version was administered to a sample of the Canadian population, excluding the territories, in paper and electronic format.

3.3.1 Objectives of the quantitative test

For the questions on language of instruction, the objectives of the test were as follows:

For mother tongue, the main goal was to determine whether the usual version of the question underestimates the number of French-mother-tongue individuals in Canada outside Quebec. The two test versions of the question specify that respondents can provide more than one mother tongue.Note 16 Under the assumption of underestimation, the total number of people who reported the minority official language as mother tongue—either alone or with another language—should have been higher with the question variants tested than with the control version (usual version).

3.3.2 Key results of the 2019 Census TestNote 17

3.3.2.1 Order of questions

The 2019 Census Test showed that the results of the questions on language of instruction and type of program attended are similar and are not statistically different, regardless of question placement in the questionnaire, for residents of Quebec and the other provinces. In Quebec, the people who reported that they went to an English-language school in Canada represented 11.5% and 12.2% of the population, respectively, in test versions 1 and 2. In Canada outside Quebec, 2.9% (version 1) and 2.8% (version 2) of the population reported having attended a regulation French-language program in a French school in Canada.

Moreover, the number of children living in a household where a rights-holder lives is also not statistically different between test versions 1 and 2, in both Quebec and the other provinces.Note 18 Table 1 shows that 2.6% of individuals younger than age 18 in Canada would be the children of rights-holders, in either version of the questionnaire.

Table 1
Number of children (0 to 17 years) residing with at least one rights-holder, by version of the 2019 Census Test questionnaire and place of residence
Table summary
This table displays the results of Number of children (0 to 17 years) residing with at least one rights-holder. The information is grouped by Place of residence (appearing as row headers), Version 1 and Version 2 (appearing as column headers).
Place of residence Version 1 Version 2
Number Percent of the total population Percent of the population aged 0 to 17 years Number Percent of the total population Percent of the population aged 0 to 17 years
Canada outside Quebec 441,720 2.2 10.1 446,320 2.2 10.1
Quebec 275,365 4.1 18.4 267,040 4.0 18.5
Canada 717,085 2.6 12.2 713,360 2.6 12.2

Non-response to the questions on language of instruction varied significantly between test versions 1 and 2. It was higher in version 2, when the questions came later in the long-form questionnaire,Note 19 just before the education module. This was expected because it is generally known that non-response in a questionnaire increases with the number of questions asked up to that point. The non-response rate was also higher for the questions on the language of education programs than for the other questions in the census test.

Compared with the other versions of the questionnaire, the number of people who reported completing secondary studies in the question immediately after the module on language of instruction in test version 2 was much lower. Since respondents are asked to provide information on their schooling in Canada in that module—a restriction not found in the education module—the proximity of the two modules may have created confusion among some respondents.

3.3.2.2 Additional information on the quality of the results

Aside from the non-response rate, other indicators of the general quality of the results were analyzed.

The estimated number of people who had been or were in a minority official language education program gathered from the 2019 Census Test was compared with the annual number of individuals enrolled in these programs, taken from data from the Elementary–Secondary Education Survey (ESES) and the Ministère de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur du Québec. Although these sources are not fully comparable with the Census Test, by focusing in on a specific age group, they still provide a minimum threshold above which the estimates from the test can be expected.

For example, during the 2017/2018 school year (most recent data available), 83,640 children and youth were enrolled in an English-language minority public education program in Quebec, compared with 166,690 children and youth enrolled in a French-language minority program in the rest of Canada, excluding the territories.

The results of the Census Test for the population between ages 3 and 17 yearsNote 20 who studied in a minority language education program are consistent with the data on school enrolments in minority language education programs derived from the ESES and the data from the Ministère de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur du Québec.

According to the results of the Census Test, 4.6% of children living in Canada outside Quebec studied in a French-language educational institution in Canada at some point in their life. This rate is comparable to the administrative data on enrolments drawn from the ESES, in which 4.3% of children attended a French-language educational institution in Canada outside Quebec in 2017/2018. The gap between these two data points can be explained by differences in the concepts measured by each source. As mentioned earlier, the data on enrolments from the ESES cover children enrolled in an official minority language school at the time of the survey, while the census test asked respondents whether they had already done studies in French in a French-language educational institution at some point in their life. Similarly, the difference between the 10.2% of children enrolled in an English-language educational institution in Quebec in 2017/2018 and the 12.2% of children living in Quebec who studied or are studying in English in Canada, according to the 2019 Census Test, can be attributed to the difference in the concepts measured.

