Report and Draft Recommendations - Results of the Consultative Engagement on the Visible Minority Concept

Diversity and Sociocultural Statistics
Statistics Canada

Contents

• Part 1: Introduction
  • 1.1. Background
  • 1.2. The engagement initiative
    • 1.2.1 Activities
    • 1.2.2 Topics
• Part 2: Findings and recommendations
  • Topic 1: Terminology
    • Recommendation on the terminology
  • Topic 2: Groups measured (categories)
    • Recommendation for groups measured (categories)
  • Topic 3: Purpose of the data
    • Recommendation for the purpose of the data
  • Topic 4: Presenting the data
    • Recommendation for presenting the data
• Part 3: Next steps

Part 1: Introduction

1.1. Background

Canada is known for its ethnocultural and religious diversity, which is reflected in the data collected through a national census since 1871. Considering the changing and complex nature of diversity in the country, Statistics Canada has conducted extensive engagement and research to improve the collection and measurement of the ethnocultural and religious diversity of the population and the terminology used to describe it.

The term "visible minority" was first coined by African-Canadian activist Kay Livingstone in 1975, who notably worked to organize a national conference of visible minority women. The term became an organizing tool to challenge unfair institutional practices in education, policing and immigration, and it was soon picked up in the media.^{Footnote 1} The term gained further recognition when it was used by Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella in her report for the federal Royal Commission on Equality in Employment (1984).^{Footnote 2} The document explored the systemic barriers that had, "whether by design or impact, the effect of limiting an individual's or a group's right to the opportunities generally available because of attributed rather than actual characteristics."^{Footnote 3} Abella identified four groups that would require targeted policy measures for employment equity, notably women, Indigenous peoples, people with disabilities and visible minorities. She contended that addressing the systemic barriers experienced by "visible minorities, (…) must begin with an attack on racism."^{Footnote 4}

The report led to the adoption of the Employment Equity Act (EEA) in 1985, which defined visible minorities as "persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour." The law was amended in 1996, but the definition for visible minority remains in effect to this day.

An interdepartmental working group led by the Labour Program at Employment and Social Development Canada (then called Employment and Immigration Canada) was tasked with developing a statistical program. To comply with the EEA, Statistics Canada was mandated to provide benchmarking data, which is collected through the national census. Groups designated as "visible minorities" were identified in 1987 by Employment and Immigration Canada and included in Employment Equity: Technical reference papers. They included, among others, South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Arab, Latin American, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean and Japanese.

Canadian society has evolved since the 1980s, and so have data needs. While data on visible minorities were specifically collected for the EEA, these data are also relevant for developing policies to fight racism and discrimination and to provide equal opportunities for all. They are currently used by governments, businesses, communities, health care providers, researchers and various organizations across the country.

In recent years, Statistics Canada has received feedback on the use of the term "visible minority" when disseminating data, and various stakeholders are calling for the agency to retire this term. There is also a growing demand for more detailed data on the population groups currently designated as "visible minorities" to highlight the diversity of these populations. In other words, policy and program development increasingly requires information on the different groups that make up the visible minority population.

At the same time, many data users have stressed the importance of comparability between census cycles and different data sources, as this might be affected if the census question is changed. These considerations should be taken into account when revising the current standard.

Over time, Statistics Canada has explored various ways of presenting relevant data that reflect the diversity of the population. One approach is to present data on distinct population groups and avoid presenting data on visible minorities as a whole. Furthermore, the agency is increasingly providing intersectional data and analyses to further break down population groups by ethnicity, religious affiliation, place of birth, generation status, language, gender and sexual orientation.

Several factors must be considered when changing or updating a statistical standard used with the census. These include legislative changes, new data needs, findings from consultative engagements, and the results of robust testing to assess the effect of changes to terminology and categories.

In the case of revising the visible minority standard, future amendments to the EEA should be factored in. The EEA Review Task Force (EEARTF) was established in 2021 with a mandate to review the EEA and advise the Minister of Labour on how to modernize and strengthen the federal equity framework.^{Footnote 5} The final report was published in December 2023, along with recommendations.^{Footnote 6} While Statistics Canada is catering to a vast array of stakeholders and recognizes the need to provide data that are well adapted to a range of purposes beyond employment equity, the specific recommendations of the EEARTF will be taken into serious consideration.

