Sandra Finley vs Lockheed Martin?

Like Michael Schmidt’s, this case of Candian Sandra Finley who conscientiously objected to participating in a Canadian census conducted by an American corporation and was subsequently charged and tried in Canadian courts, started more than a year ago. Sandra is set to continue her odyssey through the courts tomorrow, in Saskatoon. Those of us who care about Canadian sovereignty, and who don’t want our country to be swallowed up in a North American Union, would be well advised to take an interest in Sandra’s case. The story that follows came to us as a forwarded email, apparently originating with Sandra herself:

You don’t have to look far to find this sort of thing on the L-M website. This was on their home page.

(Ouch! It’s coming a little too fast!)

FOR NEWCOMERS: I appended material that was circulated in 2008, prior to my original trial date of January 2009. In case you want a quick scroll-through. – Sandra










The legal arguments I will use in Court begin in email #3 of this set. /Sandra

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


TRIAL DATES (3 days):

Monday, Jan. 11th & Tuesday, Jan. 12th

Continuing on  Monday, February 8th,  2010

9:30 am


Court Room #7

Provincial Court, Saskatoon on 19th Street between 2nd and 3rd Avenue

I expect that I will be presenting the bulk of my argument on Monday, Feb 8th.  And I will be cross-examined then.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


I (and thousands of others) did not comply with the 2006 census.  There is more than one issue.  My main reason was because the Government out-sourced some of the Canadian census work to Lockheed Martin Corporation, synonymous with the American military-industrial-congressional complex. I was charged under the Statistics Act for failure to comply with the census.  My trial was re-scheduled from January 2009 to January 2010.  If convicted, the maximum sentence is a fine of $500 and 3 months in jail.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


I believe the Charter arguments are very strong, as set out in email #3. I expect to be found “not guilty”.  I expect the Courts to overturn part of the Statistics Act because it contravenes the constitutional Rights and Freedoms of citizens.  A citizen cannot be forced to provide a “personal core of information” to the Government.  The “long census form” which I received requires one to do so, under threat of jail-time and a fine. The short form would still be an infringement of Charter protection I believe.

If I am found “guilty” I know that I will appeal the decision.

Previously I have said that if I am found “not guilty”, the Crown would likely appeal.  Now it seems to me that the situation is self-evident:  the Statistics Act is unconstitutional. The Crown will see there is no ground for appeal.  The law is solidly on the side of citizens.

But I do not know how the system works.  If parts of an Act of Parliament are found to be unconstitutional, maybe they would want the decision to come from a higher-court judge?

This trial is in front of a provincial court judge with a federal prosecutor.

If the arrangements for the postponed trial from last year are still in place, Statistics Canada is sending a lawyer along with Anil Arora, the Assistant Chief Statistician for Social, Health and Labour Statistics.  Mr. Arora and I had a lengthy conversation in 2006 at the time of the census.  In my estimation, his arguments for why I should fill out the census form were weak and did not address the reasons why I did not.

The Supreme Court has rapped the knuckles of police officers for being “dismissive” of Charter rights.  Cripes!  Statistics Canada referred this case to the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT who then laid the charges.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


By my understanding, Canadian democracy is weak at present; corporate values, corporatized public institutions and governments run by corporations (corporatocracy) are usurping democratic values and institutions.  It is a creeping path to militarism.

As with any dynamic system, if we do not correct the system (of governance in this case) BEFORE it goes past the tipping point, the system collapses and is not retrievable.  We have the feedback to know that things are wrong; it is up to us to take appropriate action in a timely way to bring the system of governance back into balance.

In the present environment, two very important tools are helpful:

1.  an understanding of history

2.  knowledge of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

HOWEVER, Charter Rights will not help us, if we do not know WHAT THEY ARE and HOW TO USE THEM.  By learning we empower ourselves. I always learn more from direct experience!

The value of sharing the trial preparation work with you:

– the number of informed people becomes more

– we come to see that the legal system is not as daunting as we believe it to be (we CAN make it accessible), and

– I benefit from your input!

If we have any appreciation of the atrocities committed by governments throughout history, we will understand the importance of challenging AND WINNING, which means forcing the Government to respect the rights and freedoms of Canadian citizens.

When I read the Supreme Court decisions related to JUST ONE aspect of the legal arguments (see email #3 in this set), I am appalled that the Government has been as dismissive of Charter Rights as they have been in relation to the Census.  The Supreme Court takes the view that the police have no excuse (they cannot plead ignorance) for failure to respect Charter Rights.  These are fundamental, constitutional rights that trump all the other laws of the land.

Statistics Canada, in response to citizen concerns about privacy issues, SAID that they had reviewed the situation, taken advice on it, and everything is okay.  The common law cases that have evolved out of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms clearly show that the Statistics Act contravenes the Charter.  The case law (1984, 1993, 1996) was in existence prior to citizen complaints (starting as early as 2003) about the 2006 census.

Through the trial I am becoming aware of the great gift that the Charter is to citizens in a free and democratic society – – IF we are aware of it and use it when the times demand.  I know there is ying and yang in everything. The yang trumps the ying in the case of the Charter!

Use of the Courts (instead of violence) to help bring correction, is part of Canadian tradition.

For example, the right of women to vote and run for office (suffrage)  was accomplished in the U.S. (1920) and in Great Britain (1918), but after repressive policing, jailing and brutality.

In Canada  (1917) Nellie McClung and her cohorts used HUMOR (theatrical satire) to get the right to vote (exception:  women of First Nations and Asian descent were denied the right to vote until after World War II.)  Later, in the 1920’s, “The Famous Five” went to the highest levels of appeal in the judicial system to get women defined as “persons”.

The excellent movie “Iron- Jawed Angels” (Hilary Swank) tells the story of what happened in the U.S.   The excellent play “Nellie McClung” tells the Canadian story.

It is amazing what can be achieved without violence through ingenuity, using parody, street theatre, writing, talking, and using the Justice system.    Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela both used the law to their advantage, even though their legal systems were far from perfect.

BUT – BACK to business! the Census-Lockheed Martin trial.  (The Queen versus Sandra Finley – – The Queen would be ashamed of what these men are doing in her name!)

As I see it, this is also about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, about the diversion of Canadian Government revenues to people who wage and make money from illegal war.

Internationally, the actions of the Government of Canada give us our identity, as seen by other people.  If we do not like what we see in the mirror, we need to change it – – we are the forces of destruction, or we are the forces for justice and peace.

The following article regarding the U.S. is, to me, insanity.  The current military, political and bureaucratic leadership in Canada is taking us to the same place as the Americans.  As mentioned in the email to Bill Moyers, we are part of the launching of unmanned drones.  They are launched by people sitting at computers, from the American desert to locations in other countries to drop bombs on people.

Thanks to Dave H for these words: “freedom takes courage”.  We are not free if we bow down.  If we do not speak up, we condone through silence; these are the lessons of the Nuremburg Trials following World War Two.

We have the power to change things; we can use brains and step-by-step patience and perseverance as the opportunities present themselves.   This trial is one of those opportunities.

But it will be of little use if we do not involve more people. Please forward.  Thanks.


= = = = = = = =  = =


Friday, 25 December 2009

by Sherwood Ross

The U.S. spends more for war annually than all state governments combined spend for the health, education, welfare, and safety of 308 million Americans.

Joseph Henchman, director of state projects for the Tax Foundation of Washington, D.C., says the states collected a total of $781 billion in taxes in 2008.

For a rough comparison, according to Wikipedia data, the total budget for defense in fiscal year 2010 will be at least $880 billion and could possibly top $1 trillion. That’s more than all the state governments collect.

Henchman says all American local governments combined (cities, counties, etc.) collect about $500 billion in taxes. Add that to total state tax take and you get over $1.3 trillion. This means Uncle Sam’s Pentagon is sopping up nearly as much money as all state, county, city, and other governmental units spend to run the country.

