2018 Qualitative and Quantitative Research about Newcomers and Immigrants

Final Report

Prepared for: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
Prepared by: Ipsos Public Affairs

POR Registration Number: 091-17
Contract Number: B8815-180420/001/CY
Award Date: February 2, 2018
Delivery Date: March 29, 2018

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

Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.

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
Ipsos Public Affairs

Executive summary

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

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 qualitative research (focus groups) among newcomers, settled immigrants and the public. Research instruments were designed with a view to gauging issues, perceptions, preferences and needs of newcomers and longer-term immigrants to Canada regarding the issues identified above as well as the views of members of the Canadian public as they relate to immigration more generally as well as immigrant contributions to Canada’s cultural mosaic.

Research objectives

The qualitative and quantitative research was intended to explore the views of members of the Canadian general population and Canada’s multicultural communities related to attitudes on issues such as immigration, integration, settlement and citizenship as well as IRCC services. Research was intended to support the Department in its ongoing efforts to ensure quality policy options, program design and advice to ministers as it relates to 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 $245,328.25.

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

A series of 16 focus groups were among newcomers (those in Canada for less than five years) as well as established immigrants (those in Canada for a period of between five and twenty years) from the Chinese, Indo-Canadian, Middle Eastern, Caribbean, African communities as well as members of the Canadian general public 18 years of age or older. Ipsos made use of special screening questions to ensure an appropriate mix of focus group participants based on age, income, education level and other relevant socio-demographic variables. All fieldwork was conducted between February 24th and March 7th, 2018.

The table below provides further detail on focus group locations as well as group composition including language of moderation, cultural community and tenure in Canada.

Focus groups were approximately 2 hours in duration. A total of 131 participants took part in the discussions, out of 160 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 a $75 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 13-minute telephone survey was conducted among a nationwide sample of n=1,000 Canadian adults between March 5th and March 19th, 2018. The telephone survey sample was a probability sample generated through random digit dialing obtaining an overall margin of error of +/-3.1 percentage points (calculated at a 95% confidence interval). The 11-minute online survey was conducted among 1,004 respondents between March 5th and March 19th, 2018, 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 as an important economic and cultural driver to Canadian society

Notwithstanding a range of concerns expressed most participants concede that immigration has a positive effect on Canada and Canadians, is beneficial for our collective economic prospects and is integral to shaping Canada’s cultural mosaic. Despite this, general public participants often expressed concerns related the potential impacts of immigration on our social safety net, job market and security. Newcomers for their part often wondered aloud about the fairness of the immigration process as well as foreign credential recognition. These concerns coupled with much confusion related to the relative distinction between various immigration classes – economic, family, refugee, humanitarian class immigrants and asylum seekers serves only to perpetuate existing myths related to the impact of immigration on Canadians and Canadian society more broadly.

Given the obvious penchant by general public and immigrants who have come in through ‘traditional channels’ to single out refugees and asylum seekers for what is wrong with immigration, it is essential that a tailored approach to communicating the benefits be considered. Communications need to focus on the obvious economic and cultural benefits of immigration to Canada as well as the steps that are taken to facilitate efficient economic and cultural integration into Canadian society. Doing so will help set aside concerns among both audiences (the public and newcomers) as to Canada’s capacity to accommodate more immigrants going forward.

Although there is general agreement with the proposed immigration levels, with most understanding the benefits of economic and family class immigrants – more information related to refugee class immigrants, the processes they must follow, their contributions to Canadian society (economic or cultural) would be helpful in setting aside concern. It appears that efforts should be made to provide information that will assist in setting aside or alleviating concerns amongst the general public and immigrants related to the potential unique economic strains resulting from refugees as well as asylum seekers who are seen as more reliant on social services than other immigrants. Particular focus should be put on highlighting the measures in place to facilitate and expedite integration both economic and cultural for all immigrants. Furthermore, additional information should be provided on screening and application processes applicable to all categories of immigrants as well as measures in place to ensure the system is fair, and that public safety is a key consideration at all times. Moreover, participant stated that they would have appreciated additional information on the extent to which the current plan would ensure optimum outcomes both for the country as well as for those immigrating here. Findings suggest the provision of such information would likely lead to increased support for immigration levels as detailed in the three-year plan.

Integration

Given the diversity of challenges, it appears that the keys to successful integration are language acquisition and employment. According to newcomer participants integration is also largely dependent on one’s ability to forge meaningful relationships outside of their ethnic community. Integration necessarily also means an understanding of Canadian society including successful acquisition of social and cultural norms, both of which are key to successful integration into the work place and deepening ties to the broader community. Integration rarely happens quickly, in fact in many cases newcomers state that it can take anywhere from a few years to a generation (first generation Canadians) for this to fully occur. In addition, several newcomer participants (particularly those in the GTA) cite inconsistencies in the provision of key settlement information at time of arrival and beyond as well as settlement services in need of updating. The effective and consistent provision and dissemination of such information and services that are up to date and reflective of current circumstances is key to successful integration.

Irregular migration

There appears to be much confusion related to irregular migration (asylum seekers) among participants in both research audiences. In the absence of clear information on the process participants are often left to fill in the blanks with inaccurate or false information which in turn has the potential to also negatively impact views and perceptions of immigration more broadly and the benefits associated with a coordinated immigration policy (addressing challenges associated with an aging population, low birth rates and the obvious benefits of a motivated workforce).

Few had heard of the Safe Third Country agreement. Fact sheets detailing the asylum process were generally well received, most saying the information was helpful is answering some basic questions and providing reassurance that there were indeed procedures in place to deal with asylum seekers crossing the Canada/U.S. land border. Having said this, many misconceptions related to irregular migration appear to persist despite information presented. Concerns tend to be fueled by three things: 1) the impression among other immigrants that asylum seekers have intentionally circumvented normal processes in order to expedite their migration to Canada – in this case it all boils down to a matter of fairness – specifically following the rules on immigrating to Canada and the legitimacy of refugee claims (selected refugees vs. asylum seekers) ; 2) concerns that standard security procedures may have somehow been set aside in the interest of an expedited process – these concerns are shared by immigrants and the general public alike, and 3) a need for more information (beyond either of the fact sheets presented) as to the actual process, for example how many are seeking asylum, process timelines and stages, the number of those declined entry, and the costs associated with this process.

Citizenship by descent

Most participants were unfamiliar with issues related to citizenship by descent. Most were of the view that Canadian citizenship should not be passed on indefinitely. There was agreement however that a child born to Canadian parents outside of Canada should automatically receive Canadian citizenship. Participants were generally comfortable in principle with a policy that set certain limits on first generation Canadian citizens born outside of Canada who wished to pass on citizenship to their offspring if they too were born outside of Canada. Participants’ views on when it would be acceptable to pass on citizenship to the second generation tended to be mixed and shifted depending on whether the move from Canada was temporary or permanent and in the case of second generation born outside of Canada, if there was a demonstrated attachment to Canada. According to most, the inability to demonstrate attachment to Canada should necessarily preclude an individual who is second generation born outside of Canada from automatically receiving Canadian citizenship Furthermore, in instances of children born to first generation Canadians who have grown up entirely outside of Canada most felt that Canadian citizenship should not automatically be available. Participants were generally willing to concede that the increased incidence of people pursuing international employment opportunities was worthy of consideration when deciding as to the eligibility of second generation citizenship. However, discussing situations where ties to Canada were not as clear, concerns arose, once again, focusing on the fairness of contributions to social services and Canada’s social safety net. Like refugee immigrants, there was a view among some that there was a potential here for abuse of our social safety net. Participants were generally of the view that there was a need for a clear and consistent policy providing guidelines for second generation applicants to demonstrate their sense of attachment to Canada. Suggestions included demonstrated financial contributions to Canada via taxes or property ownership. Some also suggested that in the case of second generation child applicants, an assessment of their parents’ attachment to the country would be more suitable.

There was a clear sense and expectation amongst all participants that the assessment of attachment to Canada should be unambiguous and expeditious so as to minimize any unnecessary inconvenience to those with a demonstrated strong attachment to Canada.

Family sponsorship and excessive demand

Themes of fairness of process and give and take also surfaced in discussions on family sponsorship, and excessive demand.

In the case of family sponsorship, newcomers particularly those in the Punjabi, Filipino and Middle Eastern groups held very strong views here. Often the discussion focused on the cultural importance of caring for family members and consequently their resistance to a process that they equated to a ‘lottery’ rather than one based on individual merit.

As for the Excessive Demand Policy, awareness and unaided understanding of the policy was for all intents and purposes non-existent among both research audiences. Upon further prompting general public participants generally agreed with the essence of the policy and were reassured that such measures were in place. It should be noted however that there were those who questioned the extent to which such a policy was in keeping with Canadian values – Canada’s tradition of humanitarian assistance was often raised in this case. Newcomers were somewhat more divided on this –some, particularly those in the Punjabi, Middle Eastern and to a somewhat lesser extent Filipino groups, caring for family members is part of their culture. It should therefore come as no surprise that these audiences had a hard time disassociating their emotions when discussing the practical merits of such a policy. Despite continued prompting, these participants struggled to acknowledge the impact of excessive demand upon Canadians or the Canadian health care system. There was much confusion among both research audiences as to whether excessive demand applied to those currently living in Canada and their family members in their country of origin and those yet to immigrate to Canada who might be affected by the Excessive Demand Policy.

When questioned as to their views on mitigating strategies intended to offset costs to the Canadian taxpayer most felt this was a good idea. In fact, more often than not this additional information was sufficient to set aside participants concerns related to the potential for increased burden on Canada’s health and social services systems.

Client services

Newcomers tend to rely on CIC.CG.CA, social media channels as well as cultural community based information channels (TV, Radio, in-person) for immigration related information. When questioned as to the usefulness of CIC.GC.CA, there was a sense among most that although information provided was extensive, the sheer volume presented, how intuitively it was presented and language in which it was presented (English or French only) could at times prove challenging, particularly for those recently arrived, older immigrants, those less technologically inclined or for those in their country of origin who are in the process of applying to immigrate to Canada. Suggested improvements included, in language options, a live chat feature, short videos and simplified language. There was much consternation among newcomers as to the inability to access assistance via the 1-800 number. This was a source of frustration amongst many and leading some to wonder if this was done intentionally in order to compel clients to use CIC.GC.CA

Message testing

Message #1 was considered by most as a statement of fact, several participants simply saying this could not be disputed.

Message #1: Canada was built on immigration. Unless of Indigenous descent, our ancestors are immigrants. Our strength as a multicultural society is a result of newcomers, governments, communities and businesses working together.

Supporting facts:

According to the 2016 Census, immigrants account for approximately 22% of Canada’s population.

Overall, immigrants fare better (or integrate more successfully) in Canada than in most Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries and at a 2017 OECD conference, Canada was one of the four countries cited for its efforts to improve coordination between different levels of government, service providers and civil society associations.

Message #2 was most often seen as the more rational and practical message. Participants felt this message was more likely to underscore the benefits for both immigrants (Canadian Citizenship) as well as for Canadians welcoming them short it was more likely to underscore a win/win scenario.

Message #2: Immigration helps offset the impacts of an aging population. A larger job pool and tax base will help support retirees and help fund social programs like Old Age Security, transit and housing subsidies, and coordination of health care.

Supporting Facts:

More than 5 million Canadians are set to retire by 2035. Immigration will help us fill the worker-to-retiree gap to keep Canada working.

In 1971, there were 6.6 people of working age for each senior. By 2012, the worker-to-retiree ratio had dropped to 4.2 to 1, and projections put the ratio at 2 to 1 by 2036, at which time five million Canadians are set to retire.

75% of Canada’s population growth comes from immigration, mostly the economic category.

Message #3 was least likely to resonate with participants except for some in the North York and Halifax general public groups. For most this message was neither compelling nor relatable.

Message #3: Immigration helps support the economy at the local community level as immigrants are more likely to start a business than those born in Canada. This helps create jobs.

Supporting Facts:

Immigrants have a higher rate of entrepreneurship than their Canadian-born counterparts. (Among immigrants who entered in the 2000 cohort, by 2010 5.3% of immigrant taxfilers owned a private company, compared with 4.8% of the comparison group composed mainly of persons born in Canada). Beyond job creation, these activities can also attract investment and trade opportunities.

In light of these findings it would appear that if the intent is to underscore why immigration is important to our collective and sustained economic and social wellbeing, message #2 is likely to have the most impact as it resonates most strongly with participants from a practical and rational perspective. It answers two key questions 1) what’s in it for me as a Canadian citizen – ensuring a sustained quality of living and collective economic prosperity, and 2) what’s in it for immigrants - all the benefits that come with Canadian citizenship.

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.beaudion@ipsos.com

Detailed qualitative findings

a. Immigration and Canada

General public participants were asked for their initial thoughts as they relate to Canada and immigration. Feedback provided was for the most part positive. Many, particularly those in Halifax and Toronto, spoke with pride of Canada as a country of immigrants, as a welcoming, accepting and multicultural nation. Participants spoke of a diverse society which values human rights and allows for a safe existence. The overarching impression among those holding mostly positive views was that Canada’s cultural mosaic is constantly enriched by immigrants.

“I think we attract multi-nations and all aspects of the world because we are relatively safe, relatively easy to get in and out of… put it this way, if I was to pack up and leave to go somewhere else, I don’t know where else I’d go.” (General Public – North York)

“I think Immigration is part of the fabric of Canada.” (General Public – Halifax)

“We’re welcoming – we’re there to help others that are in need.” (General Public – Halifax)

“Canada is open and fair. I don’t object to immigration at all.” (General Public – Red Deer)

"We are a country of Immigrants.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“We’re welcoming here, and we’re a peaceful country. I see it in a positive light.” (General Public – Montréal)

Some participants were also quick to opine that in some cases social media had contributed to confusion around the impacts of recent immigrants on Canada. They indicated that social media served to fuel half-truths and sensationalize supposed negative impacts.

“Fake news! The internet feeds misinformation… people don’t know what is true or not.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“I think those fears are driven by social media and misinformation.” (General Public – Red Deer)

In those instances where participants expressed mixed views with regards to immigration, concerns tended to be fueled by an avowed lack of familiarity with the immigration process. Specifically, the perception that there are very few checks and balances in place within the steps involved in immigrating to Canada. For others, concerns center on public safety; the potential for additional strains on what some see as a social safety net (access to health care, housing, social assistance) that is at, if not beyond capacity (specific references to access to health care, housing and social assistance); as well as impacts or potential impacts on local job markets.

“I think that we should be careful about the type of people coming in…what they are bringing with them. I’m concerned about the safety of Canadians.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“I have nothing against the people who come here; my parents and I are immigrants, but I say to myself: We have to be careful about who we’re bringing in.” (General Public – Montréal)

“So, the perception of us being a great country with human rights is great, but once they’re here it doesn’t work out for everybody. The equal rights are there, but after the support ends, where do you go?” (General Public – North York)

“We let too many in and they get more benefits that we do as Canadians.” (General Public – Surrey)

It should also be noted that concerns expressed were most often framed in the context of Canada accepting refugee immigrants who, according to some, struggle with language, finding employment and who, according to these participants, are consequently more likely to rely government supports. It should therefore not come as any surprise that when subsequently discussing challenges for Canada as related to immigration, much of the conversation focussed on the impacts resulting from refugee migrants.

b. Challenges facing immigrant communities

Newcomer focus group participants were questioned as to some of the challenges facing their respective communities. Interestingly, it appears challenges can be grouped into two broad categories. Firstly, there are challenges that cut across all newcomer communities, and which are primarily focussed on economic integration. These include language acquisition with the explicit purpose of finding employment, acquiring Canadian experience, and foreign credential recognition. Indeed, according to participants in most groups these factors tended to be constants that make successful integration into Canadian society truly challenging.

“We’re not using English all the time back in the Philippines…. So, I think communication is a barrier.” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“…we feel we have an accent and we are being made fun of…” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“We have so many gates and gate keepers who prevent foreign credential recognition…” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“….how can you have the Canadian Experience if no one is going to give you that?” (Mixed immigrant – Halifax)

“You have to have Canadian experience before you get a job, you get frustrated because you’re like, well I need you to give me experience before I can answer that – so chicken and egg …” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“In Hong Kong I was an auditor. Even though I have a license – I think so different here. And when I try to look for a job, I was told I don’t have Canadian experience. So even being overqualified is no – will not get me get me a in a better position. So, it’s difficult for me to look for the same career as I did in Hong Kong, so I try to delete something on my resume, because even if I ask for a lower grade job, I will not be given that job.” (Cantonese – North York)

“The non-recognition of Chinese degrees and work experience” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

Secondly, there are challenges associated with cultural integration. The main driver here being a inclination cultural isolation i.e. a tendency to live within known communities for largely practical reasons: established networks, affordable housing, social comfort and sense of belonging as a newcomer, the desire to share common experiences as well as to communicate in one’s mother tongue).

