POR Number: POR 076-10
Contract Number: G9178-100001/012/CY
Award Date: 2010-11-23
Contact Amount: $109,998.95
Prepared for Human Resources and Skills Development Canada
nc-por-rop-gd@hrsdc-rhdcc.gc.ca
March 2011
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français sur demande.
Phoenix SPI is a ‘Gold Seal Certified’ Corporate Member of the MRIA
Phoenix SPI was commissioned by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada to explore with Canadians issues relevant to the department’s mandate.
The objectives of the 2010-2011 survey included the following:
A mixed methodology was used that included a telephone survey and a set of focus groups. The survey averaged 17 minutes and was conducted with 1,505 Canadian residents, 18 years of age and older. Based on a sample of this size, the results can be considered to be accurate to within +/- 2.53%, 19 times out of 20. The fieldwork for the survey was conducted January 29 to February 18, 2011.
A set of eight focus groups was conducted in four locations (two per city), using both in-person (Toronto, Montreal) and online focus groups (Halifax and Calgary). The groups were segmented by age: one group per location consisted of participants 18-35 years old, and the other group of participants aged 36-65. The qualitative research results provide an indication of participants’ views about the issues explored, but cannot be generalized to the full population of Canadian residents, 18 years and older.
The economy was identified most often when respondents were asked to identify the most important issue or challenge facing the country at this time. In total, 29% identified the economy in general terms, while a further 14% pointed specifically to employment and unemployment. The only other issue cited with much frequency was health care (12%).
While many focus group participants identified the economy and/or employment in general, many focused on personal concerns in these areas. These included the cost of living, the need to work longer/delay retirement, concerns over the ability to finance retirement, concerns over the sustainability of the Canada Pension Plan, and the level of personal debt. In the area of employment, some participants pointed to the aging workforce and the challenge of replacing it as a concern. Some identified immigration as an issue, specifically the need for more immigrants, linking it to the aging workforce and the need to replace it.
Assessments of federal government performance were decidedly mixed. Canadians were most satisfied with government performance in terms of increasing access to post-secondary education (51%), followed by helping Canadians improve their skills (50%), making sure employers have the skilled workforce they need (48%), providing help for individuals with disabilities (47%), addressing unemployment (47%), and increasing access to apprenticeships (46%). Fewer Canadians expressed satisfaction with government performance in other areas, including ensuring the sustainability of the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security Program (43%), helping newcomers to Canada find meaningful work (43%), helping low-income families (39%), helping older workers (37%), preparing for an aging population (33%), addressing homelessness (27%), and support for unpaid caregivers (24%). Dissatisfaction was greatest in the following areas: addressing homelessness (48%), support for unpaid caregivers (46%) and preparing for an aging population (42%), with significant numbers expressing strong dissatisfaction in each of these areas. The level of dissatisfaction was lowest regarding access to apprenticeships (22%).
Compared to one year ago, assessments of federal government performance in all areas has declined, with the largest drops recorded for ensuring the sustainability of the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security Program and helping low-income families (each down eight percentage points), followed by enabling more Canadians to access apprenticeships (down seven points) and helping Canadians improve their skills (down six points).
When asked how big an impact the recession had on them and others in their household, almost one-quarter of survey respondents (23%) rated the impact as big, while slightly more (28%) rated the impact as small. In total, 40% provided scores above the mid-point on the scale, suggesting that the recession had at least a moderate impact on their household.
As was the case with survey respondents, the recession affected focus group participants and their families unevenly. With the exception of younger participants in Calgary, nearly all of whom described the recession as having minimal or no impact, each focus group included participants whose assessments of the impact varied from minimal, to moderate, to large. Participants collectively described a variety of ways in which they and their families were affected by the recession, but they tended to fall into one of the three following categories:
Survey respondents who were not retired and who said the recession had an impact on them or others in their household were asked whether they did a number of things as a result of the recession. Approximately one-quarter upgraded their education or skills (28%), changed their jobs or careers (26%), or delayed their retirement (23%). Significantly fewer delayed going back to school (15%), while 3% took early retirement. Focus group participants were asked if they did anything to lessen the impact of the recession. Virtually all of them have taken some action, with the most frequently-identified measure, by far, being general belt tightening (e.g. going out less, deferring larger purchases, cancelling/deferring a trip, comparing prices). With the exception of taking early retirement and delaying a return to school, at least a few participants in most focus groups said they have taken the actions identified by survey respondents.
Most Canadians (60%) think their personal situation and standard of living is about the same as it was before the recession. However, almost one-third (31%) described their situation as worse, while only 8% think it is better now than before. Focus group participants were almost equally divided between those who described their personal situation as about the same, and those who described it as worse. Only a few described their situation as better, while some said they were unable to judge this yet.