Despite the coherence of these results, the analysis of the 2019 Census Test data revealed some issues that have to be considered during the edit and imputation steps. For example, some respondents to the paper questionnaire had trouble following the flow in the module on language of instruction. In fact, around 9% of respondents to the paper questionnaire in Quebec missed the first skip and, as a result, answered the questions for residents of Canada outside Quebec. However, not only can this issue be identified, but also three-quarters of Canadians are expected to complete the electronic questionnaire in 2021, which will significantly reduce the magnitude of corrections required.

3.3.2.3 Language “filters”

The results of the 2019 Census Test suggest that using language criteria, or “filters,” to reduce the number of households that need to answer the questions on rights-holders and their children in the electronic questionnaire could result in an underestimation of the number of children of rights-holders.Note 21 The results from the paper versions of the census test questionnaire, in which all respondents had to answer a block of questions on language of instruction, reveal that a considerable proportion of children (12%) who were students at a French-language school outside Quebec lived in a household in which no member answered “French” to at least one of the three language questions considered in the filters. These children could not have been identified as children of rights-holders if, like in the electronic questionnaire, their household had been excluded on the basis of these language characteristics.

More broadly, the 2019 Census Test results indicate that about half (53%) of the children of rights-holders in Canada outside Quebec can be enumerated only by the parents’ education, the children’s education, or both, and not by mother tongue (Chart 1).Note 22 The results also confirm the findings in the first parts of this document, namely the significant proportion of children who only meet the criterion under subsection 23(2) of the Charter. As a result, 31% of children are children of rights-holders since one of the children studied or is studying in a regular French program in a French-language school in Canada, without either parent having French as their mother tongue or having done their schooling in French in Canada. While this was not very common when the Survey on the Vitality of Official-Language Minorities was conducted in 2006—even despite the fact that this survey did not include all parents likely to be rights-holders as per the three criteria under section 23—it has expanded since then. It is quite significant in certain provinces: 61%, 43% and 44% of children in Prince Edward Island, Manitoba and British Columbia, respectively, would be considered the children of rights-holders as per subsection 23(2).

Chart 1 Distribution by eligibility criteria of children (0 to 17 years old) residing with at least one rights-holder, by province of residence (Canada outside Quebec), 2019 Census Test version 2

Data table for Chart 1
Data table for chart 1
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 1. The information is grouped by Eligibility criteria of children of rights-holders (appearing as row headers), Canada outside Quebec, N.L., P.E.I., N.S., N.B., Ont., Man., Sask., Alta. and B.C., calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Eligibility criteria of children of rights-holders Canada outside Quebec N.L. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C.
percent
Schooling in French (mother tongue other than French) — parent(s) and child 8.6 0.0 0.0 5.2 11.8 8.0 15.5 0.0 14.8 0.0
Schooling in French (mother tongue other than French) — child only 30.9 7.9 60.9 8.4 2.4 32.7 43.2 25.1 37.6 43.6
Schooling in French (mother tongue other than French) — parents(s) only 13.9 31.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 16.2 13.3 65.3 3.5 22.6
French mother tongue of parent (with or without other criteria) 46.6 61.0 39.1 86.4 84.8 43.1 28.0 9.6 44.1 33.8
3.3.2.4 Mother tongue

Chart 2 shows the total number of people with a minority official language, reported alone or with one or more languages, as their mother tongue, based on the three versions of the question on mother tongue. While some differences between the control version and the alternative versions are observed, none of these differences are statistically significant. Similarly, the test versions do not yield more individuals with a French mother tongue in Canada outside Quebec or in all of Canada. In other words, the 2019 Census Test did not confirm that the total number of individuals with French as their first language learned in childhood and still understood in Canada outside Quebec was underestimated by the question in past censuses, regardless of the province of residence.

