2018-19 Annual Tracking Study (Winter)/Qualitative Research

Final report

Prepared for: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada

Supplier Name: Ipsos
Contract Number: B8815-19-0308/001/CY
Contract Value: $249,822.69 (including HST)
Award Date: 2018-12-21
Delivery Date: 2019-10-10

Registration Number: POR 094-18

For more information on this report, please contact IRCC at: IRCC.COMMPOR-ROPCOMM.IRCC@cic.gc.ca

Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.

Copyright

This public opinion research report presents the results of a survey and focus groups conducted by Ipsos on behalf of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. The research was conducted with 2,000 Canadians by telephone, 2,004 Canadians online, and 103 Canadians in 14 focus groups, between February 20, 2019 and May 2, 2019.

Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Étude de suivi annuelle de 2018-19 (Hiver)/Recherche qualitative.

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. For more information on this report, please contact Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada at IRCC.COMMPOR-ROPCOMM.IRCC@cic.gc.ca or at:

Communications Branch
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
Jean Edmonds Tower South
365 Laurier Ave W
Ottawa ON K1A 1L1

Catalogue Number: Ci4-183/2019E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-32828-7

Related publications (registration number: POR 094-18):
Catalogue Number: Ci4-183/2019F-PDF (Final Report, French)
ISBN 978-0-660-32829-4

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, 2019

Political neutrality statement

I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Ipsos that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.

Mike Colledge President signature

Mike Colledge
President
Ipsos Public Affairs

Executive summary

Ipsos Public Affairs is pleased to present this report to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

Background

Since 1994, when it was established as a new department bringing together immigration services and citizenship registration, Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) has played several key roles: admitting immigrants, foreign students, visitors and temporary workers; resettling refugees; helping immigrants adapt to Canadian society and become Canadian citizens; and managing access to Canada.

IRCC conducts an ongoing research program to help the Department develop a better understanding of Canadian attitudes toward the issues surrounding citizenship and immigration. By gauging and analyzing the opinions of newcomers and immigrants, the Department gains insights into important policy areas related to the mandate of the department and related services.

IRCC identified a need to conduct quantitative research (telephone and online surveys) and qualitative research (focus groups) among the general public, newcomers and settled immigrants.

Research objectives

The qualitative and quantitative research was intended to explore the views of members of the Canadian general population and attitudes of newcomers and settled immigrants on issues such as immigration, integration, settlement, multiculturalism and citizenship as well as IRCC services that are of key importance to IRCC’s policies and programs. Research was intended to support IRCC in ensuring high quality policy options, program design and advice to ministers; encouraging and effectively managing citizen-focused services; managing organizational and strategic risks proactively; and gathering and using relevant information on program results. The value of this contract, including HST, is $249,822.69.

Methodology

The research project included two phases: a series of qualitative in-person focus groups and a quantitative survey conducted online and by telephone.

Qualitative

Ipsos conducted a series of 14 focus groups with two research audiences:

Ipsos made use of special screening questions to ensure appropriate mix of focus group participants based on income, age, education level, years in Canada and other relevant socio-demographic variables. The fieldwork was conducted between April 23rd and May 2nd, 2019. Two focus groups were conducted in each of seven communities, as follows:

  1. North York, ON (April 23, 2019)
    • Group 1:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Chinese
      • Language: Cantonese
    • Group 2:
      • Research audience: General public
      • Language: English
  2. Toronto, ON (April 25, 2019)
    • Group 1:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Top source Caribbean countries
      • Language: English
    • Group 2:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Top source African countries
      • Language: English
  3. Mississauga, ON (April 27, 2019)
    • Group 1:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Top source Middle Eastern countries
      • Language: English
    • Group 2:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Indo-Canadian (Punjabi)
      • Language: English
  4. Moncton, NB (April 29, 2019)
    • Group 1:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Ethno-cultural (Mix immigrants)
      • Language: English
    • Group 2:
      • Research audience: General public
      • Language: French
  5. Montreal, QC (April 30, 2019)
    • Group 1:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Arabic community
      • Language: French
    • Group 2:
      • Research audience: General public
      • Language: French
  6. Winnipeg, MB (May 1, 2019)
    • Group 1:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Filipino
      • Language: English
    • Group 2:
      • Research audience: General public
      • Language: English
  7. Vancouver, BC (May 2, 2019)
    • Group 1:
      • Research audience: Newcomers
      • Community: Chinese
      • Language: Mandarin
    • Group 2:
      • Research audience: General public
      • Language: English

Focus groups were approximately 2 hours in duration. A total of 103 participants took part in the discussions, out of 140 recruited to participate. Participants from ethno-cultural communities were provided a $125 incentive to encourage participation among these low incidence audiences. General public participants received an $85 incentive for their participation.

Note to reader: It should be noted that qualitative research findings are exploratory and directional in nature. Consequently, all qualitative findings cannot and should not be extrapolated to the Canadian population, rather, they should be considered directional in nature.

Quantitative

To meet the research objectives, Ipsos conducted a telephone survey and an online survey. The 16-minute telephone survey was conducted among a nationwide sample of n=2,000 Canadian adults between February 20th and March 18th, 2019. The telephone survey sample was a probability sample generated through random digit dialing obtaining an overall margin of error of +/-2.1 percentage points (calculated at a 95% confidence interval). The 15-minute online survey was conducted among 2,004 respondents between March 4th and March 18th, 2019, drawn entirely from Ipsos’ proprietary panel, iSay. As the online survey used non-probability sampling, a margin of error cannot be calculated. Respondents were offered the survey in the official language of their choice.

A full quantitative methodology report, including all information about the execution of the fieldwork that is needed to replicate the research initiative, may be found in Appendix 3. The quantitative survey research instruments in English and French may be found in Appendix 4. A set of tabulated results from the quantitative surveys are provided under a separate cover.

Key qualitative findings

Immigration and Canada

Notwithstanding concerns expressed by some participants, most participants were of the view that immigration has a positive impact on our economy and serves to foster greater cultural diversity within Canada.

Among general public participants, familiarity with Canada’s immigration system and policies is best defined as limited. Top of mind awareness tended to focus on stories they had heard related to Syrian refugees and in some cases asylum seekers coming to Canada. Not surprisingly, participants from newcomer groups had higher levels of awareness and knowledge of Canadian immigration policies and processes than their general public counterparts. A number of newcomers spoke about hearing of “tightened” immigration rules, issues with foreign credential recognition, racial discrimination in the workplace, and family reunification quotas filling up quickly.

Both general public and newcomer audiences acquired information on immigration through traditional media such as TV and print media, exchanges with family and friends, and social media posts. Participants from newcomer groups also referenced IRCC (IRCC website and emails) and community-specific media sources.

Canada’s immigration levels

There was general agreement with Canada’s immigration levels, though few participants knew what the current levels are. Though most participants found the current level surprising (310,000 in 2018), many trusted that the government has a plan in place to manage this number. Most participants agreed that the mix of immigration classes made sense, with more economic immigrants admitted than other immigrant classes.

Conversely, participants felt that the number of refugees coming to Canada in recent years was high. Many framed their views in the context of Syrian refugees, and expressed that they were happy to help those in need, but wondered about Canada’s capacity to welcome more. Concerns related to the economic, social or security related impacts of welcoming these individuals – specifically the necessary supports and programs needed to assist these individuals with their integration into Canadian society.

Though participants tended to agree with overall immigration levels, they wondered whether the plan considers where immigrants settle (i.e. outside of large cities) and how they integrate (i.e. matched with an available job, knowing English or French, learning the Canadian way of life). They felt this would help fill labour gaps while reducing negative impacts of larger population on health care, housing, roads and public transit.

Benefits and challenges of immigration in their community

Many participants in both the general public groups and newcomer groups recognized immigrants’ contributions to their community’s economy and cultural diversity. They mentioned the wide variety of restaurants, languages, architecture, culture and new ideas they bring to their community. Others spoke of economic benefits derived from immigration such as investments in businesses and the creation of employment opportunities. Some participants from the general public groups also spoke of skilled workers who bring their work experience and expertise to supplement labour shortfalls in their community.

Although there is general recognition of the benefits of immigration in their community, participants reiterated their concerns related to their community’s capacity to welcome new immigrants (i.e. the impact on health care, housing, roads, jobs), immigrant integration (i.e. language barriers and differences in values), and in a few cases, crime.

In terms of advice participants would give to newcomers on how to integrate into Canadian society, general public participants focused on learning Canada’s official languages and taking an active role in local community events and organizations. Participants from newcomer groups recommended seeking out community mentors who could provide newcomers with information related to housing, hospitals, schools and other community resources. Some also suggested that this would assist with learning Canadian social norms and etiquette in order to integrate into Canadian society.

Irregular migration

Although a number of participants in both the general public and newcomer audiences had heard of asylum seekers crossing the Canada-U.S. border, they lacked clear information about the situation as well as the government’s plan and efforts to address irregular migration. To address their concerns, there was a desire for more information related to the levels of asylum seekers coming from irregular vs. regular channels, how asylum seekers undergo security screening, as well as steps taken to either remove failed claimants or to ensure successful claimants are settled and efficiently integrated into Canadian society.

Participants viewed this situation through the lens of fairness and were hard pressed to come to a consensus. Some felt Canada should be fair to the asylum seekers and find a way to screen and welcome those who need our help. Others felt that the situation is unfair to Canada because they feel that these individuals are safe in the U.S. and should follow regular processes.

Message testing

Each group was presented with six messages and participants were asked to rank the messages from the most preferred to the least preferred and were asked to highlight the phrases they liked in green and the phrases they disliked in red.

Participants tended to support messages that covered a number of aspects: allowing asylum seeker claims to be heard, giving them access to due process and timely removals. However, given the lack of consensus view on how to manage asylum seekers crossing the Canada-U.S. border, a mix of messages could be beneficial. Some participants who felt strongly that Canada should welcome asylum seekers preferred messages of protection and honouring international obligations. Those who felt strongly that asylum seekers should be deterred preferred messages describing U.S. responsibilities and ways to remove failed claimants more quickly.

Note to reader: numerical ordering herein is not meant to imply any preference in messages tested. Ipsos ensured that the presentation order of messages was rotated from one session to the next in order to guard against any potential ordering bias.

Message #1: “Like many other countries, in a reality of increasing global migration, Canada is experiencing a rise in the number of people claiming asylum. Our system offers protection to those fleeing persecution, but removes those who seek to use it for other purposes. It is fair that Canada should continue to honour international obligations and hear asylum claims from individuals who arrive at our border.”

This message tended to strike the right balance between compassion for those who need protection from Canada while acknowledging the importance of defending the integrity of Canada’s immigration system. Mentions of Canada honouring international obligations resonated positively with some participants as it represents the Canada they know. Participants also liked the idea that everyone would have a chance to be heard. On the other hand, a few participants also thought this message failed to provide enough background information on international obligations, and consequently found it difficult to understand.

Message #2: “60% of individuals who enter Canada between ports of entry are arriving from the U.S. with a valid U.S. visitor or student visa. For example, individuals enter the U.S. legally after travelling by air from Africa, Asia or Europe and then make their way to Canada. It is only fair that the U.S. take responsibility for these individuals.”

This message appeals to those who expressed concerns related to safety and security, particularly the mention of the U.S. taking responsibility. Some participants suggested that the time and resources Canada saves by not accepting claims from those who hold a U.S. visa could go towards helping others in need. The few participants who were aware of the Safe Third Country Agreement said the U.S. should honour the agreement and take responsibility for the asylum seekers.

Message #3: “The number of irregular asylum claims Canada received since 2017 (~41,000) is lower than what some media reports have said the U.S. received last month (~100,000) or what Europe received in 2018 (~600,000). It is fair that Canada should continue to honour international obligations and hear asylum claims from individuals who enter Canada between ports of entry.”

In general, this message garnered mixed reactions. For some, references to the number of irregular asylum claims that U.S. and Europe received provided the context needed to make Canada’s situation appear relatively under control. For those who already thought Canada received too many asylum claims, this message stressed the severity of the problem as they considered 41,000 to be a high number of irregular asylum seekers.

Message #4: “Individuals who enter Canada between ports of entry are arriving from the U.S., which has its own refugee determination system. Canada should turn these individuals back or refuse to hear their asylum claim. It is fair that they should make their asylum claim in the U.S. instead of Canada, as that’s where they landed first.”

This message mostly resonated positively with those who hold a more negative position on irregular migration. These participants expressed their concerns on safety and security especially strongly, and liked the mention that irregular asylum seekers should seek asylum where they first landed. For most others, using words like “turn…back” or “refuse” to hear their claim was too extreme, and they felt that everyone deserved a chance to be heard.

Message #5: “Canada’s process to determine the eligibility of asylum claims is fair, as individuals are entitled to due process before the law, including various levels of appeal. The timely removal of failed claimants supports the integrity of Canada’s immigration system and contributes to Canada’s security and public safety.”

Many preferred this message as it speaks to offering due process while stating that those who compromise the integrity of Canada’s immigration system are not welcome in Canada. References to supporting “the integrity of Canada’s immigration system” and contributing to “Canada’s security and public safety” resonated positively with those who expressed security and safety concerns. However, some preferred to have more information on the process of removing failed claimants, in particular the number or levels of hearings or appeals before failed claimants are removed.

Message #6: “If an individual arrives in Canada who has already made an asylum claim in a country with a similar immigration system (i.e. the United States, Australia, New Zealand or the UK), they should not have access to Canada’s full asylum system. This will help ease the backlog at the independent board that hears refugee cases. These people would still get a hearing with the government to ensure that they are not sent back to a country where they would be in risk of danger, persecution, or torture.”

Most participants agreed to not giving access to Canada’s full asylum system if they already applied in another safe country. In particular, they liked that this option would help ease the backlog. For some, this was contingent on the idea that asylum seekers still have a hearing with the government and would not be sent back to a country where they would be in danger. Nonetheless, some participants disagreed that other countries have a similar immigration system, and did not feel that this was a valid reason to deny access to Canada’s full asylum system.

Refugee resettlement

Participants acknowledged that their knowledge of refugee resettlement is limited, often to what they know of the Syrian refugee initiative. They use this context to frame their views of the selection criteria for resettling refugees, and note that in the absence of additional information they assume the system is working as it should. However, when pressed, participants felt that many criteria for resettlement are important, and were generally torn between helping as many people as possible and preventing those most vulnerable from suffering.

Client service

Newcomer participants had a wide range of immigration application experiences, some positive and some negative. To improve the immigration application experience, newcomers wanted to see increased transparency. They wanted to know how the immigration officers would evaluate their application and to be able to track their application status. The majority mentioned that they prefer to track the application online through a mobile application or on the government website. A number of participants also wanted easier access to immigration related information and communication via electronic means (email or government website) or more traditional channels (phone).

Should you have any questions or comments, please contact:

Marc Beaudoin
Vice President Qualitative, Ipsos Public Affairs
1 Nicholas, Ottawa Ontario
Telephone: (613) 688-8973
Email: marc.beaudoin@ipsos.com

Detailed qualitative findings

a. Immigration and Canada

All participants were asked for their top of mind thoughts related to immigration. Initial feedback tended to be relatively positive with participants from both audiences focusing on: opportunities for a better life, happiness, escape from war, and fundamental change. Some general public participants also mentioned that immigrants contribute to ensuring a diverse population and that our country as a whole benefits from our multicultural society.

“Learning a new culture.” (General Public – Vancouver)

“I think [what comes to mind] is a better life, quality of work, quality of life, a better future. Comparatively, better everything, social, economic. Some may want to immigrate just to have a quality of life.” (General Public – Montreal)

“Simpler, I just think of opportunity.” (General Public – North York)

“Personally, it's the change. Looking for something better than where I was. Whether it's on the economic or social side, it's looking for something more perfect.” (General Public – Montreal)

Most general public participants were hard pressed to recall recently seeing, hearing or reading about Canada’s immigration policies. Some participants recalled news stories about the Syrian refugee initiative. A few others had heard media reports or anecdotal stories about asylum seekers and refugees coming to Canada from the U.S., with only a few, mainly in Montreal and Winnipeg, recalling specific details about individuals entering Canada irregularly or the federal government’s response to this issue. This often gave way to ancillary discussions related to U.S. immigration policies and the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

“I don't know I just thought something like welfare, helping them. I'm not sure, government assistance.” (General Public – North York)

“Yeah, I heard a couple things about refugees. One is they're clearing the backlog, there was a backlog created by the [former] government, that was reported on, something like [a] thousand refugees, that’s been cleared” (General Public - Vancouver)

“The U.S. issues. Donald Trump and the wall.” (General Public – North York)

“I heard about the asylum seekers in hotels in Ontario. How they're getting completely destroyed and it's a pretty heavy financial burden and people being encouraged to come over into Québec and Manitoba when they already have asylum in the States.” (General Public – Winnipeg)

Many participants from the newcomer groups talked about their own experiences when they first immigrated to Canada. For the more established immigrants, they compared their experiences immigrating to Canada to current immigration policies and were of the view that things had changed since they had immigrated. Participants from the Filipino, Caribbean and Chinese communities spoke of immigration rules having changed with many stating that their impression was that they had been tightened. At least one participant in each newcomer group mentioned an anecdote or media report of family reunification class quotas filling up more quickly.

Additionally, a number of participants from the Filipino, Arabic and Middle Eastern communities talked about foreign credential recognition and how they or their friends have had difficulties finding positions allowing them to apply their skills once they had arrived in Canada. Others, particularly participants from the Chinese groups, also spoke specifically about racial discrimination against Asians in the workplace.

“Then he comes to Canada and he thinks that he will reintegrate into his position and it doesn’t happen usually that way, and then there is a whole process that ensues for 5 years, 7 years, and some people don’t get back to their original status or position or vocation.” (Middle Eastern - Mississauga)

“It's about the sponsorship of parents, I think they changed some rules and they have this lottery system now, which apparently got closed very fast, so I've been trying to sponsor my parents.” (Indo-Canadian – Mississauga)

“For example, for family reunions, some people, a few minutes the quotas are snatched up. How can that be? We have to wait for so long.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“I don’t know, they just always keep on saying that I should have a certificate that comes from Canada, and not a certification program, it should be a certificate from a Canadian school.” (Filipino – Winnipeg)

“When you have a stable job, you still have the discrimination. You have the glass ceiling there, and you're looked down [on], because of our language barrier, maybe we didn’t work hard enough, because we came in halfway.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

Participants’ top sources for immigration information included traditional media such as TV and print, exchanges with family and friends, and social media posts. Newcomers also mentioned government sources (cic.gc.ca and email subscription from IRCC) and community-specific media sources, namely those in the Chinese groups mentioning Chinese newspapers and Chinese social media apps Weibo and Wechat.