If the Pentagon figure of $1 trillion is somewhat less than all other taxing authorities, keep in mind the FBI, the various intelligence agencies, the VA, the National Institutes of Health (biological warfare) are also spending on war-related activities.

A question that describes the above and answers itself is: In what area can the Federal government operate where states and cities cannot tread? The answer is: foreign affairs—raising armies, fighting wars, conducting diplomacy, etc. And so Uncle Sam keeps enlarging this area. His emphasis is not on diplomacy, either.

For every buck spent by the State Department, which gets some $50 billion a year, the Pentagon spends $20. As for the Peace Corps, its budget is a paltry $375 million—hardly enough to keep the Pentagon elephant in peanuts.

Nobel Prize economist Joseph Stiglitz and finance authority Linda Bilmes write in their “The Three Trillion Dollar War”(W.W. Norton), “defense spending has been growing as a percentage of discretionary funding (money that is not required to be spent on entitlements like Social Security), from 48 percent in 2000 to 51 percent today. That means that our defense needs are gobbling up a larger share of taxpayers’ money than ever before.”

And they add, “The Pentagon’s budget has increased by more than $600 billion, cumulatively, since we invaded Iraq.” With its 1,000 bases in the U.S. and another 800 bases globally, the U.S. truly has become a “Warfare State.” Today, military-related products account for about one-fourth of total U.S. GDP. This includes 10,000 nuclear weapons. Indeed, the U.S. has lavished $5.5 trillion just on nukes over the past 70 years.

No other nation has anything remotely like this menacing global presence. The Pentagon strengthens its grip by running joint “training” exercises with the military of 110 other nations, including outright dictatorships that suppress internal unrest.

The U.S. spends more on weaponry than the next dozen nations combined and is by far the No. 1 world arms peddler. “The government employs some 6,500 people just to coordinate and administer its arms sales program in conjunction with senior officials at American embassies around the world, who spend most of their ‘diplomatic’ careers working as arms salesmen,” writes Chalmers Johnson in “Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire(Henry Holt).”

Chalmers goes on to say the U.S. military establishment today is “close to being beyond civilian control” and that despite its ability to “deliver death and destruction to any target on earth and expect little in the way of retaliation” it demands more and newer equipment “while the Pentagon now more or less sets its own agenda” and “monopolizes the formulation and conduct of American foreign policy.”

How long will it be before this tyrannical, anti-democratic, colossus that is sucking up as much money for war as all states, counties and cities spend on peace—and which straddles the globe, boosts dictators, and beats the war drums—turns on its own people?

(Sherwood Ross is a Miami-based public relations executive who formerly worked for major dailies and wire services. Contact him at

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


The participation of Lockheed Martin Corporation in the Canadian census needs to be seen in the larger context of American intrusion into the affairs of Canada.  We have circulated parts of that in our network in the past.

Some of you will add your own items to the context.

– – – – – – – – –

The following was written in 2008,

– prior to original trial date

– prior to reading the book “IBM and the Holocaust” (see the next email)

– prior to knowing how the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms might apply.

It is part of the foundation work.

There are a number of reasons why the government should not contract-out census work to Lockheed Martin Corporation.  I am pragmatic.  Early on, I made a decision to use the reasons that I could most easily prove.

I believe that anyone who thinks that the American government/military will NOT gain access to data on Canadians through Lockheed Martin’s census contracts does not have adequate information.

I chose to say little about this one reason (security of and sovereignty over data on individual Canadians), because I do not have the resources to gather objective evidence to prove my belief that the Americans would have access to the data, eventually, through Lockheed Martin.

It is not difficult to find solid evidence that, for example, LM manufactures cluster bombs, which is most likely in contravention of International Humanitarian Law.  I say “most likely” because LM has not been tried in a court of law on this issue.  I concentrated on what, practically speaking, I could defend.

BUT! the lawyer advises me that if I sincerely believe something, (and I think I have to be able to prove that I REASONABLY believe this thing), it legitimately can become part of my defence.





– – – – – – – – – – – – —


Has to do with the way corporations work.  Get your foot in the door, take over some functions, the Government loses the knowledge of how to do the function and becomes dependent on the expertise of the corporation.  Gradually, the corporation becomes the controlling interest because they know how the system works.  How did Lockheed Martin become the American Military?

Before reading the next article, you might want to google “Lockheed Martin surveillance”.  You will see that a main thrust of their efforts now is international surveillance systems.  It is convenient that they already have control of the American census; they have contracts for the next Canadian census (and would have had more access had there not been such an outrage over the 2006 census), they have a contract for the 2010 UK census.

In addition Ron Covais, with the pretentious title President of the Americas for Lockheed Martin, is an active member of the SPP (which is now re-named) along with Steven Harper, former-President George Bush and the president of Mexico.   Covais is active in other groups of corporate leadership as well.

Ron Covais was quoted in Mclean’s Magazine, Sep 13, 2006,

Lockheed Martin executive Ron Covais, also present at the (SPP) forum, told Maclean’s magazine, in reference to the SPP talks,

“We’ve decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes, because we won’t get anywhere.” The main avenue for changes would be through executive agencies, bureaucrats and regulations, he said, adding: “The guidance from the ministers was, ‘Tell us what we need to do and we’ll make it happen.‘”

– – – – – – – – – – – – —


Local Contract

Lockheed Gets Census Job

By Mary Mosquera

Special to The Washington Post

Monday, October 3, 2005; Page D04

Lockheed Martin Corp. won a $500 million contract last week from the Census Bureau to develop and operate the information processing system for the 2010 Census. The bureau’s goal is to make the next population count more automated than the one in 2000 and to make it simpler for citizens to participate.

The Decennial Response Integration System contract includes developing an option for citizens to answer census questionnaires over the Internet. The contract provides for systems, facilities and staffing to capture and standardize census data from paper forms and the telephone as well as the Internet.

The contract also calls for capturing data coming from handheld computers to be used by census takers; a contract for the handheld devices has yet to be awarded.

“It’s like a big catch net, capturing all the data coming in no matter where it comes from,” said Preston J. Waite, associate director for the 2010 Census. “It will integrate everybody who tries to answer the census form.”

The Census Bureau also has improved its geographic database to better match housing units and street addresses using Global Positioning System coordinates.

The bureau pulled together all of its information processing services, equipment, systems and software under one contract, said Arnold Jackson, assistant director of information technology systems for the 2010 Census. “We’re hoping with one integrator there will be fewer handoffs, lower risk, and solutions can be envisioned by the prime contractor and pushed all the way through the system. We have fewer problems with unintended differences in our data that way.”

Lockheed Martin developed the information processing system used in 2000, but it was one of three contractors handling data gathered from paper forms and over the phone, said Julie Dunlap, Lockheed Martin’s 2010 program director for the contract.

Lockheed Martin’s teammates on the six-year contract include Cardinal Technologies Inc. of Bethesda; Computer Sciences Corp. of El Segundo, Calif.; Evolver Inc. of Reston; International Business Machines (IBM) Corp. of Armonk, N.Y.; Metier Ltd. of Washington; Nortel PEC Solutions of Fairfax; and Pearson Government Solutions Inc. of Arlington.

Mary Mosquera is a staff writer with Government Computer News. For more information on these and other contracts, go to

© 2005 The Washington Post Company



(I was curious about the Hudson Institute. If you are, too, their website is:

Nov 01, 2008

More data on people to keep visa-free access

(INSERT:  I believe “visa-free access” is a simple tactic of attempted intimidation or manipulation to which Canadians should not bow.)

Free ride into U.S is over, analyst says

Americans want more information about Canadians if we want access without visa

Ian MacLeod, The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Saturday, November 01, 2008

In exchange for continued visa-free access to the United States, American officials are pressuring the federal government to supply them with more information on Canadians, says an influential analyst on Canada-U.S. relations.