Chart 2 Population with the minority official language as their mother tongue, by province of residence and version of the 2019 Census Test questionnaire

Data table for Chart 2
Data table for chart 2
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 2. The information is grouped by Province (appearing as row headers), Control version, Test version 1 and Test version 2, calculated using number units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Province Control version Test version 1 Test version 2
number
N.L. 115 2,470 4,750
P.E.I. 2,210 0 1,805
N.S. 19,825 20,335 26,390
N.B. 222,135 213,915 187,250
Que. 720,595 749,420 792,520
Ont. 464,895 477,895 423,410
Man. 41,050 32,440 39,240
Sask. 10,105 3,635 12,880
Alta. 68,280 65,175 71,490
B.C. 79,140 74,200 60,185

This does not mean that the results between the different versions of the question are completely identical. As expected, the number of multiple responses is higher in the two test versions than in the control version. The number of respondents with a minority official language as their mother tongue who reported more than one language was 50% and 25% higher in test versions 1 and 2, respectively, than in the control version. However, this increase occurred at the expense of single responses, which fell by as much.

3.4 Changes to the questionnaire following the census tests and other considerations on using the census to measure the number of children of rights-holders

3.4.1 Changes to the questionnaire in light of the tests

In light of the results of the census tests, the following decisions have been made:

3.4.2 Limitations of the census in meeting data needs

Despite the expected quality of the 2021 Census results, they will have limitations. The main limitation stems from the fact that the status of a child of a rights-holder that can be determined from the census must be established not only according to the responses to the questions about the children themselves, but also according to the responses about their parents and their brothers and sisters living in the same household. This means that if a child is a child of a rights-holder only because of the education or mother tongue of a parent living outside the child’s household, or of a deceased rights-holder, that child cannot be enumerated as a child of a rights-holder.

This is more likely to happen among children living in lone-parent families.Note 24 If, for example, a child was not educated in the language of the minority and is living with a parent who was not educated in that language and whose mother tongue is not the minority official language, but has another parent living in another household who is a rights-holder, it will not be possible to tell from the census whether the child is a child of a rights-holder. In other words, “extended” families living in separate dwellings cannot be reconstructed from the census. Although most of these cases are limited to children of linguistically mixed (exogamous) couples who were not educated in the minority official language who are living with only one parent who is not the rights-holder, and while Statistics Canada will explore ways to make adjustments and evaluate imputation approaches, this limits the precision of the results.

Although the 2021 Census publication schedule had not been determined at the time of publishing this report, another inherent limitation of the census is that the results on the number of children of rights-holders will be published more than a year after data collection. It is therefore very likely that, in a given municipality, this number will have changed during this period, in particular because children are getting older or may move from their place of residence at the time of the census. For example, an area where 30 of these children resided on May 10, 2021, will perhaps see families settle there or leave once the census data are made public. Given that the status of child of a rights-holder is a characteristic passed on within the same household, the mobility of a single household or family may cause estimates to vary by more than one. This means that the 2021 Census will not allow a complete enumeration of the children of rights-holders, nor will it alone make it possible to meet all the data needs relating to the children of rights-holders, as a continuously updated register could. However, it will provide a robust estimate of the size of this population at a specific point in time, that is, on Census Day.

Taking into account the evaluation of options regarding the placement of the questions on rights-holders (right before the long-form module on education or after the short-form language questions), Statistics Canada conducted a number of additional analyses at the same time as the census tests to assess the benefits and limitations of the long- and short-form census questionnaires in meeting the need for data on rights-holders.

The 2019 Census Test was based on a probability sample of 135,000 households, but it could not be used to compare the quality level of the data on children of rights-holders that could be produced by combining the short- and long-form questionnaires administered to 100% of households (approximately 16 million) with the quality level of data from a long-form questionnaire administered to 25% of households (approximately 3.7 million). This is why Statistics Canada used data on mother tongue and language spoken at home from the 2016 Census long- and short-form questionnaires to determine whether the estimates from the long-form questionnaire (25% of households) were statistically different from the estimates produced by combining the data from the short- and long-form questionnaires (100% of households) for very small communities and small towns (municipalities).

By using data from the 2016 Census of Population, an indirect proxy measure of the population of children of rights-holders can be produced for statistical comparison purposes. The 2016 short- and long-form questionnaires can be used to estimate the population aged 0 to 17 years living in a household with at least one person whose mother tongue is a minority official language, or at least one person whose mother tongue is neither English nor French, but who speaks the minority official language at least regularly at home. This is an indirect conservative proxy measure of the number of children of rights-holders.