“I don’t really watch TV, except for sports. So if I get a little dose of political stuff, it’s usually on social media. Somebody posts and shares an article or a link.” (African – Toronto)

“The news.” “CTV” “CP24” “CBC” (General Public – North York)

“So those social media like Weibo and Wechat, and some newspapers…” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

b. Canada’s immigration levels

When specifically prompted, participants generally felt that Canada’s immigration levels are about right. A few participants expressed that the number of immigrants coming to Canada is either too many or too few. However, few participants were able to assert with confidence the number of immigrants Canada welcomes on a yearly basis. In fact, participant responses ranged from 35,000 to 500,000. When given the actual number of immigrants coming to Canada each year (310,000 in 2018), most participants were surprised as in many cases it was higher than they had guessed. Though some changed their view and felt that this was too many, a majority of participants continued to feel the level was about right. Despite this, participants from both research audiences tended to trust that the government has a plan in place to manage the number of immigrants coming to Canada and that this plan takes into consideration a number of factors. Furthermore, most were in general agreement with the relative size of immigration classes as presented in the levels plan, i.e. economic class accounting for the largest number of immigrants, followed by the family reunification class, then the refugee and humanitarian classes.

“[we need] More students, more economic migrants, more educated people.” (Cantonese – North York)

“Low on refugees. I would just, I’d slide the scales a bit more, a little higher on the economic side and drop family and refugee a bit, and maybe higher, raise up humanitarian from just 4200 compared to 46,000 on the refugee side. That’s massive.” (African – Toronto)

“I'm not sure that it is [the right level], other than economically, by bringing working class people, the people with the financial resources to uproot and come to a new country. Or others that have a marketable skill.” (General Public – Winnipeg)

When asked about their familiarity with the various classes of immigrants, most participants were generally able to list economic, family and refugee classes; however, only a few mentioned humanitarian class immigrants unprompted. In general, participants in the newcomers groups were more knowledgeable than their general public counterparts with regards to the different classes of immigrants that are considered as part of Canada’s immigration system.

When specifically prompted for feedback on refugee levels, participants tended to conflate those coming in through standard channels and those entering through irregular channels via the Canada/U.S. land border. Furthermore when speaking of refugees, many participants framed their feedback in the context of Syrian refugees specifically, rather than refugees more generally. Regardless of whether they were speaking of refugees writ large, Syrian refugees or irregular asylum seekers, there was a sense among many participants that Canada is taking in a lot of refugees through different channels. In addition, it is worthwhile noting that, when asked to think about immigration generally, there is a natural inclination among many to frame their commentary in the context of refugee migration.

“You can come as a refugee claimant. A student visa or work permit, family class.” (General Public, North York)

“I cannot remember hearing any news recently of any refugees coming here apart from the Syrian refugees, which was about probably less than a year, a year ago. So based on that, I don’t think we have, we are doing enough for refugees.” (African – Toronto)

Regardless of their view of immigration levels, many participants questioned whether the immigration levels plan considers immigrant settlement. For example, participants had the impression that immigrants tend to concentrate in large cities like Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. Those who expressed concern with this phenomenon tended to focus on the economic and social burden an increased population can have on these large urban centres in terms of availability of housing, employment, transportation, social services and, for a few participants, safety and security. Some suggested that more efforts should be made to encourage these individuals to seek out alternative locations with less population density and where their economic prospects (finding a job) might be more positive. A number of participants in the newcomer groups shared this view, saying that newcomers should settle in other locations.

Most participants, particularly newcomers, recognized that immigrants would want to move to cities where they could be reunited with their family and to be surrounded with individuals who have shared experiences and cultural interests. Some general public participants suggested that given Canada’s geography, there should be enough space to welcome immigrants, even in large urban centres.

“My father came because my uncle was in Montreal. We lived with him for a month until we found a place to live. Sense of belonging.” (Arabic – Montreal)

“The ratios, proportions, it’s like Ontario gets the bulk. Everyone comes especially to Toronto and the infrastructure can’t support it. So as an immigrant I feel it’s more…it’s harder on other immigrants.” (Caribbean - Toronto)

“I think it’s better to spread immigrants out and put them in different areas, different towns, and this way they would help the economy. It’s not a good idea to concentrate them all in Toronto or Vancouver.” (Cantonese – North York)

“I think we do have space, even though Toronto we are the biggest. There are other places to go. You can go to like- Brantford.” (General Public – North York)

Participants also questioned whether the immigration levels plan considers immigrant integration. In both newcomer and general public groups, many participants were proud that Canada is welcoming immigrants of all types because they believe “this is what Canada does” and that Canada is a country of immigrants. However, participants expressed concerns about the screening process for selecting immigrants and refugees, as well as the required funding and resources, to ensure their successful integration into Canadian society.

For example, many participants, particularly those in the French speaking groups in Moncton and Montreal, expressed concerns related to newcomers’ ability to speak either of Canada’s two official languages. They felt that not speaking English or French limits one’s ability to communicate and integrate into Canadian society. Similarly, a few participants in the Caribbean community group questioned how newcomers who do not speak an official language meet the screening requirements to immigrate to Canada.

Some others, particularly Chinese participants, had the impression that refugees receive more financial and social support from the Canadian government. There was an underlying sense of unfairness when compared to experiences of other immigrants. Participants from the Chinese communities were also more likely to feel that refugees had more lenient security screening criteria, and expressed safety and security concerns.

“With this as well, if we find they’re have difficulties with one of the two languages here, French or English, helping them to better understand that language to ease their integration at work.” (General Public – Montreal)

“Your English has to be good. You do all these tests. Your health has to be good. Then you land in Canada and you find people here who don’t speak English and you wonder, are there double standards?” (Caribbean – Toronto)

“It seems to me that this happens a lot. They appear to be in a bad spot but I think that we could easily accommodate them in Canada. I’m not talking about Quebec specifically.” (General Public – Montreal)

“Refugees and things like that, I think about how difficult it was for my family to come over and the lack of social support and things like that and in a sense it made me a little, I don't know if the word is jealous but if we had the social support that some of the Syrian refugees were getting we would have been better off and [sighs]. I just think we worked really hard to get here and there was no support and no help, we struggled…” (General Public – North York)

“For refugees, the security screening, what's the standard for screening of them, for security? We have to go through a lot of security screening before we come as immigrants. We don’t know what kind of background they have, if they had been involved in any kind of criminal cases or anything.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

c. Benefits and challenges of immigration in community

Participants generally agreed on the key benefits of immigration in their community. Comments from both general public and newcomer groups can be grouped into three broad categories:

  1. Their community’s ongoing economic prosperity
  2. A strong and skilled labour force - Skilled workers bring their work experience and skills to the community
  3. A diverse and multicultural community

Some of the specific benefits of immigration mentioned include:

“Gardens in Chinatown. That’s something everyone can go to for free, and it's such a beautiful oasis in the middle of the city.” (General Public - Vancouver)

“I know there’s a lot of new companies around my area. Well, I live in Richmond Hill so it’s not Mississauga exactly, but a lot of Iranian people starting up new companies, new businesses, you know, from scratch, which I see a lot of. And there’s a lot of new developments, so they’re boosting some jobs and the economy.” (Middle Eastern - Mississauga)

“For me, the cultural aspect has always fascinated me. I like to see immigrants here still dressed like they would in their homeland. It's impressive, it takes courage and a true sense of self. I admire that.” (General Public – Moncton)

“I also think the immigrants bring handiwork and…people want blue collar jobs here but when you bring people here…I just had someone come to my house…to get them, these handy people, carpentry and those things, it’s difficult to get in Toronto.” (Caribbean – Toronto)

“Building on that social aspect being such a diverse community already having different countries coming here we’re learning from each other. I find also those people that come here are the ones that fight for those communities that they live in so some will start grassroot networks and organizations to help the communities that they're in.” (General Public – North York)

After the discussion of the benefits of immigration, participants were asked to discuss various challenges associated with immigration in Canada. Perceived challenges varied greatly between general public and newcomer groups.

Participants from the general public groups were more concerned about how a larger population could impact the availability and cost of health care, housing, and congestion of roads and public transit. A few mentioned challenges caused by language barriers, particularly in Winnipeg and Montreal.

Participants from the newcomer groups were more concerned about some immigrants’ increased need for financial and social resources and supports and the potential negative impact this could have on their community’s public services. These participants often framed their feedback based on their perception that some newcomers are unwilling to seek out employment in order to support themselves. These concerns tended to be more prevalent among participants from Asian communities (Chinese and Filipino).

“Now it's too crowded in urban areas, and also the home prices. When you have more immigrants coming in, and then the housing, that will be a big challenge. The Canadian government should take this into consideration.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“Transit. We need more buses out there, especially in the suburbs. To get anywhere it's just horrendous.” (General Public – North York)

“I think it does because having too many immigrants, immigrants are categorized to be refugees, humanitarian, family or economic. We don’t have any problem with economic and family, but the refugees, I’m not sure about the humanitarian, some of them are not looking for a job, so they’re jobless or maybe they don’t have home. Maybe they have money from the government, but I’m not sure how are they using it?” (Filipino – Winnipeg)

“I know people who are investors, they came as investors, they're living in [a] mansion, they have two kids, they don’t work, but they still get child tax benefits.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“I talk to doctor’s offices all day and it's awful. The way the patients suffer because the receptionist doesn't know English. Or because [the patient/parent] can't communicate to the doctor or the teacher. The students know English but when the parent goes to talk to the teacher, it's no, I don't know what you're trying to tell me. So the communication is a mess and it's quite costly from a school division point of view.” (General Public – Winnipeg)

When asked about what advice they would give newcomers seeking to integrate into Canadian society, feedback from general public and newcomer audiences tended to be somewhat different.

Participants from the general public groups focused on learning the language and joining local community organizations. Newcomers spoke about the importance of seeking out community mentors who could pass on more practical information related to housing, schools, public transit, hospitals and community resources. In addition, some also suggested these activities would help newcomers learn Canadian culture and etiquette, which they considered important for integrating into Canadian society.

When asked what advice participants would give Canadians in order to help with newcomer integration, some participants spoke of tolerance and being welcoming to newcomers.

“Give them a tutor to help guide them. I remember when new employees started in the office, we had someone help them if they had questions, filling out forms, any type of question.” (Arabic – Montreal)

“Join a community organization, or volunteer at that level, to get to know what the concerns are of the people around you.” (General Public – Vancouver)

“Other advice, I’d give this in the plane while we are coming, I believe in this, when you are in Rome, do as Romans do. So you have your culture and you can preserve, of course you are going to preserve your culture at home, but once you are leaving the door outside, it’s about general culture. So it is about how to adopt the culture, understand and not try to change others.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“Most of the English classes here are available for free, so you get that when you, I would say when you're first getting here find a newcomer’s program that helps you connect to community resources that are available to you.” (General Public – Winnipeg)

d. Canada – U.S. irregular border crossing

When prompted, at least a few participants in each group had heard about asylum seekers entering Canada from the U.S by irregular border crossings. Awareness was higher in Montreal and Winnipeg and lower in Moncton. Participants tended to learn about the situation from media reports and social media posts; they noted that they felt information from media reports was more credible than the information on social media.

Generally speaking, participants attributed this situation to recent changes to U.S. immigration policy. Many assumed that asylum seekers coming in through irregular channels were doing so because they had been refused by the U.S. or were scared of being denied asylum through regular channels in the U.S.

“There are many unofficial points of entry that you can just walk across, like in the Barrie region or Quebec… there are many places where there’s not really an official border, and now because Donald Trump’s policies are more concerning. I think a lot of people have start coming across the border this way.”(Cantonese - Toronto)

“I can’t really tell, so I can’t tell how many of them are refugees or immigrants, and so I can’t tell you if there’s too much or too many.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“So definitely with Trump in the picture now, there’s been a lot of cross border asylum seekers, and apparently there’s a loophole in the system where they can cross and they can just put in their papers as, you know, they're asylum seekers.” (Indo-Canadian - Mississauga)

“First I read about the Syrians and then I read about people coming in from the U.S. Border when Trump was elected and then honestly I just stopped reading it. Whenever I saw anything having to do with immigration I just wouldn't read it… Because it angered me. Everyone’s just coming in, just coming right in.” (General Public – North York)

When presented with the actual number of irregular channel asylum claims made since 2017 (more than 41,000), reactions were mixed. Some felt the number was very high while others thought that the number demonstrated that there is a need for Canada’s protection. When discussing this issue, participants in both the general public and newcomer groups often asked for more information on the specific number of regular channel claims as compared to those making a claim via irregular channels.

Some participants expressed concerns about Canadians’ safety and security in the short and medium term, particularly participants from the Chinese groups who felt the number was very high and that Canada should have a well-managed screening system. Others worried about the added pressure these individuals are likely to put on communities in terms of housing and social services. Some suggested that they would want more information on government programs and infrastructure that were designed to help asylum seekers integrate into Canadian society.

“I think that speaks volumes on how much the world looks up to Canada. People are under the political impression that Canada is this amazing place. I want to live in a country that that’s what people think about. And that the Government has such a commitment for immigration.” (Caribbean - Toronto) .

“We can look at the US, Britain, France, what kind of mess they are in when they take all the refugees. A lot of riots, unrest, and a lot of events taken frequently, so the people's safety and security are threatened.” (Mandarin - Vancouver)

“Because you can take, you know, millions of people let’s say, but what is the quality of their life like? Is it actually a good thing that we’re taking in more or less? If they’re coming in and it’s like they’re struggling, they’re either relying on government programs to live or they’re barely making ends meet, do they have families to support? Not a lot of people are getting jobs, it’s like more information on that would be helpful to form an opinion on whether it’s too many or too little.” (African – Toronto)

When presented with additional information on regular channel vs. irregular channel asylum claims, participants in all groups were hard pressed to come to any kind of consensus. Some felt that this situation was unfair, that these individuals are jumping what they view as an immigration queue, or that these individuals were safe in the U.S. and should have followed regular processes. Others thought that the situation was fair and that Canada should find a way to screen and welcome these asylum seekers if they are in fact facing persecution in their home country. These participants believed that welcoming asylum seekers reflects the core of what makes Canada a great country.

Views were mixed regarding whether the government was doing a good job or a poor job of managing the issue. Those who felt the government is doing a good job felt that Canada has effective processes in place, that we have an obligation to hear from people who say they need our help, and that Canada is treating people with respect. Those who felt the government was doing a poor job felt that we should encourage the U.S. to take some responsibility, and that we should try to prevent irregular crossings (or encourage regular crossings) so that Canada can effectively screen asylum seekers.

“Like if when they apply for immigration and everything, then they have all the papers and everything and not an asylum claim. So instead of working on this, they’ll be working on those assessments and spending these people’s time when they’re actually legally coming to Canada and I think 41,000 is a lot.” (Ethno-cultural – Moncton)

“I think some people would feel like these are risks of safety when, like if there’s a lot of people doing that. But I think, we have a better process of screening them, making sure that they would not be a harm in the community. And you know, we signed the treaty legally, so I think we should be able to like, you know, welcome them. (Filipino – Winnipeg)

“To me, it's really a question whether they are breaking the law or not, because my understanding, crossing a border, technically is breaking the law. So starting a new life with breaking the law of the country you expect will be your new home doesn't sound like a bright idea. So there probably should be more kind of like civilized way, not necessarily just give them the boot and send them back. In official ports of entry, but I'm more kind of hesitant to open my arms and say come from all the places. From the perspective if they feel that their lives are threatened, they should be asking for the refugee status in the country where they first got, whether it's United States, whether it's France or whatever.” (General Public – Vancouver)

e. Message testing

Participants were presented with six messages and were asked to rank them from most preferred to least preferred. They highlighted the parts they liked with a green pen and the parts they disliked with a red pen.

Message #1

Message text, as shown to participants: “Like many other countries, in a reality of increasing global migration, Canada is experiencing a rise in the number of people claiming asylum. Our system offers protection to those fleeing persecution but removes those who seek to use it for other purposes. It is fair that Canada should continue to honour international obligations and hear asylum claims from individuals who arrive at our border.”

There was appreciation for the fact that this statement describes increased global migration and its impact on our country. Several participants from the general public groups, Caribbean and African communities felt positively towards honouring Canada’s international obligations as it speaks to the Canada they know. They liked the idea that everyone who arrives at the Canadian border could have a chance to be heard. It also demonstrates that Canada has respect for the rule of law and is a model for the rest of the world.

Nevertheless, general public participants from Winnipeg and Chinese communities were less likely to rank this message as their top choice. Some indicated that Canada should only honour international obligations when asylum seekers have not been granted asylum from other countries such as U.S. The Chinese communities thought this message did not provide them with enough background information on Canada’s international obligations, thus it was difficult for them to understand the message. Although they thought Canada needed to fulfill international obligations, they suggested that Canada should ensure the safety and security of its own citizens first.

On the whole, a majority of participants felt this statement strikes the right balance between compassion for those in need while acknowledging the importance of safeguarding the integrity of our immigration system.

“I like the part ‘it’s fair Canada should continue to honour international obligation and hear asylum claims at the border’. That encompasses all our borders – irregular or regular. We should stay true to what we believe and hear everyone out, give everyone a chance who’s made it here, to plead their case.” (Caribbean – Toronto)

“And I think the thing that resonated most with me is the last part, which is it's fair that Canada should continue to honour international obligations, and hear asylum claims from individuals who arrive at our border. I think a lot of our systems are based on hearing people out and giving them the benefit of the doubt.” (General Public – Vancouver)

“It’s too big, too general. Doesn’t really explain the background or the conditions of why Canada should honour these obligations and hear these asylum claims.” (Cantonese – North York)

“If our international obligations to take in asylum seekers, yes. If they're coming from the U.S. and they already have asylum in the U.S., I would say no.” (General Public – Winnipeg)

Message #2

Message text, as shown to participants: “60% of individuals who enter Canada between ports of entry are arriving from the U.S. with a valid U.S. visitor or student visa. For example, individuals enter the U.S. legally after travelling by air from Africa, Asia or Europe and then make their way to Canada. It is only fair that the U.S. take responsibility for these individuals.”

