Category Archives: Letters 2010

Canadian Census – 2010_3


Hi Pierre,
Thank you for sharing your opinion with me. As Edmund Burke defined the standards of elected representatives: “It is his duty to sacrifice his repos, his pleasures, his satisfaction, to constituents; and above all, ever and in all cases, to prefer their interests to his own.” I would really like to feel that as my representative you are willing to represent me and my opinions. I have not gleaned this based on both of the instances where we have corresponded. In both instances your response was simply re-stating “the government’s” position, which I am already familiar with. You do not solely hold the power to determine whether the government will revisit issues, the people of Canada do.


Canadian Census – 2010_2

From: []

Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 11:48 AM
To: KD
Subject: RE: Your correspondence – Census

Thank you for your comments on changes to information gathering through the census.
Recently, in a move to protect Canadians’ privacy and limit the intrusiveness of government, our Conservative government announced that filling out the long-form version of the Census will now be voluntary. The long-form of the Census asks intrusive questions like how many bedrooms you have in your house; if you drive by yourself to work or with others; or if the plumbing or wiring in your house needs to be fixed.

The government made the decision to conduct the mandatory census as the short form only. The content of the short form is unchanged from the previous census. The government also decided that the long-form be conducted as a separate voluntary survey.

StatisticsCanadawill conduct and release this survey applying the same rigorous methods and standards used for all of its surveys. I would note that this survey is intended to reach even more households than the long-form census would have reached, in order to help ensure data quality.

I would encourage Canadians to participate in this survey as vigorously as they have in the past for the long-form census.

Beyond the provision of basic information, the government does not believe it is appropriate to demand detailed information from its citizens. We believe the new National Household Survey will enable us to obtain the quality data Canadians need, without mandating the provision of personal information by citizens.
The government will not be revisiting this issue.
Minister Clement has acknowledged, with regret, the resignation of Munir Sheikh, the Chief Statistician ofCanada. Our approach is about finding a better balance between collecting necessary data and protecting the privacy rights of Canadians. It is unfortunate that Mr. Sheikh did not share these objectives.

Until a permanent successor to Mr. Sheikh is chosen, Wayne Smith, Assistant Chief Statistician, Business and Trade Statistics, will act on an interim basis.

We are confident that Statistics Canada’s employees will continue the hard work and dedication that has made Statistics Canada one of the best national statistical organizations in the world.

According to the Ignatieff Liberals (senior spokesperson Joyce Murray, MP) freeing Canadians from the threat of fines and imprisonment for not filling out a government form is a slide towards “tyranny”.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Michael Ignatieff likes to brag that he is a former professor of human rights. Yet now he and his party actually believe that our human rights are infringed making it VOLUNTARY for citizens to tell the government how many toilets they own, what time they leave for work in the morning, and other personal information.

Unlike the Ignatieff Liberals, we don’t want to threaten Canadians with fines and jail time if they won’t reveal unnecessary personal information.

Unlike the Ignatieff Liberals, we believe there must be a balance between collecting useful information and protecting Canadians’ privacy.

And, unlike the Ignatieff Liberals, we understand what “tyranny” means and we are proud thatCanadastands up to tyranny worldwide.

To label a voluntary census as “tyranny” is an insult to victims of tyranny around the world.

The Ignatieff Liberals’ latest outrageous claim proves, yet again, that they aren’t in it for Canadians. They are just in it for themselves.

Pierre Poilievre, M.P. Nepean-Carleton

Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs


Read my Reply to Pierre

Omar Khadr – 2010_4

There was NO reply to my further requests regarding Omar Khadr, his treatment, our violations based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.


Omar Khadr 3 – 2010

**Below are my multiple attempts to get a reply**

From: KD
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 10:38 AM
To: ‘
Subject: RE: Your correspondence – Omar Khadr


I would rather not focus on what other parties have done but what your party has done – as you are the party in power.