Exactly half of Canadians said their views on the value of post-secondary education changed as a result of the recession, viewing this as more important than they did before. Most of the rest, 42%, said their views did not change, while 7% said they now view post-secondary education as less important than they did before the recession. There was widespread agreement among focus group participants that some form of post-secondary degree, diploma, or certification is necessary to succeed in today’s job market.
Canadians are moderately confident about both the Canadian economy and their own personal economic security. Almost two-thirds (66%) expressed at least moderate confidence in the economy. Moreover, 27% expressed strong confidence. Assessments were similar with respect to their own economic security, although slightly fewer (64%) expressed at least moderate confidence, while somewhat more, 32%, expressed strong confidence. Most focus group participants who said they were worse off due to the recession were at least somewhat confident that their personal situation will recover within the next few years. Some qualified this by saying that while they expect things to get better, they do not expect to be as well off in terms of investments/savings as they would have been had the recession not happened.
All of those who had not yet retired were asked whether they were planning to retire within the next five years. In response, 14% said they were. Of these respondents, slightly more plan to fully retire (50%) compared to partially retire (47%). When asked why they plan to partially retire, these respondents most often identified a need for additional money (46%), followed by the desire to keep busy and/or stimulated (36%).
When asked to identify the most important issue facing Canada as a result of our aging population, survey respondents were most likely to identify health care. Almost one-third (31%) pointed to this issue in general, while 3% singled out the cost/funding of health care. Significant numbers also identified income issues – either citing retirement income in general (9%) or pointing specifically to pension plans (5%) – and workplace issues – identifying a declining workforce (8%) or the lack of skilled workers (4%). A host of other reasons were identified by 5% or less, including caregiving, affordable housing, access to home care services, economic competitiveness, and dealing with the aging population in general.
While most focus group participants were aware that Canada’s population is aging, many were not aware of the degree to which this is happening. That said, participants had no difficulty identifying key issues facing Canada as a result of the aging population, and they tended to identify the same issues as survey respondents. Health care was identified most often, both in general and in terms of specific issues: the rising cost of health care, the need to ensure that health care resources remain available (e.g. physicians, geriatric services), and the need to ensure that health care services are adapted to the aging population (e.g. pharma-care/drug programs, increased in-home care). Retirement income, pensions, workforce replenishment, and taxation issues were also routinely identified as important issues.
When survey respondents were asked to identify how big an impact they think the aging of Canada’s population will have in a number of areas, health care costs topped the list. Fully 82% think the aging population will have a big impact in this area. Most Canadians also anticipate big impacts in terms of the cost of public pensions (72%), pressure on families (69%), on Canada’s tax base (57%) and on our labour force (52%). Canadians were less likely to foresee a big impact on Canadians’ standard of living (41%) or our international competitiveness (28%). In all of these areas, most of those who did not anticipate a big impact expect at least a moderate impact. Significantly, 56% expect a big impact in all of the seven areas assessed, while almost all the rest anticipate a big impact in five or six of these areas.
Focus group participants were unanimous that the aging population will have a big impact on Canada and Canadians, and had little difficulty identifying areas where they thought it would be felt most. Overall, they tended to identify the same areas that survey participants were asked about. As well, some participants felt there would be a shift in politics and the economy due to the aging population. In the area of politics, there was a sense that as the population ages, political leaders will feel a need to shift their focus to an older electorate. Economically, some felt that because people are living longer, there will be a gradual shift to products and services targeting older Canadians.
Survey respondents were asked to identify the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a set of statements about Canada’s aging population. More than three-quarters (78%) agreed that there will be a lot of opportunity for young people as older workers retire, with 57% expressing strong agreement. As well, 71% think there won’t be enough services to meet the needs of seniors, while 66% think there won’t be enough people working to pay for the services needed by retired people. Slightly fewer (63%) agreed that there will be more strain in relations between older and younger Canadians when it comes to decisions about where governments should spend money.
Survey respondents were told that there are a number of things that governments could do to address the impact of Canada’s aging population, and were asked to identify how much emphasis they think should be placed on each area. Almost all of the potential measures were accorded high priority by majorities of Canadians. For instance, between 59% and 63% attributed high priority to health care, homecare services, the retirement income system, housing options for seniors, and long-term care facilities. Significant numbers also placed high priority on training workers (53%) and workplace policies for older workers (47%). The only area of potential government action that was not rated highly was increasing immigration to help address labour shortages. For this, 23% attributed high priority (47% accorded it at least moderate priority).
For their part, focus group participants were first asked what they think governments are doing to address the impact of Canada’s aging population. Participants typically felt unable to answer this question due to a lack of evidence. When it came to what they think governments should be doing to address the impact of our aging population, participants had no difficulty offering suggestions. The following suggestions, most of which reflect the priorities of survey respondents, were routinely made: spend more on health care, including a drug plan and prevention programs; build/fund long-term care facilities/retirement residences and regulate them; encourage/subsidize careers in senior care/geriatrics; fund more homecare services; provide incentives for people who adapt their homes to support/provide care of a senior; provide paid work leave to care for an elderly parent; increase immigration, as well as recognize foreign credentials; and encourage people to think about/plan for retirement.