This message appealed to those who expressed outward concerns related to safety and security, and the integrity of our immigration system as a whole. The sentence ‘it is only fair that U.S. take responsibility for these individuals’ resonated particularly strongly with these audiences. Some participants from both general public groups and newcomer groups thought the Canadian government should not accept asylum claims from those who hold a U.S. visa as they should apply for asylum in the U.S. Additionally, a few from the general public groups suggested that if Canada does not have to process the ‘60% of individuals…with a valid U.S. visitor or student visa’, we could use the resources to help those in need. While a few participants from the Indo-Canadian groups thought that the U.S. should take responsibility for those who have a valid U.S. visa, they also felt that Canada should not discriminate against those individuals just because they have a U.S. visa.

The few participants from the Toronto and Winnipeg groups who had some knowledge of the Safe Third Country Agreement thought that the U.S. should honour the agreement and take more responsibility for asylum seekers.

“It's only fair that the U.S. take responsibility because these people applied for a U.S. visitor or student visa therefore the U.S. accepted them there and it's their responsibility at the end of the day.” (General Public – Winnipeg)

“They have a valid US Visa, when they arrive in the US, and then they come to Canada. So they have a purpose there, they lie to the Canadian Government, we should say no up front.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“They have a valid U.S. visa and if it’s 60% that's 60% of the people that we don’t have to process and use our resources for. They have a proper visa. They use a visitor visa or student visa but they're not in any trouble. It's simple, we don’t have to use our resources for them we can really care for those who need it.” (General Public – North York)

“We’re not forcing anything, or we’re not going to the extreme of things that we should refuse to listen to these claims, or turn them back, or not accept them. It just makes this small statement that it is only fair, that the US take responsibility…But it would also mean that because somebody was able to enter US legally, we then discriminate them when it comes to asylum. They might have somehow you know, satisfied the US Visa, done it in the US, but their life might still be in danger if their Visa expires and if they are pushed back to their country. So it's kind of balanced. At the end, we’re saying that Canada shouldn't take an extreme stance, but at the beginning…, it's like we’re discriminating just because they were able to get a US Visa.” (Indo-Canadian – Mississauga)

Message #3

Message text, as shown to participants: “The number of irregular asylum claims Canada received since 2017 (~41,000) is lower than what some media reports have said the U.S. received last month (~100,000) or what Europe received in 2018 (~600,000). It is fair that Canada should continue to honour international obligations and hear asylum claims from individuals who enter Canada between ports of entry.”

This message received mixed reactions from both general public and newcomer audiences. Some general public participants in Montreal and Caribbean communities in Toronto understood the sentence ‘the number of irregular asylum claims Canada received since 2017 is lower than…the U.S…and Europe’ to mean that things are relatively under control. Some thought, given that the number of refugees that come to Canada every year seems much lower than the U.S. and European countries, that Canada should welcome more refugees each year.

For those who thought Canada welcomed too many refugees, this message only further underscored the severity of the problem as they viewed ‘more than 41,000’ as a significant number. Specifically, some Chinese participants suggested that the number is disproportionately higher than Canada’s population can absorb. However, many participants still felt it is fair for Canada to offer these individuals due process as per our international obligations.

“I think that these arguments are arguments for whether Canada should be using our resources to be processing these irregular entries of asylum seekers. I [ranked this message lowest] because it's not a reason why we should be processing them just because it’s less than Europe or the U.S. I don’t believe that's a good reason for us to continue to process them.” (General Public – North York)

“Look at the population of the US, and look at the population of Canada. You just make it proportionately, because ten times the population in the US. So we use that proportion, and I also [ranked this message lowest]. I don’t like [this message].” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“The numbers are pretty low considering the numbers of people going into Europe and the US. So we should definitely continue to honour them coming in.” (Caribbean – Toronto)

Message #4

Message text, as shown to participants: “Individuals who enter Canada between ports of entry are arriving from the U.S., which has its own refugee determination system. Canada should turn these individuals back or refuse to hear their asylum claim. It is fair that they should make their asylum claim in the U.S. instead of Canada, as that’s where they landed first.”

This message was most likely to resonate positively with those who held a more negative position on welcoming irregular refugees. According to these participants, it made sense that these individuals should seek asylum where they first landed. In particular, participants from the Chinese groups stressed their safety concerns and felt that the Canadian government should return these individuals to the U.S. for security screening and asylum claim assessments.

Others think that the phrase ‘Canada should turn these individuals back or refuse to hear asylum claims’ sounds extreme and harsh, and that this approach is not consistent with the Canada they know. The word ‘refuse’ received negative reactions from several participants in the general public groups and African communities.

“I think when they said Canada should turn these individuals back or refuse to hear their claim altogether, I think their refusal to hear the claims sounds a bit harsh.” (African – Toronto)

“The due process, I guess everyone has an opportunity, every refugee claimant has an opportunity, they have the opportunity to appeal. When you are refused, because of your criminal record, or for whatever reasons, and then you should be sent back. But then Canada is not doing good job in terms of deportation, sending them back.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“I don’t know why we would turn them away, we have a lot of space in Canada. Okay, fine, I know it's Vancouver the east or Toronto. Calgary is pretty small too but some people there, they could expand Canada with these people.” (General Public – North York)

“Canada should send back the people who refuse to hear asylum claims. We are supposed to be a welcoming country, and if a person is in danger of death, regardless of where they come from, we cannot send them back. We cannot refuse their request.” (General Public – Montreal)

Message #5

Message text, as shown to participants: “Canada’s process to determine the eligibility of asylum claims is fair, as individuals are entitled to due process before the law, including various levels of appeal. The timely removal of failed claimants supports the integrity of Canada’s immigration system and contributes to Canada’s security and public safety.”

For many, this message struck the right tone by speaking to due process while underscoring that those who would seek to abuse Canada’s immigration system would not be welcomed. The reference to ‘supporting the integrity of Canada’s system and contributing to Canada’s security and public safety’ appealed to those who have concerns about the potential abuse of our immigration system. Many participants, particularly participants from the general public and African groups, liked the idea of having different levels of appeal before the removal of failed claimants, even though they said they did not have much information on what happens to those failed claimants.

For others, opinions were divided as to the application of this message. Many were unsure of how realistically this process could be implemented, with some participants from the Chinese groups describing cases they had heard of time-consuming removal of failed claimants.

“I think it was the only one that mentioned removal of failed claimants from the system. You never really, I don’t know, I don’t personally hear about people being deported intentionally. They believe if they can’t live here on their own but having a system that actually follows up on the failed claimants is probably a good thing because it’s less of a burden on the people that are coming in successfully on us. And the mention of security and public safety was not mentioned in any of the others, so that’s why I chose it.” (African – Toronto)

“I like the fact that it says all individuals are entitled to due process before the law, and the timely removal of failed claimants supports the integrity of our system, which I believe is very true. So it says that we accept people but we also, we’re analyzing case by case.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“I don’t like the sentence, it's not practical to send someone back, because some people just drag on, some cases just drag on for ten years. You are not able to drag them back, no efficiency there. Like for example, there’s an Indian case, they will be deported after so many years of struggle. So this timely sending back, it's just empty talk.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

Message #6

Message text, as shown to participants: “If an individual arrives in Canada who has already made an asylum claim in a country with a similar immigration system (i.e. the United States, Australia, New Zealand or the UK), they should not have access to Canada’s full asylum system. This will help ease the backlog at the independent board that hears refugee cases. These people would still get a hearing with the government to ensure that they are not sent back to a country where they would be in risk of danger, persecution, or torture.”

Some participants agreed with the assertions that existing claimants ‘should not have access to Canada’s full asylum system’ and that this ‘will help ease the backlog at the independent board’. Justification for this perspective was grounded in the view that asylum seekers should wait for the results of their asylum claim before making another asylum claim in Canada. Others felt reassured that asylum seekers ‘would still get a hearing with the government to ensure that they are not sent back to the country where they would be in risk of danger, persecution or torture’.

Some participants from the general public groups, especially those from Montreal, disliked the comparison to other countries’ immigration systems given that they viewed Canada’s immigration system as distinct and unique. Consequently, having similarities to another country’s system was not a valid reason to deny anyone’s access to Canada’s full asylum system. Of note, those who were most likely to make this argument tended to point to the U.S. as an example of how ‘similar’ immigrations systems may have fundamental differences.

“This will help ease the backlog of the independent board that hear the refugee cases, I like that part because it’s avoid duplication of processing the records of one person.” (Filipino – Winnipeg)

“Well you shouldn't just be jumping around from country to country. I mean, I get, you're in the States, and…don’t know what’s going on, and you hear about whatever. And you want to go to a better place, and it's just easier, you're right here, Mexico, Canada, come to Canada, Canada's great, we’re open arms, and we’re a great place to be. But we do have obviously a backlog because of that. (General Public – Vancouver)

“Because actually, they’ve already been to countries with similar immigration systems before coming to Canada… so they technically shouldn’t be using the full asylum system in Canada. And I really agree with the point that we would still have a system that would ensure they have a chance to be heard.” (Cantonese – North York)

“Just because other countries like New Zealand and USA are similar, but we have our own country, we should have our own rules. We are Canada.” (General Public – Montreal)

f. Refugee resettlement

When asked about selection criteria for resettling refugees, participants’ views were divided. Participants felt that many aspects are important, namely: vulnerability (i.e. the need for Canada’s protection), security screening and health screening. When asked which aspect was most important, they were generally torn between helping as many people as possible and preventing those most vulnerable from suffering. It should be noted that when it comes to refugee resettlement, participants most often use Syrian refugees as their frame of reference. They make a point of stating that they know very little about the processes and government programs in place to assist those received as refugees settle and integrate once they come to Canada. In the absence of this information, many assumed that the system is working as it should.

“Sort of what my gut says but I don't know. My gut is saying the more vulnerable, but then, I don't know, it's hard.” (General Public – North York) “I’d go with vulnerable. The ones in most need. Even if you can’t help as many people. There are kids dying in war-torn countries. Helping them coming here…” (Caribbean - Toronto)

“It's hard because I feel like they're all vulnerable. They're running from their country with their little kids, or elderly or whatever with only a bag if they have one and how do you decide you're more vulnerable than the other? They're all vulnerable.” (General Public – North York)

“The government is doing a good job accepting the refugees from Syria.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

g. Client service and experience

Some newcomers described an easy and clear immigration application experience while others described a long and complicated one. When asked about their ideal immigration application experience, most newcomers focused on transparency. They wanted to know how the immigration officer evaluates their application and to be able to track their application status. Many newcomers stated that they would appreciate the ability to easily track the progress of their application online. Some also mentioned the need for access to information and communication with IRCC via electronic means (email or web-based information) or more traditional channels (phone). Some felt the application process was too long and that government should be taking further steps to shorten it.

“It takes too long, sometimes you're filling applications, going through the process, took a long time. Too long, if you have a system that can do updates, or upgrade the system. To do that, if you can use a computerized system to do it, you use less personnel, that would be better.” (Mandarin - Vancouver)

“So I would say just timely and communication, communicating all the timelines. Let’s say I apply for something, and the wait time should be reasonable, it’s not like years.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“Well like we’ve got [our mobile devices on] 24/7, utilize it, right. Create an app, I’m sure they have the money and, you know, send a quick update here and there, right.” (African – Toronto)

Appendix 1 – Recruitment screener

English recruitment screener

Hello/Bonjour, my name is _____. I'm calling from Ipsos, a national public opinion research firm.

Would you prefer to continue in English or French? [CONTINUE IN LANGUAGE OF PREFERENCE OR ARRANGE CALL BACK IN OTHER LANGUAGE]

[FOR USE IN QUEBEC/ATLANTIC CANADA]

Préférez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais ? [CONTINUE IN LANGUAGE OF PREFERENCE OR ARRANGE CALL BACK IN OTHER LANGUAGE]

On behalf of the Government of Canada we’re organizing a series of discussion groups with Canadians to explore current issues of importance to the country. A variety of topics will be discussed and we are interested in hearing your opinions.

[EXPLAIN FOCUS GROUPS] About ten people like you will be taking part, all of them randomly recruited just like you. For their time, participants will receive an honorarium of [FOR GENERAL PUBLIC: $85] [FOR IMMIGRANT: $125]. But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix and variety of people. May I ask you a few questions?

Participation is voluntary. No attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view. The format is a “round table” discussion lead by a research professional. All opinions expressed will remain anonymous and views will be grouped together to ensure no particular individual can be identified.

S1. Do you or any member of your household work in or has retired from:

YES 1 [THANK AND TERMINATE]

NO 2 [CONTINUE]

[IF “YES” TO ANY OF THE ABOVE, THANK AND TERMINATE]

S2. Were you born in Canada, or in another country?

[SKIP S3 IF BORN IN CANADA]

S3. How old were you when you moved to Canada?

[SKIP S4 IF BORN IN CANADA]

S4. In what year did you come to Canada?

[WRITE IN; NUMERIC]

Year came to Canada Focus group qualification

[SKIP S5 IF BORN IN CANADA]

S5. Because we would like to talk to people who have come to Canada in different ways, I would like you to tell me which one of the following best describes your current legal status in Canada. Again, please be assured that we are asking for this information for research purposes only. Are you...?

[READ LIST – IF RESPONDENT SAYS LANDED IMMIGRANT, CLASSIFY AS PERMANENT RESIDENT]

[SKIP S6 IF BORN IN CANADA]

S6. What is your country of origin, that is, in what country were you born and a permanent resident in before coming to Canada?

[DO NOT READ LIST; RECRUIT MIX OF DIFFERENT COUNTRIES FOR GROUPS WHERE MORE THAN ONE COUNTRY IS TARGETED]

ASK ALL

1) Could you please tell me what age category you fall in to? Are you...

2) Do you currently have children under the age of 18 living in the house with you?

[ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP]

3) Do you currently have children under the age of 13 living in the house with you?

[RECRUIT MIN 3 per group]

[ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP]

4) How many people above the age of 18 are there in your household?

5) Could you please tell me what is the last level of education that you have completed?

6) What is your current employment status?

7) [IF EMPLOYED/RETIRED] What is/was your current/past occupation?

8) Which of the following categories best describes your total household income? That is, the total income of all persons in your household combined, before taxes?

[READ LIST]

[ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP MAX 3 PER GROUP]

Ensure good mix by...

9) DO NOT ASK – NOTE GENDER

10. Have you ever attended a focus group or a one-to-one discussion for which you have received a sum of money, here or elsewhere?

[ASK IF Q10=1]

11. When did you last attend one of these discussions?

[TERMINATE IF IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS]

12. How many focus groups or one-to-one discussions have you attended in the past 5 years?

[IF MORE THAN 5, THANK & TERMINATE]

13. What topics were discussed in the focus groups you took part in during the last two years?

[TERMINATE IF RELATED TO IMMIGRATION OR SETTLEMENT ISSUES]

[SKIP Q15 TO Q19 IF BORN IN CANADA (S2=1)]

[ASK IF S6=1]

14. Do you speak, read and understand Mandarin or Cantonese? [DO NOT READ LIST]

15. And would you be comfortable participating in a group discussion conducted completely in Mandarin or would you prefer to participate in English? [DO NOT READ LIST]

16. And would you be comfortable participating in a group discussion conducted completely in Cantonese or would you prefer to participate in English? [DO NOT READ LIST]

[ASK IF S6=2]

17. Do you speak, read and understand English?

18. And would you be comfortable participating in a group discussion conducted completely in English? [DO NOT READ LIST]

[ASK IF S2=1 OR IF S6=3 OR 4 OR 5 OR 6]

19. Which of the two official languages do you regularly speak at home?

[ASK IF Q20=1]

20. How comfortable are you in taking part in a group discussion conducted completely in English? Are you... [READ LIST]

[ASK IF S6=7 OR 8 OR IF Q20=2] ASK ALL BORN IN FRENCH ARAB COUNTRIES FOR GROUP 9

21. How comfortable are you in taking part in a group discussion conducted completely in French? Are you... [READ LIST]

[ASK ALL]

22. Participants in group discussions are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts, how comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others? Are you... [READ LIST]

[ASK ALL]

23. Sometimes participants are also asked to write out their answers on a questionnaire. Is there any reason why you could not participate? If you need glasses to read, please remember to bring them.

During the discussion, you will be audio- and videotaped. This taping is being done to assist us with our report writing. Also, in this room there is a one-way mirror. Sitting behind the mirror may be Government of Canada staff, including members of the staff from the department that sponsored this research, and by staff members from Ipsos. This is standard focus group procedure to get a first-hand look at the research process and to hear first-hand your impressions and views on the research topic.

Do you agree to be observed for research purposes only?

****(IN EACH LOCATION, PLEASE ENSURE TEN (10) PARTICIPANTS ARE RECRUITED FOR 8-TO SHOW)****

[Read to Stand-by Respondents]

Thank you for answering my questions. Unfortunately, at this time, the group you qualify for is full. We would like to place you on our stand-by list. This means that if there is an opening in the group, we would then call you back and see if you are available to attend the discussion. May I please have a daytime contact number, an evening contact number and an email address, if you have one, so that we can contact you as soon as possible if an opening becomes available?

[RECORD CONTACT INFO]

[Read to Screened in Respondents]

Wonderful, you qualify to participate in one of these group discussions which will take place on, (DATE) @ (TIME) for no more than 2 hours. The Government of Canada is sponsoring this research. All those who participate will receive a [FOR GENERAL PUBLIC: $85] [FOR IMMIGRANT: $125] honorarium as a thank you for their time.

Do you have a pen handy so that I can give you the address where the group will be held? It will be held at:

We ask that you arrive at least 20 minutes early to be sure you locate the facility and have time to check-in with the hosts. Prior to being admitted into the focus group room you will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement, failure to do so will result in you being denied participation in the focus group session for which you have been selected. Payment of the incentive is contingent on participation in the focus group sessions.

In addition, we will be checking your identification prior to the group, so please be sure to bring two pieces of government issued photo identification with you (i.e. driver’s license, health card or other). Also, if you require glasses for reading, please bring them with you.

As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us. We have invited you to participate based on the questions we went through a moment ago, so we ask that you do not send a representative on your behalf should you be unable to participate. IF FOR SOME REASON YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE CALL SO THAT WE MAY GET SOMEONE TO REPLACE YOU. You can reach us at 1-xxx-xxx-xxxx at our office.

Someone will call you the day before to remind you about the discussion.

What would be a good time to reach you?

And at what telephone numbers?

May I please get your name? ON FRONT PAGE

Thank you very much for your help!

French recruitment screener

Bonjour/Hi, ici _____________. J’appelle de la part d’Ipsos, une firme nationale de recherche d’opinion publique.

Préférez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais? [CONTINUER DANS LA LANGUE DE PRÉFÉRENCE OU PLANIFIER UN RAPPEL DANS L’AUTRE LANGUE]

[USAGE RÉSERVÉ AU QUÉBEC/CANADA ATLANTIQUE]

Would you prefer to continue in English or French? [CONTINUER DANS LA LANGUE DE PRÉFÉRENCE OU PLANIFIER UN RAPPEL DANS L’AUTRE LANGUE]

Nous organisons actuellement des groupes de discussion avec les Canadiens au nom du gouvernement du Canada afin de discuter de certains enjeux d’actualité importants pour le pays. Plusieurs sujets seront abordés et nous cherchons à connaître votre opinion.

[EXPLIQUER LES GROUPES DE DISCUSSION] Environ dix personnes prendront part à nos groupes de discussion et elles auront toutes été recrutées au hasard, comme vous. En guise de remerciement, chaque participant recevra une somme de [GRAND PUBLIC : 85 $] [IMMIGRANTS : 125 $]. Mais avant de vous convier à une rencontre, je dois vous poser quelques questions pour veiller à rassembler des personnes de divers horizons. Puis-je vous poser quelques questions?

La participation est volontaire. En aucun cas, nous ne tenterons de vous vendre quoi que ce soit ou de vous faire changer d’avis. Il s’agit de participer à une « table ronde » qui sera menée par un professionnel des études de marché. Tous vos commentaires demeureront confidentiels et seront regroupés avec ceux d’autres participants de façon à assurer l’anonymat.

S1. Est-ce que vous ou un membre de votre foyer travaillez ou avez travaillé dans un des milieux suivants :

OUI 1 [REMERCIER ET CONCLURE]

NON 2 [CONTINUER]

[SI « OUI » À L’UN OU L’AUTRE, REMERCIER ET CONCLURE]

S2. Êtes-vous né au Canada ou dans un autre pays?

[PASSER S3 SI NÉ AU CANADA]

S3. Quel âge aviez-vous lorsque vous avez emménagé au Canada?

[PASSER S4 SI NÉ AU CANADA]

S4. En quelle année êtes-vous arrivé au Canada?

_________. [INSCRIRE EN CHIFFRES]

Année d’arrivée au Canada Qualification au groupe de discussion

[PASSER S5 SI NÉ AU CANADA]

S5. Comme nous cherchons à parler à des personnes venues au Canada par différents moyens, j’aimerais que vous me disiez laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux votre statut juridique actuel au Canada. Je vous assure une fois de plus que nous demandons ces renseignements uniquement à des fins de recherche. Êtes-vous…?

[LIRE LA LISTE – SI LE RÉPONDANT SE DIT IMMIGRANT ADMIS, LE CLASSER COMME RÉSIDENT PERMANENT]

[PASSER S6 SI NÉ AU CANADA]

S6. Quel est votre pays d’origine, c’est-à-dire le pays où vous êtes né et étiez résident permanent avant de venir au Canada?

[NE PAS LIRE LA LISTE; RECRUTER DES PERSONNES D’HORIZONS VARIÉS DANS LES GROUPES AXÉS SUR PLUS D’UN PAYS]

DEMANDER À TOUS

1) Pouvez-vous me dire à quel groupe d’âge vous appartenez? Avez-vous...

2) À l’heure actuelle, y a-t-il des enfants de moins de 18 ans habitant sous votre toit?

[ASSURER LA BONNE DIVERSIFICATION DE CHAQUE GROUPE]

3) À l’heure actuelle, y a-t-il des enfants de moins de 13 ans habitant sous votre toit?

[RECRUTER AU MOINS 3 par groupe]

[ASSURER LA BONNE DIVERSIFICATION DE CHAQUE GROUPE]

4) Combien de personnes de plus de 18 ans votre foyer compte-t-il?

5) Pouvez-vous m’indiquer le plus haut niveau d’études que vous avez atteint?

6) À l’heure actuelle, quel est votre statut d’emploi?

7) [SI AU TRAVAIL/À LA RETRAITE] Quel emploi occupez-vous à l’heure actuelle/occupiez-vous avant?

8) Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux votre revenu familial total, c’est-à-dire la somme des revenus avant impôts de tous les membres de votre foyer?

[LIRE LA LISTE]

[ASSURER LA BONNE DIVERSIFICATION DE CHAQUE GROUPE, MAXIMUM DE 3 PAR GROUPE]

Assurer une bonne diversification...

9) NE PAS DEMANDER – INSCRIRE LE GENRE

10) Avez-vous déjà été rémunéré pour participer à un groupe de discussion ou à une entrevue individuelle, ici ou ailleurs?

[DEMANDER SI Q10 = 1]

11) À quand remonte la dernière fois que vous avez participé à une telle rencontre?

[CONCLURE SI AU COURS DES 6 DERNIERS MOIS]

12) À combien de groupes de discussion ou d’entrevues individuelles avez-vous participé au cours des 5 dernières années?

[SI PLUS DE 5, REMERCIER ET CONCLURE]

13) Quels sujets ont été abordés lors des groupes de discussion auxquels vous avez participé au cours des deux dernières années?

[CONCLURE SI SUJET LIÉ AUX QUESTIONS D’IMMIGRATION OU D’ÉTABLISSEMENT]

[PASSER Q15 À Q19 SI NÉ AU CANADA (S2 = 1)]

[DEMANDER SI S6 = 1]

14) Parlez-vous, lisez-vous et comprenez-vous le mandarin ou le cantonais? [NE LISEZ PAS LA LISTE]

15) Et seriez-vous à l'aise de participer à une discussion de groupe entièrement en mandarin ou préféreriez-vous participer en anglais? [NE LISEZ PAS LA LISTE]

16) Et seriez-vous disposé à participer à une discussion de groupe entièrement en cantonais ou préféreriez-vous participer en anglais? [NE LISEZ PAS LA LISTE]

[DEMANDER SI S6 = 2]

17) Savez-vous parler, lire et comprendre le pendjabi?

18) Et seriez-vous à l'aise de participer à une discussion de groupe entièrement en punjabi ou préférez-vous participer en anglais? [NE LISEZ PAS LA LISTE]

[DEMANDER SI S2=1 OU SI S6=3 OU 4 OU 5 OU 6]

19) Laquelle des deux langues officielles parlez-vous régulièrement à la maison?

[DEMANDER SI Q20 = 1]

20) How comfortable are you in taking part in a group discussion conducted completely in English? Are you... [READ LIST]

[DEMANDER SI S6 = 7 OU Q20 = 2] DEMANDER À TOUS CEUX QUI PROVIENNENT DE PAYS ARABES FRANCOPHONES POUR LE GROUPE 7

21) Dans quelle mesure êtes-vous à l’aise de participer à un groupe de discussion mené entièrement en français? Êtes-vous... [LIRE LA LISTE]

[DEMANDER À TOUS]

22) Les participants à des groupes de discussion sont appelés à exprimer leur opinion et à dire ce qu’ils pensent. Dans quelle mesure êtes-vous à l’aise d’exprimer votre opinion en présence d’autres personnes? Êtes-vous... [LIRE LA LISTE]

[DEMANDER À TOUS]

23) Parfois, on demande également aux participants d’écrire leurs réponses sur un questionnaire. Y a-t-il une raison qui pourrait vous empêcher de participer? Si vous avez besoin de lunettes pour lire, n’oubliez pas de les apporter.

La rencontre sera filmée et enregistrée. Ces enregistrements nous aideront au moment de rédiger notre rapport. En outre, la pièce où se déroule la rencontre comporte un miroir d’observation derrière lequel peuvent se trouver des représentants du gouvernement du Canada, notamment des employés du ministère qui commandite l’étude, ainsi que des membres du personnel d’Ipsos. Il s’agit d’une procédure normale dans le cadre d’un groupe de discussion. Elle permet d’obtenir un premier aperçu du déroulement de l’étude et d’entendre vos impressions ainsi que vos points de vue sur le sujet à l’étude.

Acceptez-vous que l’on vous observe uniquement aux fins de l’étude?

****(VEILLEZ À RECRUTER 12 PARTICIPANTS DANS CHAQUE VILLE POUR QUE DE 8 À 10 D’ENTRE EUX SE PRÉSENTENT)****

[Lire aux répondants de réserve]

Merci d’avoir répondu à nos questions. Malheureusement, à l’heure actuelle, le groupe auquel vous êtes admissible est complet. Nous aimerions toutefois vous inscrire sur notre liste de répondants de réserve. Ainsi, si une place se libère, nous vous rappellerons pour savoir si vous êtes disposé à participer à la discussion. Puis-je avoir des numéros de téléphone où vous joindre en journée ou en soirée ainsi que votre adresse courriel, si vous en avez une, pour communiquer avec vous le plus rapidement possible si une place se libère?

[INSCRIRE LES COORDONNÉES DU RÉPONDANT]

[Lire aux répondants recrutés]

Fantastique. Vous êtes admissible à participer à l’un de nos groupes de discussion qui se tiendra le (DATE), à (HEURE). La rencontre durera deux heures tout au plus. Il s’agit d’une étude commanditée par le gouvernement du Canada. Tous les participants recevront une somme de [GRAND PUBLIC : 85 $] [IMMIGRANTS : 125 $] en guise de remerciement.

Avez-vous un crayon à portée de main pour noter l’adresse où se tiendra la rencontre? Elle aura lieu à :

[VISER UNE COMBINAISON 50-50]

Nous vous prions d’arriver au moins vingt minutes à l’avance, le temps de trouver le lieu et de vous enregistrer auprès des animateurs. Avant d’être admis dans la salle de rencontre, vous devrez signer une entente de confidentialité. Si vous refusez, vous ne pourrez pas participer à la discussion pour laquelle vous avez été choisi. La rémunération est conditionnelle à votre participation au groupe de discussion.

Nous vérifierons aussi votre identité au préalable. Il est donc important d’apporter deux pièces d’identité avec photo émises par le gouvernement (p. ex. permis de conduire, carte-santé ou autre). N’oubliez pas d’apporter vos lunettes de lecture si vous en avez besoin.

Comme nous n’invitons qu’un nombre restreint de personnes, votre participation est très importante pour nous. Vous avez été invité à participer selon vos réponses aux questions précédentes. Veuillez donc éviter d’envoyer un représentant à votre place si vous êtes incapable de participer. SI, POUR QUELQUE RAISON QUE CE SOIT, VOUS NE POUVEZ PAS VOUS PRÉSENTER, VEUILLEZ NOUS TÉLÉPHONER AFIN QUE NOUS VOUS TROUVIONS UN REMPLAÇANT. Joignez nos bureaux au 1 xxx xxx-xxxx.

Nous vous téléphonerons à nouveau la veille de la rencontre pour confirmer votre présence.

À quel moment est-il préférable de vous appeler?

Et à quels numéros de téléphone?

Puis-je avoir votre nom? SUR LA PAGE COUVERTURE

Merci beaucoup de votre contribution!

Simplified Chinese recruitment screener

您好， 我的名字叫，我是从一个叫Ipsos的全国公众意见研究机构打来电话。

我们代表加拿大政府，正在组织由加拿大居民参与的一系列讨论小组，目的是研究目前对国家有重要影响的各种问题。届时将会讨论不同的主题，我们有兴趣听到你们的意见。

[解释焦点小组] 大约将有十位像您这样的人士参与讨论，所有参与者都像您这样随机招募。为了补偿参与者花费的时间，他们将会收到一定的酬金[普通公民： $85] [移民： $125] 。但是在邀请您参与之前，我们需要向您询问一些问题，以确保我们能获得良好的人员混合以及筛选到各种不同背景的人士。我是否可以问您一些问题？

  1. 是 1 [继续]
  2. 否 2 [感谢并结束提问]

参与是自愿的。任何人不会企图向您推销任何东西或者改变您的观点。讨论的形式是在一位专业研究人士引导下进行的 “圆桌”讨论。所有意见将均以匿名形式保存，各种看法将汇总在一起，以确保无法识别任何特定的个人。

S1. 您本人或者您的任何家庭成员是否从事下列职业或者从下列职业退休：

是 1 [感谢并结束提问]

否 2 [继续]

[如果对上述任何一种职业回答“是”，感谢并结束提问]

S2. 您在加拿大出生，或者在另一个国家出生？

[如果在加拿大出生则跳过S3 ]

S3. 您移民到加拿大时的年龄是？

[如果在加拿大出生则跳过S4 ]

S4. 您是哪一年来到加拿大的？

[填入：数字]

来到加拿大时的年份 小组资格

[如果在加拿大出生则跳过S5 ]

S5. 因为我们希望与通过不同途径来到加拿大的人士交谈，所以想请您告诉我们下列哪一种情况能最好地描述您目前在加拿大的合法身份。再次请您放心，我们询问这一信息的目的是仅用于研究。请问您是......？

[读出下列选项-如果回答是登陆新移民，则归类为永久居民]

[如果在加拿大出生则跳过S6]

S6. 您的原籍国是哪里？即您来到加拿大之前，您在哪个国家出生以及是哪个国家的永久居民？

[不要读出下列选项；招募来自不同国家的人士混合成小组，针对小组包含一个以上国家]

【询问所有人】

1) 请告诉我您在哪个年龄段？您的年龄是......

2) 目前您家里与您同住的是否有18岁以下的少年儿童？

[确保每个小组的良好混合]

3) 目前您家里与您同住的是否有13岁以下的儿童？

[每组至少招募3人]

[确保每个小组的良好混合]

4) 您家中有多少人超过18岁?

5) 您能否告诉我您所完成的最高教育程度是什么？

6) 您目前的就业状态如何？

7) [如果就业/退休] 您目前/从前的职业是什么？

8) 下列哪个收入级别能最好地描述您的家庭总收入？即您的家庭中所有人的税前收入之和是多少？

[读出列表]

[确保每个小组的良好混合，每个选项最多3人]

通过下列方式确保良好的混合......

9) 不要询问 - 记录性别

10. 您是否曾经在我们这里或者其他地方参与过某个讨论小组或一对一的讨论，并因此收到过一笔酬金？

[如果Q10=1则提问]

11. 您是何时最后参与这些讨论的？

[如果在过去6个月中，则结束提问]

12. 在过去5年当中，您曾经参与过多少次焦点讨论小组或一对一的讨论？

[如果超过5次，感谢并结束提问]

13. 在过去2年中您参与的焦点小组所讨论的主题是什么？

[如果讨论的主题与移民或安置问题有关，请结束提问]

[如果在加拿大出生(S2=1)，则跳过Q15到Q19 ]

[如果S6=1则提问]

14. 您是否能说、阅读和理解中文（国语）或者粤语？ [不要读出选项]

15. 您对参与一个完全采取中文（国语）进行的小组谈论是否感到舒服？还是您更愿意用英语？ [不要读出选项]

16. 您对参与一个完全采取粤语（广东话）进行的小组谈论是否感到舒服？还是您更愿意用英语？ [不要读出选项]

[如果S6=2则提问]

17. 您是否能说、阅读并理解英语？

18. 您对参与一个完全采取英语进行的小组谈论是否感到舒服？ [不要读出选项]

[如果S2=1 或如果S6=3 或 4 或 5 6，请提问]

19. 在家里您通常讲两种官方语言中的哪一种？

[如果Q20=1则提问]

20. 您对参与一个完全采取英语进行的小组谈论感到舒服的程度如何？您感到......[读出选项]

[如果S6=7或 8或如果 Q20=2则提问] 询问所有在讲法语的阿拉伯国家出生的第9组人士

21. 您对参与一个完全采取法语进行的小组谈论感到舒服的程度如何？您感到......[读出选项]

[询问所有人]

22. 我们会让小组讨论的参与者说出他们的观点和想法，在他人面前说出自己的观点的舒服程度如何？ 您感到...... [读出选项]

[询问所有人]

23. 有时候也请参与者在某次问卷调查中写出他们的答案。您是否有任何不能够参与的理由？如果您需要戴眼镜，请记住带上眼镜。

在讨论期间，将对参与者进行录音和录像。这样做是为了帮助我们撰写报告。在这个房间里还有一个单向镜。坐在镜子后面的可能是加拿大政府的职员，包括赞助这次研究的部门的成员，以及来自Ipsos的职员。这是标准的焦点讨论小组程序，以便直接观察研究过程并直接听取参与者对研究主题的看法及观点。

您是否同意仅为研究之目的对您进行观察？

****(在每个地点，请招募十（10）名参与者，以确保有8人肯定到场)****

[读给备选回答者]

感谢您回答我的提问。不幸的是，这次您符合资格的小组已经满额。我们想将您列入备选名单。这意味着如果这个小组有空缺，我们会打电话给您，看您是否能参与讨论。我可否获得您的日间联络电话号码、晚间联络电话号码以及电子邮件地址（如果您有的话）？以便在讨论小组出现空缺时，我们可以尽快与您联络。

[记录联络信息]

[读给筛选入围的回答者]

太好了，您有资格参与某次小组讨论，讨论将在（日期）@（时间）举行，时间不超过2小时。加拿大政府赞助这次研究。所有参与者将获得酬金[普通公民: $85] [移民: $125]，以表达对他们付出时间的感谢。

您身边有笔吗？这样我可以告诉您将要举行的小组讨论的地址。小组讨论将在下列地址举行：

请您至少提前20分钟到达上述地址，以确保您能够找到讨论会的地点，并有充分时间到主办方签到。在允许您进入焦点小组讨论室之前，我们将要求您签署一份保密协议。如果不这么做，主办方将不允许您参与之前已选定您作为成员的焦点小组讨论。参与了焦点小组讨论才能获得鼓励性的酬金。

除此以外，在允许您进入讨论室之前，我们将查验您的身份证明，所以请您随身携带二件政府发放的带照片的身份证明文件（如驾驶执照、健康卡或其他身份证明）。另外，如果您阅读时需要佩戴眼镜的话，也请随身携带。

因为我们只邀请了少量参与者，所以您的参与对我们非常重要。根据我们刚才提问的问题，我们才邀请您参与讨论，假如您不能参与，我们请您不要派一位代表来参与。如果因故您无法参加，请打电话给我们，以便我们能找人来替代您。您可以打我们办公室的电话1-xxx-xxx-xxxx，与我们联络。

有人会在讨论日期的前一天打电话提醒您。

何时与您联络比较方便？

打哪个电话号码比较容易联络到您？

我能知道您的名字吗？在首页 （ON FRONT PAGE）

非常感谢您的帮助！

Traditional Chinese recruitment screener

您好，我的名字叫_____________，我是從一個叫Ipsos的全國公眾意見研究機構打來電話。

我們代表加拿大政府，正在組織由加拿大居民參與的一系列討論小組，旨在研究目前對國家有重要影響的各種問題。屆時將會討論不同的主題，我們有興趣聽到你們的意見。

[解釋焦點小組] 大約將有十位像您這樣的人士參與討論，所有參與者都像您這樣隨機招募。為了補償參與者花費的時間，他們將會收到一定的酬金[普通公民： $85] [移民： $125] 。但是在邀請您參與之前，我們需要向您詢問一些問題，以確保我們能獲得良好的人員混合以及篩選到各種不同背景的人士。我是否可以問您一些問題？

參與是自願的。任何人不會企圖向您推銷任何東西或者改變您的觀點。討論的形式是在一位專業研究人士引導下進行的“圓桌”討論。所有意見將均以匿名形式保存，各種看法將匯總在一起，以確保無法識別任何特定的個人。

S1. 您本人或者您的任何家庭成員是否從事下列職業或者從下列職業退休:

是 1 [感謝並結束提問]

否 2 [繼續]

[如果對上述任何一種職業回答“是”，感謝並結束提問]

S2. 您在加拿大出生，或者在另一個國家出生？

[如果在加拿大出生則跳過S3 ]

S3. 您移民到加拿大時的年齡是？

[如果在加拿大出生則跳過S4 ]

S4. 您是哪一年來到加拿大的？

_________. [填入：數字]

[如果在加拿大出生則跳過S5]

S5. 因為我們希望與通過不同途徑來到加拿大的人士交談，所以想請您告訴我們下列哪一種情況能最好地描述您目前在加拿大的合法身份。再次請您放心，我們詢問這一資訊的目的是僅用於研究。請問您是......？

[讀出下列選項-如果回答是登陸新移民，則歸類為永久居民]

[如果在加拿大出生則跳過S6]

S6. 您的原籍國是哪裡？即您來到加拿大之前，您在哪個國家出生以及是哪個國家的永久居民？

[不要讀出下列選項；招募來自不同國家的人士混合成小組，目標是一個以上國家]

詢問所有人

1) 請告訴我您在哪個年齡段？您的年齡是......

2) 目前您家裡與您同住的是否有18歲以下的少年兒童？

[確保每個小組的良好混合]

3) 目前您家裡與您同住的是否有13歲以下的兒童？

[每組至少招募3人]

[確保每個小組的良好混合]

4) 您家中有多少人超過18歲?

5) 您能否告訴我您所完成的最高教育程度是什麼？

6) 您目前的就業狀態如何？

7) [如果就業/退休] 您目前/從前的職業是什麼？

8) 下列哪個收入級別能最好地描述您的家庭總收入？即您的家庭中所有人的稅前收入之和是多少？

[讀出列表]

[確保每個小組的良好混合，每個小組最多3人]

通過下列方式確保良好的混合......

9) 不要詢問 - 記錄性別

10) 您是否曾經在我們這裡或者其他地方參與過某個焦點小組或一對一的討論，並因此收到過一筆酬金？

[如果Q10=1則提問]

11) 您是何時最後參與這些討論的？

[如果在過去6個月中，測結束提問]

12) 在過去5年當中，您曾經參與過多少次焦點小組或一對一的討論？

[如果超過5次，感謝並結束提問]

13) 在過去2年中您參與的焦點小組所討論的主題是什麼？

[如果討論的主題與移民或安置問題有關，請結束提問]

[如果在加拿大出生(S2=1)，則跳過Q15，提問Q19 ]

[如果S6=1則提問]

10. 您是否能說、閱讀和理解中文（國語）或者粵語？ [不要讀出選項]

11. 您對參與一個完全採取中文（國語）進行的小組談論是否感到舒服？還是您更願意用英語？ [不要讀出選項]

12. 您對參與一個完全採取粵語（廣東話）進行的小組談論是否感到舒服？還是您更願意用英語？ [不要讀出選項]

[如果S6=2則提問]

13. 您是否能說、閱讀並理解旁遮普語？

14. 您對參與一個完全採取旁遮普語進行的小組談論是否感到舒服？還是您更願意用英語？[不要讀出選項]

[如果S2=1 或如果S6=3 或 4 或 5 6，請提問]

15. 在家裡您通常講兩種官方語言中的哪一種？

[如果Q20=1則提問]

16. 您對參與一個完全採取英語進行的小組談論感到舒服的程度如何？您感到......[讀出選項]

[如果S6=7或 8或如果 Q20=2則提問] 詢問所有在講法語的阿拉伯國家出生的第7組人士

17. 您對參與一個完全採取法語進行的小組談論感到舒服的程度如何？您感到......[讀出選項]

[詢問所有人]

18. 我們會讓小組討論的參與者說出他們的觀點和想法，在他人面前說出自己的觀點的舒服程度如何？ 您感到...... [讀出選項]

[詢問所有人]

19. 有時候也請參與者在某次問卷調查中寫出他們的答案。您是否有任何不能夠參與的理由？如果您需要戴眼鏡，請記住帶上眼鏡。

在討論期間，將對參與者進行錄音和錄影。這樣做是為了幫助我們撰寫報告。在這個房間裡還有一個單向鏡。坐在鏡子後面的可能是加拿大政府的職員，包括贊助這次研究的部門的成員，以及來自Ipsos的職員。這是標準的焦點小組程式，以便直接觀察研究過程並直接聽取參與者對研究主題的看法及觀點。

您是否同意僅為研究之目的對您進行觀察？

****(在每個地點，請招募十二（12）名參與者，以確保有8-10人肯定到場)****

[讀給備選回答者]

感謝您回答我的提問。不幸的是，這次您符合資格的小組已經滿額。我們想將您列入備選名單。這意味著如果這個小組有空缺，我們會打電話給您，看您是否能參與討論。我可否獲得您的日間聯絡電話號碼、晚間聯絡電話號碼以及電子郵寄地址（如果您有的話）？以便在討論小組出現空缺時，我們可以儘快與您聯絡。

[記錄聯絡資訊]

[讀給篩選入圍的回答者]

太好了，您有資格參與某次小組討論，討論將在（日期）@（時間）舉行，時間不超過2小時。加拿大政府贊助這次研究。所有參與者將獲得酬金[普通公民: $85] [移民: $125]，以表達對他們付出時間的感謝。

您身邊有筆嗎？這樣我可以告訴您將要舉行的小組討論的位址。小組討論將在下列地址舉行：

[確保兩類人士數量均等]

請您至少提前20分鐘到達上述地址，以確保您能夠找到討論會的地點，並有充分時間到主辦方簽到。在允許您進入焦點小組討論室之前，我們將要求您簽署一份保密協議。如果不這麼做，主辦方將不允許您參與之前已選定您作為成員的焦點小組討論。參與了焦點小組討論才能獲得鼓勵性的酬金。

除此以外，在允許您進入討論室之前，我們將查驗您的身份證明，所以請您隨身攜帶二件政府發放的帶照片的身份證明檔（如駕駛執照、健康卡或其他身份證明）。另外，如果您閱讀時需要佩戴眼鏡的話，也請隨身攜帶。

因為我們只邀請了少量參與者，所以您的參與對我們非常重要。根據我們剛才提問的問題，我們才邀請您參與討論，假如您不能參與，我們請您不要派一位代表來參與。如果因故您無法參加，請打電話給我們，以便我們能找人來替代您。您可以打我們辦公室的電話1-xxx-xxx-xxxx，與我們聯絡。

有人會在討論日期的前一天打電話提醒您。

何時與您聯絡比較方便？

打哪個電話號碼比較容易聯絡到您？

我能知道您的名字嗎？ 在首頁 （ON FRONT PAGE）

非常感謝您的幫助！

Appendix 2 – Moderator’s guide

English moderator’s guide

Overview of focus group:
Section Allotted time (minutes) Ethnocultural Allotted time (minutes) Gen Pop
Introduction 10 10
Top of mind on immigration 10 10
Canada’s immigration levels/priorities 10-15 10-15
Benefits and challenges of immigration in community [ALL GEN POP. ROTATE IN ETHNO GROUPS] 15 15
U.S.-Canada irregular border crossings 50 50
Refugee resettlement [ALL GEN POP. ROTATE IN ETHNO GROUPS] 15 15
Client service [Ethnocultural groups] 15 -
Wrap up 5 5
Total 120 120

Introduction (10 minutes)

Top of mind on immigration (10 minutes)

I would like to start our discussion on the topic of immigration.

Canada’s immigration levels (10-15 minutes)

[FACT SHEET FOR MODERATOR – Annex A]

I would like to spend a bit more time talking about immigration.

A multi-year immigration levels plan was announced in November 2017 and updated in November 2018.  It outlines how the number of permanent residents Canada welcomes annually will grow beginning with 310,000 new permanent residents in 2018, and growing to 330,000 in 2019, 340,000 in 2020, and 350,000 in 2021.

Benefits and challenges of immigration in community: 15 minutes

[ASK IN ALL GEN POP GROUPS. ASK IN THE FOLLOWING ETHNO GROUPS: AFRICAN (TORONTO), MIDDLE EAST (MISSISSAUGA), CHINESE CANTONESE (NORTH YORK), MIXED IMMIGRANT (MONCTON), FILIPINO (WINNIPEG)]

I’d like to talk about the benefits and challenges of immigration in your community.

U.S.-Canada irregular border crossing (50 minutes)

[FOR MODERATOR INFO: INFORMATION ON SAFE THIRD COUNTRY AGREEMENT (ANNEX B)]

[AFTER VIEWS ARE FULLY EXPRESSED] Some people say that accepting asylum claims is fair because these individuals need Canada’s protection. Others say that accepting asylum claims is unfair because these individuals are jumping the immigration queue. Which is closer to your view? Why do you say that?

Refugee resettlement (15 minutes)

[ASK IN ALL GEN POP GROUPS. ASK IN THE FOLLOWING ETHNO GROUPS: CARIBBEAN (TORONTO), INDO-CANADIAN (MISSISSAUGA), ARABIC (MONTREAL), CHINESE MANDARIN (VANCOUVER)]

MODERATOR NOTE: Try to refocus the conversation on resettled refugees if participants

I would like to move away from irregular migration and think more broadly about the refugees Canada welcomes.

[ETHNOCULTURAL GROUPS] Client service (15 minutes)

I would like to wrap-up by understanding your experience with IRCC when immigrating to Canada.

Wrap up (5 minutes)

Thank participants.

Annex A: Immigration levels and categories information

Background Information for Moderator

The approach to the 2019-2021 levels plan was guided by feedback gathered from Canadians, stakeholders, and from provinces and territories.

Immigration class 2019 target 2020 target 2021 target
Economic Includes applicants and accompanying family members in federal programs in the Express Entry system; the Provincial Nominee Program; business immigrants; caregivers; and skilled workers and business immigrants selected by Quebec 191,600 195,800 202,300
Family Includes sponsored spouses, partners and children and parents and grandparents 88,500 91,000 91,000
Refugees and Protected Persons Includes both resettled refugees (government selected and privately sponsored) as well as protected persons (successful asylum claimants) who apply for and become permanent residents 46,450 49,700 51,700
Humanitarian and Compassionate and Other Includes persons selected on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, for reasons of public policy and in the Permit Holder Class. 4,250 4,500 5,000
Total 330,800 341,000 350,000

Annex B: Facts on the Safe Third Country Agreement

French moderator’s guide

Aperçu du déroulement de la rencontre :

Section Temps alloué (minutes) Populations ethnoculturelles Temps alloué (minutes) Population générale
Introduction 10 10
Premières réflexions sur l’immigration 10 10
Niveaux d’immigration/priorités en matière d’immigration au Canada 10 à 15 10 à 15
Avantages et défis liés à l’immigration dans la communauté [TOUTE LA POPULATION GÉNÉRALE. ROTATION DANS LES GROUPES ETHNOCULTURELS.] 15 15
Passages irréguliers à la frontière canado-américaine 50 50
Réinstallation des réfugiés [TOUTE LA POPULATION GÉNÉRALE. ROTATION DANS LES GROUPES ETHNOCULTURELS.] 15 15
Service à la clientèle [groupes ethnoculturels] 15 ---
Conclusion 5 5
Total 120 120

INTRODUCTION (10 minutes)

PREMIÈRES RÉFLEXIONS SUR L’IMMIGRATION (10 minutes)

J’aimerais amorcer notre discussion sur le sujet de l’immigration.

NIVEAUX D’IMMIGRATION AU CANADA (10 à 15 minutes)

[FICHE DE RENSEIGNEMENTS DU MODÉRATEUR – Annexe A]

J’aimerais passer un peu plus de temps à parler d’immigration.

Un plan des niveaux d’immigration pluriannuel a été annoncé en novembre 2017 et mis à jour en novembre 2018. Il résume le rythme auquel le nombre de résidents permanents que le Canada accueille annuellement augmentera en commençant par 310 000 nouveaux résidents permanents en 2018, puis 330 000 en 2019, 340 000 en 2020 et 350 000 en 2021.

AVANTAGES ET DÉFIS LIÉS À L’IMMIGRATION DANS LA COMMUNAUTÉ : 15 MINUTES

[POSER LES QUESTIONS DANS TOUS LES GROUPES DE LA POPULATION GÉNÉRALE. POSER LES QUESTIONS DANS LES GROUPES ETHNOCULTURELS SUIVANTS : ORIGINE AFRICAINE (TORONTO), MOYEN-ORIENTALE (MISSISSAUGA), CHINOISE CANTONAISE (NORTH YORK), IMMIGRANTS D’ORIGINES DIVERSES (MONCTON), PHILIPPINE (WINNIPEG)]

J’aimerais parler des avantages et des défis liés à l’immigration dans votre communauté.

PASSAGES IRRÉGULIERS À LA FRONTIÈRE CANADO-AMÉRICAINE (50 MINUTES)

[INFORMATION À L’INTENTION DU MODÉRATEUR : RENSEIGNEMENTS AU SUJET DE L’ENTENTE SUR LES TIERS PAYS SÛRS (ANNEXE B)]

[UNE FOIS QUE LES PARTICIPANTS SE SONT PLEINEMENT EXPRIMÉS SUR LE SUJET] Certains affirment qu’il est juste d’accepter les demandes d’asile parce que ceux qui en présentent ont besoin de la protection du Canada. D’autres affirment qu’il est injuste d’accepter les demandes d’asile parce que ceux qui le font passent devant les autres dans la file d’attente de l’immigration. Lequel de ces points de vue se rapproche le plus du vôtre? Pourquoi dites-vous cela?

Réinstallation des réfugiés (15 MINUTES)

[POSER LES QUESTIONS DANS TOUS LES GROUPES DE LA POPULATION GÉNÉRALE. POSER LES QUESTIONS DANS LES GROUPES ETHNOCULTURELS SUIVANTS : ORIGINE CARIBÉENNE (TORONTO), INDO-CANADIENNE (MISSISSAUGA), ARABE (MONTRÉAL), CHINOISE MANDARINE (VANCOUVER)]

NOTE AU MODÉRATEUR : Essayer de réorienter la conversation sur les réfugiés réinstallés

J’aimerais mettre de côté le sujet de l’immigration irrégulière pour réfléchir de manière plus générale aux réfugiés que le Canada accueille.

[GROUPES ETHNOCULTURELS] SERVICE À LA CLIENTÈLE (15 minutes)

Pour conclure, j’aimerais connaître l’expérience que vous avez eue avec IRCC lorsque vous avez immigré au Canada.

CONCLUSION (5 minutes)

Remercier les participants

Annexe A : Renseignements sur les niveaux et les catégories d’immigration

Renseignements contextuels à l’intention du modérateur

L’approche en ce qui concerne les niveaux d’immigration de 2019-2021 a été guidée par les commentaires recueillis auprès des Canadiens, des intervenants, des provinces et des territoires.

Catégorie d’immigration Cible 2019 Cible 2020 Cible 2021
Économique Comprend les demandeurs et les membres de la famille qui les accompagnent dans les programmes fédéraux du système Entrée express; le programme des candidats des provinces; les gens d’affaires immigrants; les soignants; les travailleurs qualifiés et les gens d’affaires immigrants sélectionnés par le Québec 191 600 195 800 202 300
Regroupement familial Comprend les époux, conjoints et enfants parrainés ainsi que les parents et les grands-parents 88 500 91 000 91 000
Réfugiés et personnes protégées Comprend les réfugiés réinstallés (sélectionnés par le gouvernement et parrainés par le secteur privé) et les personnes protégées (demande d’asile acceptée) qui présentent une demande et deviennent des résidents permanents 46 450 49 700 51 700
Considérations d’ordre humanitaire et autres Comprend les personnes de la catégorie des titulaires de permis sélectionnées en fonction de circonstances d’ordre humanitaire, pour des motifs d’intérêt public. 4 250 4 500 5 000
Total 330 800 341 000 350 000

Annexe B : Renseignements généraux au sujet de l’Entente sur les tiers pays sûrs

Simplified Chinese moderator’s guide

Overview of focus group:
部分 预留时间（分钟）Ethnocultural 预留时间 （分钟）Gen Pop
介绍 10 10
移民概述 10 10
加拿大的移民人数/优先事项 10-15 10-15
华人社区中移民的利益和挑战[ALL GEN POP. ROTATE IN ETHNO GROUPS] 15 15
美国 - 加拿大之间的非正规入境 50 50
难民重新安置[ALL GEN POP. ROTATE IN ETHNO GROUPS] 15 15
客户服务[Ethnocultural groups] 15 ---
总结 5 5
总时间 120 120

INTRODUCTION (10 minutes)

TOP OF MIND ON IMMIGRATION (10 minutes)

I would like to start our discussion on the topic of immigration.

让我们先来讨论移民这个主题。

CANADA’S IMMIGRATION LEVELS (10-15 minutes)

[FACT SHEET FOR MODERATOR – Annex A]

我想多花点时间来谈论移民问题。

你们之中有些人可能知道，可以经由不同的类别来移民加拿大。

2017年11月，政府宣布了一项多年期的移民总数计划，并于2018年11月更新。它概述了加拿大每年接纳的永久居民人数将如何增长，2018年新增永久居民31万人，2019年增加到33万人，2020年增加到34万人，2021年35万人。

BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF IMMIGRATION IN COMMUNITY: 15 MINUTES

[ASK IN ALL GEN POP GROUPS. ASK IN THE FOLLOWING ETHNO GROUPS: AFRICAN (TORONTO), MIDDLE EAST (MISSISSAUGA), CHINESE CANTONESE (NORTH YORK), MIXED IMMIGRANT (MONCTON), FILIPINO (WINNIPEG)]

我想来谈谈华人社区移民的好处和挑战。

U.S.-CANADA IRREGULAR BORDER CROSSING (50 MINUTES)

[FOR MODERATOR INFO: INFORMATION ON SAFE THIRD COUNTRY AGREEMENT (ANNEX B)]

[AFTER VIEWS ARE FULLY EXPRESSED] 有人说接受庇护申请是公平的，因为这些人需要加拿大的保护。有些人说接受庇护申请是不公平的，因为这些人在移民程序中插队。哪一种看法比较接近您的观点？您为什么这么说？

Refugee resettlement (15 MINUTES)

[ASK IN ALL GEN POP GROUPS. ASK IN THE FOLLOWING ETHNO GROUPS: CARIBBEAN (TORONTO), INDO-CANADIAN (MISSISSAUGA), ARABIC (MONTREAL), CHINESE MANDARIN (VANCOUVER)]

MODERATOR NOTE: Try to refocus the conversation on resettled refugees if participants

刚才谈过了非正规移民的问题，现在我想更广泛地思考加拿大所接纳的难民。

[ETHNOCULTURAL GROUPS] CLIENT SERVICE (15 Minutes)

最后，我想了解一下您在移民加拿大时与IRCC的经历。

WRAP UP (5 minutes)

感谢参与者。

Annex A: Immigration levels and categories information

Background Information for Moderator

2019 - 2021年总数计划的方法是以加拿大人，利益攸关方以及各省和地区的反馈为指导原则。
移民类别 2019 年目标 2020年目标 2021年目标
经济
包括參加快速入境制度的聯邦計劃申請人和隨行家庭成員；省提名計劃；商業移民；看顧人員；技術僱員；以及魁北克省選擇的商業移民		 191,600 195,800 202,300
依亲 包括赞助配偶、伴侣和子女以及父母和祖父母 88,500 91,000 91,000
难民和受保护人士 包括重新安置的难民（政府选择和私人资助）以及申请并成为永久居民的受保护人士（成功的庇护申请人） 46,450 49,700 51,700
人道和同情与其他 包括出于人道和同情因素、公共政策而被选择的人，以及许可证持有者类别。 4,250 4,500 5,000
总人数 330,800 341,000 350,000

Annex B: Facts on the Safe Third Country Agreement

Traditional Chinese moderator’s guide

Overview of focus group:
段落 預留時間（分鐘）Ethnocultural 預留時間（分鐘）Gen Pop
介绍 10 10
移民概述 10 10
加拿大的移民人數/優先事項 10 à 15 10 à 15
華人社區中移民的利益和挑戰[ALL GEN POP. ROTATE IN ETHNO GROUPS] 15 15
美國-加拿大之間的非正規入境 50 50
難民重新安置[ALL GEN POP. ROTATE IN ETHNO GROUPS] 15 15
客戶服務[Ethnocultural groups] 15 ---
總結 5 5
總時間 120 120

INTRODUCTION (10 minutes)

TOP OF MIND ON IMMIGRATION (15 minutes)

先來討論移民這個主題。

CANADA’S IMMIGRATION LEVELS (15 minutes)

[FACT SHEET FOR MODERATOR – Annex A]

我想多花點時間來談論移民問題。

你們之中有些人可能知道，可以經由不同的類別來移民加拿大。

[MODERATOR EXPLAINS] 政府透過移民「總數計劃」來管理新移民的接納。該計劃為所有移民類別（經濟、依親、難民和人道）設定接納目標。在製定這些目標時，政府會選擇一些可能的移民優先事項。 2018年，加拿大接納了大約31萬名移民。

2017年11月，政府宣布了一項多年期的移民總數計劃，並於2018年11月更新。它概述了加拿大每年接納的永久居民人數將如何增長，2018年新增永久居民31萬人，2019年增加到33萬人，2020年增加到34萬人，2021年35萬人。

BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF IMMIGRATION IN COMMUNITY: 15 MINUTES

[ASK IN ALL GEN POP GROUPS. ASK IN THE FOLLOWING ETHNO GROUPS: AFRICAN (TORONTO), MIDDLE EAST (MISSISSAUGA), CHINESE CANTONESE (NORTH YORK), MIXED IMMIGRANT (MONCTON), FILIPINO (WINNIPEG)]

我想來談談華人社區移民的好處和挑戰。

U.S.-CANADA IRREGULAR BORDER CROSSING (45 MINUTES)

[FOR MODERATOR INFO: INFORMATION ON SAFE THIRD COUNTRY AGREEMENT (ANNEX B)]

Refugee resettlement (15 MINUTES)

[ASK IN ALL GEN POP GROUPS. ASK IN THE FOLLOWING ETHNO GROUPS: CARIBBEAN (TORONTO), INDO-CANADIAN (MISSISSAUGA), ARABIC (MONTREAL), CHINESE MANDARIN (VANCOUVER)]

MODERATOR NOTE: Try to refocus the conversation on resettled refugees if participants

剛才談過了非正規移民的問題，現在我想更廣泛地思考加拿大所接納的難民。

[ETHNOCULTURAL GROUPS] CLIENT SERVICE (15 Minutes)

最後，我想了解一下您在移民加拿大時與IRCC的經歷。

WRAP UP (5 minutes)

感謝參與者。

Annex A: Immigration levels and categories information

Background Information for Moderator

2019 - 2021年總數計劃的方法是以加拿大人，利益關係方以及各省和地區的反饋為指導原則。
移民類別 2019 年目標 2020 年目標 2021 年目標
經濟 包括參加快速入境制度的聯邦計劃申請人和隨行家庭成員；省提名計劃；商業移民；看顧人員；技術僱員；以及魁北克省選擇的商業移民 191,600 195,800 202,300
依親 包括贊助配偶、伴侶和子女以及父母和祖父母 88,500 91,000 91,000
難民和受保護人士 包括重新安置的難民（政府選擇和私人資助）以及申請並成為永久居民的受保護人士（成功的庇護申請人） 46,450 49,700 51,700
人道和同情與其他 包括出於人道和同情因素、公共政策而被選擇的人，以及許可證持有者類別。 4,250 4,500 5,000
總人數 330,800 341,000 350,000

Annex B: Facts on the Safe Third Country Agreement

Appendix 3 – Quantitative methodology

Telephone survey

Ipsos conducted a 16-minute telephone survey among a nationwide sample of n=2,000 Canadian adults between February 20th and March 18th, 2019. The sample is a probability sample generated through random digit dialing. For respondents contacted on a land line, respondents within households were selected at random, by using the “birthday method” of identifying and interviewing the member of the household (aged 18+) who had their birthday last.

Respondents contacted on a cellular phone were also random digit dialed, and needed to be 18+ to participate. Wireless Samples were selected on a provincial level (as it is not practical to accurately select by market given the mobile nature of the technology) from a database containing all possible numbers in 1000-blocks of area codes and exchanges dedicated to wireless numbers.

Within the total sample of 2,000 Canadians for this survey, 1,000 respondents were contacted on their landlines, while the other 1,000 respondents were contacted on their cellphones. The margin of error for a telephone survey of 2,000 respondents is ±2.1%, using a confidence internal of 95% (19 times out of 20). The final questionnaire used was provided by IRCC to ensure adequate tracking of previous research results conducted by the department.

Telephone sample weighting

The tables below indicate the unweighted and weighted distributions of the telephone sample. The sample was stratified by region, with soft quotas also set for gender and age to ensure appropriate representation across categories. Weighting was applied to the sample to ensure that the final data reflects the adult population of Canada by region, age and gender according to the 2016 Census.

Please note, the totals below may not add up to 2,000 due to some respondents’ refusal to provide socioeconomic information.

Weighted and unweighted telephone sample: Region (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
British Columbia/Territories 272 276
Alberta 234 224
Sask./Man. 141 130
ON 748 766
QC 468 468
Atlantic Canada 137 136
Weighted and unweighted telephone sample: Gender (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
Male 1014 972
Female 984 1028
Weighted and unweighted telephone sample: Age (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
18-24 103 209
25-34 237 328
35-44 315 323
45-54 378 358
55-64 435 349
65+ 532 422
Weighted and unweighted telephone sample: Education
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
High school or less 352 357
Some post-secondary 166 173
Trade school or college 557 547
University 907 907
Weighted and unweighted telephone sample: Income
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
Under $40K 376 402
$40K to under $60K 299 300
$60K to under $100K 490 490
$100K or more 641 627
Weighted and unweighted telephone sample: Country of birth
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
Born in Canada 1556 1532
Born outside of Canada 444 468

Statistics presented in the table above show minimal differences between the final unweighted and weighted samples. However, the youngest age group (18 to 24 years old) is underrepresented, resulting in a higher weight ratio.

Call dispositions

The following table provides the call dispositions and response rate calculation, as per the MRIA’s empirical method of calculating response rates for telephone surveys.
Landline Cellphone Total
Total Numbers Attempted 35560 43828 79388
Invalid (NIS, fax/modem, business/non-res.) 21550 27339 48889
Total unresolved units (Busy, no answer, answering machine) 3458 5215 8673
Total in-scope - non-responding units 5874 6615 12489
Language problem 149 181 330
Illness, incapable, deaf 77 31 108
Household refusal 5542 6316 11858
Qualified respondent break-off 106 87 193
Total in-scope - responding units 1006 1184 2190
Over quota 6 20 26
No one 18+ 0 164 164
Occupation Disqualified 0 0 0
Completed interviews 1000 1000 2000

The response rate, calculated as the number of in-scope – responding units divided by the sum of unresolved units, in-scope – non-responding units, and in-scope – responding units, was 9.7% for landline numbers, 9.1% for cellphone numbers, and 9.4% for all telephone numbers. The total response rate of 9.4% for a telephone survey of the Canadian general population with up to 8 call-backs per household is typical. However, the landline response rate is slightly higher than cellphone.

Non-response analysis

As with any probability sample, there exists within the current sample the possibility of non-response bias. In particular, this survey would not include members of the population who do not have access to a telephone (either landline or cell phone) or who are not capable of responding to a survey in either English or French. In addition, some groups within the population are systemically less likely to answer surveys.

The table below compares the unweighted sample to the 2016 Census results by region, age, gender, education, income and country of birth. The comparison between the two samples for the three variables used in the weighting scheme (using interlocking weights for region with age and region with gender) shows a slight underrepresentation of younger Canadians (18 to 24 years of age). However, this discrepancy is small enough that it can be corrected through weighting without affecting the quality of the final results. As the regional distribution was set through hard quotas, the weighting had virtually no impact on final numbers. Males were slightly overrepresented in the unweighted sample, at 51% compared to 49% in the actual population.

Telephone sample population comparison: Region (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
British Columbia/Territories 14% 14%
Alberta 12% 11%
Sask./Man. 7% 7%
ON 37% 38%
QC 23% 24%
Atlantic Canada 7% 7%
Telephone sample population comparison: Gender (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
Male 51% 49%
Female 49% 51%
Telephone sample population comparison: Age (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
18-24 5% 11%
25-34 12% 16%
35-44 16% 16%
45-54 19% 18%
55-64 22% 18%
65+ 24% 21%
Telephone sample population comparison: Education
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
High school or less 26% 43%
Trade school or college 28% 35%
University or higher 45% 22%
Telephone sample population comparison: Income
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
Under $40K 21% 26%
$40K to under $60K 17% 16%
$60K to under $100K 27% 25%
$100K or more 35% 32%
Telephone sample population comparison: Country of birth
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
Born in Canada 78% 78%
Born outside of Canada 22% 22%

This comparison between the unweighted sample distribution and the actual population figures for variables not included in the weighting scheme shows that the final sample obtained was mostly representative of the general population for this survey. However, there are noticeable differences in education levels between the sample and the Canadian adult population, with the telephone sample being more educated than Census figures show. The largest gap was for the university educated stratum, with 45% of the sample having obtained a university degree, compared to 22% among Canadian adults. Education is a variable that could be considered in future weighting schemes for national surveys to correct for this imbalance. Income distributions for the sample are very close to those measured in the 2016 Census. The country of birth distribution matches the 2016 Census.

Online sample

The online sample of 2,004 respondents was drawn entirely from Ipsos’ proprietary panel, iSay, consisting of approximately 185,000 Canadians recruited in all provinces and territories. As this is a non-probability sample, a margin of error cannot be calculated. Respondents to the online survey were invited to participate via email, with a unique URL link to the survey provided to them. This link could only be used once, with respondents being allowed to take pause during completion and return to complete it at a later time. Survey questionnaires took 15 minutes to complete on average. All surveys were completed between March 4th and March 18th, 2019.

Incentives and quality control measures

Respondents to Ipsos’ online surveys are offered a number of innovative incentive programs in the forms of a point-based system where participants can redeem points for various items. We do not reward our panelists using cash payments.

Extensive quality-control procedures are in place within IIS (Ipsos Interactive Services, who manage our panel) to ensure that the survey inputs (sample and questionnaire design) allow for high-quality survey outputs (survey data). These processes span the life cycle of a panelist and are in place for all Ipsos online surveys. IIS experts are constantly monitoring and reviewing the performance of our quality measures and updating and integrating new ones as respondents’ behaviors and the online landscape evolve.

Panelists are who they say they are

They have not participated recently in similar surveys

They complete surveys seriously

They can only take the survey once

Online sample weighting

The tables below indicate the unweighted and weighted distributions of the online sample. The sample was stratified by region, with soft quotas also set for gender and age to ensure appropriate representation across categories. Weighting was applied to the sample to ensure that the final data reflects the adult population of Canada by region, age and gender according to the 2016 Census.

Please note, the totals below may not add up to 2,004 due to some respondents’ refusal to provide socioeconomic information.

Weighted and unweighted online sample: Region (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
  Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
British Columbia/Territories 272 277
Alberta 225 224
Sask./Man. 138 130
ON 766 767
QC 468 469
Atlantic Canada 135 137
Weighted and unweighted online sample: Gender (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
Male 1042 972
Female 959 1027
Weighted and unweighted online sample: Age (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
18-24 160 219
25-34 343 329
35-44 317 324
45-54 361 359
55-64 377 350
65+ 446 423
Weighted and unweighted online sample: Education
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
High school or less 317 320
Some post-secondary 233 239
Trade school or college 626 619
University 792 787
Weighted and unweighted online sample: Income
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
Under $40K 451 456
$40K to under $60K 336 339
$60K to under $100K 599 552
$100K or more 379 377
Weighted and unweighted online sample: Country of birth
Unweighted sample size Weighted sample size
Born in Canada 1689 1686
Born outside of Canada 310 311

Statistics presented in the tables above show minimal differences between the final unweighted and weighted samples. However, the youngest age group (18 to 24 years old) is underrepresented, resulting in a higher weight ratio of 1.38:1 remains well within acceptable ranges for a survey of the general population and compares favourably to the gap observed in the telephone sample.

Email statistics

The table below presents general statistics regarding the response rate for the email phase of research.
Total
Total Email Invitations Issued   27784
Invalid (incomplete/incorrect email address, email invitation bounce backs) 0
Total unresolved units (no response at all) 24480
Total in-scope - non-responding units 683
Qualified respondent break-off (incomplete) 683
Total in-scope - responding units 2621
Over quota 606
Other disqualified 11
Completed questionnaires 2004

The response rate, calculated as the number of in-scope – responding units divided by the sum of unresolved units, in-scope – non-responding units, and in-scope – responding units, was 9.43%. This response rate is within normal ranges for a survey of the Canadian adult population.

Non-response analysis

As with any non-probability sample there exists within the current sample the possibility of non-response bias. In particular, this survey would not include members of the population who do not have access to a computer with an Internet connection (either at home or at work) or who are not capable of responding to a survey in either English or French. In addition, some groups within the population are systemically less likely to answer surveys.

The tables below compare the unweighted sample to the 2016 Census results by region, age, gender, education, income and country of birth. Overall, the sample is highly representative of the national adult population, except for a few gaps which are described below.

Online sample population comparison: Region (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
British Columbia/Territories 14% 14%
Alberta 11% 11%
Sask./Man. 7% 7%
ON 38% 38%
QC 23% 24%
Atlantic Canada 7% 7%
Online sample population comparison: Gender (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
Male 52% 49%
Female 48% 51%
Online sample population comparison: Age (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
18-24 8% 11%
25-34 17% 16%
35-44 16% 16%
45-54 18% 18%
55-64 19% 18%
65+ 22% 21%
Online sample population comparison: Education
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
High school or less 28% 43%
Trade school or college 31% 35%
University or higher 40% 22%
Online sample population comparison: Income
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
Under $40K 21% 26%
$40K to under $60K 19% 16%
$60K to under $100K 32% 25%
$100K or more 22% 32%
Online sample population comparison: Country of birth
Unweighted percentage Census 2016 proportions (adults)
Born in Canada 84% 78%
Born outside of Canada 16% 22%

The comparison for the variables used in the weighting scheme are minimal, except for a small gap for the youngest age group, which is slightly underrepresented in the unweighted sample. However, as discussed above, the age distribution in the online sample remains solid. The largest observable gaps between the unweighted sample and Census 2016 data relates to education levels, as observed with the phone sample as well. We find that the unweighted sample tends to overrepresented more educated Canadians, although the gaps are not as important as for the telephone sample. The online sample also contains a smaller proportion of Canadians who have a household income of $100,000 and above, as well as a slightly smaller proportion of immigrants.

Comparison of phone and online samples

The tables below present a comparison of the telephone and online samples across the interlocking variables used in the weighting scheme for samples. Totals for each variable may not add up to total sample size due to some respondents’ refusal to provide socioeconomic information.

                                                                                                                                                    
Telephone and online sample comparison: Region by age (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted phone sample Unweighted online sample
Atlantic - 18-24 9 13
Atlantic - 25-34 11 20
Atlantic - 35-44 16 22
Atlantic - 45-54 25 16
Atlantic - 55-64 31 31
Atlantic - 65+ 45 33
Quebec - 18-24 30 19
Quebec - 25-34 67 64
Quebec - 35-44 84 60
Quebec - 45-54 82 93
Quebec - 55-64 97 99
Quebec - 65+ 108 133
Ontario - 18-24 38 78
Ontario - 25-34 74 149
Ontario - 35-44 116 127
Ontario - 45-54 154 147
Ontario - 55-64 173 132
Ontario - 65+ 193 133
Prairies (MB/SK)- 18-24 9 12
Prairies (MB/SK)- 25-34 21 15
Prairies (MB/SK)- 35-44 23 23
Prairies (MB/SK)- 45-54 20 21
Prairies (MB/SK)- 55-64 27 27
Prairies (MB/SK)- 65+ 41 40
Alberta - 18-24 10 16
Alberta - 25-34 24 43
Alberta - 35-44 35 29
Alberta - 45-54 48 40
Alberta - 55-64 54 44
Alberta - 65+ 63 53
BC/Territories - 18-24 7 22
BC/Territories - 25-34 40 52
BC/Territories - 35-44 41 56
BC/Territories - 45-54 49 44
BC/Territories - 55-64 53 44
BC/Territories - 65+ 82 54
Telephone and online sample comparison: Region by gender (Variable included in the weighting scheme)
Unweighted phone sample Unweighted online sample
Atlantic - Male 63 71
Atlantic - Female 74 64
Quebec - Male 220 246
Quebec - Female 248 222
Ontario - Male 376 404
Ontario - Female 372 362
Prairies (MB/SK)- Male 77 66
Prairies (MB/SK)- Female 64 72
Alberta - Male 133 118
Alberta - Female 101 107
BC/Territories - Male 148 138
BC/Territories - Female 124 134

Both samples are nearly identical across all variables and categories, aside from a few relatively small differences in age brackets. The telephone sample contains a higher proportion of Canadians in the two oldest categories, while the opposite is true for the online sample: it contains a higher proportion of Canadians in the two youngest categories. But none of these differences would affect the final numbers obtained, since the gaps are small and were easily corrected through minimal weighting.

Comparison by socioeconomic information not used in weighting

The next tables show the comparison between both samples for education and income levels, as well as country of birth, which were not included in the weighting scheme. Considering that no quotas were set for any of these three variables during fieldwork, the similarities between the two samples are remarkable, though there is a 5-point gap in those who have obtained a university degree. As discussed above, both samples over represent university-educated Canadians and underrepresent those with a completed high school degree or less, with the online sample being slightly closer to Census 2016 figures. Some differences can also be seen with regards to income levels when comparing the online and phone respondents. More specifically, these gaps are visible in the $60,000 to under $100,000 bracket (8-point gap) and the $100,000 or more bracket (13-point gap).

Finally, both samples show a difference in the proportion of respondents born in Canada. While 22% of phone respondents report being born outside of the country, only 16% of online respondents report the same. According to Census 2016 figures, the actual proportion in the Canadian population is 22%. Therefore, the telephone sample exactly represents the immigrant population, while the online sample slightly underrepresents it.

Telephone and online sample comparison: Education
The breakdown for education shown here is slightly different from that shown in tables above in order to match the data description used for Census 2016.
Unweighted phone sample Unweighted online sample Census 2016
High school or less 26% 28% 43%
Trade school or college 28% 31% 35%
University 45% 40% 22%
Telephone and online sample comparison: Income
Unweighted phone sample Unweighted online sample Census 2016
Under $40K 21% 21% 26%
$40K to under $60K 17% 19% 16%
$60K to under $100K 27% 32% 25%
$100K or more 35% 22% 33%
Telephone and online sample comparison: Country of birth
Unweighted phone sample Unweighted online sample Census 2016
Born in Canada 78% 84% 78%
Born outside of Canada 22% 16% 22%

The differences noted above in the proportion of immigrants sampled via each mode of interviewing do not explain some of the statistical differences noted in survey responses from one data collection mode to the other. Respondents who are not born in Canada are more positive than those born in the country on most questions included in this study, but the size of those gaps in attitudes are too small to make the kind of difference that would be needed to explain the differences in survey responses between online and phone respondents. At most, this smaller proportion of immigrants in the online sample could explain a difference of 1 percentage point on some questions.

Appendix 4 – Survey questionnaires

English telephone survey questionnaire

Hello, my name is [NAME]. I’m calling on behalf of Ipsos, a research firm. We are conducting a brief study for the Government of Canada on current issues of interest to Canadians. The survey takes about 12 minutes to complete. Your participation is voluntary and completely confidential. This call may be monitored or recorded for quality control purposes. Would you prefer that I continue in English or French? (IF NEEDED: Thank you. Someone will call you shortly to complete the survey in French.)

[IF NEEDED: To verify the authenticity of the survey, if you have any privacy concerns, or if you wish to register a complaint you may contact Ipsos at [contact details] or the Government of Canada at IRCC.COMMPOR-ROPCOMM.IRCC@cic.gc.ca]

LANG. (DO NOT READ) CHOOSE LANGUAGE

[ASK IF SAMPLE=LANDLINE]

S1a. May I please speak with the person in your household who is 18 years of age or older and who has had the most recent birthday? Would that be you? (IF NOT, ASK TO SPEAK WITH MEMBER 18+ WITH THE LAST BIRTHDAY)

[ASK IF SAMPLE=CELLPHONE]

S1b. Are you 18 years of age or older?

[ASK IF SAMPLE=CELLPHONE]

CEL1. Have I reached you on your cellphone?

[ASK IF CEL1=YES]

CEL2. Are you in a safe environment to talk?

[ASK IF PHONFRAM=CELLPHONE; ALLOCATE LANDLINE SAMPLE TO PROVINCE BASED ON AREA CODE/EXCHANGE]

FSAPROV. In which province do you live?

QFSA. Can you please tell me the first three digits of your postal code?

[ASK IF SAMPLE=CELLPHONE]

QB. At home, do you have a traditional telephone line other than a cell phone?

[ASK IF SAMPLE=LANDLINE]

QBB. At home, do you have a cell phone as well as a traditional telephone line?

GENDR. (RECORD GENDER)

QAGE. In what year were you born?

[ASK IF QAGE = DON’T KNOW/NO RESPONSE]

QAGE2. Would you be willing to tell me in which of the following age categories you belong? (READ LIST)

I'd like to start with a few questions about immigration issues.

Q1. In your opinion do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada? [INTERVIEWER NOTE: Accept “Don’t know” without probing.]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

[ASK IF Q1=Don’t know]

Q1A. If you HAD to choose, do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada?

[ASK IF Q1/Q1A=Too many/Too few]

Q1B. Would that be somewhat too [many/few] or significantly too [many/few]?

 

Q2. Currently, Canada aims to admit 330,000 immigrants this year. Knowing this, do you feel there are too many, too few, or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q3. As the government plans to bring in more immigrants each year, which of the three main immigration classes should grow? (READ LIST)

[RANDOMIZE FIRST THREE; MULTIPLE RESPONSE]

Q4. In general, what effect does immigration to this country have on [INSERT ITEM]? Is the effect very positive, somewhat positive, neither positive nor negative, somewhat negative or very negative? (How about) [INSERT NEXT ITEM]? (INTERVIEWER REPEAT SCALE AS NECESSARY)

[INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q6. To what extent are you satisfied with the Government of Canada’s management of our immigration system? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "Very dissatisfied" and 10 means "Very satisfied".

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

[SKIP IF DK/REF AT Q6]

Q7. What is the main reason you say that? (ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE. DO NOT PROBE MORE THAN ONCE. EMPHASIZE “MAIN REASON”)

Q8. Next, thinking about economic reasons why Canada brings newcomers to Canada...

Please tell me to what extent you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements. Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[ITEMS; RANDOMIZE]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q9. Now, thinking about Canada and immigration...

IF NECESSARY: Using the same 10-point scale, please tell me to what extent you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements. (a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".)

[ITEMS; RANDOMIZE]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q10. Now thinking about how newcomers settle in Canada…

IF NECESSARY: Using the same 10-point scale, please tell me to what extent you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements. (a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".)

[ITEMS; RANDOMIZE]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q11. Next, I will ask you some questions about refugees.

Refugees can come to Canada in different ways. Some of them come from overseas refugee camps and are selected by the Canadian government to come to Canada. Other people come to Canada as visitors and, after arriving, claim asylum, saying that they cannot go home because they face danger or persecution. Some claim asylum at our borders while others claim asylum at a port of entry.

In your opinion, do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of refugees coming to Canada?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q12. Looking specifically at the two main ways refugees can come to Canada, do you feel there are too many, too few or about the right number of… (REPEAT LIST IF NECESSARY)

[ITEMS; RANDOMIZE]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q13. Please tell me to what extent you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements. Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[ITEMS; RANDOMIZE]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q14. In the past couple of years, people have been irregularly crossing the Canada-US border and claiming asylum. Would you say you are… (READ LIST)

Q15. Please tell me to what extent you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements. Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[ITEMS; RANDOMIZE]

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q16. Over the past year, do you think the number of asylum seekers crossing the Canadian border from the U.S. has been a lot higher, a bit higher, about the same, a bit lower, or a lot lower than what it has been in recent years?

[ASK IF Q16=Higher/Lower]

Q16_OPEN. What do you think is the primary reason the number of asylum seekers crossing the border has [increased/decreased]?

Now I would like to ask you a few last questions for statistical purposes only.

DINFORMED1. Before taking this survey, how high or low would you rate your level of knowledge about the immigration process? (READ LIST)

DINFORMED2. Before taking this survey, how high or low would you rate your level of knowledge about the asylum claim process? (READ LIST)

D1. Were you born in Canada?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

[IF D1 = “NO”, ASK D2. ELSE, SKIP TO D3]
D2. In what year did you come to Canada?

D3. Did your parents immigrate to Canada from another country? (READ LIST)

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D4.Are you an Indigenous person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D5. Are there any recent immigrants, that is, individuals who have immigrated to Canada in the last ten years…? (READ LIST, ACCEPT ALL THAT APPLY)

[MULTIPLE RESPONSE]

D8. What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed to date? (READ LIST UNTIL RESPONSE IS GIVEN; ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE.)

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D9. What is your current employment status? (DO NOT READ LIST. ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE. STICK STRICTLY TO THE CODES IDENTIFIED BELOW. PROBE IF NECESSARY.)

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D10. Which of the following best describes your total household income? That is, the total income of all persons in your household combined, before taxes. Is it...? (READ LIST UNTIL RESPONSE IS GIVEN, ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE ONLY.)

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D11. What is the language that you first learned at home in childhood and still understand? (MULTIPLE RESPONSES ACCEPTED ONLY IF LANGUAGES LEARNED AT THE SAME TIME.)

[MULTIPLE RESPONSE]

GENDER. What is your gender? (DO NOT READ LIST)

That concludes the survey. Thank you very much for your thoughtful feedback. It is much appreciated. On behalf of myself, Ipsos, and the Government of Canada, have a good (day/evening).

French telephone survey questionnaire

Bonjour. Je m’appelle [NOM] et je téléphone au nom d’Ipsos, une firme de recherche. Nous menons une courte étude pour le gouvernement du Canada sur des sujets d’actualité qui intéressent les Canadiens. Le sondage prend environ 12 minutes à compléter. Votre participation est volontaire et vos réponses demeureront confidentielles. Cet appel pourrait être écouté ou enregistré à des fins de contrôle de qualité. Préférez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais? (AU BESOIN : Je vous remercie. Quelqu’un vous rappellera bientôt pour mener le sondage en anglais.)

[AU BESOIN : afin de vérifier l’authenticité de ce sondage, si vous avez des préoccupations par rapport à la confidentialité ou si vous aimeriez porter une plainte, vous pouvez contacter Ipsos [détails de contact] ou le gouvernement du Canada à IRCC.COMMPOR-ROPCOMM.IRCC@cic.gc.ca]

LANG. (NE PAS LIRE) CHOISIR LA LANGUE

[POSER SI ÉCHANTILLON=LIGNE FIXE]

S1a. Puis-je parler au membre de votre foyer âgé de 18 ans ou plus et ayant le plus récemment célébré son anniversaire? Est-ce vous? (SI N’EST PAS CETTE PERSONNE, DEMANDER À PARLER AU MEMBRE DU FOYER DE 18+ QUI A ÉTÉ LE DERNIER À CÉLÉBRER SON ANNIVERSAIRE)

[POSER SI ÉCHANTILLON=TÉLÉPHONE MOBILE]
S1b. Avez-vous 18 ans ou plus?

[POSER SI ÉCHANTILLON=TÉLÉPHONE MOBILE]

CEL1. Est-ce que je vous ai joint sur votre téléphone mobile?

[POSER SI CEL1=OUI]

CEL2. Êtes-vous dans un environnement sécuritaire pour parler?

[POSER SI PHONFRAM=TÉLÉPHONE MOBILE; REGION POUR LIGNE FIXE EST BASÉ SUR INDICATIF RÉGIONAL ET ÉCHANGE TÉLÉPHONIQUE]

FSAPROV. Dans quelle province habitez-vous?

QFSA. Veuillez me donner les trois premiers caractères de votre code postal?

[POSER SI ÉCHANTILLON=TÉLÉPHONE MOBILE]

QB. À la maison, avez-vous un téléphone terrestre traditionnel, différent d´un téléphone cellulaire?

[POSER SI ÉCHANTILLON=LIGNE FIXE]

QBB. À la maison, avez-vous un téléphone cellulaire ainsi qu’une ligne téléphonique traditionnelle?

GENDR. (NOTER LE SEXE)

QAGE. Quelle est votre année de naissance?

[POSER SI QAGE=NE SAIT PAS/PAS DE RÉPONSE]

QAGE2. Seriez-vous disposé à me dire à quelle catégorie d’âge vous appartenez? (LIRE LA LISTE)

J’aimerais commencer par quelques questions sur des enjeux relatifs à l’immigration.

Q1. À votre avis, est-ce qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez d’immigrants qui viennent au Canada? [NOTE A L’INTERVIEWER : accepter ‘nsp’ sans sonder.]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

[POSER SI Q1=Ne sait pas]

Q1A. Si vous DEVIEZ choisir, diriez-vous qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez d’immigrants qui viennent au Canada?

[POSER SI Q1/Q1A=Trop grand nombre/Trop peu]

Q1B. Est-ce sensiblement [trop grand nombre/trop peu] ou nettement [trop grand nombre/trop peu]?

Q2. Actuellement, le Canada vise à accepter 330 000 immigrants cette année. Sachant cela, diriez-vous qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez d’immigrants qui viennent au Canada?
[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q3. Étant donné que le gouvernement prévoit de faire venir plus d’immigrants chaque année, laquelle des trois principales catégories d’immigration devrait augmenter? (LIRE LA LISTE)

[RANDOMISER LES TROIS PREMIERS; RÉPONSES MULTIPLES]

Q4. De façon générale, quel effet l’immigration au Canada a-t-elle sur [INSÉRER ÉLÉMENT]? Cet effet est-il très positif, plutôt positif, ni positif ni négatif, plutôt négatif ou très négatif? (Qu’en est-il pour) [INSÉRER ÉLÉMENT SUIVANT]? (NOTE À L’ENQUÊTEUR: RÉPÉTEZ L’ÉCHELLE AU BESOIN)

[INSÉRER ÉLÉMENT; RANDOMISER]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q6. À quel point êtes-vous satisfait(e) de la façon dont le gouvernement du Canada gère notre système d’immigration? Veuillez répondre en utilisant une échelle de dix points où 1 signifie « très insatisfait(e) » et 10 signifie « très satisfait(e) »

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

[PASSER SI NSP/REF À Q6]

Q7. Pour quelle raison principale avez-vous répondu cela? (ACCEPTER UNE SEULE RÉPONSE. NE PAS DEMANDER DE PRÉCISIONS PLUS D’UNE FOIS. INSISTER SUR LA « RAISON PRINCIPALE »)

Q8. Ensuite, en pensant aux raisons économiques pour lesquelles le Canada accueille de nouveaux arrivants...
Veuillez me dire à quel point vous êtes en accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants. Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[ÉNONCÉS; RANDOMISER]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q9. Maintenant, en réfléchissant au Canada et à l’immigration...

LE CAS ÉCHÉANT : En utilisant la même échelle de 10 points, veuillez me dire dans quelle mesure vous êtes d’accord ou en désaccord avec les énoncés suivants : (une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie que vous êtes « fortement en désaccord » et 10, que vous êtes « fortement en accord ».

[ÉNONCÉS; RANDOMISER]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q10. Maintenant, en réfléchissant à la façon dont les nouveaux arrivants s’installent au Canada…

LE CAS ÉCHÉANT : En utilisant la même échelle de 10 points, veuillez me dire dans quelle mesure vous êtes d’accord ou en désaccord avec les énoncés suivants : (une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie que vous êtes « fortement en désaccord » et 10, que vous êtes « fortement en accord ».

[ÉNONCÉS; RANDOMISER]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q11. Je vais maintenant vous poser quelques questions sur les réfugiés.

Les réfugiés peuvent venir au Canada de différentes façons. Certains viennent de camps de réfugiés à l’étranger et sont sélectionnés par le gouvernement canadien pour venir au Canada. D’autres viennent au Canada en tant que visiteurs et, une fois arrivés, demandent l’asile, en disant qu’ils ne peuvent pas retourner dans leur pays, car ils risquent d’y être persécutés. Certains demandent l’asile à nos frontières, tandis que d’autres le font à un port d’entrée.