“We don’t have housing support (profit/non-profit… This is a problem for Caribbean community here.” (Caribbean – Toronto)

“The high cost of housing is very much a challenge.” (Punjabi - Surrey)

Others, particularly participants in the Caribbean, African and Middle Eastern groups spoke of experiencing racism either overtly or implicitly. Punjabi, Filipino participants spoke of challenges related cultural integration in the context of traditional family hierarchy, and the nuances of social interactions with those outside their ethnic communities. Other challenges mentioned include access to health care services, access to information for new immigrants to Canada and a sense of isolation from family and friends back home.

“Muslims and Phobia – that is the elephant in the room.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“We can’t take care of our elders.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“I think the educational background poses some challenges. Certain things I learned here, I had already learned when I was in high school, except I need to be accredited for the things I already learned back home … there’s no way to accredit what you have already learned. So, this makes me feel a little bit uncomfortable.” (Cantonese – North York)

“I think from Hong Kong; our English is pretty good - we can communicate - but it’s the culture. For example, if they talk about hockey, I don’t know what to say. So, it’s a cultural difference. I think even when they talk about baseball, hockey, I don’t know what to say. I only know about soccer. “(Cantonese – North York)

c. Immigration levels

Participants in all groups were presented with data highlighting the Government of Canadas’ three-year immigration plan which highlighted immigration targets for each of the four broad immigration classes: economic immigrants, family class immigrants, refugee and protected persons and those admitted on humanitarian grounds.

“Canada is built on immigration. These numbers don’t bother me at all.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“Overall I think it’s about the right number because it’s about one percent of Canada’s total population…if your economy grows at this rate it’s more people and that makes sense.” (General Public – Halifax)

“We have such a large land, and we need immigrants to bring us the economic benefits.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“Over three years, that’s almost a million people. That’s a lot. But it’s a good number.” (General Public – Montréal)

Participants tended to agree with both the overall targets as presented and the relative prioritization of immigration classes presented. Most understood the reasoning for prioritizing economic and family class immigrants over any of the other categories presented. General public and immigrant participants often stated that both categories were in many ways interconnected. According to participants, it is reasonable to expect that economic immigrants would aspire to reunite with family members once established here in Canada.

“The priority should be to increase economic immigrants – they will add to the workforce and create more jobs.” (Punjabi – Surrey)

“Economic immigrants are needed to grow our economy and family class is likely connected.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“Increase the family reunion category. I feel the government looks down and discriminates against family reunion… I think family reunion is the most important.” (Cantonese – North York)

Interestingly, although generally on side with prioritizing economic immigrants, both general public and newcomer participants wondered about the extent to which these individuals could apply their specialized skills in the short and medium term. There was skepticism in all groups that this was the case. Participants often spoke of qualified professionals having to take on lesser jobs just make ends meet.

These concerns tended to be broken out into two broad categories: 1) missed opportunities for Canada to take advantage of the high-end skills these immigrants bring to the table and which could help satisfy immediate needs (healthcare often mentioned here); and, 2) likely frustrations among these immigrants of the promise of a better life going unfulfilled (i.e. not having their credentials recognized despite immigrating to Canada with the expectation that this would be the case).

“…I have a friend who’s a doctor and she’s been trying to get her licenses for the last three years…. It’s pretty hard for (immigrant) doctors and people who are educated in higher fields, it’s almost impossible for them to become what they were where they came from.” (General Public – North York)

“Don’t bring them here and then make it so difficult that they become taxi drivers…” (General Public – North York)

“I think that we’re doing this because they’ll come with investments. Because if you talk to me about skills … we have many immigrants who are qualified, but we’ve made them unqualified, myself included.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

In addition, some participants, particularly those in general public groups in Red Deer and North York as well as some participants in newcomer groups, made a point of stating that concerted efforts should be made to ensure those immigrating to Canada are encouraged to consider settling outside of the traditional large urban centers (Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal). Although participants recognized the factors that drive immigrants to settle in large metropolitan centers (established ethic communities and resources, family, better economic prospects etc.) several noted the strain on social services and consequently the unintended tensions that can result from such migration patterns.

“I think there should be even more immigration to areas that have less people. I think the government should do something about it.” (Cantonese – North York)

“It has to be a controlled immigration, we need to encourage immigration across Canada, not just large cities like Vancouver, we need to make sure it is spread out to places like Edmonton.” (Punjabi – Surrey)

Furthermore, several participants in both the general public and immigrant groups stated that they would have appreciated more information on the underlying process and principles that guide government decision making when it comes to the relative distribution of immigration targets presented. Some, particularly immigrant participants, stated that they had a hard time determining if the targets were correct without knowing what factors had been considered in setting these numbers.

“These numbers don’t tell me the real story behind each category …. I need to know if it is feasible for them to have a job and a good life here… will they succeed?” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“How do I know what actually happens with these numbers and then the outcomes?” (General Public – Red Deer)

Much of the discussion regarding the governments’ three-year immigration plan focussed on targets assigned to the Refugee/Protected persons category. For some concerns tended to focus on the economic impact these immigrants could/would have on Canada’s social safety net in the short and medium term, while others were more likely to focus on the safety and security risks associated with accepting refugees.

Economic impacts:

Many participants felt refugee immigrants were more likely to struggle with language acquisition than other immigrants. Moreover, refugee immigrants are not likely to be financially self-reliant upon their arrival, this is further compounded by their inability to seek employment right away. These factors consequently mean that they are more likely to depend on social services to provide the necessities of life (food, housing, health care).

“I came as an economic immigrant and we have 43 thousand refugees come here and we have to pay for them and their pensions.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“I think the number for refugees and humanitarian is a bit too high because most of them will live on tax-payers.” (Mandarin- Vancouver)

“A lot of people see the number of refugees coming in and think about how we have to support them and maybe less about the trauma that they have been through…” (General Public Red Deer)

Public safety/security risks:

Some participants expressed specific concerns related to public safety and security implications of accepting refugees. These participants typically questioned whether refugee immigrants were subjected to the same screening process as other immigrants. When further prompted most were under the impression that this had not been the case.

“I think for refugees it’s sometimes difficult to define who is a real refugee, in that some people fake to be refugees, but for family it’s easier to verify whether they’re family members.” (Cantonese – North York)

“My wife came through the immigration system the right way …refugees coming in is a security concern.” (General Public – Red Deer)

d. Benefits of immigration for Canada

There was general agreement amongst both research audiences as to the core benefits of immigration for Canada. Participants group the overall benefits into two broad categories; Immigration as a driver of positive economic impacts and immigration as a source of cultural enrichment. Some of the specific benefits mentioned by group participants include:

• Influx of workers and skilled workers to supplement any existing shortfalls in our labour force
• Satisfying any labour market shortfalls created by an aging population
• Positive economic impact to the Canadian economy driven by increased number of consumers
• Fueling Canada’s long-standing tradition and principles of inclusiveness, openness, multiculturalism and diversity
• Contributing to ongoing cultural enrichment resulting from influx of different values, beliefs, customs and traditions from around the world

“All kinds of talented people will be settled in remote areas of Canada and will help with the economic development there.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“It broadens our horizons – we get information from other countries, when they come here they bring their expertise and we can learn from them. It’s valuable.” (General Public – North York)

“Values like acceptance, tolerance and multiculturalism….they are big words but underneath there are many layers.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“Canada’s natural (population) growth is low, we need people to help the economy….we bring them in that’s just the way it is.” (Red Deer – General Public)

“I think immigrants help our economy be more stable… they invest more, it helps the government.” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“I think it helps with racism too. These are our neighbours, the fear is gone because you get to know your neighbours.” (General Public – North York)

“Even the amount of immigrants going to Dalhousie, and going into our university population, they are going to end up being a highly educated working force for us.” (General Public – Halifax)

“Living in downtown Toronto, where it’s incredibly diverse… I get to learn about peoples’ traditions, cultures, food, their practices…” (General Public – North York)

“The workforce, and culturally, everything that people bring us from other countries is absolutely fantastic in terms of food, culture, and films. YES! Diversity!” (General Public – Montréal)

“Cultural richness, another way of seeing things, and on an economic level, a workforce.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

e. Challenges of immigration for Canada

After the discussion on the benefits of immigration participants were asked to discuss some of the key challenges they associate with immigration to Canada. Perceived challenges vary greatly depending on participants perspective i.e. general public vs. immigrant.

General public participants were more likely to focus on the impacts (both explicit and implicit) that immigration can have on: Canada’s labour market (specifically higher unemployment rates and increased competition for jobs); and increased strain and costs to Canada’s social safety net – such as health care, subsidized housing, education, employment insurance. A few also referenced immigration as a potential challenge to public safety and security – much of this discussion focussed on questions surrounding vetting processes for refugee immigrants. There were those who noted that racial intolerance, although most often the exception to the rule not the norm, could also represent a challenge going forward.

“They can’t get the job they were trained for and then take another job here.” (General Public – Surrey)

“We have to adapt to them so much, it changes us.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“If the Government is going to grow the population it should make sure that the country has the capacity to integrate these people … not just adding people to an already stressed infrastructure.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“The downside would be not enough social programs, if they aren’t able to find decent or equitable employment, because they are depending on our social programs to sustain them…” (General Public – Halifax)

“I think the only other challenge, and I don’t think it’s caused by immigration, but I think it’s a by-product of immigration, is the racism that rears its ugly head.” (General Public – Halifax)

“I mean everything you hear in the news today ….do we have enough resources to know the people that are coming in...? (General Public – North York)

“How many times have I been told: Change your name!, e.g. if I was of Italian descent, I would do better … that’s reality.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

Conversely newcomers most often spoke of the difficulties associated with language acquisition (particularly among Chinese and older Punjabi immigrants) and demonstrating Canadian experience when seeking employment. These challenges lead some to seek informal working relationships (i.e. work ‘under the table’) just to make ends meet. Furthermore, for those with foreign training, the inability to have their credentials recognized was seen as a significant challenge.

Some mentioned challenges associated with recognizing and behaving according to Canadian social norms and practices as well as challenges associated with extending their social network beyond their family, friends and ethnic community to the broader community they live in. As with their general public counterparts, a few also raised concerns related to public safety and security. Similarly, these concerns were most often framed in the context of refugees coming to Canada rather than those using other immigration channels. A few also spoke of having to deal with silent racism, prejudice and in one or two cases specifically of Islamophobia.

“The way they (Canadians) interact with their children is different here and old ways are problematic.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“They are not doing enough about security concerns.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“How do we have an even distribution of new immigrants (across the country) instead of (only in) high population areas?” (Caribbean – Toronto)

“Living in housing with cockroaches while making $23K a year and supporting children. That is hard.” (African – Toronto)

“Integration is the most important thing for the Canadian Government because they bring in skilled category (workers) but do you have jobs or even a process where they can get into the profession?” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“We feel like we’ve faced obstacles for such a long time. All this professional equivalency/experience, how we’re going to find a job—it’s contradictory!” (Middle Eastern – Montréal

“Silent Racism is a real thing.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“For negative impacts, I think lots of people get pushed out for sure (references to housing here). I work in Chinatown, I have a studio there and you really see the tension and the friction… Tension between low income people.” (Filipino – Vancouver)

f. Integration

General public and newcomers generally defined integration as the ability to effectively and actively participate in society and in their community more specifically. Key factors most often identified as enabling smoother integration included language acquisition, employment and cultural integration. Language acquisition allows immigrants to broaden networks, contacts and relationships beyond those provided within their ethnic community. It is also a key driver to finding suitable employment – also identified as an important factor to immigrants’ successful integration allowing them to feel fulfilled as contributing members of Canadian society. Beyond language acquisition and employment, many participants spoke of cultural integration. Much of the discussion here focussed on Canada’s cultural mosaic and the importance of recognizing and celebrating the unique cultures that make up our very diverse population.

“Integration means not having to work under the table.” (Punjabi - Surrey)

“…knowing the culture, for instance not to stand too close in someone’s personal space.” (Punjabi – Surrey)

“I’m in the process of being integrated – 70%. Where I live is not Chinese.” (Cantonese – North York)

“I think the key point is whether you can adapt to it, so a certain amount of communication is necessary for integration.” (Cantonese – North York)

“Integration means socializing, getting new friends…. Yes we can socialize with coworkers but we don’t go out and have a beer.” (Cantonese – North York)

“Unless you speak the same language then it’s an obstacle to integration – so, no communication, no integration.” (Cantonese – North York)

“Integration for me is improving a way of life or growing professionally, mentally, emotionally… mixing with other cultures.” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“The first things that we think about are a place to live and a place to work, in order to survive.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

“There’s linguistic and social integration. For example, you wait before crossing the street, you wait at the crosswalk.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

g. Irregular migration

Initially participants were asked whether they had heard anything about people crossing the Canada/US border on foot to claim asylum in Canada. There were at least a few participants in each session who stated they were aware of this phenomenon. Those who were aware most often relayed media reports of scantily dressed asylum seekers walking into Canada in the middle of winter and subsequently being arrested. Following this discussion participants in all groups were asked about their familiarity with the Safe Third Country agreement (STCA). Few if any had heard of the agreement before. After having been read a very brief description of the STCA, participants were then provided with two fact sheets related to irregular migration. A first fact sheet which focussed on addressing the myth of asylum seekers as queue jumpers and the second meant to provide a more comprehensive overview of the immigration process as it relates to asylum seekers crossing the Canada/US land border. Overall participants felt the information provided was somewhat helpful in better understanding the process. That said, there was agreement in all sessions that more information would be welcomed, specifically:

• How many instances of asylum seekers have there been?
• Of those, how many have been denied access to Canada?
• How long does the IRB take to assess each file and come to a decision?
• What are the real costs to Canada for dealing with these Asylum seekers?

“Makes sense, I mean, we have to do our due diligence and check people out, and all of that, but seems like an awfully long process.” (General Public – Halifax)

“I agree, that made it really clear to me. It’s not hey, welcome, come one, come all – it (fact sheets) makes the process very clear.” (General Public – Toronto)

“I want to know what they (IRCC) are doing. How do you assess them? So that I can have confidence.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“I want to know more about how this is working out?” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

“It’s nice, but the timelines aren’t listed … if it takes 20 years to do that, it’s not ideal.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

“For me, it’s the time from when they’re intercepted at the border to when their claims are either allowed or not…” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

Some participants, particularly in the newcomer groups questioned the legitimacy of those making asylum claims, the suggestion being that these individuals could simply be exploiting a loophole to expedite an eventual immigration process, for these participants the material presented in the two fact sheets was not sufficient to set these concerns aside.

“It worries me because it’s unfair… we pass all the requirements to be here in Canada and they just walk into Canada…. And Canada takes them in….” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“I think there are rules and regulations on the border – I do not understand how people can just walk across the border…. I just worry that it’s easy to let them come in, but can you get them out when you feel they’re not a refugee?” (Cantonese – North York)

h. Citizenship by descent

This issue was discussed with general public participants in Red Deer and Montreal, as well as with those in the Punjabi and Filipino groups in Surrey and Vancouver respectively, those in the Middle Eastern group in Montreal, the African group in Toronto as well as the Cantonese group in North York. Familiarity with the issue of citizenship by descent more generally, and awareness of cases involving individuals affected by the current policy more specifically, was extremely low among both general public and newcomer audiences. Following a brief initial discussion on familiarity with the current policy, participants were provided with high-level information on the policy as well as two separate real-life scenarios to help illustrate how the policy might apply under different circumstances (scenarios are included in annex to the moderator’s guide - Appendix 1).

Despite not being familiar with that of the current policy, participants were not taken aback when informed that Canadian citizenship cannot be passed on from one generation to the next in perpetuity. In fact, for most this was a given.

“It makes sense … it’s as if there’s someone in Australia, on the other side of the world, and I’m transferring a citizenship that has no connection.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

“…the single generation rule makes sense.” (General Public – Surrey)

After having had an opportunity to review both scenarios presented, participants in all sessions tended to agree that a child born to Canadian parents outside of Canada should be considered Canadian as they are first generation Canadians born outside of Canada. However, views as to whether this policy should also apply to second generation born outside of Canada were much more nuanced. In fact, participants’ opinions on this matter were largely dependent on how long the first-generation parents (those born outside of Canada to Canadian parents) had been residing outside of the country. More specifically, was this on a temporary basis (typically defined as no more than a few years) or a more permanent basis as per the example presented in scenario #1 (second generation born outside of Canada with no attachment to Canada for more than 40 years). Participants were much more likely to feel that certain accommodations should/could be made for those dealing with short term scenarios and who could demonstrate a significant sense of attachment to Canada.