Based on this approach, the approximate total number of children of rights-holders in Canada (by proxy measure) is estimated at 574,450 according to the short-form questionnaire. Of these, 121,355 lived in a municipality (census subdivision [CSD]) where fewer than 500 children meet the proxy measure criterion, and 43,800 lived in a CSD where fewer than 100 children meet the proxy measure criterion.Note 25

Chart 3 shows the results of the statistical analysis conducted by classifying CSDs by the number of children in each CSD who meet the proxy measure criterion. This chart reveals that, among all CSDs in Canada (municipalities or localities) that were home to at least one child of a rights-holder in 2016 (based on the proxy measure) (i.e., 3,081 out of 4,670 CSDs), 95% had an estimated number that did not differ significantly between the short-form and long-form questionnaires, at a 95% confidence level.

Chart 3 Proportion of census subdivisions (CSDs) where the estimated number of children (0 to 17 years) of rights-holders obtained from the short-form questionnaire is within or outside the confidence interval (p < 0.05) of the estimate obtained from the long-form questionnaire (indirect measure), by estimated number of children of rights-holders in the CSD, 2016

Data table for Chart 3
Data table for chart 3
Table summary
This table displays the results of Data table for chart 3. The information is grouped by Estimated number of children of rights-holders in the CSD (appearing as row headers), The number obtained from the short-form questionnaire falls outside the 95% confidence interval of the estimate obtained from the long-form questionnaire and The number obtained from the short-form questionnaire falls within the 95% confidence interval of the estimate obtained from the long-form questionnaire, calculated using percent units of measure (appearing as column headers).
Estimated number of children of rights-holders in the CSD The number obtained from the short-form questionnaire falls outside the 95% confidence interval of the estimate obtained from the long-form questionnaire The number obtained from the short-form questionnaire falls within the 95% confidence interval of the estimate obtained from the long-form questionnaire
percent
0 0 100
1 to 9 3 97
10 to 24 5 95
25 to 49 8 92
50 to 99 8 92
100 to 499 9 91
500 to 999 7 93
1,000 or more 8 92
At least one child 5 95

Moreover, in the CSDs with fewer than 100 children who meet the established proxy measure criterion—that is, municipalities or localities where school services in the minority official language are more likely to be unavailable—about half of children of rights-holders live in a CSD where the difference between the number from the short-form questionnaire and the long-form questionnaire was less than 10.Note 26 It can be difficult for users to interpret such differences because of the rounding rules that aim to safeguard the confidentiality of information collected from respondents.

Whether data are collected from the short- or long-form questionnaire, the 2021 Census will provide quality data and at lower levels of geography on the population of children eligible for instruction in the minority official language.Note 27 As a result, the number of children of rights-holders obtained using census data will be the number that determined by jurisprudence as corresponding or coming close to the upper limit of the range that includes the number of children whose parents “will eventually avail themselves” of their constitutional right to have them educated in the minority official language. The latter number will therefore be lower than the number (maximum) produced from the census and higher than the number (minimum) of current enrolments in minority official language programs.

4. Towards a data “ecosystem” on rights-holders

While the 2021 Census of Population is a core component for collecting data on the children of rights-holders in terms of instruction in the minority official language, the data derived from it are just one part of the information sought by the courts and representatives of official language minority communities. To paint a more complete picture of rights-holders in Canada and to produce the information required, additional information must be drawn from other sources.

Statistics Canada is able to use its methods to produce the three required datasets mentioned by the courts: (1) the estimated maximum number of eligible children of rights-holders at the municipality (census subdivision) level or for non-standard geographic areas, such as school catchment areas, using data from the Census of Population; (2) the minimum number of children of rights-holders (children currently enrolled in a minority language educational institution or program), using administrative school data; (3) the estimated number of rights-holders who intend to or would like to exercise their constitutional rights, using a new postcensal survey on official language minorities (2022).

While its objective is not to collect data at lower levels of geography, the new postcensal survey—currently under development—to be conducted following the 2021 Census of Population will help to estimate the number and proportion of parents who will or would like to exercise their right to enrol their children in a minority language educational institution, based on census information on concentration and demographic weight in each municipality or locality. These data would complement those from the census and would provide information on “the number of persons who [would] eventually avail themselves of the contemplated” program or institution.

