Search this site powered by FreeFind

Quick Link

for your convenience!

Human Rights, Youth Voices etc.

click here


For Information Concerning the Crisis in Darfur

click here


Northern Uganda Crisis

click here


 Whistleblowers Need Protection



Fifth Anniversary Conference
Notes for remarks by Hon. David Kilgour, J.D.
Lord Elgin Hotel,
10 Feb 2011

My assigned topic is the need for good research by NGOs to provide legislators and other policymakers with responsible options. Poor public policy often results from inadequate, bad or sometimes even no substantive research (A good example of the latter is the National Energy Programme of 1980; a more recent one is the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act of 2005, which has aptly been termed the “whistleblower persecution act’).

In the necessary but often neglected field of family and marriage, research is often contested and political, so the role of IMFC and is all the more important today.

One of the first things persons involved in policy-making learn is that there is “research” to support virtually any point of view. Sometimes it seems that the more counter-intuitive the viewpoint the more vehement its advocates are about the accuracy of their “data”.

Standards for Good Research

In preparing for this event, I learned that an Ottawa-based organization, the Social Research and Demonstration Corporation, has been doing high-quality work for over two decades and is a recipient of the Outstanding Research Contribution Award (2000).

Let me therefore offer some selected parts of its code of practice. The ten principles are carried on its website (, but I’ll quote or paraphrase only some of them:

Respect for human dignity. ..(is the) cardinal principle of modern research ethics... This principle aspires to protecting the multiple and interdependent interests of the person — from bodily to psychological to cultural integrity…

Respect for truth… requires that data be accurately gathered, recorded, and preserved and the results of research be reported fairly and honestly. Information will not be knowingly misinterpreted or used in inappropriate ways.

Respect for … consent...translates into a requirement for free and informed consent on the part of all participants in research, including the right to withdraw from research without penalty.

Respect for vulnerable persons…whose diminished competence or decision-making capacity make them vulnerable. Children, institutionalized persons or others who are vulnerable are entitled… to special protection against abuse, exploitation, or discrimination…I add here parenthetically that children from broken families are sometimes among the most vulnerable Canadians.

Respect for privacy and confidentiality… must be applied to protect the access, control and dissemination of personal information… such standards help to protect the mental or psychological integrity of individuals.

Respect for justice and inclusiveness...means that no segment of the population should be unfairly burdened with the harms of research. (This)… imposes particular obligations toward individuals who are vulnerable and unable to protect their own interests in order to ensure that they are not exploited...

Balancing harms and benefits… Research participants must not be subjected to unnecessary risks of harm, and their participation in research must be essential to achieving scientifically and societally important aims that cannot be realized without the involvement of human participants…

Respect for interests of the wider society…No research should be undertaken that is predisposed toward a particular outcome…Funders and operational partners should be notified of the protocols, standards and guidelines under which the research will be undertaken.

Respect for the broad dissemination of research findings. (They should be)… shared with the general public, with funders, with research participants, and with colleagues. Findings should be made available in the context of independently published and easily accessible reports.

Finally, Respect for high standards of evidence. The analysis of all research data is guided by a commitment to raise the standards of evidence that are used in assessing social policies and programs. This commitment implies the use of the best available technology, methodology, or practice appropriate to each research project.

Long census vs. voluntary survey

Good research requires good data. I was disappointed with the 2010 Canadian decision to replace the mandatory long census with a voluntary survey in 2011. Statisticians, economists, former government officials, charities, doctors and educators stepped forward to explain how much the private and public sectors depend on demographic details collected by the mandatory long form.

The provinces warned the decision would undermine the accuracy of budget decisions and erode the ability to direct social programs to the most vulnerable. Provincial representatives worry that the next census will produce inaccurate results in part because needier Canadians won’t fill out the voluntary long form. That would mean they would no longer show up in statistics.

At the very least, the two methodologies make the 2011 data non-comparable with the last census. As you know, it is the ability to accurately measure change of data over time which has made our Canadian census statistics the envy worldwide. At this time when governments are very correctly increasing the emphasis on results-based program decision-making, the lost of this valuable tool to measure results is likely to have long range negative effects on Canada’s public policy.


Permit me in closing, ladies and gentlemen, to stress that accurate research by NGOs like the IMFC is terribly important to good policy in a crucial social policy field.

Thank you.

Home Books Photo Gallery About David Survey Results Useful Links Submit Feedback