Slightly less than one-third (30%) of Canadians said they provide care for an adult family member or friend in need of assistance due to aging, illness, or disability. Most of those who provide care do this for one individual only (70%). However, 22% provide care for two people, while 7% provide care for three or more. In terms of who they provide care for, over half (55%) said they help look after one or both of their parents. Almost one-quarter (24%) provide care for some other relative, not including children or siblings. Other categories of individuals that receive care include friends (10%), a spouse or partner (9%), children (9%), siblings (4%), and neighbours (2%). General aging (58%) and physical disability (38%) were identified most often as the main health or physical condition of the person for whom care is provided. Also cited with some frequency were chronic illness (26%) and intellectual disability or mental health issues (23%). Eight percent identified a terminal illness (8%).
Approximately two-thirds of respondents who act as caregivers said that, on average, they spend under five hours (33%) or between five and 10 hours (35%) per week serving as a caregiver. That said, 15% spend more than 20 hours per week providing care. When asked to rate a set of issues/challenges in terms of how relevant they are to them personally, four were described as big issues by approximately one-quarter of caregivers: transportation (29%), balancing caregiving duties (27%), providing care to someone who lives out of town (25%), and finding health care information or resources (24%). Somewhat fewer identified out-of-pocket expenses (20%) and suitable housing (17%) as big issues for them personally.
Focus group participants provided similar feedback. Generally a few in every group – particularly in the older focus groups – said they currently provide or have provided care for an adult family member or friend. Most of those who provide care do so for one person, but many provide care for more than one. The people cared for typically include a parent or parents, grandparents, parents-in-law, and elderly neighbours. Some participants are caring for a spouse in need of assistance due to an illness or disability. The amount of time per week devoted to providing care varied considerably, ranging from 1-2 hours a week to over 15 hours a week
Approximately half (52%) of surveyed caregivers think they are coping very well with the responsibilities of providing care, while an additional 40% think they are coping moderately well. When asked to identify the main type of support or assistance that would be most helpful to them if government were able to provide support/assistance to caregivers, 22% did not identify anything. Heading the list of suggestions that were offered was assistance related to homecare (24%), followed closely by financial help in general (23%). Also suggested were transportation (9%) and health care support (8%). Cited by small numbers were general information from government, tax breaks, housing, education, and community programs.
While most focus group participants claimed to be coping relatively well with their caregiving responsibilities, some felt that they are not coping with these responsibilities very well. Reasons include the amount of time and effort required to provide care, the emotional and psychological strains involved in providing care for the elderly, especially those suffering from dementia, difficulty accessing and/or understanding information related to caregiving, difficulty balancingcaregiving activities with work, family, or personal life, and the need to provide care to someone living in another location. Focus group participants currently providing care or anticipating having to do this in the future had little difficulty identifying types of government support or assistance that would be helpful. Moreover, they tended to identify the same types of assistance as survey respondents, with an emphasis on both financial and non-financial forms of assistance. As well, some felt that having a course that would teach caregivers the basics would be useful (e.g. dealing with medications, dementia, medical appointments, other caregiving challenges).
Non-caregiving survey respondents were asked how likely they think it is that they will be providing care for an adult family member or friend in the next five to 10 years. Approximately half think this is very (25%) or somewhat likely (26%).
Almost one-third of respondents said they are carrying a significantly (12%) or moderately (18%) higher level of household debt now, not including mortgages, compared to five years ago. That said, 24% said their level of debt is about the same as it was, while 19% said their household debt is now lower than it was then (26% said they do not have any household debt).
Surveyed Canadians with at least some household debt were asked how concerned they were about the amount of their debt. While 60% expressed concern (with 24% very concerned), 39% said they were not very or not concerned at all about this. Those who expressed concern were asked whether the amount of their debt was preventing them from taking any of seven potential actions. Over half (55%) said their debt was stopping them from saving for unexpected expenditures, while many said it prevented them from saving for retirement (49%), making RRSP contributions (46%), or opening or contributing to a Tax Free Savings Account (44%). More than one-third said their debt was preventing them from saving or paying for their own or their children’s education or training (39%), making RESP contributions (38%), or retiring (37%).
Slightly more than one-third of those who have at least some household debt think it is very (15%) or somewhat likely (20%) that they will increase the amount they owe in the next few years.
I hereby certify as a Senior Officer of Phoenix Strategic Perspectives 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.
Philippe Azzie, Vice-President, Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc.
Supplier Name: Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc.
PWGSC Contract Number: G9178-100001/012/CY
Award Date: 2010-11-23
Contract amount: $109,998.95
To obtain more information on this study, please email nc-por-rop-gd@hrsdc-rhdcc.gc.ca.