“In the case of scenario #2 it should stay the same but processing times should be faster – a fast tracked citizenship, it should be a simpler process.” (African – Toronto)

“I am a citizen here, if I have a child in India, then my child should be a citizen of Canada but the second generation no.” (Punjabi – Surrey)

When pressed as to which means could be used to demonstrate a significant sense of attachment to Canada, responses were more nuanced. Indeed, some participants noted that demonstrating a sense of attachment would necessarily fall to the parents (first generation born outside of Canada) as children, particularly those younger, would be hard pressed to do so. Beyond this, participants suggested that Canada would first and foremost require a clearly stated and established government policy on how to deal such situations to prevent any further confusion around this issue. In terms of practical suggestions as how strong attachment could be demonstrated, participants offered a few suggestions including:

• Demonstrated evidence of contributing to Canada and Canada’s social safety net - in the form of tax contributions;
• Land ownership (which necessarily implies having to pay property taxes);
• A potential residency requirement, and;
• An expedited path to citizenship for those who meet a residency requirement.

“Maybe we should use how many years someone pays taxes in Canada – so if you don’t pay taxes and you want the benefits of being a Canadian citizen, that’s not fair.” (Cantonese – North York)

“I think that we should just add a law, taking into account the person’s last 5 or 10 years or an arbitrary number to find out where the person has lived.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

“It makes sense … it’s as if there’s someone in Australia, on the other side of the world, and I’m transferring a citizenship that has no connection.” (Middle Eastern – Montréal)

There was a clear sense and expectation amongst all participants that the assessment of attachment to Canada should be unambiguous and expeditious thus minimizing unnecessary inconveniences or delays for those able to demonstrate a strong attachment to Canada.

i. Family sponsorship

Newcomers’ reactions to changes to the family sponsorship program tended to be mixed, with a lean to the negative. Participants in all sessions where family sponsorship was discussed (Punjabi, Mandarin, Middle Eastern, Caribbean and Mixed Immigrants) stated having some awareness of recent changes made although when prompted only a few in each of these sessions could provide additional detail. Participants were then prompted with some of the specific changes to the program including:

1. Changes to reduce the inventory of applications and processing times to < 12 months;
2. Removal of co-habitation requirement /condition; and,
3. Changes to the Parents and Grandparents Program: In 2017, the Government changed from a first-in, first-served process to a random selection process.

Much of the ensuing discussion focussed on changes to the Parents and Grandparents Program from a first-in, first serve approach to a random (lottery) based process. Most participants were opposed to this change. Despite the Government’s assertion that this change was made to make the process ‘fairer’ in principle, most simply felt this was not the case in practice. Indeed, many participants felt that this was unfair to those who had complied with all the requirements (as per the previous process) and had a reasonable expectation of being reunified with their loved ones. There was a sense among some that this approach trivialized something that is of extreme importance. Participants often spoke of the importance of family as well as their expectation that once established in Canada they would be able to sponsor parents and grand-parents who they had left in their country of origin and who were likely to go uncared for otherwise.

“It shouldn’t be a lottery system… we can’t depend on luck to meet the obligation we have to our parents within our culture.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“I have been here and waiting for my parents for three years and someone wins because of the lottery and chance… that’s not fair.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“If I have paid my dues, I should get priority.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“I don’t like it… for example if someone applies and they get all their documents and randomly gets selected and then suddenly he’s unqualified…” (Mixed Ethnicities – Halifax)

“Not fair… It’s based on chance and I’ve never won the lottery.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

The removal of the co-habitation requirement which required some sponsored spouses or partners to live for their sponsor for two years to keep their PR status was also met with reservation. Several participants wondered whether this would increase cases of fraud, or as a few put it marriages of convenience.

“Sponsored spouses and partners should also be scored for immigration.” (Mandarin – Vancouver)

“Government needs strict censorship on fake marriages.” (Mandarin - Vancouver)

“That will encourage fake marriages.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“That change is going to open the door to fraud.” (Middle Eastern – Mississauga)

Despite these concerns, participants were appreciative of all efforts made to reduce the inventory of applications and expedite processing times.

j. Excessive demand

Few participants in either of the target audiences appeared to be aware of the Excessive Demand Policy prior to being provided with a brief description of what it entailed. Once provided with additional information reactions tended to be mixed. Those in the general public groups held more positive views than their counterparts in the newcomer groups. Positive views regarding the need for the policy tended to be driven by concerns related to capacity of Canada’s current social safety net. These participants generally felt it was reasonable for the Government of Canada to be mindful of the potential impacts excessive demand could have on Canada’s health and social services. Furthermore, there were those who were reassured to know that the Government of Canada has a process in place to mitigate potential costs as well as possible impacts on existing waiting lists resulting from the potential increased health care needs of immigrant family members.

“It’s not even an immigration issue. We have a system already in trouble and just bringing in more people will make it worse.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“I am in the health system waiting for care and I want to hear that I come first and that there is a system in place.” (General Public – Red Deer)

“I think on paper it seems fair, it’s when you’re actually hearing about the actual cases and you’re putting a face to that, that it doesn’t seem fair, but we’ve got to cut somewhere.” (General Public – Halifax)

However, there were several newcomers who made a point of noting that having ones’ family close by is key to an immigrants’ ability to settle and become a contributing member of society. According to these participants, denying access for family members under the guise of the Excessive Demand policy was simply not acceptable. These participants were quick to note that immigrants are contributing members of Canadian society, they work and pay taxes. According to these participants caring for family members is fundamental to their culture and therefore it should come as no surprise that these audiences had a hard time disassociating their emotions when discussing the practical merits of such a policy.

“I think people who are already and citizens should be able to bring sick parents.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

“This is the way Canada shows me how much it values me as a citizen.” (Punjabi – Mississauga)

Filipino participants for their part, were torn, on the one hand they understood the very real impact this type of situation could have on a health and social services that are already stretched. However, as was the case with Punjabi community participants, there was a sense that this issue could not simply be boiled down to dollars and cents as there is a fundamental human element at play here. As such, this type of approach was not in keeping with what people have come to expect from a country like Canada. It should be noted as well that there were general public participants, particularly those in North York and Halifax who expressed similar reservations. These participants questioned whether the policy as described was in keeping with Canada’s values and more specifically with Canada’s long tradition of humanitarian aid.

“This hits close to home because in Filipino culture we are very close to our family. Filipinos want to bring their parents but their parents are now looking at 70 years old, 60 years old so technically they are not going to be contributing to the country, they are not going to be working. They are going to be reaping the benefits of having health care.” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“Actually, I wanted to bring my parents here. If this assessment or policy would apply then I would feel sorry because my dad is 72 years old and my mom is 60 and they have medical issues as well-being that age…” (Filipino – Vancouver)

k. Client services

Participants were asked to share their views on IRCC client service processes and information delivery. Participants stated that when it came to needing information their first stop is online channels, specifically CIC.GC.CA and social media (Facebook often mentioned here). Across all groups it appears that CIC.GC.CA is a key source of definitive and comprehensive information, this view appeared to be particularly strongly held among those in the Caribbean and African groups.

“The information is usually there, you can find all the information there.” (African – Toronto)

“All you need to know and it’s very easy.” (African – Toronto)

However, when newcomers were further prompted as to their satisfaction with the information provided, views were mixed and are largely dependent on how recently one has immigrated in Canada. In fact, it appears use of IRCC client service channels (website and social media channels as well as in-person or phone) is largely dependent on newcomers’ ability to easily access online information (frequent references to those who have recently arrived, older immigrants, those with limited technological skills and those in their country of origin and in the process of applying to come to Canada) as well as ones’ ability to read and communicate in either of Canada two official languages.

“It’s not so good for older people I am not very young.” (African – Toronto)

“Give me somebody so I can talk to them. I feel like they are hiding something.” (African – Toronto)

“Applying on the site is very complicated and I have to go section by section…” (Punjabi – Surrey)

Beyond this, several participants, particularly those in the Mandarin, Cantonese and Filipino groups commented on the fact that information presented on CIC.GC.CA (frequent references to PDF documents here) was very text heavy, and lacking in practical examples. For some this was a further source of frustration. These participants suggested alternative methods of presenting and accessing the information such alternative languages, video tutorials and a live chat options might be advisable. Some participants in the mixed immigrant group in Halifax noted that although the site provided useful information it was largely a ‘one way’ information source from IRCC to immigrants but not vice versa.

“It’s kind of long for me with difficult language problem, so you may not fully understand it. You may not have a deep understanding. So, the information is very blurred.” (Cantonese – North York)

“Yeah, the instructions are not clear. Plenty of information. Would be nice to have some examples. Otherwise it’s kind of difficult to comprehend.” (Cantonese – North York)

“Sometimes it can be really confusing. I’m still a permanent resident so I did the travel document when I was in the Philippines and I was looking into the website and it was really confusing.” (Filipino – Vancouver)

“Speak it in someone’s language, I think that may help for translation or even just case scenarios because sometimes you read the whole thing versus just a two-minute video, you might just get it.” (Filipino – Vancouver)

Beyond CIC.GC.CA participants in all sessions where client services were touched on made a point of commenting on the relative inability to access IRCC representatives by phone. Some stating that it appeared clear that IRCC did not want to be contacted by phone despite their being a 1-800 number available.

“The website that they got – no specific examples and there’s no phone inquiry. They won’t answer the phone! They said do not call, we won’t answer the phone. So, it’s kind of a strange process to me, confusing process.” (Cantonese – North York)

Other sources often referenced by participants when seeking out immigration related information included community newspapers, local community television and radio shows, as well as community based in-person resources.

l. Message testing

General Public participants were asked to review a series of three distinct messages intended to underscore the importance of immigration to Canada. Message #1 focussed on Canada as a land of immigrants, message #2 spoke of the importance of immigration in the context of an aging population and message #3 referenced the impact of immigration on local economies. Each of the three messages tested can be found in appendix to this report.

Message #1 was well received overall and according to most was deemed to be a statement of fact, several participants simply saying that this assertion could not be disputed it also appears to appeal on an emotional level. Canada indeed has benefited from a long tradition of immigration, it is a nation of immigrants and, save for indigenous peoples, all those who now call Canada home have origins elsewhere in the world. Overall this message was positively received.

“I like number one – the first sentence says it all to me, Canada was built on immigration, a lot of people forget that. I was born here but my ancestors had to immigrate to Canada.” (General Public – North York)

“I think number one really resonates with me. Number two as well, but number one fits me more because it’s factual historical information.” (General Public – North York)

“Message one that is what we learned in school. Message two is what my parents tell me know about immigration.” (General Public – Halifax)

Message #2 also garnered mostly positive feedback. Contrary to message #1 which may have been more compelling for some on an emotional level, message #2 was most often seen as the more rational and practical message. Participants felt this message was more likely to underscore the benefits for both immigrants (Canadian Citizenship) as well as for Canadians welcoming them (a reasonable response to the inevitable challenges resulting from an aging population) – in short it was more likely to underscore a win/win scenario.

“Two because people are very aware of the aging population. They’re always talking about this grey cloud, so I think number two.” (General Public – North York)

"I love number one but if I had to convince somebody I would use number two, definitely. The old age thing, the housing, it’s all right there. It’s so important.” (General Public – North York)

“Number one is more heartwarming whereas the other two speak to what immigration can do for us.” (General Public – Halifax)

Message #3 typically was the least well received of the messages tested except for some participants in the North York and Halifax general public groups who were able to relate it to real life situations in their neighborhood. However, for most this message was neither compelling nor relatable – a few participants countering that newcomers tend to hire within their own community and therefore the economic benefits for the local community at large were negligible.

“They need to hear that immigrants are going to be hiring people and starting businesses, and that type of thing, they need to hear that.” (General Public – Halifax)

“…Talking about the Syrians, how many of them are coming here, and I guess they’re more flexible and they see opportunities in different ways. They’ll start a business in someone’s garage and then move into a property… they will start with whatever to start making money, and they they’ll start hiring people, and they do, usually their own, unfortunately, but at least they’re hired! So, they’re not a strain either. (General Public – North York)

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 PREFERNECE 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 PREFERNECE 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: $75] [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?

• Yes 1 [CONTINUE]
• No 2 [THANK AND TERMINATE]

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]

• Market Research or Marketing
• Public Relations or Media (TV, Print)
• Advertising and communications
• An employee of a political party
• An employee of a government department or agency, whether federal or provincial
• As an immigration lawyer
• A volunteer for immigrant settlement services

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

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

• 1 Canada GO TO Q1 [ CONTINUE FOR POSSIBLE RECRUIT TO GEN POP SESSIONS – GROUPS 1,5,6,8,10,16]
• 2 Another country CONTINUE TO S3
• 99 Don’t now/Refused THANK AND TERMINATE

[SKIP S3 IF BORN IN CANADA]

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

• Years old [TERMINATE IF MOVED TO CANADA UNDER AGE OF 14]

[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

• 1 Between 2014 and 2018: GROUPS 2,3,4,7,9,11,12,13, 14 and 15 (minimum 5 per group)
• 2 Between 2008 and 2013: GROUPS 2,3,4,7,9,11,12,13, 14 and 15 (minimum 5 per group)
• 3 Between 2003 and 2007: GROUPS 2,3,4,7,9,11,12,13,14 and 15 (maximum 2 per group)
• 4 2002 or earlier (recruit according to language preference): GROUPS 1,5,6,8,10,16 (aim for 2 per group) (Ensure group composition reflects a good mix)
• 5 Born in Canada English Speaking: GROUPS 1,5,6,10,16
• 6 Born in Canada French Speaking: GROUPS 8
• 99 Don’t know/Refused: THANK AND TERMINATE

[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]

• 01 – A Canadian citizen GET A MIX
• 02 – A permanent resident of Canada (NB: includes “landed immigrant”)
• 03 – A temporary foreign worker/resident (NB: includes temporary live-in care giver)
• 04 – A refugee TERMINATE
• 05 – or, are you in Canada on a student visa? TERMINATE
• 99 - REFUSE/DK/NA TERMINATE

[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]

• China, Taiwan, Hong Kong 1 GROUPS 3 & 15
• India, Pakistan 2 GROUPS 2 & 14
• Philippines 3 GROUPS 4
• Iraq, Iran, Syria, Morocco, Lebanon
• Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Tunisia 4 GROUP 13
• Caribbean (Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Bahamas Islands, Barbados, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada) 5 GROUP 11
• African (Ethiopia, Kenya, Mauritius, Nigeria, Somalia, South Africa, Eritrea, Federal Republic of Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Republic Dem. Of Congo) 6 GROUP 12
• French-speaking: Lebanon, Morocco 7 GROUP 7 -> RECRUIT 3 OF EACH
• French speaking: Algeria, Syria 8 GROUPS 7
• Other 9 [THANK AND TERMINATE]

