The purpose of this website is:
- to raise awareness about the ways population estimates and forecasts produced by the Provincial Government British Columbia have been falsified,
- to correct the statements about me posted online by people in positions of government authority in BC, including those in the BC Public Service Agency, the BC Government Employees Union, the BC Labour Relations Board, BC Statistics, as well as Arbitrator Vince Ready,
- to provide a public record of my efforts to implement formal policies and clear accountabilities for the review processes of analytic products as set out by Former Statistics Canada Chief Statistician, Ivan Fellegi, including population numbers created by Canada’s Official Statistical Agencies:
Readers should be aware, senior public officials overseeing British Columbia's Official Statistical Agency, BC Statistics, can change methods, data and the numbers themselves without peer review and without informing the public. For example, for over ten years, BC Statistics officials provided incorrect methods and data accompanying population numbers to citizens addressing public school closures2 as well as to Statistics Canada and Finance Canada addressing equalization payments3.
As well, government officials have attempted to cover-up the falsification of reports to Statistics Canada addressing equalization payments claiming:
When informed about the falsification of reports / wrong doing, misfeasance and malfeasance, former BC Statistics Executive Director, Angelo Cocco responded:
I contend that while serving the people of British Columbia, I was targeted for removal after raising concerns about the non-statistical and substandard methods, data and models, and removed from BC's public service, because I was in a position as a BC's Population Analyst to discover the manager's and the executive director's falsification of BC Statistic's reports to Statistics Canada in 2004 and 2005 for an assessment of methods to determine Canada's equalization payments. See endnotes 2 and 3 for links to supporting documents.
The problems could have easily been fixed; however, the manager and executive director chose instead to blame others (myself in this case) simply in an effort to avoid embarrassment for their many fundamental mistakes.
Yet, while individual government officials overseeing BC Statistics misled citizens and Statistics and Finance Canada, as well as citizens concerned about the public school the corruption is not limited to this case.
The wide spread support for the coverup, including the denial of a fair hearing, point to systemic problems. In this case, position, authority and trying to "look good" are thought to be more important than providing reliable information and more important than the quality of public service in BC.
In this case, pretending to use scientific/statistical methods to calculate population numbers while numbers were just made up to "look good". For example, changing migration numbers to claim the current government's policies are attracting people - numbers that can be changed by the BC Ministry of Finance.
Also, the emphasis on position and hierarchy, rather than on providing reliable information, made impossible the understanding of social and economic dynamics. For example, adopting the change in the number of telephone landline hookups as an indicator of population change because having "two indicators looks better than one".
"Looking good", considering themselves to be "elite" (Don McRae), as well as being more arrogant than skilled, the directors of BC Statistics are not required to have external peer review. Instead they prefer to what they like, favouring minimal internal review (one person did the study and only the Chief Demographer and the Executive Director were to read the report. The Executive Director chose this data set (telephone landlines - Telus data) and chose the person to test this data set). Then the Executive Director along with the Chief Demographer (who the Executive Director had given the position of Manager of the Population Section) approved the use of Telus data as an indicator of population change. Consequently, all the municipalities in the Greater Vancouver Regional District were found to have had declines in population over the previous decade. Being men and women who know how to "look good" erasers and pencils were feverously applied and voila, the numbers "looked good" again - almost exactly the same as the census results. Taxpayers pay for this idiousy and their protectors (BCPSA BCGEU and elected representatives) support this behaviour.
Unfortunately, the focus on position, posturing and pension made people in BC Statistics more interested in power over the numbers than understanding where we are and where we are heading on current demographic trends and reporting these trends to citizens.
Rather than allowing peer review and ensuring public accountability - instead of providing reliable information including publishing the correct methods and data to accompany findings (in this case population estimates and projections) government officials proved their worth - useless.
1"The United Nations Economic and Social Council, Statistical Commission and Economic Commission for Europe, Conference of European Statisticians, 47th plenary session, "Analytic Activities at Statistics Canada", submitted by Statistics Canada, prepared by Chief Statistician, Ivan Fellegi, 1999.", page 7.
2 The 1998 methods were revised in 2011 stating some of the changes during this time period "After extensive analyses it was later determined that telephone line data (Telus) was a suitable indicator and was subsequently added to the model in 2000. With the availability of the 2001 census and further model development it was indicated that the OAS data were no longer statistically significant and were dropped from the model in 2003." P. 8 GENERALIZATION ESTIMATION SYSTEM (GES) Small Area Population Estimation, Method and Error Evaluation, August 2011, (GES 2011).
3 "BC Stats produces its CSD-level population estimates using regression methods with specific symptomatic indicators (number of residential electrical connections and Old Age Security (OAS) recipients). For more details on the methodology, see Generalized Estimation System (GES), Small Area Population Estimation Methodology published by BC Stats in 1998 and available on their website. "The Equalization Program and the Property Tax Base: Feasibility Study Conducted by Statistics Canada", February 28, 2005, p. 63 Conclusions of Finance Canada received June 18, 2012
4 Response to request through Freedom of Information for the source of the quote asserting the "integrity" of BC Statistics (June 22, 2012)
6 "Canada’s latest baby boom caught experts by surprise" (Sarah Boesveld, National Post, July 4, 2014). Boesveld pointed out that the latest baby boom was felt all across Canada and that while retailers and real estate agents responded to the changing demographics:
Having worked for the Provincial Government of British Columbia as a Population Analyst, I have another explanation. First it is important to understand what analysis is (watching for and understanding inconsistancies) and how analysis can be useful to discover missing information about society and why it is important. Also, it is helpful to understand "Such work requires the active intellectual partnership of the statistical office" (Fellegi, 1999). If the statistical office is run by people more interested in the 3 Ps (posturing, position, and pension) then Canadians are not served well.
For an open, verifiable, valid set of well-defined population projection scenarios go to the Population Projection Project