“Not only about (routine) individuals, but also about people that you may be looking at for reasons, but there’s no indictment and there’s no charge,” Christopher Sands of the Hudson Institute told a security intelligence conference in Ottawa yesterday.

“This raises privacy flags everywhere, but we’d like to know who your suspicious people are before they enter the United States.”

View Larger Image

An unidentified RCMP officer keeps his foot on the base of a Canadian flag, Sweet Grass, Montana, July 18, 2006.

Grant Black, Canwest News Service

He recounted a recent conversation in which Stewart Baker, assistant secretary of policy at the Department of Homeland Security, told him Canadians have “had a better deal than anybody else in terms of access to the United States and for that they’ve paid nothing.”

The Bush administration, Mr. Baker continued, is now telling Canada “we want to give you less access, but we want you to pay more and, by the way, we’re standardizing this (with other visa-free countries) so you’re not special anymore.”

Mr. Sands concluded, “this politically is a very difficult message to pass on to Canadians, setting aside all of the privacy concerns, but it’s one that’s unlikely to change in the next administration.”

The case of Maher Arar also changes nothing.

“I don’t think that we’re convinced Maher Arar was vindicated or acquitted by your process,” Mr. Sands said, referring to the O’Connor judicial inquiry. “What you did was re-evaluate the treatment of Maher Arar and decide that procedural mistakes along the way had been made. That didn’t vindicate him from the charge that he was involved in fundraising for terror.

“People in Canada have turned the man into some sort of national hero, but if you expect the next administration to join you in sending him laurels, I think you’re going to be mistaken. Even Barack Obama … is not going to go near that with a 10-foot pole” and Mr. Arar will not have his name removed from the U.S. no-fly list “in my lifetime.”

European nations, meanwhile, have agreed to begin sharing more information with the U.S. on their citizens starting in January, part of what Mr. Sands said is a gradual movement by the U.S. toward a “simpler policy” for all visa-waiver countries to provide a “package of benefits,” to the U.S. in exchange for ease of access. Mexico already has such an arrangement.

Canadian officials have said this country will meet the new standard, “plus or minus a little,” by 2011, he said. “But there’ll be tremendous pressure (from the U.S.) to get there faster.”

John Sims, deputy minister of justice, later told delegates Canada is “not getting a free ride. There are challenges of how we share intelligence now and we don’t have all the answers,” he said. But, “the quality of the information that we still share regularly with our allies is of the highest quality and I have no doubt whatsoever that it’s seen to be very valuable and is prized by the people with whom we share it.”

Americans want more information about Canadians if we want access without visa

Ian MacLeod, The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Saturday, November 01, 2008

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

– – – – – – – – – – — – – – – –


I think the connections would be more easily understood if we used ONE WORD instead of a variety of phrases in different contexts, but which are essentially the same thing.  When Bill Moyers was talking with Marcy Kaptur and Simon Johnson (the last email I sent to you), much of the conversation was related to mortgages and Banks.

–    they referred to “Wall Street” and I tended to think of American banking corporations.

–    young American Iraqi War veteran, corporations making money from war and I tended to think of the industrial-military corporations.

–    decline of bees and the licensing of spirotetamat:  chemical/biotech corporations.

–    Nuclear Waste Management Organization: Electricity and uranium companies

–    Corporate takeover of universities:  Monsanto, chem./biotech corporations, pharmaceutical/biotech corporations, Cameco, Areva, uranium and nuclear corporations.  Lockheed Martin (military corporations) at Dalhousie University.

–    Water:  tar sands corporations

–    War:  the weapons and surveillance guys

–    Factory food:  the gigantic food corporations

–    SPP:  Corporate CEO’s working with Stephen Harper, George Bush and Vicente from Mexico

–    Battle in Seattle:  WTO

–    WTO (World Trade Organization):  personally, I tend to think of biotechnology and water corporations.  Also, that the WTO is about the same people as the SPP.

–    CODEX ALIMENTARIUS:  pharmaceutical/biotech companies

–    “HARMONIZATION OF REGULATIONS”:  Chem/Biotech/Big Pharma

–    Agwest Biotech Inc and Canada Biotech:  we learned from looking at who the intervenors were in the Supreme Court on the side of Monsanto that there are “Government Fronts”.  It was the Government intervening in the Supreme Court on the side of Monsanto, but you couldn’t tell from the name.

–    Sask Water Corporation:  this is the Government.

–    University of Saskatchewan:  this is now also defined as a Corporation by an Act of the Legislature.

The point is: I tend to compartmentalize.

In every instance we are talking about the same thing. Corporations.  I know they aren’t ALL bad!  Still, for me, I am going to start thinking in a more integrated way, and doing that by using one word “corporations” where it makes sense.

I have talked before about the need for Governments to provide “full disclosure”.  Through the use of names that do not disclose if an entity is Government funded, we are seriously misled.  At some point we need to outlaw this practice.

–    – – –  – – – – – –

How do I fit this news report (U.S. wants more information on Canadians) into our on-going work?


1.  Is the news report related to email  “Battle in Seattle” (WTO protest) ?  (WTO equals corporations)

Following the Battle in Seattle (1999), the National Guard would have strategized to prevent repeat occurrences. The protestors (50,000 to 100,000 people) were successful in closing down the WTO=corporations meeting. That is a pretty big threat to those who are comfortable wielding the reins of money and power in this old world.

Horrors!  Four years later (2003), another mass assembly of protestors at the WTO=corporations meeting, this time in Cancun.  Success again! The WTO=corporations meeting collapsed under the pressure.

The Seattle battle wasn’t confined to Seattle.  Old-timers in our network will remember Chad Kister, an American who goes city-to-city giving a presentation on the extinction threats to polar bears, a consequence of climate change.

Chad told me that he joined the peaceful protest against the WTO=corporations in 1999, but in Washington, D.C.  He was badly injured by the police.  Someone video-taped Chad as it was happening;  he later won a legal battle and compensation from the authorities.

Chad was surprised by the ability of the police to identify organizers from among the thousands of protestors.

QUESTION:  What strategies have been employed in the aftermath of the WTO=corporations in Seattle?

The obvious strategy – – deal with the causes of the protest – – is not considered.  Instead:


a.  Strategic location.

Meetings that are likely to attract protestors are strategically located to make it impossible for protestors to get near them.  They are secretive, as much as possible.


b.  Police officers work inside the crowd, to discredit the protestors by inciting violence (as shocking as that may be).

We circulated two videos of the peaceful protestors at the SPP Summit (Security and Prosperity Partnership) at Montebello, outside Ottawa in August 2007 (SPP equals corporations).  The protestors saw through the police plants whose faces were hidden by a toque and bandana, who, rock in hand were trying to turn the protest into a violent one.  An astute protestor noticed the shoes on the “violent protestors” – the shoes of policemen.  “The anarchists” were policemen, planted in the crowd to turn things violent.  This happening in Canada.  I am still dumbfounded.

MANY thanks to filmmaker Paul Manly (Nanaimo, B.C.).  Last June I had the good fortune to spend a few hours talking with Paul about his work.  (The amazing people in this country blow me away.)

Paul’s Montebello video includes media footage of the Minister Responsible for the Quebec police, trying to justify that members of the police force were trained, disguised and deployed to join a group of protestors for the assigned purpose of turning the crowd violent.

It may be a tactic arising out of the Battle in Seattle.  Discredit the protestors.  Turn peaceful protest into violence.  The media will gobble it up.  The message of the protestors is lost.

That lost or forgotten message of the protestors needs to be re-stated.  Thank-you to the young man, Stuart Townsend, for re-articulating that message through his script and film “Battle in Seattle”.


c.  (Another strategy before and in the aftermath of Seattle): The American (and Canadian) security forces will strengthen their files on those who are suspected of organizing the dissidence.

I know a number of Canadians who went to Seattle to join the protests in 1999, and people who went to Cancun, and to Montebello.  (INSERT:  and now to Copenhagen.) These are dedicated people who see that changes are necessary.  They don’t get paid to speak up, to travel, to help-out.  What they do is for the benefit of everyone, and “for seven generations” hence.

Steve writes:  “Seattle was a blast. We had 41 busloads of Canadians go down from Vancouver that day. Look how far we have come in 9 years.”

It is possible that part of the American plan, coming out of those very successful protests, was to obtain files on the Canadian dissidents, people like Steve.  It’s not good enough that only the Canadian security forces have the files.

“Battle in Seattle” makes it clear that the establishment was out-of-touch.  The 50,000 to 100,000 protestors were a complete surprise, coming out of nowhere.  The establishment does not want to be unprepared again.

Unprepared for … us.  That’s who the protestors are, by and large.  People who are a little better informed, who take a little longer view of the world, who can see where we’re headed, and are resolved to make changes so that our grand-children will have an inhabitable Earth.  I see us as people who are willing to take responsibility and to work together.

9/11 and “Homeland Security” added impetus to the plan for the Canadian population to come under the same surveillance as is the American population.

Imagine yourself sitting around the strategy table:  how in Canada, a western democracy with a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, can the police and military hope to contain an organized body of peaceful protestors that number in the tens of thousands?

What I want the police and military to see through is the WTO, the transnational corporate interests.  If you are deployed to police the WTO=corporations meetings or an SPP=corporations Summit, … I’d say you are between a rock and a hard place.  The protestors are actually working to make things better for the families of the police and military. The powers-that-be represented by the WTO and SPP do not serve the public interest, and yet it is them you are deployed to protect, psychopathic large corporations. That is your job, as it is being sold to you.  Actually your job is not to serve corporate masters.

There will be more and more protests.  That’s pretty easy to see, as described in the email about the Encana pipeline incidents.  I want everyone to understand that the REASON there are tens of thousands of Canadians who are willing to protest isn’t because we are a bunch of radical, violent, angry, ignorant, “crowd-followers”.

We will protest because we are a little better informed, because we see where we are headed, and fundamentally because the government has opted out of its regulatory job, in favour of subservience to ignorance, money and destruction (large transnational corporations that are very corrupt.  I can say that unequivocally because there is a long, well-documented public record of their court convictions.).

In February (2008) we circulated the information on the Canada – U.S. Troop Exchange Agreement.  In June 2008 the information about the new “Canada First Defence Strategy”:  “interoperability” with the American Military and “Compatible doctrine” among other niceties.

Okay, so maybe this American need for Canadian data “Not only about (routine) individuals, …” arises out of an increasingly non-compliant population.  Made non-compliant by government.

Hand over the data on “(routine) Canadians” to the Americans.  To purchase visa-free access to the U.S.?


I don’t think you have to be a wizard to figure out that the cost to the government of that action will be … more non-compliance by Canadians.  It’s called non-violent resistance.  The majority of Canadians value Canada.  We stand on guard for thee.  Against thieves.

++++   OR   +++++

2.  Do I interpret the news report:

“Handing over data on (routine) Canadians to the Americans” fits in the pattern of the email sent on Nov 15th 2008, “Massive ‘Homeland Defense’ Joint Exercise Is Underway”

For context we have

1999:  Battle in Seattle

2001:  9/11, etc,


A.  2004 – health records of the Canadian military are contracted out to (American) Lockheed Martin Corp

B.  Feb 14th, 2008  –  Canada and U.S. sign Troop Exchange Agreement

C.  June 19, 2008 – Canada has a new “defence” strategy.  We will have “compatible doctrine” with the U.S. and “interoperability”.  The decades-long Canadian dedication to alternatives to “killing wars” is gone.

D.  Oct 1, 2008:  “the First Brigade of the Third Infantry Division, three to four thousand soldiers, has been deployed in the United States as of October 1.”

E.  “November 14, 2008 – The United States government’s national threat level is Elevated, or Yellow. (For airline flights it is “High” or Orange.)  They expect violence during the transition between the Bush and Obama administrations.

F.  November 12 – 18: Massive ‘Homeland Defense’ Joint Exercise Is Under Way.  (Canada is part of this, through NORAD and the other agreements we now have with the U.S.)

And now, we can add ?? :

G.  “Americans want more information about Canadians if we want access without visas” ?

The justification for the turning over of data on Canadians is not related to internal civil disruption to the corporate-driven agenda, exemplified by the WTO battle.

The justification is the military integration of the U.S. and Canada for the purpose of protecting us from externally-created terrorists.

++++   OR   +++++

Or maybe this is merely a case of Plan A didn’t work.  So we need a Plan B:

3.  2006 Census, a thwarted opportunity for the Americans to get the data on Canadians ?

The Census offered the opportunity for the American security forces to gain access to Canadian Census data.  It could have been accomplished with the out-sourcing of Census work to Lockheed Martin Corp.  Under the Patriot Act, Lockheed Martin is legally required to hand requested data over to the U.S. government (the U.S. military, of which Lockheed Martin is a major player anyway).  And note: the Canadian Government would NOT be advised when there is such a handover of information on its people.  The Patriot Act is clear about that.

However!  there was so much protest two years before the 2006 Census that the Government of Canada was forced to draw back and promise that Lockheed Martin would not have access to the Census data.

So if Plan A (the Census) was thwarted, then Plan B.  Strong-arming it:  give us access to the data on Canadians.  If you won’t, we’ll make it so that Canadians will be required to have a visa in order to enter the U.S.. We’ll hassle you until we get what we want.

In 2004, and continuing, the Canadian Government has asserted, “No way that the U.S. will have access to Canadian (Census) data.  We listened to Canadians.”

November 2008, an American (the Hudson Institute) tells us:  “Canadian officials have said this country will meet the new standard (data on Canadians), “plus or minus a little,” by 2011, he said. “But there’ll be tremendous pressure (from the U.S.) to get there faster.”

The President of the Americas for Lockheed Martin, active on the SPP with Stephen Harper tells Macleans Magazine that

“We’ve decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes, because we won’t get anywhere.” The main avenue for changes would be through executive agencies, bureaucrats and regulations, he said, adding: “The guidance from the ministers was, ‘Tell us what we need to do and we’ll make it happen.‘”

When Christopher Sands of the Hudson Institute tells a security intelligence conference in Ottawa, “we’d like to know who your suspicious people are before they enter the United States.”,

I (Sandra Finley) think I’ll just step forth and volunteer my name for the list.  Save them the trouble.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Statistics Canada has already awarded contracts to Lockheed Martin Corporation for the next (2011) Census. People in Kingston Ontario and others started as early as 2008 to lobby the Government against the contracting-out for 2011.

The lobbying was (is) a repeat of the advance efforts in 2003 -2004 to stop the contracts for the 2006 census which were coordinated and supported through the “Vive le Canada” and “Count me Out” web-sites.

People in Kingston are more aware of the census-Lockheed Martin debacle because of the efforts of Todd and Chelsea Stelmach.  Todd was also charged with failure to comply.  Darek Czernewcan from Marathon Ontario was in a similar boat.  Their trials were completed in 2008.  In my opinion it was a matter of the Government using the courts to try and intimidate people.

My trial is the last one.  Through this network and other support, I am in a position to mount more rigorous legal challenge.

There are important reasons from history to halt Government collection of private information on citizens. And if you know the role of census (data) collection on citizens in Nazi Europe through IBM, there is no way on God’s Green Earth that we should accept the participation of Lockheed Martin in ANY census work.  Lockheed Martin has been or is, not only a manufacturer of weapons in blatant contravention of Canadian and International Law, one of its main thrusts today is in international surveillance.

I prefer to challenge Trouble when I see it coming, not wait until it arrives.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


The issues raised by the trial are important for Canadians.  I need as much media coverage, as many people at the trial (especially on Feb 8th, and as many informed people as possible.  If more people do not become informed, my efforts are of little value.

Financial participation:  I am representing myself to keep the costs low.  But I have hired two different lawyers to prepare the documents for two Charter arguments, one of which is in email #3.

I hope the court will, in the end, order the Government to pay my legal costs. (I expect the Court will find in my favour.)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =



—–Original Message—–

From: []

Sent: May 18, 2006


Subject: Count me out of the census!

Importance: High

The Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada, the Honourable Maxime Bernier, has asked me to respond to your email of May 3, 2006.

I would like to assure you that Statistics Canada has taken a number of important safeguards to protect the privacy and confidentiality of your Census responses. These safeguards have been independently assessed by IT security specialists and the entire assessment process overseen by a Task Force headed by the former Auditor General of Canada, Mr. Denis Desautels. The task force was clear in their conclusion: “Canadians can trust that the information gathered during the 2006 Census will be secure.” The entire report is available at I would also like to expand on some of the security safeguards in place for the 2006 Census.

Statistics Canada is completely responsible for every phase of conducting the 2006 Census. The contract with Lockheed Martin Canada, IBM Canada and Transcontinental Printing Canada is strictly for the provision of hardware, software and printing services. No contractor ever has access to or is in possession of Census responses.

Census information is, at all times, under the complete care and full control of Statistics Canada employees. In fact, all census databases, facilities and networks containing confidential data are physically isolated from any networks outside Statistics Canada. Therefore, even if a request were ever to be made by an external authority to any contractor for confidential data, it would be physically impossible for a contractor to comply, given that they are never in possession of census responses.

Public Works and Government Services Canada awarded the contract through an open, transparent, and stringent competitive bidding process following all the laws and regulations pertaining to procurement. Statistics Canada has relied on the private sector in the past to provide equipment and services to conduct a Census in a cost effective manner, without compromising confidentiality, and the 2006 Census is no exception.

Census data are a vital source of information for decisions by governments and private citizens and businesses that affect the daily lives of Canadians. The data must be complete and accurate for these purposes. We have put so much emphasis on security and confidentiality measures regarding contractor provided systems to ensure that Canadians can complete their Census questionnaires in full confidence of these measures. It is critical that we all be part of the Canadian family portrait that is the Census. I urge you to be part of that portrait.

Thank you for your interest in the census.

Ivan P. Fellegi

Chief Statistician of Canada



(sent at end of May 2006 by Sandra Finley)

Dear Ivan,

In your response you defend the tendering process. The tendering PROCESS is of little concern to me.


I am vehemently opposed to actions that enrich corporations that are part of the American war machine.

I doubt it is possible for you to address my fundamental objection, communicated to you beginning in 2003 or 2004.

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley



SUBJECT: Census Data

October 13, 2006


Ivan Felligi

Chief Statistician of Canada


Industry Canada

Minister Responsible for Statistics Canada Maxime Bernier



CC: Lockheed-Martin

President (Canadian operations)

Martin Munro

613-599-3270 ext 3498 (Martin’s exec asst, Diane Grandy)

Dear Ivan,

I am in receipt of your registered letter dated October 3, 2006.

It does not address my reason for non-compliance with the census, communicated to you consistently and beginning back in 2003.

The reason you provide for the necessity of compliance with the census is not truth. I presume that if your reason is an untruth, it is because you do not have a truthful reason to offer.

I would be failing my responsibilities as a citizen were I to bow in cowardice to anyone, civil servant or otherwise, who attempts to intimidate me with the threat of the judicial system – jail time and fines – when there is no reasonable basis.

Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. I will not, through complicity, add to their financial profits. I communicated this to you more than two years before the census, as did many other Canadians.

If I am to be treated equally before the Law, then you must equally refer the thousands of other Canadians who have not complied with the census to the Judicial system. I presume you are doing this.

The reason you have provided for the necessity of my compliance, quoting from your letter of October 3, 2006 is: “A compulsory response is required of all respondents because the census is essential for providing the information needed by governments, businesses, researchers and individual Canadians to shed light on issues that are critical to virtually every sector of society. If respondents were to arbitrarily choose whether or not they would answer the census questions, the result would not accurately reflect the characteristics of the population and would therefore not be considered useful or reliable.”

I am sorry to say, but that is a load of bull. Most people off the street know it’s not the way statistics work. I find it offensive that citizens are treated as though they are ignorant. In my particular case, I am a graduate of the College of Commerce, University of Saskatchewan. I majored in Quantitative Analysis (Statistics) and graduated with Honours. Every day we are provided with reliable statistical information not based on 100% sampling.

I repeat my point: if you must resort to blatant untruths I presume it is because you don’t have a valid argument to offer.

Another point I would like to make: you chose to define the Canadian census in a way that necessitated the out-sourcing.

On your website you record that the first census in Canada was conducted in 1666, the first national census in 1871. For centuries and decades the Government has defined the census in a way that civil servants had the capability of doing the work. To me, quite frankly, it is prudent to keep one’s work within the limits you are capable of managing.

If the Government is not capable of doing that which has been successfully managed by civil servants for decades and centuries, then the answer is to fire those responsible for the mismanagement. The answer is not to knowingly create some over-sized census monster which weakens one’s capabilities and then dictates an attitude of “I am so weakened I must rely on Big Daddy LM to help me out.”

Statistics Canada and its employees are to serve the interests of the citizens of Canada. Previous administrations have done that very well. If not, there would have been problems in the past. I am not aware of any. So I suggest that you need to re-think what you are doing.

Third and final point: in the last paragraph of your letter you say, “I would like to assure you that the information you provide on your census questionnaire will be kept strictly confidential, …”.

I reassure children so they may feel safe and secure. I think you mis-read the situation: I am secure, I am an adult. I do not need to be reassured by you. I will arrive at my own conclusions by observing your actions and by reading what you write.

Furthermore, not once in my communications with the Government have I mentioned concerns about the confidentiality of information. I have been clear and explicit in the reason for my non-compliance. You repeat this mantra about confidentiality. Not once have you addressed or attempted to address my explicitly-stated reason for non-compliance: the Statistics Canada contract with Lockheed-Martin enriches a corporation that plays a very large role in the American killing machine.

I am not being snooty. I am not “radical”. I come from rural Saskatchewan which is small “c” conservative country. I am “mature”, a Mother of 2 children. I do not believe in increasing the hatred in the world through killing other people and their children. Lockheed-Martin profits from the killing.

I don’t know into which pigeon hole you have slotted me. I am able to think. I can connect the dots between my actions and wider outcomes. I was a member of and benefited from the Girl Guides of Canada for many years. I learned service to community. That community and sisterhood extends to women in all countries of the world. I had the privilege of attending an international camp. I slept in the same tent, cooked, laughed and danced with these women when they and I were young. I really don’t like seeing them killed, as in Iraq. That’s killed, as in dead. Why would I participate in, or be a collaborator with Lockheed-Martin? Perhaps you have not read the Washington Post, October 11? 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred (research overseen by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health). The killing, once started, does not stop.

You were told by thousands of Canadians that Lockheed-Martin is a large part of the American war machine. You made a bad decision to “out-source”.

Your letter of October 3 is an attempt to coerce me through the threat of jail time and fines. Were my plate not full at the moment, did I not have more important priorities, I would be researching the avenues through which to lay charges, to “turn the matter over to the Department of Justice”, as you say. So that you might be tried for your tactics vis-a-vis me.

Yours truly,

Sandra Finley

Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1





of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)

comprising Halifax Friends Meeting, Antigonish Worship Group, Dartmouth Worship Group and South Shore Worship Group

Lucienne Robillard

Minister of Industry

House of Commons

Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

February 15, 2004

Dear Lucienne Robillard,

The Halifax Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) is very concerned about the Canadian government’s decision to award a $20.5 million dollar contract to a unit of the U.S. weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT).

The $20.5 million dollars is the amount to be spent to contract out work of Statistics Canada on the 2006 National Census. Lockheed Martin Canada Inc. is to lead a consortium that includes IBM Canada, Transcontinental Printing Inc. Canada and ADECCO Employment Services Ltd. Canada.

In February 2003, Lockheed Martin Canada Inc. was also awarded a multi-year contract by the Canadian Department of National Defence to provide a health care information system on Canadian Forces personnel. That contract is worth approximately $17 million and covers only the first 14 months of the project. The contract has the potential to exceed an estimated value of $56 million, however, if all four phases are delivered over the anticipated 10-year period.

These decisions were made while Alan Rock was serving on Jean Chrétien’s Cabinet as Minister of Industry. We are writing to you, the new Minister of Industry, to make you aware of our continuing objections.

While Quakers realize that, under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and World Trade Organization Agreement regulations, non-Canadian firms are eligible to bid on contracts to provide essential public services, we are loathe to see the Canadian public’s tax dollars flow to a military contractor that benefits richly from the development (and deployment) of weapons of mass destruction.

We are also loathe to assist a principal member of the U.S. military-industrial complex to further develop its capacity to collect, store, analyze, and retrieve sensitive information on citizens of any country.

We have read that a spokesperson for former Public Works Minister Ralph Goodale has stated that under the obligations of the NAFTA, Canada cannot alter contracts with Lockheed Martin and if we were to do so we could be sued for millions of dollars. (Toronto Star, October 15, 2003)

We ask you, in your capacity as Industry Minister and in conjunction with other members of Cabinet, to find a way forward that would best extricate our country from these contracts.

While many would welcome an outcome in which Statistics Canada would be allotted the funding and capacity to fully carry out an activity as important as the Canadian census, it is of particular importance to Quakers – because of our Peace Testimony* – that contracts not be let to a subsidiary of a trans-national corporation that sold almost $27 billion dollars worth of weapons in 2002.

We therefore ask:

1. that your government cancel all its contracts with Lockheed Martin and 2. that you pledge not to grant millions more to Lockheed Martin in the future.

We would appreciate hearing from you soon in regards to this important matter.

Sylvia Mangalam

Clerk of the Halifax Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) 1388 Bedford Highway Bedford NS B4A 1E2

* George Fox’s declaration of 1661 to Charles II is referred to as the Friends Historic Peace Testimony: “We utterly deny all outward wars and strife and fightings with outward weapons, for any ends or under any pretence whatsoever. And this is our testimony to the whole world.”

cc: Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada; Stephen Owen, Minister of Public Works; Jim Peterson, Minister of International Trade; Bill Graham, Minister of Foreign Affairs; David Pratt, Minister of National Defence; Ivan P. Fellegi, Chief Statistician of Canada

Our Monthly Meeting will also be sharing this letter with other Friends’ Meetings, as well as the general public.



There have been a few media reports about the high rate of non-compliance with the 2006 census. The cause has been attributed, for example, to a transient population (e.g. Alberta).

If you are in the email networks you know what the media is not telling: the Government contracted-out part of the 2006 census to Lockheed-Martin Corporation which is part of the American military machine. People have refused to co-operate with the census as a form of protest or resistance.

There are a number of reasons why the census should not have been out-sourced but the Lockheed-Martin situation is pivotal.

My first communication to the Government about their plans to “out-source” to Lockheed-Martin was in 2003. I have appended a copy of the excellent letter from the Quaker (Society of Friends) community in Halifax dated February 2004. …

Later, we worked with the Government on the GDR (Government Directive on Regulating) which is part of so-called “Smart Regulations”. I used the GDR to reinforce the point about the census, telling the Government that Canadians are learning non-compliance with regulations. I told them there would be a high level of non-compliance with the census for very legitimate reasons, if they did not change their direction. It wasn’t hard to figure out, from all the protest. The rule of law in Canada is being undermined which is a very serious situation.

Corruption, governments in bed with the people they are supposed to regulate, the complete failure to regulate to protect “the commons”, the gun registry, contracting-out to corporations like Lockheed-Martin, etc. etc. – all PREDICTABLY lead to a loss of confidence and consequent disrespect for the laws of the land. Definitely not a good place to be. You can point this out to the Government, but they seem incapable of hearing.

I have continued to communicate with Ivan Felligi (Chief Statistician for Canada) about the census. A Statistics Canada person (Anil Arora) phoned me and we talked the matter through, or so I thought.

I have participated in the on-line support network at Vive le Canada. These are people who have resisted the census in various ways. Statistics Canada personnel also watch the site. “Count Me Out” (a play on the Government promotion of the Census “Count Me In”)  was another web-site for the sharing of information in 2006.

There are thousands of people across Canada who have not complied, many of them for the same reason: Lockheed-Martin. On July 5th we circulated in our network the report that 400,000 adults in British Columbia alone had not sent in their census forms – 10% of the population. The Government stepped up efforts to gain compliance. They do not disseminate the information on how many people have sabotaged the census in various ways, from the provision of inaccurate information up to refusal to submit.

Through the disclosure process I tried to obtain the budgeted and actual cost of the 2006 census. They responded by saying that the budgeted and actual costs were the same:  no cost overruns.  And yet in the newspaper reports about the stepped up efforts to “count me in” they did not deny the additional costs.

The letter I received this week from Ivan Felligi tells me, “If your completed questionnaire is not received by Statistics Canada by October 27, 2006, I will turn the matter over to the Department of Justice with a recommendation that appropriate charges be laid….”

Further, if I am tried and found guilty of an offence under the Statistics Act, I “may be liable to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both.”

The reason given by Ivan for why the census form from me is required, is simply not true. It is contained in my reply to him.


– – – – – – – – – — – –


I want to bridge from the story of the Census trials over to the Canada First Defence Strategy so that Canadians understand the mechanics of the process.  The military-industrial complex is and has been tunnelling into Canada. Lockheed Martin is the perfect vehicle through which to explain HOW it is done.

More accurate than “military-industrial complex” is “GOVERNMENT-military-industrial complex”. (From other email, re Dwight Eisenhower’s farewell speech: “…Eisenhower initially used the term military-industrial-congressional complex, and thus indicated the essential role that the United States Congress plays in the propagation of the military industry. But, it is said, that the president chose to strike the word “congressional” in order to placate members of the legislative branch of the federal government.”)

The new Canada First Defence Strategy spells out very clearly that it is a “government-military-industrial complex”:

1.  “A Military in Partnership with Canadian Industry

The Canada First Defence Strategy will also have significant benefits for Canadian industry.”

2.  “It will also allow the Government to develop a stronger, mutually beneficial relation-ship with industry.”



Two face jail time in census protest


The Canadian Press

July 5, 2008 at 4:39 PM EDT

TORONTO — At least two people who defiantly refused to complete the 2006 Canadian census in protest of a software contract awarded to an arms manufacturer say they are willing to go to prison over the issue.

Todd Stelmach and Sandra Findley have never met, but are linked both by their cause and subsequent legal fight.

The two refused to hand in their 2006 census forms because Lockheed Martin won the contract to upgrade Statistics Canada’s software.

The billion-dollar American arms dealer supplies weapons to armies around the world, including for the war in Iraq.

Ms. Findley, 59, said she first heard about Lockheed Martin’s potential bid for the software contract in 2003 and immediately got in touch with Statistics Canada to voice her displeasure.

“[(Lockheed Martin] makes billions of dollars through the business of killing people, and destroying the environment in the process of killing people,” Ms. Findley said from her home in Saskatoon.

“So there’s no way that I’m going to see my tax dollars go to help enrich them.”

Mr. Stelmach’s decision to protest the company’s involvement in gathering Canadian data was quite different.

The 32-year-old Kingston, Ont., resident actually filled out his form before he and his wife heard about a census opposition group called Count Me Out.

“We discovered Lockheed Martin was outsourced by [Statistics Canada] to upgrade their software and do a lot of the processing of the 2006 census,” said Mr. Stelmach.

“This just shocked me and at first I thought it was a bit of a hoax.”

Failing to complete the national census is a federal offence. Ms. Findley and Mr. Stelmach both face a maximum penalty of three months in jail and a $500 fine.

Mr. Stelmach said he met with Crown lawyers on Friday and was offered the opportunity to fill out the form and receive a reduced fine with no jail time.

Mr. Stelmach has already refused similar offers and said he will plead not guilty in court Aug. 8.

Ms. Findley’s court date is set for early 2009.

Statistics Canada forwards the files of people who refuse to fill out the form to federal authorities, who then decide if charges should be laid.

Census branch director-general Peter Morrison said charges are only laid against someone “who has made a very conscious decision numerous times not to comply with the legal requirement of the census.”

“It is the law.”

The federal government uses the census to determine the level of funding jurisdictions across the country receive. In 2007/2008 nearly $70-billion was transferred, Mr. Morrison said.

Most of the 65 people charged for not filing the 2006 census have now complied, he said.

Mr. Morrison called the response to the census a “resounding success,” especially on Canada’s native reserves.

Still, residents of 22 reserves failed to complete the form, but Mr. Morrison blamed the number on rural access.

“You’re not going to charge everybody on the reserve because you can’t get access to it,” he said.

Fifty-two cases of incomplete forms were referred to the federal Justice Department after the 2001 census, with seven people being convicted.

Because of trade agreements such as NAFTA the bidding process for government contracts is open internationally to companies like Lockheed Martin.

Mr. Morrison also said concerns the arms dealer would be handling Canadians’ personal information is unfounded.

He likened the company’s role to that of a programmer upgrading a personal computer.

“Under no circumstances does anyone other than a Statscan employee, sworn in under the Statistics Act ever have access to any confidential census information,” he said.

Ms. Findley and Mr. Stelmach both said they’ve received resounding support from family, friends and co-workers – many of whom had no idea Lockheed Martin was involved in the census.

Both say they’re comfortable with their decision and hope the Canadian government will be more “ethical” in the contracts it awards in the future.

“There’s no reason on Earth that the Canadian census, any part of it, needed to be contracted out to enrich [Lockheed Martin],” said Ms. Findley

The next census is in 2011, with the bidding for the next software contract currently under way.


(3)  NO CHARGES SOUGHT FOR 35,000 NATIVES WHO IGNORE CENSUS  (***IMPORTANT:  I CITE THIS ONLY BECAUSE OF the StatsCan statement in the G&M:  “Mr. Morrison called the response to the census a “resounding success,” especially on Canada’s native reserves.”)

A repeated theme of my work over the years has been that Government use of “spin doctors” or “communications specialists” also contributes to the undermining of our system of governance. We learn to mistrust what the Government says, because too many times we see through the spin. It is as though we are thought to be stupid.

In the G&M article above, Census branch director-general Peter Morrison is quoted:  “Mr. Morrison called the response to the census a “resounding success,” especially on Canada’s native reserves.”

The response to the Census was a disaster that caused large cost overruns as the Government sought to get compliance.  The part of the statement related to First Nations, of and by itself is true.  But in the context of the court cases it is very misleading.

First Nations’ compliance is a separate issue.  It was being handled well by StatsCan, Jan.2008):  “Statistics Canada seeks co-operative approach as compliance climbs”.

“Charges won’t be pursued against natives on reserves because their compliance rates used to be considerably worse, says Anil Arora, director general of the census program branch at Statistics Canada.”

… oh.  What we see here is that the Census branch director-general has changed in the time since the article was written in January 2008.  Anil Arora does not appear to be at the helm any longer.

No charges sought for 35,000 natives who ignore census

By the numbers

Native census participation rates

1986: 952 reserves, 136 incomplete

1991: 1,123 reserves, 78 incomplete

2001: 1,080 reserves, 30 incomplete

2006: 1,123 reserves, 22 incomplete

Statistics Canada seeks co-operative approach as compliance climbs

Jan 15, 2008 04:30 AM

Robyn Doolittle

Staff Reporter

Thousands of natives across Canada refused to complete the 2006 census – including the Six Nations in Ontario – and will not face any legal consequences, despite the fact that 64 people not living on reserves were charged under the Statistics Act.

Charges won’t be pursued against natives on reserves because their compliance rates used to be considerably worse, says Anil Arora, director general of the census program branch at Statistics Canada.

“One has to pick a path. One has to pick a road and you pick a road that is obviously yielding success. Twenty years of experience has shown us that working with the community is the best,” Arora said.

The maximum penalty for not completing the census is a $500 fine and three months in prison. Of the 64 charged, nearly all decided to complete it rather than go to court.

Some 35,000 people living on reserves refused to complete the census, Arora said. As a courtesy, Statistics Canada seeks permission from the band office before entering the reserve, although it isn’t legally obligated to do so. The census isn’t mailed out to reserves, because many still use a P.O. box system, which means census takers can’t verify addresses, Arora said.

In 1986, there were 952 reserves in Canada. Of those, about 136 reserves refused to complete the questionnaires. As a result, an aboriginal liaison committee was established, which employed and trained native people to conduct the surveys.

By comparison, there are 1,123 reserves across Canada today, with 22 refusing to complete the census.

However, said Arora, more and more reserves are modernizing so that in the future Statistics Canada may be able to mail the census form directly to people on the reserves.

Six Nations, outside Brantford, is one of the largest reserves that refused to participate in 2006.

Chief William Montour hopes to change the reserve’s attitude. Montour first served as chief between 1985 and 1991. After working in the government more than a decade, he was re-elected in December.

He used to agree with the majority of his constituents the census wasn’t something native people should be forced to complete. For one, Canadian reserves are bombarded by government pollsters, he said. People don’t understand the use of the census. And, most important, a deep distrust of the federal government remains.

“I used to think this way. I’ve since changed my mind,” said Montour. “We’ve got to convince the community that we’ve got to have these kinds of numbers. More and more it gives us the ability to argue for more programs and services.”

Natives on reserves have to answer the long questionnaire – which normally only one in five Canadians get – because “that information is in demand,” said Arora.

Six Nations claims a population of about 22,800 natives. There could be hundreds more non-status natives, perhaps with aboriginal relatives, living on the reserve.

At the Alderville First Nation community, outside Cobourg, a notice went out in the community newsletter that census takers, many from within the native community, would be stopping by.

“If people wanted to do it they could,” said Chief James Marsden. “I think it’s good myself. For resources and funding, it’s good to have the proper count for Ontario.”

But it’s a tough sell to some, he said. “It’s probably the same as voting,” he said. “A lot of bands won’t vote in federal or provincial elections. `We have our own jurisdiction. We’re our own nation.'”



(this was never published, probably due to length.)


Re:  Two face jail time in census protest, July 5



I did not fill in my 2006 Census form. Part of the Census work was contracted out to Lockheed Martin Corporation, the world’s number one arms dealer that makes billions of dollars through wars and violence.

I am not breaking the law.

If my case is properly argued, I will be found “not guilty”.  The Statistics Act says that I, the citizen, must comply but it doesn’t end there. It sets out conditions for the Government. I also have responsibilities as a citizen.

StatsCan says “Most of the 65 people charged for not filing the 2006 census have now complied”.

Yes, most of the protestors have complied.  One person sitting in isolation, without people to impartially explain the Statistics Act and Charter rights, intimidated by the court system, without adequate financial resources or time or knowledge or experience, will fill in the form. They get a reduced fine and no jail time in exchange. They hold out as long as possible.