ASK ALL

1. Could you please tell me what age category you fall in to? Are you…
   • Under 20 0 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
   • 20-24 years 1
   • 25-34 years 2
   • 35-44 years 3
   • 45-54 years 4
   • 55-64 years 5
   • 65+ years 6
   • Refuse 99 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
2. Do you currently have children under the age of 18 living in the house with you?
   [ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP]
   • Yes 1
   • No 2
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]
   • Yes 1
   • No 2
4. How many people above the age of 18 are there in your household?
   • One 1
   • More than one 2
5. Could you please tell me what is the last level of education that you have completed?
   • Some high school 1
   • Completed high school 2
   • Some College/University 3
   • Completed College/University 4
   • RF/DK 99
6. What is your current employment status?
   • Working full-time 1
   • Working part-time 2
   • Self-employed 3
   • Retired 4
   • Currently not working 5
   • Student 6
   • Other 7
   • DK/RF 99
7. [IF EMPLOYED/RETIRED] What is/was your current/past occupation?
   • (PLEASE SPECIFY)
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]
   • Under $20,000 1
   • $20,000 to just under $ 40,000 2
   • $40,000 to just under $ 60,000 3
   • $60,000 to just under $ 80,000 4
   • $80,000 to just under $100,000 5
   • $100,000 to just under $150,000 6
   • $150,000 and above 7
   • DK/RF 99
   Ensure good mix by...
   • Recruiting 2-3 from the below $40K category (1; 2)
   • Recruiting 3-4 from the between $40 and $80K category (3; 4)
   • Recruiting 5-6 from the above $80K category (5; 6; 7)
9. DO NOT ASK – NOTE GENDER
   • Male 1
   • Female 2
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?
    • Yes 1 [MAXIMUM 6 PER GROUP]
    • No 2 [SKIP Q15 TO Q19 IF BORN IN CANADA (S2=1)]
    [ASK IF Q10=1]
12. When did you last attend one of these discussions?
    [TERMINATE IF IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS]
13. How many focus groups or one-to-one discussions have you attended in the past 5 years?
    • [SPECIFY: NUMBER OF SESSIONS]
    [IF MORE THAN 5, THANK & TERMINATE]
14. What topics were discussed in the focus groups you took part in during the last two years?
    • [SPECIFY]
    [TERMINATE IF RELATED TO IMMIGRATION OR SETTLEMENT ISSUES]
    [SKIP Q15 TO Q19 IF BORN IN CANADA (S2=1)]
    [ASK IF S6=1]
15. Do you speak, read and understand Mandarin or Cantonese? [DO NOT READ LIST]
    • Yes, Mandarin 1 [GO TO Q16]
    • Yes, Cantonese 2 [GO TO Q17]
    • No 3 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
16. 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]
    • Yes, comfortable in Mandarin 1 [QUALIFY FOR GROUP 3; GO TO Q23]
    • No, prefer English 2 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    • Equally comfortable in English or Mandarin 3 [QUALIFY FOR GROUP 3; GO TO Q23]
17. 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]
    • Yes, comfortable in Cantonese 1 [QUALIFY FOR GROUP 15; GO TO Q23]
    • No, prefer English 2 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    • Equally comfortable in English or Cantonese 3 [QUALIFY FOR GROUP 15; GO TO Q23]
    [ASK IF S6=2]
18. Do you speak, read and understand Punjabi?
    • Yes 1 [GO TO Q14]
    • No 2 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
19. And would you be comfortable participating in a group discussion conducted completely in Punjabi or would you prefer to participate in English? [DO NOT READ LIST]
    • Yes, comfortable in Punjabi 1 [QUALIFY FOR GROUPS 2 & 14; GO TO Q23]
    • No, prefer English 2 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    • Equally comfortable in English or Punjabi 3 [QUALIFY FOR GROUPS 2 & 14; GO TO Q23]
    [ASK IF S2=1 OR IF S6=3 OR 4 OR 5 OR 6]
20. Which of the two official languages do you regularly speak at home?
    • English 1 [GO TO Q 21]
    • French 2 [SKIP TO Q 22]
    [ASK IF Q20=1]
21. How comfortable are you in taking part in a group discussion conducted completely in English? Are you... [READ LIST]
    • Very comfortable 1 [SKIP TO Q23]
    • Fairly comfortable 2 [SKIP TO Q23]
    • Not very comfortable 3 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    • Very uncomfortable 4 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    [ASK IF S6=7 OR 8 OR IF Q20=2] ASK ALL BORN IN FRENCH ARAB COUNTRIES FOR GROUP 7
22. How comfortable are you in taking part in a group discussion conducted completely in French? Are you... [READ LIST]
    • Very comfortable 1 [GO TO Q23]
    • Fairly comfortable 2 [GO TO Q23]
    • Not very comfortable 3 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    • Very uncomfortable 4 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    [ASK ALL]
23. 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]
    • Very comfortable 1 [MIN 5 PER GROUP]
    • Fairly comfortable 2
    • Not very comfortable 3 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    • Very uncomfortable 4 [THANK AND TERMINATE]
    [ASK ALL]
24. 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.
    • Yes 1 [THANK & TERMINATE]
    • No 2 [CONTINUE]
    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?
    • Yes 1 [GO TO INVITATION]
    • No 2 [THANK & TERMINATE]

****(IN EACH LOCATION, PLEASE ENSURE TWELVE (12) PARTICIPANTS ARE RECRUITED FOR 8-10 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: $75] [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:

[ENSURE 50-50 SPLIT]

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

Punjabi recruitment screener

Simplified Chinese recruitment screener

Traditional Chinese recruitment screener

Appendix 2 - Moderator's guide

Please note: the English moderator’s guide differs from the guide used in French, Punjabi and Chinese. Consequently, we have included a separate English translation of the French, Punjabi and Chinese moderator’s guide.

English moderator’s guide

Introduction (5 Minutes)

• Introduce moderator and welcome participants to the focus group.
  • As we indicated during the recruiting process, we are conducting focus group discussions on behalf of the Government of Canada.
• The discussion will last approximately 2 hours. Feel free to excuse yourself during the session if necessary.
• Explanation re:
  • Audio-taping – The session is being audio-taped for analysis purposes, in case we need to double-check the proceedings against our notes. These audio-tapes remain in our possession and will not be released to anyone without written consent from all participants.
  • One-way mirror – There are observers representing the government who will be watching the discussion from behind the glass.
  • It is also important for you to know that your responses today will in no way affect your dealings with the Government of Canada.
  • Confidentiality – Please note that anything you say during these groups will be held in the strictest confidence. We do not attribute comments to specific people. Our report summarizes the findings from the groups but does not mention anyone by name. The report can be accessed through the Library of Parliament or Archives Canada.
• Describe how a discussion group functions:
  • Discussion groups are designed to stimulate an open and honest discussion. My role as a moderator is to guide the discussion and encourage everyone to participate. Another function of the moderator is to ensure that the discussion stays on topic and on time.
  • Your role is to answer questions and voice your opinions. We are looking for minority as well as majority opinion in a focus group, so don't hold back if you have a comment even if you feel your opinion may be different from others in the group. There may or may not be others who share your point of view. Everyone's opinion is important and should be respected.
  • I would also like to stress that there are no wrong answers. We are simply looking for your opinions and attitudes. This is not a test of your knowledge. We did not expect you to do anything in preparation for this group.
  Please note that the moderator is not an employee of the Government of Canada and may not be able to answer some of your questions about what we will be discussing. If important questions do come up over the course of the group, we will try to get answers for you before you leave. (Moderator introduces herself/himself). Participants should introduce themselves, using their first names only.

Gen- Pop – Warm-up Exercise – 10 Minutes

• What comes to mind when you think about Canada and immigration? Probe: Sources of pride/concern

(Advise participants that they will have the opportunity to discuss issues in greater detail at a point later in the discussions groups)

Immigrant Groups – Warm-up Exercise – 10 Minutes

ALL PARTICIPANTS – DO NOT DO THE FLIP CHART AS IT IS TOO TIME CONSUMING.

• What are the challenges that are facing your community?
• [Immigrant Groups – Specify their Ethnocultural Community]
• (Advise participants that they will have the opportunity to discuss issues in greater detail at a point later in the discussions groups)

Canada and Immigration - 60 Minutes

CANADA’S IMMIGRATION LEVELS AND CATEGORIES – 15 MINUTES

The Government uses an annual plan to determine which choices and priorities the Government should make when it comes to immigration. It is more than just the number of immigrants coming to Canada. This year the government announced a plan over three years – or until 2020. [FACT SHEET FOR MODERATOR – Annex B]

• Number of immigrants – Too many/About right/Too few
  • And, why do you say (Too many/About right/Too few)?
• Immigration categories/priorities [Family, humanitarian/economic]
  • Economic/Humanitarian/Family – Priority for Canada?
  • Difference between a refugee/immigrant/asylum seeker

BENEFITS OF IMMIGRATION: THINKING ABOUT CANADA – 15 MINUTES

• What is the main purpose or benefits of immigration?
• PROBE: Economic/Humanitarian/National renewal/International obligations/Cultural/Diversity
• PROBE: Impact on Canada/Canadians/Province/City/Neighbourhood/Social services

CHALLENGES OF IMMIGRATION – 15 MINUTES

Next I would like to discuss the impact that immigration has on Canada. What are the challenges?

• PROBE: Impact on Canada/Canadians/Province/City/Neighbourhood/Social services

SETTLEMENT AND INTEGRATION – 15 MINUTES

• What does integration mean to you? Probe: Social/Economic?
• How well is integration going? Who is responsible for integration?
• [GEN POP] What does Canada do to help immigrants and refugees settle once they get here?
• Role of Government of Canada? Does well? Need for improvement?
• [IMMIGRANTS] What does Canada do to help people in your community settle once they get here?

Irregular Arrivals / Asylum – 15 MINUTES

• Have you heard anything recently about people seeking asylum at Canada’s borders?
• [MODERATOR PROVIDES INFORMATION ON CURRENT SITUATION]
  • Annex D: Background information on the Safe Third Country Agreement (For Moderator only)
  • Annex E: Asylum myths (For participants)
  • Annex F: Asylum process (For participants)
• Let’s walk through the information that I just gave you.
  • Is any of the information surprising?
  • Probe views and impact of information.

Total to this point. 90 Minutes

SECTIONS TO BE ALTERNATED – YOU HAVE 30 MINUTES

Citizenship by Descent - 15 Minutes

I’d like to change topics to discuss the topic of citizenship for people who are born outside Canada to Canadian parents. Have you read or heard anything about the limits on citizenship by descent for people who have been born outside of Canada?

MODERATOR DESCRIBES: Generally speaking, children of Canadian citizens are automatically Canadian citizens at birth. However, for those born outside of Canada, the ability to automatically get citizenship at birth is limited to the first generation born abroad. For example, if you give birth to your child outside of Canada, they are Canadian. But if they then also give birth to their own children outside of Canada, those children will not be Canadian. The idea is that people should have some attachment to Canada; you can’t pass citizenship on from generation to generation indefinitely without having some attachment to Canada. But given the global world we live in, when more and more people work abroad for periods of time, there are some who question this policy.

You will see in the attachment I am circulating (Annex H), two scenarios. Let’s go through them now and then we can discuss.

SCENARIO A:

• A young couple from Canada decides to move to Australia.
• Ten years later they have a child (Ariel), who is automatically a Canadian citizen (first generation).
• That child (Ariel) stays in Australia, and 40 years later has a child of her own (Brett).
  • That child (Brett), under current rules would not be Canadian.
  • The child (Brett) would be “second generation born abroad”.
  • It would have been 50 years since anyone in the family lived in Canada.

SCENARIO B:

• A young couple working for an international engineering firm moves to Australia for three years to work on a project. During that time they have a child (Cathy), who is automatically Canadian (first generation).
• The couple moves back to Canada when the child (Cathy) is 2 years old.
• The child (Cathy) lives her life in Canada, until she is 35, at which point she too gets an opportunity to work abroad for two years. During this time she meets someone and has a child (Erika).
  • Under current rules, that child (Erika) would also not be Canadian (second gen born abroad).
  • Cathy intends to move back to Canada, but she has to apply for the child (Erika) to immigrate.

Discussion:

• If you the government were to propose a straightforward rule, in your view who should receive Canadian citizenship: first generation or second generation?
• Is there a way we could think about citizenship for second generation children that includes a test of their attachment to Canada?
  • If so, what should be considered at attachment? How would that be established? (family ties?)

Family Sponsorship – 15 Minutes

• Have you heard anything lately from the Government of Canada on family class immigration/family sponsorship? Where did you hear? Impressions?
• Have you heard about changes to the spousal sponsorship program?
  • Changes to reduce the inventory of applications and processing times to < 12 months?
  • Removal of condition (some sponsored spouses or partners had to live for their sponsor for two years to keep their PR status)?
  • Parents and Grandparents Program: In 2017, the Government changed from a first-in, first-served process to a random selection process in order to increase fairness and equal access to the PGP application process. How did you hear about the changes (website/social media/newspaper/word of mouth?) What do you think of this change? Random selection process? Fairer?
• Probe knowledge and perceptions of changes. AVOID ANECDOTAL STORIES UNLESS DIRECTLY RELATED.

Balancing immigration and Health and Social Services Costs – 15 Minutes

I’d like to change topics to discuss the topic of an immigrant’s potential to place excessive demand on health or social services.

• Do you think there is a risk that immigrants could place pressure on health and social services? [IF YES] What are the risks? [IF NO] Why not?
• Have you heard of the excessive demand policy? What, if anything, have you heard?
• BRIEFLY PROBE KNOWLEDGE OF: There has been some recent high-profile cases in the media, where applicants were initially found inadmissible due to the health and social services costs of their dependents. For example, an entrepreneur in Manitoba whose daughter has epilepsy and developmental delays and a university professor in Toronto whose child had Down syndrome.

WALK PARTICIPANTS THROUGH EXPLANATION AND HAVE READY ON FLIP CHART AS VISUAL AID

• EXCESSIVE DEMAND:
  • Policy is used to protect the health and social services which are paid for by public funds.
  • Exceptions: Refugees and certain family sponsorships.

THE PROCESS

First: Excessive demand is determined by Government through an assessment of:

• The health and social service needs of applicant/family member
• Cost to Canada
• Impact on wait lists.

Second: Cost assessment is evaluated against a set threshold

• Threshold is set at the average Canadian health and social services costs, currently $6,655 per year, or $33,275 over 5 years.

Third: If accessed as excessive demand, the application is refused unless they present a viable mitigation plan or if they are considered under humanitarian and compassionate considerations.

• What are your thoughts on this?
  There are some who say the policy is too harsh and is out of step with current values around people with disabilities. And further, it can prevent us from allowing in some very skilled applicants. How do we balance that with protecting publicly funded health and social services?

Client Service/Delivery of Programs/Information (A section may be developed which is appropriate for gen pop: TBD) – 20 Minutes

• Before the group I asked you to fill out a sheet on where you get your information on policy, services and programs related to immigration, refugees and citizenship. Could you pass those forward? [Annex G]
• Recently have you or a family members accessed IRCC’s/CIC’s: FIRST ESTABLISH LIST AND PURPOSE AND THEN GO BACK TO EACH
  • Applications: Ask type
  • Website
  • Online Tool Link – my App (used to follow the status of your application)
  • Social Media channels
  • Call Centre
  • In-person services
    • PROBE: Purpose/ type of application/outcome/satisfaction
    • Hardest/Need for improvement/Suggested changes?

Message Testing (15 minutes, or as time allows)

Message #1: Canada was built on immigration. Unless of Indigenous descent, our ancestors are immigrants. Our strength as a multicultural society is a result of newcomers, governments, communities and businesses working together.

Supporting facts:

• According to the 2016 Census, immigrants account for approximately 22% of Canada’s population.
• Overall, immigrants fare better (or integrate more successfully) in Canada than in most Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries and at a 2017 OECD conference, Canada was one of the four countries cited for its efforts to improve coordination between different levels of government, service providers and civil society associations.

Message #2: Immigration helps offset the impacts of an aging population. A larger job pool and tax base will help support retirees and help fund social programs like Old Age Security, transit and housing subsidies, and coordination of health care.

Supporting Facts:

• More than 5 million Canadians are set to retire by 2035. Immigration will help us fill the worker-to-retiree gap to keep Canada working.
• In 1971, there were 6.6 people of working age for each senior. By 2012, the worker-to-retiree ratio had dropped to 4.2 to 1, and projections put the ratio at 2 to 1 by 2036, at which time five million Canadians are set to retire.
• 75% of Canada’s population growth comes from immigration, mostly the economic category.

Message #3: Immigration helps support the economy at the local community level as immigrants are more likely to start a business than those born in Canada. This helps create jobs.

Supporting Facts:

• Immigrants have a higher rate of entrepreneurship than their Canadian-born counterparts. (Among immigrants who entered in the 2000 cohort, by 2010 5.3% of immigrant taxfilers owned a private company, compared with 4.8% of the comparison group composed mainly of persons born in Canada). Beyond job creation, these activities can also attract investment and trade opportunities.

Thank participants

Annex A: Issues

• A shrinking middle class
• Ability of local businesses and industries to succeed
• An aging population
• Availability of affordable childcare options
• Availability of healthcare services
• Availability of jobs
• Availability of public transit
• Availability of services
• Cost of housing
• Crime
• Foreign Credential Recognition
• Homelessness
• Integrating immigrants into the community
• Language training
• Lack of cell phone coverage
• Level of Employment Insurance benefits for those who can’t find work
• Low high school graduation rates
• Poverty
• Preserving a clean environment
• Quality of roads and bridges
• Reliable broadband or high-speed Internet
• Settlement services for newcomers
• Traffic congestion
• Young people leaving for opportunities elsewhere

Annex B: Immigration Levels and Categories Information

Background information for the moderator:

The approach to the 2018 levels plan was guided by feedback from Canadians and from provinces and territories.