The data on rights-holders and their children drawn from the 2021 Census and the postcensal survey will also be used in combination with geographical data to match the place of residence of children of rights-holders with the exact location of each minority language educational institution in Canada. As a result, Statistics Canada will be able to determine the exact distance between the place of residence of rights-holders and the geographic location of these educational institutions.

For example, the 2019 Census Test data show that 94% of children of rights-holders in Canada outside Quebec lived within 15 km of a minority language school, and almost 9 in 10 lived within 10 km of a minority school. In Quebec, the proportions were 97% and 92%, respectively.

5. Conclusion

In response to the recommendations in the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages’ 2017 report on the enumeration of rights-holders, and following requests from representatives of official language minorities across Canada, the Government of Canada asked Statistics Canada to “identify the best ways to collect quality data on rights-holders and their children as stipulated in paragraphs 23(1)(a) and (b) and subsection 23(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

Taking into account key elements of jurisprudence—particularly the Supreme Court of Canada and Supreme Court of British Columbia judgments cited in this document—as well as the work of the House of Commons Standing Committee to identify the needs for statistical data on rights-holders and their children, Statistics Canada examined different options and assessed their potential and limitations. A rigorous scientific approach was used. This included compliance with legal requirements, data quality assessment, respondent burden, confidentiality, historical comparability and costs.

In 2021, the census will have a brand-new block of questions aimed at measuring the number of children of rights-holders under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This addition is the result of the efforts and work of experts led by Statistics Canada to meet the data needs for planning public services, such as school infrastructure and educational services in the minority official language in Canada.

Formed in 2017, the Advisory Committee on Language Statistics provided opinions and advice on the collection strategy, the development of questions, and their qualitative and quantitative testing. The six new questions (five on the electronic questionnaire), combined with other census questions, will be used to establish the most comprehensive database to date on rights-holders and their children under paragraphs 23(1)(a) and (b) and subsection 23(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These results will be made available at the municipality or locality levels and at custom geographic levels, and they can be crossed with the other characteristics collected by the long-form census questionnaire, such as citizenship.

The census will be a key component of the data “ecosystem” that Statistics Canada is implementing. In addition to the census, this ecosystem will include administrative data and a new postcensal survey that is under development. Each of these sources will improve and enrich the availability of data on rights-holders.

As with any data source, the census has its limitations. This is especially true in the unique context of children of rights-holders, as the complex task of enumerating them requires the use of several questions combined, including on the relationships between persons living under the same roof. In addition, the census cannot produce a register of children of rights-holders, nor is that its purpose. However, it will help meet a key need both for the various players and stakeholders in official language minority communities, and for provincial and territorial ministries of education.

Appendix 1 – Complementary Table

Table A.1
Population with the official minority language as their mother tongue (multiple responses included), by province of residence and version of the 2019 Census Test
Table summary
This table displays the results of Population with the official minority language as their mother tongue (multiple responses included). The information is grouped by Province (appearing as row headers), Control version, Test version 1, Test version 2, P-value:
Test version 1 and P-value:
Test version 2 (appearing as column headers).
Province Control version Test version 1 Test version 2 P-valueTable A.1 Note 1:
Test version 1
P-valueTable A.1 Note 1:
Test version 2
Newfoundland and Labrador 115 2,470 4,755 0.2755 0.0530
Prince Edward Island 2,210 0 1,810 0.2648 0.9400
Nova Scotia 19,820 20,340 26,385 0.9589 0.8674
New Brunswick 222,130 213,915 187,245 0.6346 0.6764
Quebec 720,595 749,420 792,515 0.5931 0.1253
Ontario 464,895 477,895 423,410 0.6140 0.3011
Manitoba 41,050 32,440 39,240 0.4939 0.9151
Saskatchewan 10,105 3,635 12,885 0.0943 0.9055
Alberta 68,275 65,175 71,490 0.9742 0.7071
British Columbia 79,145 74,200 60,185 0.4845 0.1742
Canada outside Quebec 907,745 890,075 827,405 0.6388 0.2056
Canada 1,628,335 1,639,495 1,619,920 0.1291 0.1946
Date modified: