Focus Groups on Newcomer and Immigrant Issues

Draft Report
PN8319

Table of contents

Executive summary

Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) commissioned Environics Research Group to conduct quali­tative public opinion research among newcomers and settled immigrants. This research was designed to gauge the issues, preferences and needs of newcomers and longer term immigrants to Canada with regard to the issues including:

Methodology

Environics Research conducted a series of 14 focus groups with immigrants to Canada between April 11 and 21, 2015. Sessions were conducted in Surrey, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Brampton, Toronto (2 nights) and Montreal. The two sessions in each of Surrey and Brampton were conducted in Punjabi among South Asians, the two sessions in Vancouver with Richmond residents were conducted in Mandarin, two of the sessions in Toronto were conducted in Cantonese and the two sessions in Montreal with newcomers from the Middle East and North Africa were conducted in French. Four sessions with Filipinos in Winnipeg (2) and Toronto (2) were conducted in English. In each location, one focus group was conducted with people who were permanent residents or Canadian citizens who had arrived within the past five years. The second group consisted of Canadian residents and citizens who had lived in Canada for five to 10 years. The fourteen sessions were distributed as follows:

Date and time / Group Composition

The groups lasted approximately 90 to 120 minutes, and consisted of 8 to 10 participants (out of 10 people recruited for each group).

Statement of limitations: Qualitative research provides insight into the range of opinions held within a population, rather than the weights of the opinions held, as would be measured in a quantitative study. The results of this type of research should be viewed as indicative rather than projectable.

Cost of research

The cost of this research was $155,958.98 (HST included).

Use of findings of the qualitative research

By gauging and analyzing the opinions of newcomers and immigrants, the Government of Canada gains insights into important policy areas related to the mandate of the department and related services. The information gained through this public opinion research will be shared throughout Citizenship and Immigration Canada to assist it when establishing priorities, developing policies, and planning programs and services.

General findings

Participants were asked to identify what they believe should be the current priority for the Government of Canada. More recent immigrants to Canada in particular are often confused as to what issues are federal as opposed to provincial or municipal issues. Some of the more common themes that surfaced included: employment for new Canadians, immigration and citizenship issues, health care and taxes.  Other priorities mentioned less often included crime and national security, public transportation and infrastructure, affordable housing, education, and live-in caregiver work conditions. All in all jobs were probably mentioned more often than any other single issue.

When participants were asked to circle words that they felt best described the state of the Canadian economy, they tended to pick a wide variety of words – some with negative and some with positive connotations. Participants very rarely referred to the economy as “strong” and were more likely to refer to it as stable, sluggish, uneven, in crisis, stagnant, weak, tepid and in outright decline. Others chose positive words such as “stable”, “strong”, “growing”, “competitive” and “safe” to describe the economy.

Many participants had a hard time identifying threats to the Canadian economy as a whole since their focus was so personal. Some mentioned the declining price of oil, the falling dollar, terrorist attacks and not taking full advantage of the skills offered by recent immigrants as threats.

Top of mind awareness of the federal government’s recent announcements on new supports for families was relatively low. In most sessions people with children were aware that the UCCB was being increased and to a lesser extent that the tax credit for children’s fitness was going up. There was also scattered awareness of the proposed income splitting measures and those that had heard of it had at least some awareness of what it actually meant.

To the extent that people knew about changes to family support programs, they tended to approve of them.  Beyond that, there was clear interest among most participants in how the policies could be expanded to other segments of the population. For instance, participants who did not have young families wondered about programs for older citizens and single people. 

Participants struggled to identify issues or actions for the federal government that related specifically to their community. They focused much more on what needed to be done for immigrants in general regardless of where they came from and this took the form of more lenient or supportive family reunification/ family sponsorship policies, better language programs for new immigrants or less rigid language proficiency requirements, and better programs to help immigrants get their credentials recognized in Canada. Less common issues included affordable housing and lowering residency requirements for citizenship.

Overall, awareness of Express Entry was relatively low.  Some had simply heard the name and assumed that it would accelerate the immigration process and thus would be a good thing.  In some sessions, many claimed to be aware of Express Entry, but rather than describing the new electronic system to manage applications from skilled workers, they cited ways they believed processing times for certain applications could be expedited.

When participants were asked for unprompted recollections of changes to the Citizenship Act, many immigrants confused policies around citizenship with policies around immigration.  The most noteworthy immigration-related issue raised here related to “tougher” language requirements and how the exemption from these was being raised to 65 instead of 55.

Participants welcome faster processing times for citizenship applications but expressed concerns about the cost and some wished they could have the option of paying extra for faster processing.

Most participants were not aware that non-citizens could join the Canadian Forces at all, let alone get citizenship faster if they do so.

There was little awareness of the new measures around revocation of Canadian citizenship for those convicted of terrorism or treason. Participants were more aware of how citizenship could be revoked for a fraudulent application.

Only a few participants spontaneously mentioned the recent controversy about allowing a woman to wear a niqab during a citizenship oath. Opinion on this issue was very mixed. Some agreed that immigrants ought to adopt “Canadian values” and remove any face covering during the oath. Others felt that Canada was a diverse country with religious freedoms that should be respected. Many wanted some sort of compromise whereby a Muslim woman could show her face in private to verify her identity and then cover her face when in a room full of people for the actual ceremony.

Opinion was also very mixed about Canada’s involvement in the conflict with ISIS in Iraq and Syria. Some thought Canada had a duty to take part alongside our allies. Others felt that Canada should be a country of peace and would risk making itself a target for terrorist attack if it took part. Overall awareness of Canada’s role here was quite low.

Most participants felt that being “settled and integrated” meant first and foremost having a stable job that was in their field. It meant moving beyond the initial “survival job”. Some also mentioned having a home, sending their children to school as other markers of integration.

The feeling of belonging in Canada was often tied to socializing with other Canadians, seeing their children interact with Canadians from other communities, benefitting from Canadian social programs and benefits such as health care, EI, pensions etc… and also integrating in the workplace with people from all levels. Some identified the citizenship ceremony itself as a moment where they felt they belonged.

Most said that they had made an effort to expand their social circle beyond their own community. It was clear that language skills were a big factor here. Some newcomers arrived in Canada already being highly fluent in English or French and so it was natural for them to make friends in the workplace and in their neighbourhoods or religious institutions with people from other places. Newcomers from China had much bigger language problems that impeded them from interacting with people outside the Chinese community. 

People mentioned a wide variety of news sources. Most reported using social media and online sources such as Facebook and yahoo and google to get news. There was also a mix of local mainstream Canadian TV, radio and newspapers mentioned as well as ethnic media sources.

If the Government of Canada needed to communicate to people in other countries about new requirements for visitors, a variety of tactics could be considered – and these varied by the countries of origin. Some from India mentioned going through travel agents, while those from China were more dismissive of this idea. Others spoke of putting new information on embassy websites and the CIC website since that is where people go to get up to date information on documentation like visas. In fact, in situations where visitors must obtain a visa, it was thought that any new additional documentation requirements should be communicated at the visa application stage.

Political neutrality statement and contact information

I hereby certify as a Senior Officer of Environics Research Group 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 contain any reference to electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leader.

Derek Leebosh

Derek Leebosh
Vice President, Public Affairs
Environics Research Group
derek.leebosh@environics.ca
(416) 969-2817

Supplier name: Environics Research Group

PWGSC contract number: B8815-150640/001/CY

Contract award date: 2015-03-25

For more information, contact CIC at por-rop@cic.gc.ca

Introduction

Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) commissioned Environics Research Group to conduct quali­tative public opinion research among newcomers and settled immigrants. This research was designed to gauge the issues, preferences and needs of newcomers and longer term immigrants to Canada with regard to the following:

Background

CIC 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.

The information gained through this public opinion research will be shared throughout the Department to assist it when establishing priorities, developing policies, and planning programs and services.

Methodology

Environics Research conducted a series of 14 focus groups with immigrants to Canada between April 11 and 21, 2015. Sessions were conducted in Surrey, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Brampton, Toronto (2 nights) and Montreal. The two sessions in each of Surrey and Brampton were conducted in Punjabi among South Asians, the two sessions in Vancouver with Richmond residents were conducted in Mandarin, two of the sessions in Toronto were conducted in Cantonese and the two sessions in Montreal with newcomers from the Middle East and North Africa were conducted in French. Four sessions with Filipinos in Winnipeg (2) and Toronto (2) were conducted in English. In each location, one focus group was conducted with people who were permanent residents or Canadian citizens who had arrived within the past five years. The second group consisted of Canadian residents and citizens who had lived in Canada for five to 10 years. The fourteen sessions were distributed as follows:

Date and time/ Group Composition

The groups lasted approximately 90 to 120 minutes, and consisted of 8 to 10 participants (out of 10 people recruited for each group).

Environics developed the recruitment screener and provided it to CIC for review prior to finalizing. Participants were screened to ensure they were invited to the appropriate session according to ethnic background and how long they had been living in Canada. Participants were also screened to ensure the groups included a mix of gender, education, age, and that they would be comfortable voicing their opinions in front of others. Normal focus group exclusions were in place (marketing research, media, employment in the federal government, and recent related focus group attendance).

All participants were offered a $125 honorarium to encourage participation and thank them for their commit­ment.  All groups were video and audio recorded for use in subsequent analysis by the research team - during the recruitment process and at the session sign-in participants were asked to consent to such recording.

Given the various languages in which the sessions were held, specialized moderators were used:

All qualitative research work was conducted in accordance with the professional standards established by the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA) and applicable PIPEDA legislation.

Detailed findings

Priorities for the Government of Canada

Participants were asked to identify what they believe should be the current priority for the Government of Canada. Some of the more common themes that surfaced included the following:

Other priorities mentioned less often included crime and national security, public transportation and infrastructure, affordable housing, education, and live-in caregiver work conditions. All in all jobs were probably mentioned more often than any other single issue.

It should be noted that more recent immigrants to Canada in particular were often confused as to which issues were in fact federal as opposed to provincial or municipal issues.

Current Economic Situation in Canada

Participants were asked to select one word they felt best described the state of the Canadian economy (participants could choose among a list of words or they could propose one of their own words).  Responses to this exercise were in large part inspired by three factors:  first, participants would often compare the Canadian economy to their home country’s economy; second, their perception was influenced by any difficulty they may be having in finding work; and third, participants were more likely to consider their local or regional economy rather than the Canadian economy as a whole.

By and large, the tone in most of the sessions was rather subdued and leaning more towards concern and negative feelings rather than towards strength and positive sentiment.  Participants very rarely referred to the economy as “strong” and were more likely to refer to it as stable, sluggish, uneven, in crisis, stagnant, weak, tepid and in outright decline.  For most of these participants, issues like the decline in oil prices, the “weak” Canadian dollar, unemployment and underemployment among new immigrants and recent headline-making closings in the retail sector all weighed heavily in their views of the economy.

References to more neutral terms such as “stable,” “safe,” “balanced” and “fair” were mostly inspired by the feeling that the economy is not volatile, that it is diversified, that there are both positive and negative trends in the market, and that Canadians do have access to a variety of social safety nets to help them cope with economic challenges.

Some did feel that the economy is competitive and growing although how these terms were interpreted tended to vary.  While some felt that Canada was competitive on the international stage (largely due to our diversified and resource-rich economy), some considered the labour market in Canada as competitive, in the sense that it is difficult to find the job they want.  Perceptions of growth were in part inspired by the influx of immigrants into the country, which was seen an indicator of economic success.

Most participants had a hard time identifying potential threats to the Canadian economy as a whole.  Some of the more common comments included the following:

Familiarity with New Policies to Help Families

Participants were asked if they had heard anything recently from the Government of Canada about support for families. Top of mind, unprompted awareness of the federal government’s recent announcements on new supports for families was relatively low, though some initiatives were more likely to be recalled compared to others, particularly by participants with children. At least a few participants in each session were able to spontaneously recall one, and sometimes two, major policies.

The increase in the Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB) was one of the most recalled policy changes.  In almost each session, one or two participants were able to accurately explain the specific changes to the policy. When specifically prompted by the moderator, many participants in each session admitted to having heard of the change to this benefit.  Some were also aware of the changes to the tax credit for children’s fitness and arts programs although it was not always clear whether participants were aware of the change in the benefit or whether they were simply claiming to be aware of the existence of the benefit.