Selon vous, y a-t-il un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez de réfugiés qui viennent au Canada?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q12. En pensant plus particulièrement aux deux principales façons pour les réfugiés d’entrer au Canada, croyez-vous qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez de… (RÉPÉTER LA LISTE SI NÉCESSAIRE)

[ÉNONCÉS; RANDOMISER]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q13. Veuillez me dire à quel point vous êtes en accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants. Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[ÉNONCÉS; RANDOMISER]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q14. Au cours des deux dernières années, des personnes ont traversé la frontière entre les États-Unis et le Canada de façon irrégulière pour demander l’asile. Diriez-vous que vous êtes... (LIRE LA LISTE)

Q15. Veuillez me dire à quel point vous êtes en accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants. Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[ÉNONCÉS; RANDOMISER]

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q16. Pensez-vous que le nombre de demandeurs d’asile qui ont traversé la frontière canadienne à partir des États-Unis l’an dernier a été bien plus élevé, un peu plus élevé, environ le même, un peu moins élevé ou bien moins élevé que lors des années récentes?

[POSER SI Q16=plus élevé/moins élevé]

Q16_OPEN. Selon vous, quelle est la raison principale qui explique pourquoi le nombre de demandeurs d’asile qui traversent la frontière a [augmenté/diminué]?

Nous avons maintenant quelques questions à vous poser à des fins statistiques seulement.

DINFORMED1. Avant ce sondage, comment auriez-vous décrit votre niveau de connaissance sur le processus d’immigration? (LIRE LA LISTE)

DINFORMED2. Avant ce sondage, comment auriez-vous décrit votre niveau de connaissance sur le processus de demande d’asile? (LIRE LA LISTE)

D1. Êtes-vous né(e) au Canada?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

[SI D1 = “NON”, DEMANDER D2. AUTRE, PASSER À D3]

D2. En quelle année êtes-vous arrivé(e) au Canada?

D3. Vos parents ont-ils immigré au Canada d’un autre pays? (LIRE LA LISTE)

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D4. Êtes-vous une personne autochtone, c’est-à-dire un Métis, un Inuit ou un membre des Premières nations (Amérindien)?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D5. Y a-t-il un immigrant récent, c’est-à-dire une personne qui a immigré au Canada au cours des dix dernières années…? (LIRE LA LISTE, SÉLECTIONNER TOUTES LES RÉPONSES QUI S’APPLIQUENT)

[RÉPONSES MULTIPLES]

D8. Quel est le plus haut niveau de scolarité que vous avez atteint jusqu’à maintenant? (LISEZ LA LISTE; JUSQU’A CE QU’UNE REPONSE SOINT DONÉE, ACCEPTEZ UNE SEULE RÉPONSE.)

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D9. Quelle est votre situation d’emploi actuelle? (NE LISEZ PAS LA LISTE. ACCEPTEZ UNE SEULE RÉPONSE. TENEZ-VOUS-EN AUX CODES INDIQUÉS CI-DESSOUS. SONDEZ AU BESOIN.)

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D10. Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux le revenu total de votre ménage, c’est-à-dire le revenu total de toutes les personnes de votre ménage avant impôt? Est-ce...? (LISEZ LA LISTE, ACCEPTEZ UNE SEULE RÉPONSE.)

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D11. Quelle est la langue que vous avez apprise en premier lieu à la maison dans votre enfance et que vous comprenez toujours? (ACCEPTEZ PLUSIEURS RÉPONSES UNIQUEMENT SI LE RÉPONDANT A APPRIS CES LANGUES EN MÊME TEMPS.)

[RÉPONSES MULTIPLES]

GENDER. Quel est votre genre ? Par genre, on entend le genre actuel, qui peut différer du sexe assigné à la naissance ou de celui inscrit dans les documents légaux. (NE LISEZ PAS LA LISTE)

Voilà toutes les questions que nous avions à vous poser. Merci d’avoir pris la peine de répondre à notre sondage. Nous vous en sommes très reconnaissants. De ma part, d’Ipsos et du Gouvernement du Canada, je vous souhaite une bonne (soirée/journée).

English online survey questionnaire

We are conducting a brief study for the Government of Canada on current issues of interest to Canadians. The survey takes about 15 minutes to complete. Your participation is voluntary and completely confidential.

Would you prefer to continue in English or French?

YEAR. What is your date of birth?

MONTH

[PN: TERMINATE IF UNDER 18]

RESP_GENDER. Are you…?

QMktSize_CA. What is your postal code? (example: A8A8A8)

D1. Were you born in Canada?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

[IF D1 = “NO”, ASK D2. ELSE, SKIP TO D3]

D2. In what year did you come to Canada?

D3. Did your parents immigrate to Canada from another country?
[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D4. Are you an Indigenous person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

Our first few questions are about immigration issues.

Q1. In your opinion do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada?

[RANDOMIZE CODES 1 AND 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

[ASK IF Q1=Don’t know]

Q1A. If you had to choose, do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada?
[RANDOMIZE CODES 1 AND 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

[ASK IF Q1/Q1A=Too many/Too few]

Q1B. Would that be somewhat too [many/few] or significantly too [many/few]?

Q2. Currently, Canada aims to admit 330,000 immigrants this year. Knowing this, do you feel there are too many, too few, or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada?

[RANDOMIZE CODES 1 AND 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q3. As the government plans to bring in more immigrants each year, which of the three main immigration classes should grow?

[RANDOMIZE FIRST THREE; MULTIPLE RESPONSE]

Q4. In general, what effect does immigration to this country have on the following? Is the effect very positive, somewhat positive, neither positive nor negative, somewhat negative or very negative?

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS]

[SKIP IF DK/REF AT Q4C (Neighbourhood)]

Q4C_OPEN. You mentioned that you feel that immigration has a [RESPONSE AT Q4C] effect on your neighbourhood. What is the main reason why you say that?

Q4F. In general, what effect does immigration to this country have on the following? Is the effect very positive, somewhat positive, neither positive nor negative, somewhat negative or very negative?

[COLUMNS]

Q5. In your opinion do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of immigrants coming to…

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS: RANDOMIZE CODES 1 AND 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q6. To what extent are you satisfied with the Government of Canada’s management of our immigration system? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "Very dissatisfied" and 10 means "Very satisfied".

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

[SKIP IF DK/REF AT Q6]

Q7. What is the main reason you say that?

Q8. Next, thinking about economic reasons why Canada brings newcomers to Canada...

To what extent do you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS]

Q9. Now, thinking about Canada and immigration...

To what extent do you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS]

[SKIP IF DK/REF AT Q9B]

Q9B_OPEN.  You gave a response of [response at Q9B] on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree", for the statement:
Immigration is causing Canada to change in ways that I don't like.

Why do you say that?

Q10. Now thinking about how newcomers settle in Canada…

To what extent do you either agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS]

Q11. Next, we have some questions about refugees.

Refugees can come to Canada in different ways. Some of them come from overseas refugee camps and are selected by the Canadian government to come to Canada. Other people come to Canada as visitors and, after arriving, claim asylum, saying that they cannot go home because they face danger or persecution. Some claim asylum at our borders while others claim asylum at a port of entry.

In your opinion, do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of refugees coming to Canada?

[RANDOMIZE CODES 1 and 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

Q12. Looking specifically at the two main ways refugees can come to Canada, do you feel there are too many, too few or about the right number of refugees coming to Canada?

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS; RANDOMIZE CODES 1 and 2]

Q13. To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".
[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS]

Q14. In the past couple of years, people have been irregularly crossing the Canada-US border and claiming asylum. Would you say you are…

[RANDOMIZE ORDER OF Q15A/Q15A_OPEN AND Q15B/Q15B_OPEN]

Q15A. To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statement? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[COLUMNS]

[IF Q15A IS 6 OR LESS]

Q15A_OPEN. Why do you say that?

Q15B. To what extent do you agree or disagree with each of the following statement? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 10 means "strongly agree".

[COLUMNS]

[IF Q15B IS 4 OR MORE]

Q15B_OPEN. Why do you say that?

Q16. Over the past year, do you think the number of asylum seekers crossing the Canadian border from the U.S. has been a lot higher, a bit higher, about the same, a bit lower, or a lot lower than what it has been in recent years?

[ASK IF Q16=Higher/Lower]

Q16_OPEN. What do you think is the primary reason the number of asylum seekers crossing the border has [increased/decreased]?

Our last few questions are for statistical purposes only.

DINFORMED1. Before taking this survey, how high or low would you rate your level of knowledge about the immigration process?

DINFORMED2. Before taking this survey, how high or low would you rate your level of knowledge about the asylum claim process?

DMEDIA1. Have you done any of the following actions on immigration issues within the past week?

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE]

[COLUMNS]

DMEDIA2. Have you done any of the following actions on immigration issues within the past six months?

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE; DO NOT SHOW IF YES AT DMEDIA1]

[COLUMNS]

DMEDIA3. And what are your preferred media sources for information about Canadian immigration issues?

[MULTIPLE MENTION; RANDOMIZE BLOCKS AND WITHIN BLOCKS; ANCHOR LOW “OTHER” IN EACH]

Television

Radio

Newspapers or Magazines

Social Media

News Websites

Other [ANCHOR LOW]

[ASK IF DMEDIA3=Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit]

DMEDIA4. You mentioned you get your immigration news from the following social media sites. Is this information posted or reposted from newspapers, magazines or news websites?

[ROWS; RANDOMIZE; SHOW IF SELECTED AT DMEDIA3]

[COLUMNS]

D5. Are there any recent immigrants, that is, individuals who have immigrated to Canada in the last ten years…?

[MULTIPLE MENTION]

D8. What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed to date?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D9. What is your current employment status?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D10. Which of the following best describes your total household income? That is, the total income of all persons in your household combined, before taxes. Is it...?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

D11. What is the language that you first learned at home in childhood and still understand?

[MULTI-RESPONSE]

GENDER. What is your gender?

That concludes the survey. Thank you very much for your thoughtful feedback. It is much appreciated.

French online survey questionnaire

Nous menons une courte étude pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada sur des sujets d’actualité intéressant les Canadiennes et les Canadiens. Il vous faudra approximativement 15 minutes pour répondre à ce sondage. Votre participation est volontaire et entièrement confidentielle.
Préférez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais?

YEAR. Quelle est votre date de naissance?

MONTH

[PN: TERMINEZ SI MOINS DE 18 ANS]

RESP_GENDER. Vous êtes?

QMktSize_CA. Quel est votre code postal? (exemple: A8A8A8)

D1. Êtes-vous né(e) au Canada?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

[POSER SI D1=Non]

D2. En quelle année êtes-vous arrivé(e) au Canada?

D3. Vos parents ont-ils immigré au Canada d’un autre pays?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D4. Êtes-vous une personne autochtone, c’est-à-dire un Métis, un Inuit ou un membre des Premières nations (Amérindien)?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Nos premières quelques questions portent sur des enjeux relatifs à l’immigration.

Q1. À votre avis, est-ce qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez d’immigrants qui viennent au Canada?

[RANDOMISER LES CODES 1 ET 2; RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

[POSER SI Q1=Ne sait pas]

Q1A. Si vous deviez choisir, diriez-vous qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez d’immigrants qui viennent au Canada?

[RANDOMISER LES CODES 1 ET 2; RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

[POSER SI Q1/Q1A=Trop grand nombre/Trop peu]

Q1B. Est-ce sensiblement [trop grand nombre/trop peu] ou nettement [trop grand nombre/trop peu]?

Q2. Actuellement, le Canada vise à accepter 330 000 immigrants cette année. Sachant cela, diriez-vous qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez d’immigrants qui viennent au Canada?

[RANDOMISER LES CODES 1 ET 2; RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q3. Étant donné que le gouvernement prévoit de faire venir plus d’immigrants chaque année, laquelle des trois principales catégories d’immigration devrait augmenter?

[RANDOMISER LES TROIS PREMIERS; RÉPONSES MULTIPLES]

Q4. De façon générale, quel effet l’immigration au Canada a-t-elle sur les éléments suivants? Cet effet est-il très positif, plutôt positif, ni positif ni négatif, plutôt négatif ou très négatif?

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES]

[PASSER SI NSP/REF À Q4C (quartier)]

Q4C_OPEN. Vous avez dit que l’immigration avait un effet [RÉPONSE À Q4C] sur votre quartier. Quelle est la raison principale qui vous fait dire cela?

Q4F.  De façon générale, quel effet l’immigration au Canada a-t-elle sur l’élément suivant? Cet effet est-il très positif, plutôt positif, ni positif ni négatif, plutôt négatif ou très négatif?

[COLONNES]

Q5. Selon vous, y a-t-il un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez d’immigrants qui arrivent dans...

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES: RANDOMISER LES CODES 1 ET 2; RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q6. À quel point êtes-vous satisfait(e) de la façon dont le gouvernement du Canada gère notre système d’immigration? Veuillez répondre en utilisant une échelle de dix points où 1 signifie « très insatisfait(e) » et 10 signifie « très satisfait(e) »

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

[PASSER SI NSP/REF À Q6]

Q7. Pour quelle raison principale avez-vous répondu cela?

Q8. Ensuite, en pensant aux raisons économiques pour lesquelles le Canada accueille de nouveaux arrivants...

À quel point êtes-vous en accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES]

Q9. Maintenant, en réfléchissant au Canada et à l’immigration...

À quel point êtes-vous en accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES]

[PASSER SI NSP/REF À Q9B]

Q9B_OPEN.  Vous avez donné une réponse de [RÉPONSE À Q9B] sur une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie que vous êtes « fortement en désaccord » et 10, que vous êtes « fortement en accord » avec l’énoncé :

L’immigration fait en sorte que le Canada évolue d’une façon qui ne me plaît pas.

Pourquoi dites-vous cela?

Q10. Maintenant, en réfléchissant à la façon dont les nouveaux arrivants s’installent au Canada…

À quel point êtes-vous en accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES]

Q11. Nous vous poserons maintenant quelques questions sur les réfugiés

Les réfugiés peuvent venir au Canada de différentes façons. Certains viennent de camps de réfugiés à l’étranger et sont sélectionnés par le gouvernement canadien pour venir au Canada. D’autres viennent au Canada en tant que visiteurs et, une fois arrivés, demandent l’asile, en disant qu’ils ne peuvent pas retourner dans leur pays, car ils risquent d’y être persécutés. Certains demandent l’asile à nos frontières, tandis que d’autres le font à un port d’entrée.

Selon vous, y a-t-il un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez de réfugiés qui viennent au Canada?

[RANDOMISER LES CODES 1 ET 2; RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

Q12. En pensant plus particulièrement aux deux principales façons pour les réfugiés d’entrer au Canada, croyez-vous qu’il y a un trop grand nombre, trop peu ou juste assez de réfugiés qui viennent au Canada?

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES; RANDOMISER LES CODES 1 ET 2]

Q13. À quel point êtes-vous en accord ou en désaccord avec chacun des énoncés suivants? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES]

Q14. Au cours des deux dernières années, des personnes ont traversé la frontière entre les États-Unis et le Canada de façon irrégulière pour demander l’asile. Diriez-vous que vous êtes...

[RANDOMISER L’ORDRE DE Q15A/Q15A_OPEN ET Q15B/Q15B_OPEN]

Q15A. À quel point êtes-vous en accord ou en désaccord avec l’énoncé suivant? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[COLONNES]

[POSER SI Q15A EST 6 OU MOINS]

Q15A_OPEN. Pourquoi dites-vous cela?

Q15B. À quel point êtes-vous en accord ou en désaccord avec l’énoncé suivant? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10 où 1 signifie « fortement en désaccord » et 10 signifie « fortement en accord ».

[COLONNES]

[POSER SI Q15B EST 4 OU PLUS]

Q15B_OPEN. Pourquoi dites-vous cela?

Q16. Pensez-vous que le nombre de demandeurs d’asile qui ont traversé la frontière canadienne à partir des États-Unis l’an dernier a été bien plus élevé, un peu plus élevé, environ le même, un peu moins élevé ou bien moins élevé que lors des années récentes?

[POSER SI Q16=plus élevé/moins élevé]

Q16_OPEN. Selon vous, quelle est la raison principale qui explique pourquoi le nombre de demandeurs d’asile qui traversent la frontière a [augmenté/diminué]?

Nous avons maintenant quelques questions à vous poser à des fins statistiques seulement.

DINFORMED1. Avant ce sondage, comment auriez-vous décrit votre niveau de connaissance sur le processus d’immigration?

DINFORMED2. Avant ce sondage, comment auriez-vous décrit votre niveau de connaissance sur le processus de demande d’asile?

DMEDIA1. Avez-vous fait l’une ou l’autre des activités suivantes en lien avec les questions d’immigration au cours de la dernière semaine?

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER]

[COLONNES]

DMEDIA2. Avez-vous fait l’une ou l’autre des activités suivantes en lien avec les questions d’immigration au cours des six derniers mois?

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER; NE MONTRER PAS SI OUI À DMEDIA1]

[COLONNES]

DMEDIA3. Quelles sont vos sources d’information préférées pour les questions d’immigration au Canada?

[RÉPONSES MULTIPLES; RANDOMISER LES BLOCS ET A L'INTERIEUR DES BLOCS; ANCRER “AUTRE” AU FOND DANS CHAQUE]

Télévision

Radio

Journaux ou magazines

Médias sociaux

Sites Web de nouvelles

Autre [ANCRER AU FOND]

[POSER SI DMEDIA3=Facebook, Twitter, ou Reddit]

DMEDIA4. Vous avez dit que vos nouvelles sur l’immigration provenaient des sites de médias sociaux suivants. Ces nouvelles sont-elles publiées, ou republiées, de journaux, magazines ou sites Web de nouvelles?

[RANGÉES; RANDOMISER; MONTRER SI SELECTIONNÉ À DMEDIA3]

[COLONNES]

D5. Y a-t-il un immigrant récent, c’est-à-dire une personne qui a immigré au Canada au cours des dix dernières années…?

[RÉPONSES MULTIPLES]

D8. Quel est le plus haut niveau de scolarité que vous avez atteint jusqu’à maintenant?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D9. Quelle est votre situation d’emploi actuelle?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D10. Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux le revenu total de votre ménage, c’est-à-dire le revenu total de toutes les personnes de votre ménage avant impôt? Est-ce...?

[RÉPONSE UNIQUE]

D11. Quelle est la langue que vous avez apprise en premier lieu à la maison dans votre enfance et que vous comprenez toujours?

[RÉPONSES MULTIPLES]

GENDER. Quel est votre genre? Par genre, on entend le genre actuel, qui peut différer du sexe assigné à la naissance ou de celui inscrit dans les documents légaux.

Voilà toutes les questions que nous avions à vous poser. Merci d’avoir pris la peine de répondre à notre sondage. Nous vous en sommes très reconnaissants. Au revoir.