Annex C: Information on Settlement Services

Background Information for Moderator

IRCC’s Settlement Services:

• The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that newcomers, including refugees, successfully integrate and contribute fully to the Canadian economy, Canadian society and the communities in which they live.
• Through the Settlement Program managed by IRCC, newcomers receive the information they need about life in Canada and the community in which they will settle, language training, finding a job, and connections with established immigrants and Canadians.
• Canada offers pre-arrival information and orientation services overseas, which include comprehensive in-person and online services so that selected permanent residents have access to information on life in Canada, and employment-related services to help with job readiness before they arrive.
• Once they are here, refugees and immigrants have access to the full suite of IRCC-funded settlement supports, including services provided by over 500 local Service Provider Organizations. These supports and services help them integrate and build a successful life in Canada as quickly as possible and include:
  • Language assessment and training to achieve settlement and integration goals;
  • Support to build networks in communities: build connections between newcomers and community members, public institutions, employers and community organizations;
  • One-on-one and group mentoring with established immigrants and/or long-time Canadians;
  • Child and youth leadership and peer support projects; and
  • Information and Orientation and help in finding and retaining employment.
• Support Services, including child care, transportation assistance, translation, interpretation, crisis counselling and provisions for disabilities, are offered across the Settlement program to enable access to direct settlement services.
• Federally-funded settlement services are often complemented by provincial and territorial programs and IRCC also works closely with provincial and territorial officials to assess resource requirements and ensure that they are satisfactorily addressed.
• Once an individual becomes a citizen, they are no longer eligible to receive IRCC-funded newcomer services, but can continue with their language studies through complementary language programs offered by their local Service Provider Organizations.

Syrian Refugees:

• In total, since November 2015, Canada has welcomed more than 50,000 Syrian refugees.
• Syrians are happy with their life in Canada.
• Integration rate is at about the same rate as refugee groups in the past.
• Some Syrian refugees are already giving back to their communities.
• Government sponsored tend to be less knowledgeable of Canada’s official languages.
• Privately sponsored adult refugees tend to be more educated and knowledgeable of either French or English.
• Employment rates within one year of arrival: GARS – 10% and Privately-sponsored – 50%.

Annex D: Facts on the Safe Third Country Agreement

• The Safe Third Country Agreement between Canada and the United States (U.S.) is part of the U.S.–Canada Smart Border Action Plan.
• Under the Agreement, refugee claimants are required to request refugee protection in the first safe country they arrive in, unless they qualify for an exception to the Agreement.
• The Agreement helps both governments better manage access to the refugee system in each country for people crossing the Canada–U.S. land border. The two countries signed the Agreement on December 5, 2002, and it came into effect on December 29, 2004.
• To date, the U.S. is the only country that is designated as a safe third country by Canada under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
• The Agreement does not apply to U.S. citizens or habitual residents of the U.S. who are not citizens of any country (“stateless persons”).
• Since the 1980s, countries around the world have been using safe third country-type agreements as a way to address pressures on domestic asylum systems from the continued growth of global migration. In the mid-1990s, the United Nations Refugee Agency expressed support for these types of agreements.

Annex E: Visual Aid on Asylum Program

Annex E – Text version.

Title: “Myth: are asylum seekers queue jumpers?”

“Fact: Asylum seekers are asking for protection under international and Canadian laws. They are a separate category and are neither ahead nor behind applicants for immigration, permanent residence or citizenship.”

Flow chart, showing that the asylum system is distinct from other immigration categories:

• Asylum system:
  • Asylum claims made at Canada-U.S. land border ports of entry
  • Asylum claims made at IRCC or CBSA inland office
  • Individuals irregularly enter Canada between established ports of entry
    • Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
      Decisions on applications are made by independent IRB adjudicators.
      • Accepted asylum claimants get protected person status and can apply to become permanent residents.
      • Those who do not meet the refugee definition are asked to leave or will be deported.
• Other immigration categories:
  • Family Class
  • Economic Immigrants
  • Refugees resettled from overseas
    • Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
      Decisions on applications are made by trained IRCC officers overseas and in Canada.

Annex F: Visual Aid on Claiming Asylum

Annex F – Text version.

Title: “Claiming asylum: No automatic stay in Canada”

Flow chart:

1. Enter Canada between ports of entry (POE).
2. Arrest and detention by RCMP.
3. Taken to nearest CBSA POE.
4. Security and health checks. No one leaves POE without initial checks.
5. Person is deemed eligible to make an asylum claim.
6. Hearing at Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada.
7. Accepted – given protected person status.

If applicant is deemed to be inadmissible to enter Canada based on security or health check, to be ineligible to make a claim, or not to be in need of Canada’s protection, they must depart Canada or be removed.

Annex G: Pre-Session Participant Exercise

Where do you get your information on policy, services and programs related to immigration, refugees and citizenship? Please be as accurate as possible – for instance, if you use the Internet, please specify the website, if it is from a newspaper, which one? Etc.

Please write legibly! The moderator will be collecting these during the session.

Annex H: Citizenship by Descent

SCENARIO A:

• A young couple from Canada decides to move to Australia.
• Ten years later they have a child (Ariel), who is automatically a Canadian citizen (first generation).
• That child (Ariel) stays in Australia, and 40 years later has a child of her own (Brett).
  • That child (Brett), under current rules would not be Canadian.
  • The child (Brett) would be “second generation born abroad”.
  • It would have been 50 years since anyone in the family lived in Canada.

SCENARIO B:

• A young couple working for an international engineering firm moves to Australia for three years to work on a project. During that time they have a child (Cathy), who is automatically Canadian (first generation).
• The couple moves back to Canada when the child (Cathy) is 2 years old.
• The child (Cathy) lives her life in Canada, until she is 35, at which point she too gets an opportunity to work abroad for two years. During this time she meets someone and has a child (Erika).
  • Under current rules, that child (Erika) would also not be Canadian (second gen born abroad).
  • Cathy intends to move back to Canada, but she has to apply for the child (Erika) to immigrate.

French moderator's guide

Introduction (5 Minutes)

• Présentation du modérateur et mot de bienvenue à l’intention des participants au groupe de discussion.
  • Comme nous l’avons indiqué dans le cadre du processus de recrutement, nous tenons des groupes de discussion pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada.
• La rencontre durera environ deux heures. N’hésitez pas à vous absenter en cas de besoin.
• Explication concernant :
  • Enregistrement audio – La rencontre est enregistrée à des fins d’analyse, au cas où il serait nécessaire de revérifier la teneur des échanges. Les bandes audio demeurent en notre possession et ne seront transmises à personne sans le consentement écrit de tous les participants.
  • Miroir d’observation – Derrière la vitre, des observateurs représentant le gouvernement assistent à la rencontre.
  • Il est également important que vous sachiez que les réponses que vous donnerez aujourd’hui n’auront aucune incidence sur vos relations avec le gouvernement du Canada.
  • Confidentialité – Soyez assuré que tout ce que vous direz au cours de la rencontre demeurera strictement confidentiel. Nous n’attribuons pas les commentaires à des personnes en particulier. Notre rapport présente un sommaire des faits saillants de la rencontre, mais aucun nom n’y est mentionné. On peut obtenir le rapport en s’adressant à la bibliothèque du Parlement ou à Archives Canada.
• Description du fonctionnement d’un groupe de discussion :
  • Les groupes de discussion favorisent une discussion franche et ouverte. En qualité de modérateur, mon rôle est de guider la discussion et d’encourager tout un chacun à y prendre part. Le rôle du modérateur est également de veiller à ce que la discussion ne dérape pas et respecte les délais prévus.
  • Votre rôle consiste à répondre aux questions et à exprimer vos opinions. Nous voulons connaître toutes les opinions, qu’elles soient minoritaires ou majoritaires. N’hésitez donc pas à vous exprimer, même si vous croyez que votre opinion est différente de celles des autres participants. Les autres peuvent ou non partager votre point de vue. L’opinion de chacun est importante et mérite le respect.
  • J’aimerais également souligner qu’il n’y a pas de mauvaises réponses. Nous cherchons simplement à connaître vos opinions et attitudes. Il ne s’agit pas d’un test de connaissances. Nous ne nous attendions pas à ce que vous fassiez quoi que ce soit pour vous préparer à cette rencontre.

Veuillez noter que le modérateur n’est pas un employé du gouvernement du Canada et qu’il est possible qu’il ne soit pas en mesure de répondre à certaines de vos questions. Si des questions importantes sont posées durant la rencontre, nous tenterons de vous fournir des réponses avant votre départ. (Le modérateur se présente). Les participants se présentent en mentionnant uniquement leur prénom.

• Quels sont vos principaux loisirs ou passe-temps?

Exercice de mise en train (5 minutes)

• Qu’est-ce qui vous vient à l’esprit lorsque vous pensez au Canada et à l’immigration? Sonder : Sources de fierté/préoccupation

(Avisez les participants qu’ils pourront discuter plus en détail de certains enjeux plus tard dans la rencontre.)

Enjeux – Réponses spontanées – 15 minutes

TOUS LES PARTICIPANTS

Quels sont les défis que rencontre votre collectivité? (Groupes d’immigrants – Précisez le groupe ethnoculturel des membres du groupe.) (Inscrivez les réponses sur le tableau de papier) [Annexe A]

[Le modérateur passera en revue la liste fournie – Il sondera les éléments non mentionnés après avoir examiné ceux qui figurent au sommet de la liste des participants.]

• Qu’est-ce que vous fait dire cela? De quel enjeu ou de quelle préoccupation s’agit-il en particulier?
• Avez-vous entendu parler d’une mesure prise par le gouvernement fédéral à ce sujet?
• Comment le gouvernement fédéral s’en sort-il en ce qui concerne cet enjeu?

Canada et immigration – 40 minutes

PRIORITÉS/NIVEAUX D’IMMIGRATION DU CANADA

Le gouvernement utilise un plan annuel pour déterminer quelles sont les décisions que devrait prendre le gouvernement ainsi que pour établir les priorités en matière d’immigration. Il ne s’agit pas simplement de déterminer le nombre d’immigrants au Canada. Cette année, le gouvernement a annoncé un plan de trois ans, soit jusqu’en 2020. [FEUILLET DE RENSEIGNEMENTS DU MODÉRATEUR – Annexe B]

• Nombre d’immigrants – trop/juste assez/pas assez
  • Et pourquoi dites-vous qu’il y a (trop/juste assez/pas assez) d’immigrants?
• Catégories d’immigrants/priorités [facteurs familiaux/humanitaires/économiques]
  • Facteurs économiques/humanitaires/familiaux
  • Différence entre un réfugié, un migrant et un demandeur d’asile
• Objectif de l’immigration : En songeant au Canada, quel est le principal objectif de l’immigration? (15 minutes)
  • SONDER : Facteurs économiques/facteurs humanitaires/renouveau national/obligations internationales

BIENFAITS/DÉFIS DE L’IMMIGRATION (au moins 20 minutes)

J’aimerais maintenant discuter de l’incidence de l’immigration sur le Canada. Quels sont ses bienfaits et quels sont les défis qu’elle pose?

LE MODÉRATEUR SE REND AU TABLEAU DE PAPIER : Alors, quels sont les bienfaits/défis que vous avez relevés? Y en a-t-il d’autres? Que pensez-vous de ceux-ci?

SONDER :

• Prospérité économique
  • Abordez ces sujets : vieillissement de la population/besoins de main-d’œuvre à combler/nouvelles idées/innovation/création d’emploi
• Société/Impact culturel
  • Société diversifiée/Inspiration/Traditions canadiennes
• Installation/Intégration
  • Accueil des nouveaux arrivants/Soutien à l’intégration/Sentiment d’appartenance
  • Concurrence autour des ressources/Échelle communautaire/Échelle nationale
• Réputation du Canada
  • Obligations humanitaires
  • Concurrence mondiale/pays de choix où immigrer
• Concurrence mondiale : Étudiants et travailleurs étrangers, visiteurs (R.-U./É.-U./Australie). Pourquoi le Canada est-il une destination plus attrayante?
• Besoins du marché du travail/vieillissement de la population/besoins économiques (en temps de crise?)
• Pour les immigrants/le Canada : Installation/Intégration
• Favoriser une attitude accueillante plutôt qu’un sentiment de doute ou de peur.

Installation et intégration

• [GRAND PUBLIC] Que fait le Canada pour aider les immigrants et les réfugiés à s’installer lorsqu’ils arrivent ici?
• [IMMIGRANTS] Que fait le Canada pour aider les gens de votre collectivité à s’installer lorsqu’ils arrivent ici?
• Que signifie l’intégration pour vous? Sonder : Intégration sociale/économique?
• Comment se passe l’intégration?
  • Sonder : Moteurs/obstacles/suggestions.
  • Sonder : Réfugiés réinstallés venus de l’étranger.
  • Sonder : Rôle des autres (province, municipalité, entreprises, etc.), rôles des gens (p. ex. : comment les Canadiens peuvent-ils aider les nouveaux arrivants à s’installer et à s’intégrer?).
• [FEUILLET DE RENSEIGNEMENTS DU MODÉRATEUR SUR LES SERVICES D’INSTALLATION] Annexe C : Intégration/Renseignements sur les services d’installation

Migrants irréguliers/Demandeurs d’asile – 10 minutes

• Avez-vous récemment entendu quoi que ce soit à propos de gens qui se présentent à la frontière canadienne pour demander l’asile?
• Comment le Canada devrait-il gérer cette situation?
• Comment pensez-vous que le Canada gère cette situation? Qu’avez-vous entendu sur ce que fait le gouvernement du Canada à ce sujet? Que pourrait-il faire de plus à votre avis?
• Quelle est l’incidence de cette situation sur le Canada? Sur les collectivités?
• [LE MODÉRATEUR FOURNIT DES RENSEIGNEMENTS SUR LA SITUATION ACTUELLE]
  • Annexe D : Renseignements généraux au sujet de l’Entente sur les tiers pays sûrs (pour le modérateur seulement)
  • Annexe E : Mythes liés aux demandes d’asile (pour les participants)
  • Annexe F : Processus de demande d’asile (pour les participants)
• Passons en revue l’information que je viens de vous donner.
  • Y a-t-il quelque chose qui vous surprend?
  • Cela change-t-il votre vision de la situation d’une façon ou d’une autre?
  • Cela a-t-il répondu aux questions que vous vous posiez à ce sujet? Sinon, avez-vous besoin de plus de renseignements? Si oui, quel genre de renseignements aimeriez-vous recevoir? De quelle manière?

LE MODÉRATEUR DEVRA PROBABLEMENT ALTERNER ENTRE LES SUJETS QUI SUIVENT (EXAMINER UNE COMBINAISON DE SUJETS AVEC DIFFÉRENTS GROUPES DE DISCUSSION) EN FONCTION DU MINUTAGE ET DU RYTHME DES GROUPES

Canadiens dépossédés de leur citoyenneté – 10 minutes

J’aimerais passer à un autre sujet et que l’on discute de la citoyenneté de l’angle de ce que certains appellent les « Canadiens déchus ». Qu’avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu récemment à propos des Canadiens déchus?

LE MODÉRATEUR DÉCRIT : En général, les enfants de citoyens canadiens sont automatiquement citoyens canadiens à la naissance. Toutefois, dans le cas de naissances à l’étranger, seuls les enfants de la première génération obtiennent la citoyenneté. Si vous donnez naissance à un enfant à l’étranger, il sera Canadien. Mais si votre fille donne plus tard naissance à ses enfants à l’extérieur du Canada, ils ne seront pas Canadiens. Le principe veut que les gens doivent maintenir leur lien avec le Canada; vous ne pouvez transmettre la citoyenneté d’une génération à l’autre sans habiter le pays et y être attaché dans une certaine mesure. Mais compte tenu du monde dans lequel nous vivons, à une époque où de plus en plus de gens travaillent à l’étranger, certains remettent en question cette politique.

• Quelles sont vos premières impressions sur ces mesures?
• La citoyenneté devrait-elle être accordée à la deuxième génération née à l’étranger s’il est démontré qu’un lien avec le Canada a été conservé?
• Comment le Canada devrait-il gérer cette situation?

Parrainage familial – 10 minutes

• Avez-vous récemment entendu quoi que ce soit de la part du gouvernement du Canada à propos de l’immigration de la catégorie du regroupement familial ou du parrainage familial? Si oui, de quoi s’agissait-il? Est-ce que c’était positif ou négatif? D’où provenait l’information (médias sociaux, actualités, bouche-à-oreille)?
• Le gouvernement a récemment apporté des changements au programme de parrainage d’un conjoint ou d’un époux dans le but de réduire considérablement l’accumulation de demandes et de permettre un traitement en moins de 12 mois dans la plupart des cas.
  • En avez-vous entendu parler?
  • Croyez-vous que le gouvernement en fait assez pour réunir les couples et les familles? Que pourrait-il faire de plus?
• Le gouvernement a récemment éliminé une condition qui obligeait certains conjoints ou époux parrainés à vivre avec leur parrain pendant deux ans pour conserver leur statut de résident permanent.
  • En avez-vous entendu parler?
  • Que pensez-vous de ce changement?
• Avez-vous récemment visité le site d’Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada (IRCC)?
  • Si vous avez soumis une demande de parrainage, utilisez-vous l’outil en ligne qui relie votre demande à votre compte et vous permet de vérifier son état?
  • Trouvez-vous qu’il est facile de naviguer sur le site d’IRCC? Si non, qu’est-ce qui pourrait être amélioré?
• Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit à propos de changements apportés au Programme des parents et des grands-parents? En 2017, le gouvernement est passé d’une sélection fondée sur le principe du « premier arrivé, premier servi » à un système de sélection au hasard afin de rendre plus équitables l’accès au programme et le processus de demande. Comment avez-vous entendu parler de ces changements (site Web/médias sociaux/bouche-à-oreille)?
  • Que pensez-vous de ce changement?
  • Pensez-vous que le système de sélection au hasard rend le processus plus équitable ou moins équitable? Selon vous, comment pourrait-on améliorer l’équité du système?