Furthermore, data standards used in the national census are developed to work adequately across a wide range of demographics throughout Canada, respecting the highest standards of data quality and confidentiality. The gaps in population characteristics between provinces, notable differences between rural and urban areas, and the requirements to produce and define data in both official languages pose challenges in revisiting the visible minority standard.

Statistics Canada is currently testing different options to update the visible minority data standard in preparation for the 2026 Census. In addition to this targeted engagement initiative, additional consultations were held regarding the content of the previous census (2026 Census of Population Content Consultation). This feedback was reflected in the approaches for the 2024 Census Test. Results of the census test will be used to provide recommendations for the final content included in the 2026 Census questionnaire. While Statistics Canada is following the census timeline, the overall objective is to determine the agency standard that can be used beyond the census, notably in various surveys and in other federal, provincial and municipal departments.

1.2. The engagement initiative

Statistics Canada has committed to consulting with partners, stakeholders and the general public to establish suitable terminology for describing the population, review the categories to reflect its increasing diversity, and offer adequate and flexible ways to present the data for a wide range of purposes.

Over the past several years, there has been a continuous effort to interact with data users on ethnocultural data through informal discussions with government and community stakeholders. Additionally, a focused engagement with government stakeholders took place in the spring of 2021, complemented by the establishment of the Expert Advisory Committee on Immigration and Ethnocultural Statistics.

These initiatives are led in parallel to an extensive consultation program that allows data users and interested parties across Canada to share their views on both the content and dissemination strategy of the Census. The report to the 2026 Census of population content consultation was published in May 2024.

To refine the focus on the visible minority standard and broaden the discourse to include a diverse array of stakeholders, Statistics Canada initiated a consultative engagement on the visible minority concept in October 2022 (Visible minority concept consultative engagement). The aim of this consultation was to solicit input on the visible minority data standard from a wide spectrum of participants, including data users; representatives of civil society organizations; government entities at the federal, provincial and local levels; academics; researchers; and all other interested parties, such as the general public. A range of activities was planned, comprising targeted meetings, two phases of discussion groups and a publicly accessible feedback form. The overarching goal was to leverage this collective input in proposing modifications to the visible minority standard in preparation for the 2026 Census.

The consultation was publicized through public announcements on the Statistics Canada web page and social media outlets. The announcements listed the types of input sought, provided a timeline for the consultation, and gave contact information for interested parties to make submissions or reach out to Statistics Canada with questions and comments.

In addition, stakeholders and partners, including civil society organizations and a number of researchers in the field of ethnocultural diversity, were invited by email to participate and were encouraged to share the consultation invitation with others within their network. Interested parties were invited to participate in group discussions and to submit written proposals to Statistics Canada.

The engagement focused on various aspects of the visible minority standard, notably the terminology used for dissemination, the categories, the purpose of the data, and the derivation of responses leading to the final data dissemination.

1.2.1 Activities

The engagement took place from October 2022 to November 2023. In the fall of 2022, Statistics Canada organized discussion groups comprising academics and key stakeholders in federal and provincial governments. This activity gathered 48 participants.

In May 2023, Statistics Canada organized virtual information sessions with representatives from various federal departments to share preliminary results from the engagement and to collect feedback. This activity gathered 178 participants, who were also invited to share feedback through an online form. Over 70 submissions were received.

A second phase of discussion groups was held in June 2023 to collect feedback from representatives of organizations involved in equity, diversity and inclusion initiatives, including various not-for-profit organizations supporting diverse communities. This activity gathered 57 participants.

Finally, early findings were shared with the general public in November 2023 and promoted on various social media platforms. At that time, any interested party was invited to provide feedback on these preliminary results, informing the conclusions and recommendations of the current report. Statistics Canada received over 200 responses.

In sum, over 500 people participated in the engagement activities, including academics; representatives from federal, provincial and municipal governments; not-for-profit organizations; community-based organizations; and the general public.