There was scattered awareness of the proposed Family Tax Cut, often referred to as income splitting by participants, and those who had heard of it had at least some awareness of what it actually meant.  Other unrelated policies participants tended to mention during this segment of the discussion were changes to Tax Free Saving Account (TFSA) limits and to first-time home-buyer policies.

To the extent that people knew about changes to family support programs, they tended to approve of them.  Beyond that, there was clear interest among most participants in how the policies could be expanded to other segments of the population. For instance, participants who did not have young families wondered about programs for older citizens and single people.

When specifically asked how they had become aware of the changes to these specific family support programs, participants mentioned word-of-mouth, they remembered seeing TV, newspaper and public transportation advertising and seeing information on Government of Canada websites (e.g. CIC.gc.ca).  A select few found out about them by watching the news and through social media.  A number of participants had also recently filed their 2014 income tax return, and thus referred to their income tax software or to their accountant as their source of information, particularly those in the groups who were married, with at least one child and who were responsible for filing their personal taxes.

Your Community

Participants were asked if they believe there are issues specific to their own ethnic community that they feel the Government of Canada should address.

Participants struggled to identify issues or actions for the federal government that related specifically to their community. They focused much more on what needed to be done for immigrants in general regardless of where they came from and this took the form of more lenient or supportive family reunification/ family sponsorship policies, better language programs for new immigrants or less rigid language proficiency requirements, and better programs to help immigrants get their credentials recognized in Canada. Less common issues included affordable housing and lowering residency requirements for citizenship.

Only in rare instances did participants refer to an issue that was exclusive to their community.  This included a need for greater oversight of the working conditions of live-in caregivers among Filipinos and language-related issues among Cantonese and Mandarin participants in Toronto and Vancouver.

Express Entry

Participants were asked if they had heard anything about an immigration policy called “Express Entry.”  Participants were not provided with any details of the policy and were asked to explain the concept in their own words if they had, in fact heard of it.

Overall, awareness of Express Entry was relatively low.  Some had simply heard the name and assumed that it would accelerate the immigration process and thus would be a good thing.  In some sessions, many claimed to be aware of Express Entry, but rather than describing the new electronic system to manage applications from skilled workers, they cited ways they believed processing times for certain applications could be expedited.

Those who knew any program details raised a variety of questions related to its operation, such as the feasibility of applicants abroad securing job offers in their field prior to their arrival in Canada, and the management of the candidate pool, including adaptive qualification criteria.

Those who were more accurately familiar with Express Entry had heard about it from a friend or relative who was looking into immigrating to Canada.  A few had also noticed it on CIC’s or the Government of Canada’s website.

Familiarity with Changes to the Citizenship Act

When participants were asked for unprompted recollections of changes to the Citizenship Act, many immigrants confused policies around citizenship with policies around immigration.  The most noteworthy immigration-related issue raised here related to “tougher” language requirements and how the exemption from these was being raised to 65 instead of 55.

When asked to focus specifically on citizenship, unprompted awareness was highest of changes to the residency requirements and of changes to the processing fee for citizenship applications.

Although there was moderate to good awareness of changes to the residency requirements, only a few could specifically recall the complete details of the change. Participants seemed less likely to be able to specify how a year was defined (183 days) and more likely to recall the “4 out of 6 years” part of the requirement.  Even when it was explained to them that for a year to count, they needed to be in Canada for 183 days out of that year, some were confused as to whether these needed to be consecutive days and some asked whether their “years” could accumulate faster if they never left Canada at all.

Participants were well versed in the citizenship processing costs and by how much the fee had increased. There was much lower awareness of other recent changes such as faster processing times, but tended to be fairly high in Montreal and generally higher in the sessions with immigrants who have been in Canada under 5 years.

Participants welcomed faster processing times for citizenship applications but expressed concerns about the cost.   Some wished they could have the option of paying extra for faster processing.

None of the participants volunteered anything about permanent residents in the armed forces and citizenship.  In fact, participants were not even aware that non-citizens could join the Canadian Forces at all, let alone get citizenship faster if they do so.