Équilibrer l’immigration et le coût des services sociaux – 10 minutes

Changeons de sujet pour parler de la possibilité que l’immigration entraîne un excès de demande de services de santé et de services sociaux.

• Pensez-vous qu’il y a un risque que les immigrants constituent un fardeau excessif pour les services sociaux et les services de santé? [Si oui] Quels sont les risques? [SI NON] Pourquoi?
• Avez-vous entendu parler d’une politique concernant le fardeau excessif? Si oui, qu’est-ce que vous en savez?

LE MODÉRATEUR DÉCRIT :

Récemment, les médias ont exposé plusieurs cas de personnes qui souhaitaient immigrer au Canada dans lesquels le demandeur ou un membre de sa famille avait été jugé inadmissible en raison de frais médicaux trop élevés, ce qui risquait de causer un fardeau excessif pour les services sociaux ou les services de santé. Par exemple, un entrepreneur du Manitoba dont la fille souffre d’épilepsie et de retards de développement ainsi qu’un professeur de Toronto qui a un enfant atteint du syndrome de Down.

Dans le cadre de sa politique, le gouvernement détermine si une personne constitue un fardeau excessif en évaluant les services de santé et les services sociaux dont un demandeur ou un membre de sa famille aurait besoin pour traiter un problème de santé, le coût de ces services au Canada et l’incidence du besoin sur les listes d’attente. Si l’immigrant éventuel a besoin de services dont le coût dépasse une certaine limite, sa demande sera refusée. La limite établie correspond au coût moyen des services de santé et des services sociaux pour un Canadien, soit 6 655 $ par année, ou 33 275 $ sur 5 ans. Certains cas sont évalués en fonction de considérations humanitaires. La politique concernant le fardeau excessif vise à protéger les services de santé et les services sociaux payés par la population, y compris ceux pour lesquels les Canadiens doivent s’inscrire sur de longues listes d’attente, tout en favorisant la protection des réfugiés et la réunification des familles.

• Quelle est votre opinion à ce sujet?
• Compte tenu de ces cas très médiatisés, où les demandeurs ont été jugés inadmissibles en raison du coût des services de santé et des services sociaux dont eux ou une personne à leur charge avaient besoin, quel serait selon vous l’équilibre à atteindre entre la protection des services publics et la simplification de la procédure d’immigration pour les candidats qualifiés?

Service à la clientèle/Mise en œuvre de programmes/Information (une section destinée au grand public pourrait s’ajouter : à confirmer) – 10 minutes

Mettre à jour en fonction des options, des considérations et des événements récents qui ont une incidence sur les priorités en matière de service à la clientèle

• Avant la discussion, je vous ai demandé d’écrire sur une feuille vos sources de renseignements au sujet des politiques, des services et de programmes liés à l’immigration, aux réfugiés et à la citoyenneté. Pourriez-vous me remettre vos feuilles? [Annexe G]
• Y en a-t-il parmi vous qui sont abonnés aux pages de médias sociaux d’IRCC (Twitter, Facebook et YouTube)? (Si oui) Pourquoi vous y êtes abonné? Y a-t-il des choses que vous aimez ou qui pourraient être améliorées?
• Ensuite, j’aimerais que nous parlions de votre perception d’IRCC et de l’expérience que vous avez vécue lorsque vous y avez présenté une demande.
• Pourriez-vous me raconter comment s’est déroulé le processus de demande auprès d’IRCC pour vous? Y a-t-il quoi que ce soit que vous aimeriez souligner? Qu’avez-vous trouvé le plus difficile? Qu’avez-vous aimé (s’il y a lieu)? Y a-t-il des choses qui ont été améliorées? Quelles sont les améliorations que vous aimeriez voir apportées?

Test de messages (10 minutes, si le temps le permet)

Deux messages à tester dans tous les groupes, en fonction des messages les plus favorables testés durant les groupes de discussion pour étude qualitative annuelle de suivi EKOS – la compilation des résultats est en cours. Les messages à tester sont à confirmer.

Remercier les participants

Annexe A : Enjeux

• Rétrécissement de la classe moyenne
• Capacité de réussite des entreprises et des industries locales
• Vieillissement de la population
• Accès à des services de garde abordables
• Accès aux services de soins de santé
• Accès à l’emploi
• Accès au transport collectif
• Accès aux services
• Coût du logement
• Criminalité
• Validation des titres de compétence étrangers
• Itinérance
• Intégration des immigrants dans la collectivité
• Cours de langue
• Absence de couverture cellulaire
• Montant des prestations d’assurance-emploi pour ceux qui n’arrivent pas à trouver du travail
• Faibles taux d’obtention de diplômes d’études secondaires
• Pauvreté
• Préservation de la salubrité de l’environnement
• État des routes et des ponts
• Service Internet fiable à bande large ou haute vitesse
• Services d’installation pour les nouveaux arrivants
• Congestion routière
• Départ des jeunes à la recherche d’occasions ailleurs

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

Renseignements généraux pour le modérateur

L’approche adoptée pour établir le plan des niveaux de 2018 a été orientée par les commentaires formulés par les Canadiens et par les provinces et territoires.

Catégorie d’immigration	Cible pour 2016	Cible pour 2017	Cible pour 2018	Cible pour 2019	Cible pour 2020
Immigration économique Cette catégorie comprend les personnes qui ont présenté une demande (et les membres de leur famille qui les accompagnent) au titre des programmes fédéraux du système Entrée express et du Programme des candidats des provinces; les gens d’affaires immigrants; les aides familiaux; les travailleurs qualifiés et les gens d’affaires immigrants sélectionnés par le Québec.	160 600	172 500	177 500	191 600	195 800
Regroupement familial Cette catégorie comprend les époux, les conjoints de fait, les enfants, les parents et les grands-parents parrainés.	80 000	84 000	86 000	88 500	91 000
Réfugiés et personnes protégées Cette catégorie comprend les réfugiés réinstallés (pris en charge par le gouvernement ou parrainés par le secteur privé) ainsi que les personnes protégées qui deviennent des résidents permanents.	55 800	40 000	43 000	45 650	48 700
Personnes admises pour des raisons d’ordre humanitaire et d’autres raisons Cette catégorie comprend les personnes choisies pour des raisons d’ordre humanitaire ou pour des raisons d’intérêt public et les titulaires de permis.	3 600	3 500	3 500	4 250	4 500
TOTAL	300 000	300 000	310 000	330 000	340 000

Annexe C : Information sur les services d’établissement

Renseignements généraux pour le modérateur

Services d'établissement d'IRCC :

• Le gouvernement du Canada est déterminé à ce que les nouveaux arrivants, y compris les réfugiés, réussissent leur intégration dans leur collectivité d’accueil et la société canadienne, et y contribuent pleinement, de même qu’à l’économie canadienne.
• Par l’entremise du Programme d’établissement, qui est géré par IRCC, les nouveaux arrivants reçoivent les renseignements dont ils ont besoin à propos de la vie au Canada et de la collectivité où ils s’établiront, ainsi que des cours de langue et de l’aide pour chercher un emploi et créer des liens avec des immigrants établis et des Canadiens.
• Le Canada offre des services d’information et d’orientation avant l’arrivée des futurs immigrants, à l’étranger. Il s’agit de services en personne et en ligne complets qui permettent aux résidents permanents sélectionnés d’obtenir de l’information sur la vie au Canada ainsi que des services liés à l'emploi qui leur permettent de se préparer à travailler avant même leur arrivée.
• Lorsqu'ils arrivent ici, les réfugiés et les immigrants ont accès à la gamme complète des mesures de soutien à l'établissement financées par IRCC, notamment aux services offerts par plus de 500 fournisseurs de services locaux. Ces services et mesures de soutien facilitent leur intégration et les aident à réussir leur vie au Canada le plus rapidement possible. En voici quelques-uns :
  • Une évaluation et une formation linguistiques pour atteindre les objectifs en matière d’établissement et d’intégration;
  • De l’aide pour établir des réseaux dans les collectivités : tisser des liens entre les nouveaux arrivants et les membres de la collectivité, les institutions publiques, les employeurs et les organismes communautaires;
  • Du mentorat individuel et collectif offert par des immigrants établis ou des Canadiens de longue date;
  • Des projets de leadership et de soutien par les pairs pour les enfants et les jeunes;
  • de l’information et de l’orientation ainsi que de l’aide pour trouver et conserver un emploi.
• Des services de soutien, y compris des services de garde d’enfants, d’aide au transport, de traduction ou d’interprétation, de counseling en situation de crise, et des dispositions pour les personnes handicapées, sont offerts pour donner accès aux services directs du Programme d’établissement.
• De nombreux programmes provinciaux et territoriaux sont offerts en complément aux services d’établissement financés par le gouvernement fédéral. IRCC travaille en étroite collaboration avec les représentants des provinces et des territoires dans le but d’évaluer les besoins en matière de ressources et de veiller à ce que ces besoins soient comblés.
• Lorsqu’une personne obtient la citoyenneté canadienne, elle n’est plus admissible aux services aux nouveaux arrivants financés par IRCC, mais elle peut continuer à suivre des cours de langue dans le cadre de programmes linguistiques complémentaires offerts par des fournisseurs de services locaux.

Réfugiés syriens :

• Depuis novembre 2015, le Canada a accueilli plus de 50 000 réfugiés syriens.
• Les Syriens sont satisfaits de leur nouvelle vie au Canada.
• Leur taux d’intégration est semblable à celui d’autres groupes de réfugiés arrivés au Canada avant eux.
• Certains réfugiés syriens redonnent déjà à leur collectivité.
• Les réfugiés pris en charge par le gouvernement ont en général une moins bonne connaissance des langues officielles du Canada.
• D’une manière générale, les réfugiés adultes parrainés par le secteur privé sont plus scolarisés et connaissent mieux le français ou l’anglais.
• Un an après leur arrivée au Canada, le taux d’emploi des réfugiés pris en charge par le gouvernement est de 10 % et celui des réfugiés parrainés par le secteur privé, de 50 %.

Annexe D : Les faits concernant l’Entente sur les tiers pays sûrs

• L’Entente sur les tiers pays sûrs conclue entre le Canada et les États-Unis fait partie intégrante du Plan d’action pour une frontière intelligente mis au point par les deux pays.
• En vertu de l’Entente, les demandeurs d’asile doivent demander la protection du premier pays sûr où ils entrent, à moins d’être visés par une exception à l’Entente.
• L’Entente permet aux deux gouvernements de mieux gérer l’accès au système d’octroi de l’asile dans les deux pays pour les personnes qui traversent la frontière terrestre entre le Canada et les États-Unis. Les deux pays ont signé l’Entente le 5 décembre 2002. Celle-ci est entrée en vigueur le 29 décembre 2004.
• À ce jour, les États-Unis sont le seul pays désigné comme tiers pays sûr par le Canada en vertu de la Loi sur l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés.
• L’Entente ne s’applique pas aux citoyens américains ou aux résidents habituels des États-Unis qui ne sont citoyens d’aucun pays (les « apatrides »).
• Depuis les années 1980, de nombreux pays utilisent des ententes semblables à celle sur les tiers pays sûrs pour réduire la pression exercée sur les systèmes d’octroi de l’asile nationaux par la croissance continue de la migration à l’échelle mondiale. Au milieu des années 1990, le Haut Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés a exprimé son appui à l’égard de telles ententes.

Annexe E : Aide visuelle sur le Programme d’octroi de l’asile

Annexe E – Version texte

Titre : « Mythe : Pourquoi les demandeurs d’asile court-circuitent-ils les files d’attente? »

« Fait : Les demandeurs d’asile demandent une protection en vertu des lois canadiennes et internationales. Ils font partie d’une catégorie à part et ne se trouvent donc pas à passer devant ni à attendre derrière les personnes qui ont présenté une demande d’immigration, de résidence permanente ou de citoyenneté. »

Organigramme démontrant que le système d’octroi de l’asile est distinct des autres catégories d’immigration :

• Système d’octroi de l’asile
  • Demandes d’asile présentées aux postes frontaliers terrestres canado-américains
  • Demandes d’asile présentées dans un bureau intérieur d’IRCC ou de l’ASFC
  • Personnes entrées illégalement au Canada entre les points d’entrée officiels
    • Commission de l’immigration et du statut de réfugié du Canada
      Ce sont des arbitres de la CISR indépendants qui se prononcent sur les demandes.
      • Les demandeurs d’asile acceptés obtiennent le statut de personne protégée et peuvent présenter une demande de résidence permanente.
      • Les personnes qui ne répondent pas à la définition de réfugié sont priées de quitter le pays ou seront expulsées.
• Autres catégories d’immigration
  • Regroupement familial
  • Immigrants économiques
  • Réfugiés réinstallés depuis l’étranger
    • Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada
      Ce sont des agents expérimentés d’IRCC à l’étranger et au Canada qui se prononcent sur les demandes.

Annexe F : Aide visuelle sur les demandes d’asile

Annexe F – Version texte

Titre : « Demander l’asile : Aucun séjour automatique au Canada »

Diagramme

1. Entrée au Canada entre deux points d’entrée (PE).
2. Arrestation et détention par la GRC.
3. Transport vers le PE de l’ASFC le plus près.
4. Vérication de sécurité et examen médical. Personne ne quitte le PE avant que les vérifications initiales aient été faites.
5. La personne est jugées admissible à présenter une demande d’asile.
6. Audience devant la Commission de l’immigration et du statut de réfugié.
7. Demande acceptée – Le statut de personne protégée est accordé.

Si l’on détermine que le demandeur est interdit de territoire au Canada pour des motifs de sécurité ou sanitaires, que la demande est irrecevable ou que le demandeur n’a pas besoin de la protection du Canada, la personne doit quitter le Canada, faute de quoi elle sera renvoyée.

Annexe G : Exercice préalable pour les participants

Où vous renseignez-vous sur les politiques, les services et les programmes liés à l’immigration, aux réfugiés et à la citoyenneté? Veuillez être le plus précis possible. Par exemple, si vous utilisez Internet, quel site Web visitez-vous? Si vous lisez le journal, lequel lisez-vous? Etc.

Veuillez écrire lisiblement! Le modérateur recueillera vos réponses durant la séance.

French, Punjabi and Chinese moderator’s guide (English Translation)

Introduction (5 Minutes)

• Introduce moderator and welcome participants to the focus group.
  • As we indicated during the recruiting process, we are conducting focus group discussions on behalf of the Government of Canada.
• The discussion will last approximately 2 hours. Feel free to excuse yourself during the session if necessary.
• Explanation re:
  • Audio-taping – The session is being audio-taped for analysis purposes, in case we need to double-check the proceedings against our notes. These audio-tapes remain in our possession and will not be released to anyone without written consent from all participants.
  • One-way mirror – There are observers representing the government who will be watching the discussion from behind the glass.
  • It is also important for you to know that your responses today will in no way affect your dealings with the Government of Canada.
  • Confidentiality – Please note that anything you say during these groups will be held in the strictest confidence. We do not attribute comments to specific people. Our report summarizes the findings from the groups but does not mention anyone by name. The report can be accessed through the Library of Parliament or Archives Canada.
• Describe how a discussion group functions:
  • Discussion groups are designed to stimulate an open and honest discussion. My role as a moderator is to guide the discussion and encourage everyone to participate. Another function of the moderator is to ensure that the discussion stays on topic and on time.
  • Your role is to answer questions and voice your opinions. We are looking for minority as well as majority opinion in a focus group, so don't hold back if you have a comment even if you feel your opinion may be different from others in the group. There may or may not be others who share your point of view. Everyone's opinion is important and should be respected.
  • I would also like to stress that there are no wrong answers. We are simply looking for your opinions and attitudes. This is not a test of your knowledge. We did not expect you to do anything in preparation for this group.

Please note that the moderator is not an employee of the Government of Canada and may not be able to answer some of your questions about what we will be discussing. If important questions do come up over the course of the group, we will try to get answers for you before you leave. (Moderator introduces herself/himself). Participants should introduce themselves, using their first names only.

• What are your main hobbies or pastimes?