1.2.2 Topics

Terminology

The United Nations (UN) Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has called on Canada (in 2007, 2012 and 2017 (International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination)) to reconsider using the term "visible minority." The committee stated that the term's "lack of precision may pose a barrier to effectively addressing the socio-economic gaps of different ethnic groups." The UN Independent Expert on Minority Issues (Statement by the United Nations Independent Expert on minority issues, Ms Gay McDougall, on the conclusion of her official visit to Canada) has also stated that Canada's use of the term "has served to obscure and dilute the differences and distinct experiences of diverse minority groups." The UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent (Statement to the media by the United Nations’ Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, on the conclusion of its official visit to Canada, 17-21 October 2016) has expressed similar concerns. While some of these considerations were addressed when data were presented for distinct groups that make up the visible minority population, the term itself continues to be criticized by many stakeholders.

As previously mentioned, the Government of Canada announced in 2021 the creation of a task force to review the EEA (Government of Canada launches Task Force to review the Employment Equity Act). The terms of reference recognized some challenges to the federal employment equity framework, including renewed attention to systemic racism and "calls by stakeholders to retire the term 'visible minorities' and rethink the category."^{Footnote 7} In its final report, the task force recommended replacing the term "visible minority" with "racialized worker," noting that "the language of 'visible minority' has been almost universally criticized, and the task force received substantial requests to have it changed."^{Footnote 8} However, while the term "visible minority" is vastly criticized, the results of the current consultative engagement suggest that there is no consensus regarding the most appropriate term with which to replace it.

Categories

As previously mentioned, the current categories (Classification of visible minority) were listed in Employment Equity: Technical reference papers (1987) by Employment and Immigration Canada. While minor changes were made over the years, the categories remained mostly intact to keep comparability between census cycles.

In recent years, various stakeholders have proposed changing the response categories to ensure their coherence, collect more granular data or meet the data needs of specific communities.^{Footnote 9} In the end, different data users have different data needs, and no single list of categories can meet everyone's expectations.

Some stakeholders have pointed out that the current list overrepresents certain groups. For instance, some proposed reducing the number of groups to combine the "Chinese," "Korean" and "Japanese" categories into an "East Asian" category, or to include the "Filipino" category in the "Southeast Asian" category. Another common proposition was to combine the "Arab" and "West Asian" categories into a "Middle Eastern" category. Furthermore, combining categories appears preferable to some data users when the survey sample prevents the presentation of data for smaller groups.

Also, according to employment equity definitions, Indigenous peoples and visible minorities are mutually exclusive equity-deserving groups. Therefore, to avoid response burden, people who identify as Indigenous in the census and in other Statistics Canada surveys have been counted as part of the "non-visible minority" population and skip the census question altogether. Many stakeholders have mentioned that a considerable number of Indigenous people are of mixed background (i.e., Indigenous and non-Indigenous) and that this important dimension of Indigenous identity should be reflected in the data.

One final consideration is that there is currently no single definition or recommended classification for measuring ethnocultural characteristics at the international level.^{Footnote 10} Rather, approaches and criteria vary widely between countries. The choice of terms and classifications depends on various factors, reflecting historical and political developments and legislative requirements specific to each country.

Purpose of the data

The primary objective of the data on visible minorities collected in the Canadian census is to provide benchmarks to meet the requirements of the EEA. That said, data on visible minorities also support anti-racism strategy programs and the measurement of equity and diversity in the labour, social, health, education and justice fields.

Given the recent initiatives by federal^{Footnote 11} and provincial^{Footnote 12} governments to develop anti-racism programs and legislation, stakeholders are increasingly expressing their need for race-based data. While the EEA defines visible minorities as people "other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour," the data collected and disseminated in the census and in other surveys extend beyond racial groups (e.g., Black, White) to include ethnic (e.g., Arab, Latin American), region-based (e.g., South Asian, West Asian) and country-based (e.g., Chinese, Filipino, Korean) groups.

During the current consultative engagement, Statistics Canada gathered feedback on the data needs of participants beyond employment equity to evaluate how the future standard could be more adaptable to various research purposes, including anti-racism, health, education and justice.

Presenting the data

The current approach to presenting the data on visible minorities collected in the census is to derive each respondent in one group, even when they select more than one category (for more information on the derivation method, see Visible minority of person). For instance, a respondent identifying as a Black and White person is included only in the "Black" population category, and a respondent identifying as a Black and Chinese person is included in the "multiple visible minorities" population category. This approach has been criticized by some stakeholders, and alternative options were presented to participants during the consultative engagement.