Only the odd person made any unprompted mention of how Canadian citizenship could now be revoked under certain circumstances.  Even among those who seemed to recall something, the details of what they recalled were rarely accurate or complete.  Participants seemed more inclined to mention how citizenship could be revoked for a fraudulent application.  Other reasons for revocation mentioned by a select few included if a serious crime had been committed or if the person, through their travel behaviour, showed no interest or sign of wanting to live in Canada.  None of the revocation scenarios provided by participants seemed to involve dual citizenship as a criteria.

Wearing of a Niqab at the Oath-Taking Ceremony

While on the topic of “citizenship,” participants were asked if they had heard, read or seen anything in the news recently regarding citizenship ceremonies.  Only a few people spontaneously recalled a recent controversy about allowing a woman to wear a niqab while taking her citizenship oath.  This was not a top of mind issue for participants and the moderator always needed to prompt participants as to whether or not they recalled anything about this issue.  Even after prompting, no more than half of the participants in any session seemed to be familiar with the incident.

Although there were sessions where opinions were fairly one-sided, overall opinions on this issue were quite mixed.  On one hand some participants felt immigrants ought to adopt “Canadian values” and remove any face covering during the ceremony. Among participants who believed that the niqab was being worn out of personal choice and not out of religious observance, similar to how some people wear a hat, they typically leaned towards the removal of the niqab out of respect for the solemnity and importance of the oath-taking ceremony.

Some who felt it was important to show one’s face focused on security concerns rather than values or feelings of disrespect, notably a fear that the individual could be an imposter.  As such, many suggested some sort of compromise whereby an individual could show one’s face in private for identity-verification purposes, and then attend the ceremony with a face covering.  Some also suggested that fingerprints could be taken to verify identity, therefore bypassing any need for immigrants to show their face at all.

On the other hand, others felt that, insofar as the niqab was worn on religious grounds, it could be worn out of respect for the Charter of Freedom and Rights and in line with the view that Canada is a diverse country with religious freedoms that should be respected.

Canada’s Involvement in the Middle East

While on the topic of sources of news, the moderator asked participants whether they had read, heard or seen anything in the news about Canada’s involvement in the Middle East.  General familiarity with the latest mission was spotty.  When specifically asked their opinion about Canada’s involvement in the conflict with ISIS in Iraq and Syria, sentiments were very mixed.  On the one hand, some thought Canada had a duty to take part alongside our allies and that we needed to be proactive in countering terrorism. On the other hand, a variety of arguments were proposed to highlight why Canada should not take part in the conflict.  More specifically, some felt that Canada should not just follow in the footsteps of the United States, it should strive to maintain its enviable reputation as a peacekeeper, it is not our battle to fight and that it would risk making itself a target for retaliatory terrorist attacks if it took part.

Settlement and Integration

A few participants raised settlement and integration as a priority for the government of Canada at the beginning of the focus group, though in the subsequent discussion on this issue there were important subtleties in terms of what was actually meant by being settled and integrated.

Most participants felt that being settled and integrated meant first and foremost having a stable job that was in their field.  Participants were quick to point out the difference between “having a job” and having a “meaningful job.”  To them, the importance lay in their ability to have a job for which they were actually trained and educated – it meant having their credentials recognized and having a job that they loved.  This was in stark contrast to a “survival job” or a temporary job that simply allowed them to pay the bills while they waited or worked towards having their credentials recognized, or waited until the right employer gave them the opportunity to prove themselves.  Only then would they feel “settled.”  For many people, another criterion of settlement was owning a house in Canada.

A few noted that “settlement” and “integration” meant two separate things for them. “Settlement” referred to their economic situation, including having a meaningful job, being financially stable and owning a home.  “Integration” referred to their social situation, whereby they felt they could comfortably function in all aspects of society without a second thought, and without discrimination, language barriers or any other barrier.  They would feel accepted as part of the community and as a team member at work. Discrimination was a particularly common theme in the sessions in Montreal, where some participants felt they constantly faced discrimination, as much in their everyday lives as when they applied for jobs.

Some also felt that they would consider themselves settled and integrated once they felt they were living in Canada the way they used to live back home and that they no longer felt homesick.  Basically the point at which they attained a certain economic and social lifestyle that was at least equal to or better than what they had back home, diminished any regrets of immigration, as they began to favour their new Canadian home.

Having “a sense of belonging” was often tied to the criteria associated with feeling settled and integrated.  When asked what would trigger a sense of belonging beyond having a meaningful job and owning a house, participants would refer to things like having their children attend school and socializing with Canadians from other communities, benefitting from Canadian social programs and benefits such as health care, Employment Insurance (EI), pensions etc., and socializing and having a support network with Canadians other than those in their own ethnic community. Having a sense of belonging also meant “acceptance” in the workplace for some – in other words, having earned the respect of co-workers and peers for being able to do what his/her credentials and prior work experience specified they could do.

Some identified the citizenship ceremony itself as the special moment where they felt they “belonged.” Paying their taxes and feeling like they had become accustomed to the weather were other examples provided.

Most said that they had made an effort to expand their social circle beyond their own community. It was clear that language skills were a big factor here. Many newcomers who participated in this research arrived in Canada already being highly fluent in English or French and so it was easier for them to make friends in the workplace, in their neighbourhoods or at religious institutions with people from other places. Newcomer participants from China had limited knowledge of Canada’s official languages, and that impeded them from interacting with people outside the Chinese community and many admitted to limiting their social activities, and even their employment, to their own community.

Participants generally agreed that socializing with other Canadians and other ethnicities was significantly easier, and happened almost naturally, in the workplace. Students and recent graduates also indicated that the campus and classroom setting were highly conducive to meeting people outside their own ethnic community.

Sources of News and Information

When asked where they typically get their news and stay up to date on current affairs, participants provided a range of sources, both mainstream and specific to their ethnicity. Propensity to use certain media was also age-related.

The Internet was a very popular destination for news. Participants could easily access a wide variety of sites and get the exact type of news that interested them the most, in the language of their choice.  Although participants often listed specific websites for specific news agencies such as newspaper websites, CBC, CNN, CP24, etc., there were also many who frequently resorted to more general news aggregators such as Google and Yahoo. Participants indicated that some communities have even created specific websites that are used as reference points for both those already in Canada and those thinking of immigrating to Canada, such as ones created by North African communities.

Television was also very popular, with participants accessing a mix of English and ethnic channels. Radio was also used but not nearly as much as television and the Internet. Newspapers appeared to be used the least among all the different media, but in the end it was still a source used by many, especially the free dailies.

Social media were used more intensely by certain groups compared to others. While some just tended to use Facebook with friends, many others in certain communities relied on Facebook extensively for news and keeping in touch with what was happening in their ethnic community.  While mainstream North American social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and YouTube were also quite popular, those from China were also avid users of sites and services specific to China like Weibo, QQ and WeChat.

The various sources of news and information mentioned in the sessions are listed below – items with a star (*) were often mentioned for that particular medium:

Cantonese – Toronto

Television

Radio

Newspapers

Internet and Social Media

Mandarin – Vancouver

Television

Radio

Newspapers

Internet and Social Media

Punjabi – Surrey

Television

Radio

Newspapers

Internet and Social Media

Punjabi – Brampton

Television

Radio

Newspapers

Internet and Social Media

North Africans

Television

Radio

Newspapers

Internet and Social Media

Filipino – Winnipeg

Television

Radio

Newspapers

Internet and Social Media

Filipino – Toronto

Television

Radio

Newspapers

Internet and Social Media

If the Government of Canada needed to communicate to people in other countries about new requirements for visitors, a variety of tactics could be considered – and these varied by the countries of origin. Some from India mentioned going through travel agents, while those from China were more dismissive of this idea. Others spoke of putting new information on embassy websites and the CIC website since that is where people go to get up to date information on documentation like visas. In fact, in situations where visitors must obtain a visa, it was thought that any new additional documentation requirements should be communicated at the visa application stage.

Appendix A – Recruitment screeners

Environics Research Group Limited
Qualitative Research on Newcomer and Immigrant Issues
Citizenship and Immigration Canada
PN8319
March 27, 2015

Recruitment for Group Discussion

Respondent Name: 
Home #: 
Business #: 
Group #: 
Recruiter: 

10 recruits per session. All participants were born outside of Canada and moved to Canada when they were 14 years of age or over.

Participants in Surrey and Richmond must reside in those municipalities. Participants in Brampton are to be from Brampton or Mississauga.

Mandarin speaking participants are to be from China or Taiwan. Cantonese speaking participants are to be from Hong Kong. Punjabi speaking participants are to be from India or Pakistan. All must be able to speak, read and write Mandarin/Cantonese/Punjabi.

Hello/Bonjour, my name is (name) from Environics Research; we are calling today to invite participants to attend a focus group discussion we are currently conducting on behalf of the Government of Canada.  Your participation in the research is completely voluntary and your decision to participate or not will not affect any dealings you may have with the government.

All information collected, used and/or disclosed will be used for research purposes only and administered as per the requirements of the Privacy Act.  The session will last a maximum of 2 hours and you will receive a cash gift as a thank you for attending the session.  May we have your permission to ask you or someone else in your household some further questions to see if you/they fit in our study?

1. Are you or is any member of your household or your immediate family employed in:

A market research, communications or public relations firm, or an advertising agency

Media (Radio, Television, Newspapers, Magazines, etc.)

A federal or provincial government department or agency

An organization that provides services to newcomers or refugees

(If yes to any of the above – Thank and terminate)

Were you born in Canada, or in another country?

How old were you when you moved to Canada? (Years) Years old

In what year did you come to Canada? (Year). (Write in do not read).

We have been asked to speak to participants from all different ages.  So that we may do this accurately, may I have your exact age please? (age). (Write in)

7. 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

8. 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 Punjabi groups 5 and 6 in Brampton, ask:)

9. What part of the Greater Toronto Area do you live in? Do you live in Brampton, Mississauga or some other part of the Greater Toronto Area?

(For Cantonese and Filipino groups 1, 2, 3 and 4 in Toronto, ask:)

 10. What part of the Greater Toronto Area do you live in?

(Get mix – Cantonese participants should be mostly from Markham, Richmond Hill, Scarborough or North York

(For groups 7, 8, 9 and 10 in the lower mainland of BC, ask:)

11. What part of the Lower Mainland do you live in?

(Ask all)

12. What is the highest level of education you have received? (Do not read list – get mix)

13. Currently are you…? (read list)

 

(Ask q.14 if working full or part-time. Terminate if tied to exclusions in q. 1)

14. What is your current occupation?

(Ask all)

15. Which of the following categories best corresponds to the total annual income, before taxes, of all members of your household, for 2014? (Read)

(Get a good mix)

(Ask all born in China or Taiwan for groups 9 or 10)

16. Do you speak, read and understand Mandarin Chinese?

17. And would you be comfortable participating in a group discussion conducted completely in Mandarin or would you prefer to participate in English?

(Ask all born in Hong Kong for groups 3 or 4)

18. Do you speak, read and understand Cantonese?

19. And would you be comfortable participating in a group discussion conducted completely in Cantonese or would you prefer to participate in English?

(Ask all born in India or Pakistan for groups 5, 6, 7 or 8)

20. Do you speak and understand Punjabi?

21. And would you be comfortable participating in a group discussion conducted completely in Punjabi or would you prefer to participate in English?

(Ask all born in the Philippines for groups 1, 2, 13 and 14)

22. The session will be conducted in English. How comfortable are you in taking part in a group discussion with other Filipinos and Filipinas conducted completely in English?   Are you...(Read list)

(Ask all born in Lebanon, Syria, Morocco, Algeria or Tunisia for groups 11 and 12)

23. The session will be conducted in French. How comfortable are you in taking part in a group discussion with other people from the Middle East conducted completely in French?   Are you... (read list)

(Ask all)

24. 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)

25. 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?

(If yes ask:)

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

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

(If more than 5, terminate)

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

(Ask all)

29. 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.

(Note: terminate if respondent offers any reason such as sight or hearing problem, a written or verbal language problem, a concern with not being able to communicate effectively.)

(Interviewer tell respondent)

Please bring along some form of identification as you may be asked to show it.

Important:

The session is 2 hours in length, but we are asking that all participants arrive 15 minutes prior to the start time of the session.

Are you able to be at the research facility 15 minutes prior to the session time?

I would like to invite you to a group discussion on:

The session will last 2 hours in total and you will receive $125 to thank you for your participation.

Locations:

(Interviewers: Tell respondent that it is a small group and anyone who does not show or cancels at the last
minute will compromise the project.  Make sure they know we feel their opinions are valuable and we are
serious about finding out what they have to offer.)