Warm Up Exercise (5 minutes)

• What comes to mind when you think about Canada and immigration? Probe: Sources of pride/concern

(Advise participants that they will have the opportunity to discuss issues in greater detail at a point later in the discussions groups)

Top of Mind – Issues – 15 minutes

ALL PARTICIPANTS

What are the challenges that are facing your community? [Immigrant Groups – Specify their Ethnocultural Community) (write on flip chart) [Annex A]

[Moderator will sum up the list provided – Will probe on those not mentioned after the participant top list is explored]

• 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?
• How is the federal government doing on this issue?

Canada and Immigration – 40 Minutes

CANADA’S IMMIGRATION LEVELS/PRIORITIES

The Government uses an annual plan to determine which choices and priorities the Government should make when it comes to immigration. It is more than just the number of immigrants coming to Canada. This year the government announced a plan over three years – or until 2020. [FACT SHEET FOR MODERATOR – Annex B]

• Number of immigrants – Too many/About right/Too few
  • And, why do you say (Too many/About right/Too few)?
• Immigration categories/priorities [Family, humanitarian/economic]
  • Economic/Humanitarian/Family
  • Difference between a refugee/migrant/asylum seeker
• Purpose of immigration: Thinking about Canada, what is the main purpose of immigration? (15 minutes)
  • PROBE: Economic/Humanitarian/National renewal/International obligations

BENEFITS/CHALLENGES OF IMMIGRATION

Next I would like to discuss the impact that immigration has on Canada. What are the benefits and the challenges?

MODERATOR GOES TO FLIP CHART: Ok what are the benefits/challenges you have identified? How about the others, how do you feel about these?

PROBE

• Economic Prosperity
  • Address aging population/Fill labour market needs/New ideas/Innovation/Job creation
• Society/Cultural impact
  • Diverse society/Inspiration/On Canadian traditions
• Settlement /Integration
  • Welcoming newcomers/Supporting integration/Sense of belonging
  • Competition for resources/Community level/National level
• Canada’s reputation
  • Humanitarian obligations
  • Global competitiveness/as a country of choice for immigration
• Global competition: International students, workers and visitors (UK/USA/Australia). What makes Canada a more attractive destination?
• Labour market needs/aging population/economic needs (In times of crisis?)
• For immigrants/For Canada: Settlement/integration
• Generating a welcoming spirit rather than an atmosphere of suspicion or fear.

Settlement and Integration

• [GEN POP] What does Canada do to help immigrants and refugees settle once they get here?
• [IMMIGRANTS] What does Canada do to help people in your community settle once they get here?
• What does integration mean to you? Probe: Social/Economic?
• How well is integration going?
  • Probe: Drivers/barriers/suggestions.
  • Probe: Refugees resettled from overseas.
  • Probe: roles of others (province, municipality, businesses, etc.), roles of individuals (i.e. how can Canadians help with the settlement and integration of newcomers?).
• [FACT SHEET FOR MODERATOR ON SETTLEMENT SERVICES] Annex C: Integration/Information on Settlement Services

Irregular Arrivals / Asylum – 10 minutes

• Have you heard anything recently about people seeking asylum at Canada’s borders?
• How should Canada manage this situation?
• How do you feel that Canada is managing this situation? What have you heard that the Government of Canada is doing? What more do you think they could be doing?
• What impact does this situation have on Canada? Communities?
• [MODERATOR PROVIDES INFORMATION ON CURRENT SITUATION]
  • Annex D: Background information on the Safe Third Country Agreement (For Moderator only)
  • Annex E: Asylum myths (For participants)
  • Annex F: Asylum process (For participants)
• Let’s walk through the information that I just gave you.
  • Is any of the information surprising?
  • Does it change any of your views on the situation?
  • Does it answer the questions you had about the situation? Or, do you feel you need additional information? If so, what information would you like to receive? How?

THE MODERATOR WILL LIKELY HAVE TO ALTERNATE BETWEEN THE FOLLOWING (DIFFERENT FOCUS GROUPS TO EXPLORE A MIX OF THE FOLLOWING) DEPENDING ON TIMING AND PACE OF GROUPS

Lost Canadians - 10 Minutes

I’d like to change topics to discuss the topic of citizenship related to what some describe as “lost Canadians.” What have you seen, read or heard about lost Canadians, if anything?

MODERATOR DESCRIBES: Generally speaking, children of Canadian citizens are automatically Canadian citizens at birth. We limit this though, to the first generation of children born abroad. If you give birth to your child outside of Canada, they are Canadian. But if they then give birth to their own children outside of Canada, those children will not be Canadian. The idea is that people should have some attachment to Canada; you can’t pass citizenship on from generation to generation without living here and having some attachment to Canada. But given the global world we live in, when more and more people work abroad for periods of time, there are some who question this policy.

• What are your initial thoughts on this?
• Should citizenship be granted to the second generation based on a demonstrated attachment or connection to Canada?
• How should Canada manage this situation?

Family Sponsorship – 10 Minutes

• Have you heard anything lately from the Government of Canada on family class immigration/family sponsorship? If so, what is it? Was it positive or negative? Where did you hear this from (ie. social media/news/word of mouth)?
• The Government recently made changes to the spousal sponsorship program to significantly reduce the inventory of applications, and reduce processing times to under 12 months for most applications.
  • Did you hear about this?
  • Do you think the Government is doing enough to reunite spouses and families? What more could the Government do?
• The Government recently removed the condition that applied to some sponsored spouses or partners to live with their sponsor for two years in order to keep their permanent resident status.
  • Did you hear about this?
  • What do you think of this change?
• Have you accessed IRCC’s website recently?
  • If you have submitted a sponsorship application, do you use the online tool Link my App to follow the status of your application?
  • Do you find IRCC’s website easy to navigate? If not, what could be improved?
• Have you heard anything about changes to the Parents and Grandparents Program? In 2017, the Government changed from a first-in, first-served process to a random selection process in order to increase fairness and equal access to the PGP application process. How did you hear about the changes (website/social media/newspaper/word of mouth?)
  • What do you think of this change?
  • Do you think the random selection system makes the sponsorship process more or less fair? How do you think the system could be more fair?

Balancing immigration and Health and Social Services Costs – 10 Minutes

I’d like to change topics to discuss the topic of an immigrant’s potential to place excessive demand on health or social services.

• Do you think there is a risk that immigrants could place pressure on health and social services? [IF YES] What are the risks? [IF NO] Why not?
• Have you heard of the excessive demand policy? What, if anything, have you heard?

MODERATOR DESCRIBES:

There have been a number of cases in the media recently where applicants or their family members wanting to immigrate to Canada have been found inadmissible to Canada because their medical costs are deemed to be an excessive demand on health or social services. For example, an entrepreneur in Manitoba whose daughter has epilepsy and developmental delays and a university professor in Toronto whose child had Down Syndrome.

In the excessive demand policy, the government determines excessive demand by assessing the health or social services that would be required by an applicant or family member to treat a certain health condition, the costs of those services in Canada and the effect on wait lists. If immigration applicants need services that cost more than a certain threshold, they will be refused. The threshold is set at the average Canadian health and social services costs, currently $6,655 per year, or $33,275 over 5 years. Some cases are assessed based on humanitarian and compassionate considerations. The excessive demand policy is intended to protect health and social services that are paid for by the public, including those that have significant wait lists for Canadians, while promoting refugee protection and supporting family reunification.

• What are your thoughts on this?
• Given recent high-profile cases in the media, where applicants were initially found inadmissible due to the health and social services costs of their dependents, where do you think the balance should be between protecting publicly-funded health social services, and facilitating the entry of skilled applicants?

Client Service/Delivery of Programs/Information (A section may be developed which is appropriate for gen pop: TBD) – 10 Minutes

To be updated to reflect recent development/considerations/options on client service priorities

• Before the group I asked you to fill out a sheet on where you get your information on policy, services and programs related to immigration, refugees and citizenship. Could you pass those forward? [Annex G]
• Thinking about social media, does anyone follow IRCC’s social media channels (Twitter, Facebook and YouTube)? (If yes) Why do you follow it? Is there anything that we are doing well or that could be improved?
• Next, I would like to discuss your perceptions or experiences with IRCC applications.
• Could you tell me a little about your experience with an IRCC application process? Anything that you would like to highlight? What did you find hardest? What (if anything) did you like?’ Anything that you have seen change for the better? Anything that you would like to see improved/enhanced?

Message Testing (10 minutes, or as time allows)

Two messages to be tested among all groups, based on the most favourable messages tested in the EKOS Annual Tracking study qualitative focus groups – results currently being compiled. Messages to be tested TBD.

Thank participants

Annex A: Issues

• A shrinking middle class
• Ability of local businesses and industries to succeed
• An aging population
• Availability of affordable childcare options
• Availability of healthcare services
• Availability of jobs
• Availability of public transit
• Availability of services
• Cost of housing
• Crime
• Foreign Credential Recognition
• Homelessness
• Integrating immigrants into the community
• Language training
• Lack of cell phone coverage
• Level of Employment Insurance benefits for those who can’t find work
• Low high school graduation rates
• Poverty
• Preserving a clean environment
• Quality of roads and bridges
• Reliable broadband or high-speed Internet
• Settlement services for newcomers
• Traffic congestion
• Young people leaving for opportunities elsewhere

Annex B: Immigration Levels and Categories Information

Background information for the moderator:

The approach to the 2018 levels plan was guided by feedback from Canadians and from provinces and territories.

Annex C: Information on Settlement Services

Background Information for Moderator

IRCC’s Settlement Services:

• The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that newcomers, including refugees, successfully integrate and contribute fully to the Canadian economy, Canadian society and the communities in which they live.
• Through the Settlement Program managed by IRCC, newcomers receive the information they need about life in Canada and the community in which they will settle, language training, finding a job, and connections with established immigrants and Canadians.
• Canada offers pre-arrival information and orientation services overseas, which include comprehensive in-person and online services so that selected permanent residents have access to information on life in Canada, and employment-related services to help with job readiness before they arrive.
• Once they are here, refugees and immigrants have access to the full suite of IRCC-funded settlement supports, including services provided by over 500 local Service Provider Organizations. These supports and services help them integrate and build a successful life in Canada as quickly as possible and include:
  • Language assessment and training to achieve settlement and integration goals;
  • Support to build networks in communities: build connections between newcomers and community members, public institutions, employers and community organizations;
  • One-on-one and group mentoring with established immigrants and/or long-time Canadians;
  • Child and youth leadership and peer support projects; and
  • Information and Orientation and help in finding and retaining employment.
• Support Services, including child care, transportation assistance, translation, interpretation, crisis counselling and provisions for disabilities, are offered across the Settlement program to enable access to direct settlement services.
• Federally-funded settlement services are often complemented by provincial and territorial programs and IRCC also works closely with provincial and territorial officials to assess resource requirements and ensure that they are satisfactorily addressed.
• Once an individual becomes a citizen, they are no longer eligible to receive IRCC-funded newcomer services, but can continue with their language studies through complementary language programs offered by their local Service Provider Organizations.

Syrian Refugees:

• In total, since November 2015, Canada has welcomed more than 50,000 Syrian refugees.
• Syrians are happy with their life in Canada.
• Integration rate is at about the same rate as refugee groups in the past.
• Some Syrian refugees are already giving back to their communities.
• Government sponsored tend to be less knowledgeable of Canada’s official languages.
• Privately sponsored adult refugees tend to be more educated and knowledgeable of either French or English.
• Employment rates within one year of arrival: GARS – 10% and Privately-sponsored – 50%.

Annex D: Facts on the Safe Third Country Agreement

• The Safe Third Country Agreement between Canada and the United States (U.S.) is part of the U.S.–Canada Smart Border Action Plan.
• Under the Agreement, refugee claimants are required to request refugee protection in the first safe country they arrive in, unless they qualify for an exception to the Agreement.
• The Agreement helps both governments better manage access to the refugee system in each country for people crossing the Canada–U.S. land border. The two countries signed the Agreement on December 5, 2002, and it came into effect on December 29, 2004.
• To date, the U.S. is the only country that is designated as a safe third country by Canada under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
• The Agreement does not apply to U.S. citizens or habitual residents of the U.S. who are not citizens of any country (“stateless persons”).
• Since the 1980s, countries around the world have been using safe third country-type agreements as a way to address pressures on domestic asylum systems from the continued growth of global migration. In the mid-1990s, the United Nations Refugee Agency expressed support for these types of agreements.

Annex E: Visual Aid on Asylum Program

Annex E – Text version.

Title: “Myth: are asylum seekers queue jumpers?”

“Fact: Asylum seekers are asking for protection under international and Canadian laws. They are a separate category and are neither ahead nor behind applicants for immigration, permanent residence or citizenship.”

Flow chart, showing that the asylum system is distinct from other immigration categories:

• Asylum system:
  • Asylum claims made at Canada-U.S. land border ports of entry
  • Asylum claims made at IRCC or CBSA inland office
  • Individuals irregularly enter Canada between established ports of entry
    • Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
      Decisions on applications are made by independent IRB adjudicators.
      • Accepted asylum claimants get protected person status and can apply to become permanent residents.
      • Those who do not meet the refugee definition are asked to leave or will be deported.
• Other immigration categories:
  • Family Class
  • Economic Immigrants
  • Refugees resettled from overseas
    • Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
      Decisions on applications are made by trained IRCC officers overseas and in Canada.

Annex F: Visual Aid on Claiming Asylum

Annex F – Text version.

Title: “Claiming asylum: No automatic stay in Canada”

Flow chart:

1. Enter Canada between ports of entry (POE).
2. Arrest and detention by RCMP.
3. Taken to nearest CBSA POE.
4. Security and health checks. No one leaves POE without initial checks.
5. Person is deemed eligible to make an asylum claim.
6. Hearing at Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada.
7. Accepted – given protected person status.

If applicant is deemed to be inadmissible to enter Canada based on security or health check, to be ineligible to make a claim, or not to be in need of Canada’s protection, they must depart Canada or be removed.

Annex G: Pre-Session Participant Exercise

Where do you get your information on policy, services and programs related to immigration, refugees and citizenship? Please be as accurate as possible – for instance, if you use the Internet, please specify the website, if it is from a newspaper, which one? Etc.

Please write legibly! The moderator will be collecting these during the session.

Punjabi moderator’s guide

Simplified Chinese moderator’s guide

Traditional Chinese moderator’s guide

Appendix 3 - Quantitative methodology

Telephone survey

Ipsos conducted a 13-minute telephone survey among a nationwide sample of n=1,000 Canadian adults between March 5th and March 19th, 2018. 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 1,000 Canadians for this survey, 500 respondents were contacted on their landlines, while the other 500 respondents were contacted on their cellphones. The margin of error for a telephone survey of 1,000 respondents is of ±3.1%, 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 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 and in line with the sample specifications provided by IRCC. A Random Iterative Method (RIM) technique was applied to the weighting.

Please note, the totals below may not add up to 1,000 due to some respondents’ refusal to provide socioeconomic information.

Statistics presented in the tables above show minimal differences between the final unweighted and weighted samples. While the impact of the weights was more important for the youngest age group (18 to 24 years old), it remains well within acceptable ranges for a survey of the general population, with a weight ratio of 1.63:1.

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.

The total response rate of 8.3% for a telephone survey of the Canadian general population with up to 8 call-backs per household is typical. Of note is that the response rate is nearly identical for both contact methods.

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 tables below compare 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 (region, gender and age) 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. The regional distribution having been set through hard quotas, the weighting had virtually no impact on final numbers. Males were very slightly overrepresented in the unweighted sample, at 52% compared to 49% in the actual population.

This comparison between the unweighted sample distribution and the actual population figures for variables not included in the weighting 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 44% 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 and country of birth distributions for the sample are very close to those measured in the 2016 Census.

Online sample

The online sample of 1,004 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 11 minutes to complete on average, which is slightly faster than for data collected over the phone (13 minutes). This small difference in completion time is typical for phone and online surveys. All surveys were completed between March 5th and March 19th, 2018.

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.

Are Panelists who they say they are

• Double Opt-In approach to confirm identity
• Country validation via Geo-IP
• Mismatch between device settings and geolocation
• Anonymous proxy detection
• Detection of robots via Captcha code
• Detection of “5 minutes“ emails (temporary email addresses)
• Detection of data anomalies and patterns
• Maintenance of Ipsos blacklist
• RealAnswer™- detection of pasted and robot answers

They have not participated recently in similar surveys

• Strict panel usage rules to avoid interviewing the same people too often and prevent them from becoming too used to a type of survey or product category
• Duplicate devices identification through digital Fingerprinting (RelevantID®) and web/flashcookie

They complete surveys seriously

• Survey taking behavior: speeding, straight lining, open-ends quality evaluation
• Panelists’ history monitored across surveys and used for panel purge removing “bad” or inactive respondents

They can only take the survey once

• Duplicate emails identification
• Duplicate devices identification through digital fingerprinting (RelevantID®) and web/flashcookie
• Duplicate contact details identification

Sample weighting

The tables below indicate the unweighted and weighted distributions of the online sample. Weighting was applied to the sample to ensure that the final data sing the same approach described for the telephone portion of the research, in order to reflect the adult population of Canada by region, age and gender according to the 2016 Census. A Random Iterative Method (RIM) technique was applied for weighting.