Another issue is that data on visible minorities divide the population into large categories that do not reflect the diversity of groups (e.g., Black, Latin American, South Asian). Statistics Canada sought feedback on options to provide more granular and flexible data to users and communities.

While the visible minority variable has been the most commonly disseminated variable from the census question since 1996, more detailed data are available through the population group variable^{Footnote 13} contrast to the visible minority variable, the population group variable provides data that more closely match the responses provided by respondents on the census questionnaire, including single and multiple responses. This variable includes 12 single-response categories, counting respondents who reported a single population group. Additionally, it presents a large number of multiple-response categories (67 in total), corresponding to each of the possible combinations of two population groups (e.g., "White and South Asian," "Chinese and Black"). Finally, it includes categories for those who reported three or more population groups ("White and multiple population groups" and "multiple population groups, not included elsewhere"). However, while these data offer granular detail on multiple responses, they are not always suitable for analytical purposes because of the large number of categories.

Part 2: Findings and draft recommendations

Topic 1: Terminology

During the consultative engagement, various terms were presented to participants as potential substitutes for "visible minority," including "racialized group," "population group," "Black, Indigenous and People of Colour," and "ethnocultural group." These terms were presented because they were most frequently reported by various stakeholders before the engagement. No clear consensus emerged from participants, and various considerations were raised.

Several participants preferred the term "racialized group" to replace "visible minority." They noted that the term "racialized" is already used by various federal departments, by provincial and municipal governments, and in the media. They also argued that the term more accurately presents race as a social construct by emphasizing the process of racialization.

However, the term "racialized" was also the most controversial option. Many participants were offended when they were described as belonging to a racialized group. Furthermore, most francophone participants did not think that Statistics Canada should adopt race-based terminology because it is more generally considered to be offensive in French. Regardless of their official language, many participants felt that labelling all non-White people as "racialized" reinforces the White population as the dominant group. Finally, participants also noted the various definitions of "racialization" related to skin colour, culture, religion, ethnicity, language, etc. currently in use.

"Population group" was the second most preferred term. Participants argued that it is sufficiently broad and flexible to apply to a number of situations and to be defined differently according to the needs of different organizations and programs. It was also considered to be a more neutral term that would likely have a longer lifespan, considering the sensitivity of this topic. Participants also noted that the term could include the White population, without making this population either the reference or the norm. On the other hand, some participants opposed this term because of its vagueness.

Recommendation on the terminology

1. Align the terminology in accordance with future amendments to the EEA

In its final report to the Minister of Labour, the EEARTF recommends changing the term "visible minority" to "racialized workers."^{Footnote 14} Because the EEA has enshrined the definition and terminology for data on visible minorities since the 1980s, the recommendation of the EEARTF weighs heavily in the balance. If the recommendation is adopted in a future amendment to the EEA, Statistics Canada should align its terminology and definitions to provide benchmarking data.

While the term "racialized" did not yield a consensus for a term to replace "visible minority," a majority of participants preferred the term over other options. It appears preferable because it acknowledges the effect of racialization on the lived experiences of many Canadians while emphasizing the social and subjective construction of racial categories.

Statistics Canada recognizes that using this term when referring to a specific set of groups is limiting. For instance, these data cannot encompass every group that experiences racialization based on its religion, language or ethnicity.

Also, while Indigenous peoples experience racialization in Canadian society, data on these populations should be separate from other racialized groups to reflect the mandate of the EEA. Similarly, the EEARTF has recommended separating the Black population from other racialized groups. A detailed communication plan will be developed to explain and define the new standard to the public and its relation to the terms and definitions of the EEA.

Topic 2: Groups measured (categories)

During the consultative engagement, no clear consensus emerged on a list of categories to measure groups. Some participants suggested that combining certain categories, as seen in option 2, would be more useful for anti-racism purposes because the resulting data would better reflect how others perceive individuals rather than the respondent's personal identity, which can often be quite specific.

Other participants argued that more detail is always preferable and saw no advantage in reducing the number of categories. Moreover, these participants noted that reducing the number of categories would mean that details for certain groups would be lost (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Filipino, Arab, West Asian).