My trial is January 7 and 8, 2009 so I have time.  I am not isolated;  I ask for help.   I am very grateful for the support received, I know I could not stand on my own.  I cannot afford lawyer bills which might run to more than ten thousand dollars.  So I will represent myself in court, if absolutely necessary.  I do not have the skills to defend against the day-and-a-half of prosecutor’s arguments, but there is time to figure that part out, too.

Others share my concerns.  In 2003-04 there was fierce protest generated by news of the Lockheed Martin Census contract.  In response Statistics Canada reduced the involvement of Lockheed in the Census.  2006 Census work is just one of the contracts awarded to Lockheed Martin.  In 2004 they were awarded a multi-year contract worth $56 million to look after the medical records of the Canadian military.  In January 2008 “the purchase contract for 17 C-130J Hercules aircraft was valued at approximately $1.4 billion U.S., with an additional amount to be added in 2009 for at least 20 years of in-service support”.  That’s a sampling.

Lockheed Martin figures prominently in the new Canadian “defence” strategy (June 19), which requires some explanation.

The language of the strategy leads one to believe that Canadian industries will be the beneficiaries:

“A Military in Partnership with Canadian Industry

The Canada First Defence Strategy will also have significant benefits for Canadian industry. The infusion of long-term stable funding it provides will enable industry to reach for global excellence and to be better positioned to compete for defence contracts at home and abroad, thus enabling a pro-active investment in research and development and opportunities for domestic and international spin-offs as well as potential commercial applications.”

There is a lot of money to be had.  Minister responsible, Peter Mackay: “… reveals details of $490-billion defence strategy to modernize military”.

Who gets the money?  Tax-payors pay it. The billion-dollar contracts are awarded to Lockheed Martin. Lockheed works with Canadian industries: “Under the in-service support portion, the contractor will be required to spend in Canada 75 per cent of the total cost in direct industrial regional benefits – well above the 60-per-cent ratio negotiated by the previous government for purchases of this magnitude.”  (Source:  Michael M Fortier, Minister of Public Works, Government press release, January 2008.)

Also:  “Dalhousie University is announcing a multi-million dollar research contract with Lockheed-Martin. This contract is the result of government policy, which requires a foreign company to invest in Canada before it can enter into a government contract.”

These are called “offset agreements”.  They will in time duplicate the American military-industrial complex, in Canada.  Some say that has already happened.

The only way that Lockheed Martin has excess money to dole out (e.g. to Dalhousie University), is if the government contracts are exorbitant. The contracting-out of the Census and other purchases have nothing to do with the efficiency of Lockheed Martin because it is the private sector doing the work.  It has everything to do with transnational corporate access to the public purse through Government contracts and contacts.  In the U.S., Lockheed Martin spent more on lobbying Congress than any of its competitors, spending $9.7 million in 2002. Only General Electric and Philip Morris reported more lobbying expenses. In the 2004 election cycle, Lockheed contributed more than $1.9 million.

The June 19, 2008 “Canada First Defence Strategy” says that Canada needs to have “compatible doctrine” with the U.S., along with  being “interoperable”.  Lockheed Martin is an obvious vehicle through which to become interoperable.

80% of Lockheed’s money comes from the Government of the USA.  The biggest chunk of the 80% is from military contracts.  (It should be noted that Lockheed is diversifying into other Government service areas.  The Canadian census is one example.  Lockheed is also set to perform “data capture” and other services for the 2011 Census in the United Kingdom, depending upon the resistance in the UK.  It does US census work.  The medical records of Canadian soldiers have already been mentioned. That is a huge conflict-of-interest.  I think of the American Iraqi war veterans whose health and reproductive capacity has been seriously harmed by weapons that use depleted uranium. Or the Viet Nam war veterans who lives were ruined by exposure to the chemical weapon called Agent Orange. Both these groups have had to fight for decades.)

Canadian defence strategy is to become “compatible” in “doctrine” with the U.S..  The problem with the “doctrine” of the Bush Administration is that killing creates hatred.  Hatred breeds violence. Violence becomes terrorism. It is known that dropping bombs on people is counter-productive.  But lucrative for Lockheed Martin.

The killing-combat model (doctrine) only escalates problems.  It does not mobilize the tremendous power of people, as Gandhi did.  A crowd of thousands, eventually millions, will overcome the various forms of violence, given time. It is the fastest road to peace.  The killing ways of “combat” add to the hatred, prolong the conflict, is transferred from one generation to the next and will destroy the earth.  In its long history, the killing ways have never accomplished peace, only destruction.  This planet is and has been our one and only home.

Another individual who understands that we must discover alternatives to the killing ways is George Soros. George Soros is a self-made billionaire.  He helps bring freedom-fighters from various countries to the U.S. where they are trained in resistance.  They return to their countries to help overthrow oppressive regimes.  Soros works with local people “on-the-ground”.  It is about empowerment, the best weapon.

Becoming compatible with “the doctrine” of the Bush Administration, its buddies in Halliburton Corporation, Lockheed Martin, the contracting-out to mercenaries, etc., Canada too is setting up to cash in on “combat”.  Is that what we want for “defence” strategy – –  opportunities to make money?  (Really, it is a transfer of money out of the public purse to the military industry that has record profits because of illegal and immoral war.)

The Canada First Defence Strategy states: “It will also allow the Government to develop a stronger, mutually beneficial relation-ship with industry.”  The role of Governments is the relationship with human beings and other species, not corporations.

Canadians need to determine

– how much it will really cost Canadians and

– who benefits from this $490-billion defence strategy to modernize the military under Minister of Defence, Peter Mackay.

But getting back to Lockheed’s contract for Census work, the reason I will be on trial in January:

In the G&M article, Census branch director-general Peter Morrison is quoted:  “Mr. Morrison called the response to the census a “resounding success,” especially on Canada’s native reserves.”

The response to the 2006 Census (May) was a disaster that caused huge cost overruns. You may remember all the “Count Me In” advertising.  By July, 2006, ten thousand people from B.C. alone had still not filled in their Census forms. A portion of the overruns should be included in the costs when the “low-bid” from Lockheed Martin is considered.

The part of the statement related to First Nations (a “resounding success,” especially on Canada’s native reserves.”), of and by itself might be true.  But in the context of the court cases it is very misleading.   From newspaper reports in January 2008:  “Charges won’t be pursued against natives on reserves because their compliance rates used to be considerably worse, says Anil Arora, director general of the census program branch at Statistics Canada.”  The head line of the newspaper article is: “No charges sought for 35,000 natives who ignore Census.”

First Nations’ compliance was being handled well by StatsCan:  “Statistics Canada seeks co-operative approach as compliance climbs”.  There has been a change.  The January 2008 article names Anil Arora as branch director-general; the July 5 news report identifies Peter Morrison as branch director-general.

The frank and honest approach of Government (Anil Arora) builds respect.  Misleading statements bring disrespect and distrust.  So does Lockheed Martin’s record of court convictions and fines amounting to tens of millions of dollars.

If Lockheed Martin was a person, they would be in jail.  If they could not hide behind the corporate person, their conscience would bother them.

I am a person and so eligible for the jail cell. I have a conscience which is clear.  With effort and help I will, in justice, stay out of jail!

Sandra Finley



Filed under News

3 responses to “Sandra Finley vs Lockheed Martin?

  1. thebovine

    So far today, this is , surprisingly, the most popular story…. and on a raw milk blog… go figure.

    I thought it was worth publishing… but didn’t expect it to attract such a crowd.

    I guess it’s one story that may not make much of a ripple in the mainstream medias of this land.

    Go Sandra!!!!

    You tell them….

  2. Pingback: Lockheed Martin “Next Generation Identification Milestone” » The Battles

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s