(Note: Please tell all respondents that they will receive a confirmation call the day prior to the session. If for some reason they have not heard from us they should contact us at (contact us). If their name is not on the

Appendix B – Discussion guides

Environics Research Group Limited
2015/2016 – Focus Groups with Newcomer and Established
Immigrants Discussion agenda Citizenship and Immigration Canada

PN8319
April 12, 2015

1. Introduction to Procedures (10 minutes)

Welcome to the focus group.  We want to hear your opinions. Feel free to agree or disagree.  Even if you are just one person among ten that takes a certain point of view, you could represent a lot of people who feel the same way as you do.

You don’t have to direct all your comments to me; you can exchange ideas and arguments with each other too. There are some observers watching the session on the other side of the two way mirror and they are part of the research team.

We are also video-taping this session to help me write my report. The video will only be used internally to analyse the research and will not be released to anyone else. I may take some notes during the group to remind myself of things also. Anything you say here will remain confidential and anonymous and any comments you make will not be linked to you by name in any reporting we do on this project.

I should also mention that I work for a public opinion research company. I do not work for the Government of Canada which is the client that commissioned the research.

The host/hostess will pay you your incentives at the end of the session.

Let’s go around the table so you can each introduce yourselves to the group. Tell us your name and a little bit about yourself, such as what kind of work you do if you work outside the home and how long ago you moved to Canada and how you came to Canada (i.e. What class of immigrant were you?)

1. Warm-up – General context (20 minutes)

Before we get into the main topic of our focus group tonight, I want to start with a fairly broad question. Could you each write down your answer to the following question - Thinking of the issues facing Canada today which one would you say the Government of Canada (that is the federal government) should focus on most? (NB: Keep in mind that there are issues that are municipal, provincial or federal government issues – please focus on federal issues)

Flip chart – probe – tries to ensure participants focus on federal government issues

(Probe on key issues mentioned.)

2. Word exercise – Economy (20 minutes)

I have an exercise I would like to do with you now. I am going to hand you a sheet with some words that might be used to describe Canada’s economy.  I would like you to take a look and circle the word that you most strongly associate with Canada’s economy.

(Hand out word list - after participants have circled words go around the table and write on a flip chart)

Why did you choose that word? (Discuss)

What do you each feel is the greatest threat to the Canadian economy? (Discuss)

Have you heard anything recently from the Government of Canada about support for families? What did you hear?

[Probe if necessary:  Universal Child Care Benefit increase? Increased children’s fitness tax credit? Income splitting?]

3. Your community (10 minutes)

Are there any issues that the federal government should focus on that relate to your community?

What makes you say that?  What specifically is the issue or concern here?

Have you heard of any federal government action to address this issue?

4. Express Entry – Awareness and perceptions (5 minutes)

Has anyone heard of “Express Entry”? What is it all about? What will its impact be?

Are you confident that your acquaintances back home would use/know how to use the Express Entry system?

5. Citizenship and integration (30 minutes)

Citizenship

Have you heard of recent Government of Canada announcements regarding citizenship or citizenship legislation?

[Probe if not mentioned: (note that these are all still proposed and not yet in effect)]: 

If not mentioned: Have you heard anything in the news about citizenship ceremonies and face covering?

Settlement and Integration in Canada

6. Preferred communications channels (10 minutes)

How do you stay up-to-date on current affairs or issues that affect you/your family/your community?

Could you each write on paper under headings for “Television”, “Radio”, “Newspapers” and “Online/Social Media” – what you use personally to inform yourself?

Probe: Television/Radio/Print/Internet/Transit/Social Media - (Specific Names of Stations, Channels, newspapers, websites) – Probe: English/French as well as in-language sources

What is the best way for the Government of Canada to reach you/your community?

What if the Government of Canada was going to have new requirements for visitors (ie: tourists or business travellers) to Canada? How should Canada make people in other countries aware of this before they arrive at the airport without the right documents?

7. Conclusion (10 minutes)

We have covered a lot of topics today and really appreciate you taking the time and energy to come down here and give your opinion. Your input is very important and insightful. To conclude, I wanted to ask you whether you have any last thoughts that you want to give the Government of Canada about today’s topic.

Thank you for participating!