Various participants believed that Indigenous peoples should also be able to identify with a non-Indigenous group because this population is increasingly diverse.

One common criticism was that the categories on both lists are incoherent because they straddle race, ethnicity, nationality and geographical descent.

That said, most respondents felt that historical comparability is important for their data needs and were concerned with the potential effects caused by changing the categories in the questionnaire.

Most respondents believed that some categories are too broad and should be more granular. For instance, various participants expressed that the "Black" category should be further disaggregated. They contended that increased emphasis on this population is justified given the disproportionate effect of racism on Black people. Different subcategories were suggested (e.g., "Black Canadian," "Black Caribbean," "Black East African," "Black West African"). These comments were echoed for the Latin American and South Asian groups, which encompass diverse populations that should be further broken down.

Various participants were also in favour of changing the labels of certain categories, arguing that they should be more relevant and reflective of the self-perception of the concerned communities. Some participants asked to change the label "Latin American" to "Latino," "Latino or Latina," or "Latino, Latina or Latinx." The label "West Asian" was considered inapt to refer to the descendants of this region of Asia, as respondents would not necessarily recognize themselves as "West Asian." The term "Middle Eastern" was preferred, even if other participants denoted a colonial undertone in this terminology. Finally, the term "Arab" was criticized for not adequately representing non-Arab populations of North Africa (e.g., Berber, Coptic). The term "North African" is preferred.

Recommendation for groups measured (categories)

1. Modify the categories to ensure relevance while retaining comparability and data quality

Many participants in the consultative engagement voiced the opinion that categories should be modified to better reflect the diversity of the population. At the same time, most emphasized the importance of keeping historical comparability between census cycles. Meeting both these objectives requires a balanced and measured approach.

To keep historical comparability with past census cycles, the categories in the census questionnaire should remain the same until enough evidence is gathered regarding the effects of potential modifications. A testing strategy will be put in place to evaluate the effect of modifying certain categories, notably "West Asian," "Arab" and "Latin American."

That said, Statistics Canada is currently testing the removal of the "skip" between the Indigenous group and population group questions. If results are positive, Indigenous respondents would be able to identify with one or many non-Indigenous population groups, reflecting the increasing diversity of this population.

Even if the categories remain mostly intact on the questionnaire, different approaches can be adopted at the stage of presenting the data. For instance, a "White" category should be presented instead of the "not a visible minority" (or non-racialized) category. Furthermore, different variables can be created to accommodate a variety of data needs and to further disaggregate the data (see Topic 4: Presenting the data).

Topic 3: Purpose of the data

Participants expressed a wide range of applications for the data collected on visible minorities that are not reflected in the current emphasis on the EEA. Government organizations, academic researchers and community organizations use data on visible minorities in the fields of health, education and justice, and several participants use the current categories as a proxy for "race" data. For many users, data are used for benchmarking specific populations in a context where anti-racism policies are being developed by the federal government and by provincial and municipal governments.

Participants highlighted the need to provide data for a wide range of purposes. In this context, it was recognized that Statistics Canada will face challenges in meeting the needs of different data users. For instance, data users mentioned the challenges of fulfilling the mandates of anti-racism policies with the current standard given the discrimination experienced by certain religious communities (i.e., Muslim and Jewish). Consequently, Statistics Canada heard from various participants that data on religious groups are crucial to understanding the various dimensions of racialization in Canada.

Participants recognized the wealth of data collected through the national census, including data on ethnic and cultural origins, immigration, religion, and language. However, a recurring challenge is that the number of questions included in the census and other household surveys is limited.

Some data users called for Statistics Canada to develop a "race" data standard, with explicit reference to this concept in the question. They contended that Statistics Canada is evading the reality of racism by adopting euphemistic terminologies and has a duty as the national statistical agency to tackle the phenomenon of racism by providing reliable data. However, other participants believed this approach could potentially reinforce racism in society by reifying the concept of "race." As previously mentioned, this important debate is also reflected in conversations on the terminology and the categories.

Various participants questioned whether these data should reflect the respondents' perception of their identity or how they are being perceived by others in society. While self-identification is the primary purpose of the question, participants who are looking to evaluate the effects of racialization in society want the question to measure how people are being perceived and would prefer fewer categories (e.g., "Black," "Asian," "Latino," "Middle Eastern," "Indigenous"). At the same time, many participants advocated for a more open-ended question (i.e., a write-in field without check boxes) allowing the respondent to identify according to their self-perception.