Please note, the totals below may not add up to 1,004 due to some respondents’ refusal to provide socioeconomic information.

Statistics presented in the tables above show minimal differences between the final unweighted and weighted samples. While the impact of the weights was more important for the youngest and oldest age brackets, a weight ratio of 1.29:1 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. Overall, a response rate of 12.4% was achieved, which 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, save for a few gaps described below.

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 three 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.

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 it true for the line 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. There is a small 4-point gap in those who have obtained a trade school or college diploma, as well as those who have obtained a university degree. As discussed above, both samples overrepresent 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, with online respondents having slightly lower reported income levels than phone respondents. More specifically, these gaps are visible in the $40,000 to $60,000 bracket (7-point gap) and the $60,000 to under $100,000 bracket (8-point gap).

Finally, both samples show a difference in the proportion of respondents born in Canada. While a quarter (24%) of phone respondents report being born outside of the country, only one-in-six (15%) online respondents report the same. According to Census 2016 figures, the actual proportion in the Canadian population is 21%. Therefore, the telephone sample slightly overrepresents the immigrant population, while the online sample slightly underrepresents it.

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 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 10 minutes to complete. Your participation is voluntary and completely confidential. This call may be monitored or recorded for quality control purposes. This survey is registered with the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA). 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.)

• Yes (CONTINUE)
• No (ASK TO SPEAK TO 'ELIGIBLE' PERSON AND START AGAIN)
• REFUSED (THANK AND TERMINATE)

LANG.(DO NOT READ) CHOOSE LANGUAGE

• English
• French

[ASK S1a 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)

• Yes (CONTINUE)
• No (THANK AND TERMINATE)
• DK/REF (THANK AND TERMINATE)

[ASK S1b IF SAMPLE=CELLPHONE]

S1b. Are you 18 years of age or older?

• Yes (CONTINUE)
• No (THANK AND TERMINATE)
• DK/REF (THANK AND TERMINATE)

[ASK CEL1 IF SAMPLE=CELLPHONE]

CEL1. Have I reached you on your cellphone?

• Yes (CONTINUE)
• No (THANK AND TERMINATE)
• DK/REF (THANK AND TERMINATE)

[ASK CEL2 IF CEL1=YES]

CEL2. Are you in a safe environment to talk?

• Yes (CONTINUE)
• No (THANK AND TERMINATE)
• DK/REF (THANK AND TERMINATE)

[ASK FSAPROV IF PHONFRAM=2 (CELLPHONE); OTHERWISE SKIP TO QFSA]

[LANDLINE REGION ALLOCAITON BASED ON AREA CODE/EXCHANGE]

[FSAPROV]

[SINGLE RESPONSE PREQUAL]

[QUOTA]

FSAPROV. In which province do you live?

• British Columbia
• Alberta
• Saskatchewan
• Manitoba
• Ontario
• Quebec
• New Brunswick
• Nova Scotia
• PEI (Prince Edward Island)
• Newfoundland and Labrador
• Yukon
• North West Territories
• Nunavut
• DK/REF (THANK AND TERMINATE)

[HIDDEN VARIABLE [PROVINCE] – ALLOCATE CELLPHONE SAMPLE FROM FSAPROV / ALLOCATE LANDLINE SAMPLE TO PROVINCE BASED ON AREA CODE/EXCHANGE. USE PROVINCE FROM FSAPROV]

[PROVINCE]

• British Columbia
• Alberta
• Saskatchewan
• Manitoba
• Ontario
• Quebec
• New Brunswick
• Nova Scotia
• PEI (Prince Edward Island)
• Newfoundland and Labrador
• Yukon
• North West Territories
• Nunavut

[ASK ALL]

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

[INSERT POSTAL CODE MODULE]

[ASK QB IF SAMPLE=CELLPHONE]

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

• Yes
• No
• DK/REF

[ASK QBB IF SAMPLE=LANDLINE]

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

• Yes
• No
• DK/REF

[HIDDEN VARIABLE [PHONEOWN]

[QUOTA]

[PHONEOWN]

• Landline [QBB=NO; OR QB=DK/REF; SAMPLE=LANDLINE]
• Cell [QB=NO; OR QB=DK/REF; SAMPLE=CELLPHONE]
• Landline/Cell [QB=YES OR QBB=YES]

GENDR. (RECORD GENDER)

• Male
• Female

QAGE. In what year were you born?

• Record year: [RANGE: 1900-2000]
• DON’T KNOW/NO RESPONSE

[IF QAGE = DON’T KNOW/NO RESPONSE, ASK QAGE2. ELSE SKIP TO PREAMBLE BEFORE Q1.]

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

• 18 to 24
• 25 to 34
• 35 to 44
• 45 to 54
• 55 to 64
• 65 or older
• DK/NO RESPONSE (THANK AND TERMINATE)
• REFUSED (THANK AND TERMINATE)

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?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• NO RESPONSE

Q2. Currently, Canada aims to admit over 300,000 immigrants each year. Knowing this, do you feel there are too many, too few, or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• NO RESPONSE

Q3. If the government decides to bring in more immigrants, which of the three main immigration classes should grow?

[RANDOMIZE FIRST THREE; SINGLE RESPONSE]

• The family members of people already in Canada
• Economic immigrants
• Refugees
• NO 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]

• Your city
• Your province
• Your neighbourhood
• You personally
• Canada

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Very positive
• Somewhat positive
• Neither positive nor negative
• Somewhat negative
• Very negative
• NO RESPONSE

Q5. 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]

• Very dissatisfied 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Very satisfied 10
• NO RESPONSE

[IF DK/REF AT Q5, SKIP TO Q7]

Q6. Why do you say that? (PROBE ONCE FOR ADDITIONAL RESPONSE)

• [OPEN END]
• NO RESPONSE

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

Q7. 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]

• Immigration is necessary if Canada is to sustain its economic growth in the face of an aging population.
• Canada's competitiveness depends on our ability to recruit immigrants who meet our country's evolving labour needs.
• I am proud of Canada's reputation as an open and welcoming society.
• Immigration is causing Canada to change in ways that I don't like.
• Accepting immigrants from many different cultures makes Canadian culture stronger.
• Immigration has placed too much pressure on public services in Canada.
• Canada should focus on helping unemployed Canadians rather than looking for skilled immigrants for our workforce.
• Most immigrants who come here want to contribute to society.
• Immigrants need to do more to integrate into Canadian society.

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Strongly disagree 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Strongly agree 10
• NO RESPONSE

Q8A. Refugees can come to Canada in different ways. Some of them come from overseas 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. Others claim asylum at our borders or 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]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• NO RESPONSE

Q8B. 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? How about… (REPEAT LIST IF NECESSARY)

[ITEMS; ROTATE]

• Refugees selected by the Canadian government to come to Canada
• People who come to Canada and claim asylum

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• NO RESPONSE

Q9. 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; ROTATE]

• Accepting refugees is part of Canada's humanitarian tradition.
• Canada has a responsibility to do its part in accepting refugees.

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Strongly disagree 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Strongly agree 10
• NO RESPONSE

Q10. 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; ROTATE]

• I am confident that the Government of Canada is taking the appropriate steps to manage the crossings at unguarded points on the Canada-U.S. border.
• It is not our responsibility to accept asylum claims for people who come to Canada from the U.S.

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Strongly disagree 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Strongly agree 10
• NO RESPONSE

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

D1. Were you born in Canada?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Yes
• No
• NO RESPONSE

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

D2. In what year did you come to Canada?

• Record year [RANGE 1900-2018]
• NO RESPONSE

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

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• One parent
• Both parents
• No
• NO RESPONSE

D4. What were the ethnic or cultural origins of your ancestors? (DO NOT READ LIST. ACCEPT MULTIPLE RESPONSES.)

[RANDOMIZE; MULTI-RESPONSE]

• British (English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh)
• French
• Other western European (Italian, Spanish, German)
• Scandinavian (Swedish, Fin, Danish, Norwegian)
• Eastern European (Polish, Russian, Slav, Greek)
• Middle Eastern (Lebanese, Turk, Iraqi)
• South Asian (Pakistani, Indian, Sri Lankan)
• Southeast Asian (Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean)
• Oceania (Australian, Kiwi, Polynesian)
• Latin American (Mexican, Brazilian, Chilean)
• Caribbean (Jamaican, Trinidadian, Haitian)
• Native American/Indigenous (Ojibway, Iroquois, Cree...)
• American (general mention)
• African (Nigerian, Somali, Egyptian)
• Or another group (specify) [ANCHOR]
• NO RESPONSE [ANCHOR]

D5. Are you an Indigenous person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Yes
• No
• NO RESPONSE

D6 Next, we would like to ask you whether or not you are a member of a visible minority. We are using categories which are defined by Statistics Canada and the Employment Equity Act. With which of the following population groups do you identify? (READ LIST. ACCEPT MULTIPLE RESPONSES.)

[RANDOMIZE; MULTI-RESPONSE]

• White
• South Asian
• Chinese
• Black
• Filipino
• Latin American
• Arab
• Southeast Asian
• West Asian
• Korean
• Japanese
• Other (specify) [ANCHOR]
• NO RESPONSE [ANCHOR]

D7. How frequently do you have contact with newcomers to Canada, by that we mean people who have come to Canada in the last five years? (READ LIST IF NECESSARY)

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Daily
• Weekly
• Monthly
• Yearly
• Less frequently than yearly
• Never
• NO RESPONSE

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

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Elementary school or less
• Secondary school
• Some post-secondary
• College, vocational or trade school
• Undergraduate university program
• Graduate or professional university program
• NO 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]

• Employed full-time for pay (i.e. more than 30 hours)
• Employed part-time for pay
• Self-employed
• Unemployed, and currently seeking work
• Homemaker
• Student
• Disabled
• Retired
• Other (specify)
• NO 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, ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE ONLY.)

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Under $20,000
• $20,000 to just under $40,000
• $40,000 to just under $60,000
• $60,000 to just under $80,000
• $80,000 to just under $100,000
• $100,000 to just under $150,000
• $150,000 and above
• NO RESPONSE

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

[MULTI-RESPONSE]

• English
• French
• Other (specify)
• NO RESPONSE

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 questionnaire

English online questionnaire

We are conducting a brief study for the Government of Canada on current issues of interest to Canadians. The survey takes about 10 minutes to complete. Your participation is voluntary and completely confidential. This call may be monitored or recorded for quality control purposes. This survey is registered with the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA). Would you prefer to continue in English or French?

YEAR/MONTH. What is your date of birth?

• YEAR (1915 to 2015)

MONTH

• January
• February
• March
• April
• May
• June
• July
• August
• September
• October
• November
• December

[PN: TERMINATE IF UNDER 18]

RESP_GENDER. What is your gender?

• Male
• Female

QMktSize_CA. Please insert your postal code? (example: A8A8A8)

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?

[ROTATE CODES 1 AND 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• Don't know
• Refused

Q2. Currently, Canada aims to admit over 300,000 immigrants each year. Knowing this, do you feel there are too many, too few, or about the right number of immigrants coming to Canada?

[ROTATE CODES 1 AND 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• Don't know
• Refused

Q3. If the government decides to bring in more immigrants, which of the three main immigration classes should grow?

[RANDOMIZE FIRST THREE; SINGLE RESPONSE]

• The family members of people already in Canada
• Economic immigrants
• Refugees
• None of the above
• Don't know / Refused

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?

[GRID DOWN; RANDOMIZE]

• Your city
• Your province
• Your neighbourhood
• You personally
• Canada

[GRID ACROSS]

• Very positive
• Somewhat positive
• Neither positive nor negative
• Somewhat negative
• Very negative
• Don't know

Q5. 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]

• Very dissatisfied 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Very satisfied 10
• Don’t know/Refused

[IF DK/REF AT Q5, SKIP TO Q7]

Q6. Why do you say that?

• [OPEN END]

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

Q7. 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".

[GRID DOWN; RANDOMIZE]

• Immigration is necessary if Canada is to sustain its economic growth in the face of an aging population.
• Canada's competitiveness depends on our ability to recruit immigrants who meet our country's evolving labour needs.
• I am proud of Canada's reputation as an open and welcoming society.
• Immigration is causing Canada to change in ways that I don't like.
• Accepting immigrants from many different cultures makes Canadian culture stronger.
• Immigration has placed too much pressure on public services in Canada.
• Canada should focus on helping unemployed Canadians rather than looking for skilled immigrants for our workforce.
• Most immigrants who come here want to contribute to society.
• Immigrants need to do more to integrate into Canadian society.

[GRID ACROSS]

• Strongly disagree 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Strongly agree 10
• Don’t know

Q8A. Refugees can come to Canada in different ways. Some of them come from overseas 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. Others claim asylum at our borders or 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?

[ROTATE CODES 1 and 2; SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• Don't know
• Refused

Q8B. 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? How about…

[GRID DOWN; ROTATE]

• Refugees selected by the Canadian government to come to Canada
• People who come to Canada and claim asylum

[GRID ACROSS; ROTATE CODES 1 and 2]

• Too many
• Too few
• About the right number
• Don't know
• Refused

Q9. 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".

[GRID DOWN; ROTATE]

• Accepting refugees is part of Canada's humanitarian tradition.
• Canada has a responsibility to do its part in accepting refugees.

[GRID ACROSS]

• Strongly disagree 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Strongly agree 10
• Don’t know

Q10. 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".

[GRID DOWN; ROTATE]

• I am confident that the Government of Canada is taking the appropriate steps to manage the crossings at unguarded points on the Canada-U.S. border.
• It is not our responsibility to accept asylum claims for people who come to Canada from the U.S.

[GRID ACROSS]

• Strongly disagree 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Strongly agree 10
• Don’t know

Our last few questions are for statistical purposes only.

D1. Were you born in Canada?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Yes
• No
• Refused

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

D2. In what year did you come to Canada?

• [NUMERIC TEXT BOX; ALLOW 1910-2018]
• Refused

D3. Did your parents immigrate to Canada from another country?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• One parent
• Both parents
• No
• Refused

D4. What were the ethnic or cultural origins of your ancestors?

[RANDOMIZE; MULTI-RESPONSE]

• British (English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh)
• French
• Other western European (Italian, Spanish, German)
• Scandinavian (Swedish, Fin, Danish, Norwegian)
• Eastern European (Polish, Russian, Slav, Greek)
• Middle Eastern (Lebanese, Turk, Iraqi)
• South Asian (Pakistani, Indian, Sri Lankan)
• Southeast Asian (Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean)
• Oceania (Australian, Kiwi, Polynesian)
• Latin American (Mexican, Brazilian, Chilean)
• Caribbean (Jamaican, Trinidadian, Haitian)
• Native American/ABORIGINAL (Ojibway, Iroquois, Cree...)
• American (general mention)
• African (Nigerian, Somali, Egyptian)
• Or another group (specify) [ANCHOR]
• Don't know/Refused [ANCHOR]

D5. Are you an Indigenous person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Yes
• No
• Refused

D6 Next, we would like to ask you whether or not you are a member of a visible minority. We are using categories which are defined by Statistics Canada and the Employment Equity Act. With which of the following population groups do you identify as?

[RANDOMIZE; MULTI-RESPONSE]

• White
• South Asian
• Chinese
• Black
• Filipino
• Latin American
• Arab
• Southeast Asian
• West Asian
• Korean
• Japanese
• Other (specify) [ANCHOR]
• Don't know/Refused [ANCHOR]

D7. How frequently do you have contact with newcomers to Canada, by that we mean people who have come to Canada in the last five years?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Daily
• Weekly
• Monthly
• Yearly
• Less frequently than yearly
• Never
• Don't know/Refused

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

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Elementary school or less
• Secondary school
• Some post-secondary
• College, vocational or trade school
• Undergraduate university program
• Graduate or professional university program
• Refused

D9. What is your current employment status?

[SINGLE RESPONSE]

• Employed full-time for pay (i.e. more than 30 hours)
• Employed part-time for pay
• Self-employed
• Unemployed, and currently seeking work
• Homemaker
• Student
• Disabled
• Retired
• Other (specify)
• Don't know/Refused

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]

• Under $20,000
• $20,000 to just under $40,000
• $40,000 to just under $60,000
• $60,000 to just under $80,000
• $80,000 to just under $100,000
• $100,000 to just under $150,000
• $150,000 and above
• Refused

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

[MULTI-RESPONSE]

• English
• French
• Other (specify)
• Refused

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

French online questionnaire