You did not respond to the issue of the human rights violation – is this deserved based on Omar Khadr’s actions as a minor?  It seems that is what you are saying based on your response. I am a member of your constituency and providing you with what I would like.  I expect the government to work to repatriate Omar Khadr – just as I would expect you would do that same for me.
The Supreme Court ruling still indicated that there have been human rights violation and that the Geneva convention has been violated.  We have also violated the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.  The Supreme court overturned the rulings because it was overstepping their bounds to direct the government to repatriate Omar Khadr, a step they have never taken before.  Also it isn’t like the ruling was backing or in support of the Government ““offends the most basic Canadian standards about the treatment of detained youth suspects.” – not exactly a ringing endorsement. This ruling does not absolve you or your party of responsibility.
Not to mention the cost incurred to keep Khadr inGuantanamo.

I have not stated that I do not wish for Khadr to be held accountable but he must be afforded his Canadian.

I would like a response to our human rights violations, Geneva convention violations and UN convention Rights of the Child violations.  I would also like to ensure that you are taking my opinion and view as a constituency of your riding as *you* represent *me* as my MP.

Best regards


From: KD
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 8:48 AM
Subject: RE: Your correspondence – Omar Khadr

Hi Pierre,

I am expecting your response to this.

Best Regards,


RE: Your correspondence – Omar Khadr

From: KD
To: <>
CC: <>
Date: Mar 09 2010 – 10:02am

Hi Pierre,

I have tried calling your constituency office who indicated that perhaps I had the wrong e-mail address.  As I have already had a response this solution seems unlikely.  I have cc’d the secondary e-mail address which is located on the government site.

Again – I am still awaiting a response to this.  I am free to discuss at any time –  I do think that this turn around time for response is unacceptable.

What are the conservatives going to do with regard to Omar Khadr moving forward?
What are the conservatives going to do in the future to ensure we meet the Geneva convention and the UN convention on the rights of the child guidelines?

What is our response to the violations already committed??


Omar Khadr 2 – 2010

From: []
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 10:01 AM
To: KD
Subject: RE: Your correspondence – Omar Khadr


Thank you for your comments on the Omar Khadr case.

As you know, the Supreme Court of Canada recently overturned two previous lower court decisions and ruled that the Government is not required to ask for accused terrorist Omar Khadr’s return toCanada.

We are pleased that the Supreme Court unanimously agreed with us that decisions regardingCanada’s foreign affairs are for the democratically elected Government to decide – and not the courts.  We are currently reviewing the ruling in its entirety.

Omar Khadr is accused of the most serious of crimes, including the murder of US Army medic Sergeant Christopher Speer and the planting of roadside bombs in Afghanistan – the very type of weapon that has taken so many Canadian lives in that war-torn country.

Clearly these accusations are serious enough for the Obama Administration to identify Khadr as one of theGuantanamoterrorist camp prisoners set for trial under a military commission.

And while the Liberals will continue to cry for Omar Khadr’s return toCanada, we are merely following the same policy as previous Liberal governments following Khadr’s capture on the battlefields ofAfghanistanin 2002.


Pierre Poilievre,  M.P. Nepean-Carleton

Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Read my reply

Canadian Census – 2010

Sent: July 23, 2010 7:46 AM
To: Poilievre, Pierre – M.P.
Subject: Census
Importance: High

Hi Pierre,

I would like to ensure that I take a moment to let you know (as you are my member of parliament) my opinion regarding the census. I strongly feel that the census should remain as is and not change from mandatory to voluntary.

The long form is a critical source of information about diversity, employment, income, education and other characteristics of Canadians. It is essential to business, research, planning and good public policies and programs. Stakeholders ranging from the business community, to university researchers to social justice advocates are raising their voices to oppose this move.

Best Regards,

Read Pierre’s Reply

Omar Khadr – 2010

From: KD
Sent: February 17, 2010 4:20 PM
To: Poilievre, Pierre – M.P.

Subject: Omar Khadr

Hello Pierre,

I have just moved into your riding in Old Barrhaven.  I wanted to get in touch to let you know how disappointed I am with our governments response to Omar Khadr.  It makes me uncomfortable as a Canadian to see our Government taking no, or bare minimum action in order to return him home.  Since the Supreme court has been very clear about our errors and the fact that his human rights have been abused I have been very surprised with the inaction of your party.

In addressing the human rights of Omar Khadr you would give us all confidence that our own rights would be safeguarded.
Please let me know what your stance on this issue is and what you are doing about this issue.

Best Regards,

Read Pierre’s Reply