Participants also expressed a clear need for data on racialization and the experience of racism that is not addressed by the current question in the census. Meeting this need would require the development of a larger statistical program, including a sample survey.

Recommendation for the purpose of the data

1. Expand statistical programs to measure racism and discrimination

There are still gaps in capturing the experiences, perceptions and awareness of racism and hate that cannot be addressed through current surveys and administrative data. Filling these gaps will require the development of new questions for Statistics Canada's current social surveys and the advancement of a conceptual framework for operationalizing a measure of racism and discrimination with relevant indicators to better understand equity, diversity and inclusion.

Statistics Canada aims to develop tools to understand and monitor racism, including the process of racialization and its effect on Canadians. Different means to this end are currently being considered and tested, notably new questions to better measure how a person is perceived by others in society (i.e., how the person is "racialized") and the effects experienced because of this process of racialization. While Statistics Canada collects data on experiences of discrimination in the General Social Survey, a more targeted approach could expand the understanding of racism. Also, socioeconomic indicators (labour, education, housing, health) should be factored in to understand and measure the effects of systemic racism in Canadian society.

Topic 4: Presenting the data

In general, participants in the engagement expressed a need for more flexible and disaggregated data. Different options were presented to the participants for their feedback, including multiple response variables and cross-tabulations.

One important consideration is that according to the technical guidelines from the EEA, individuals of mixed backgrounds who select more than one response category are currently derived in one category (see the detailed derivation approach (Visible minority of person)). While the detail for various combinations of multiple responses is available in large data tables (Visible minority and population group by generation status: Canada, provinces and territories, census metropolitan areas and census agglomerations with parts), most data users rely on the visible minority variable. One way to mitigate these limitations is to present the data as a multiple response variable, displaying multiple and single responses. Most participants agreed that this approach would be useful.

Different stakeholders had previously expressed a need to obtain more details for certain groups. Alternate approaches were presented to the participants, offering more granular and flexible data. The first option was a data table cross-tabulating visible minorities by region of birth of parents. Most participants were enthusiastic with this proposition, even if some considered the level of disaggregation to be insufficient.

Recommendation for presenting the data

1. Provide more options to meet various data needs

To provide more disaggregated data, Statistics Canada should leverage the data collected in the census and provide different options to data users. To that aim, more than one variable could be derived to present the data collected through the census question and in other surveys.

While data for the purpose of the EEA would match the operational definition of the legislation (i.e., terminology and categories), a more disaggregated variable could be available to data users. Inversely, a more aggregated variable could be derived when samples are not sufficient to present data for all groups (i.e., combining Chinese, Japanese and Korean into an "East Asian" category; Filipino and Southeast Asian into a single category; and West Asian and Arab into a single category).

Also, in response to data users who want to see the total responses of certain population groups, a multiple response variable could be derived. A multiple response variable presents the sum of single and multiple responses for each group. Total response counts indicate the number of people who reported a specified group, either as their only response or in addition to one or more groups. For an example, see data for ethnic and cultural origins.

Finally, cross-tabulating data with other variables such as the region of birth of parents would provide more granular data. Other possibilities are to cross them with the ethnic and cultural origin, language, or religion variables.

Part 3: Next steps

The public consultation summarized in this report was one of several activities that informed the work involved in the development and updating of ethnocultural data. In addition to the public consultation, Statistics Canada regularly meets with an advisory committee, composed of leading researchers and academics, to discuss its data programs. Ongoing conversations with various stakeholders also inform the development and updating of the visible minority data standard.

Statistics Canada is currently undertaking 2024 Census Test, which will provide recommendations for the 2026 Census. All the comments received during this consultation and other engagement activities were considered, and many are reflected in the recommendations of this report.

Research continues in preparation for the disseminating of data from the 2026 Census and other household surveys. As previously mentioned, modifying the question is only one step toward modernizing the data standard.

Changes to the derivation method, including processing multiple responses, combining response categories when relevant and combining different variables to obtain more disaggregated data, will be investigated in preparation for the disseminating of data from the 2026 Census.