Continuous Qualitative Data Collection of Canadians’ Views – February 2022

Final Report

Prepared for the Privy Council Office

Supplier name: The Strategic Counsel
Contract number: 35035-182346/001/CY
Contract value: $2,428,991.50
Award date: December 16, 2021
Delivery date: April 22, 2022

Registration number: POR-005-19
For more information on this report, please email por-rop@pco-bcp.ca
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.

Continuous Qualitative Data Collection of Canadians’ Views

Final Report

Prepared for the Privy Council Office

Supplier Name: The Strategic Counsel
February 2022
This public opinion research report presents the results of a series of focus groups conducted by The Strategic Counsel on behalf of the Privy Council Office. The third cycle of the third year of the study included a total of twelve focus groups with Canadian adults (18 years of age and older) conducted between February 2nd and February 28th, 2022.
Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Rapport final - Collecte continue de données qualitatives sur les opinions des canadiens – février 2022.
This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from the Privy Council Office. For more information on this report, please contact the Privy Council Office at: por-rop@pco-bcp.ca or at:
Privy Council Office
Blackburn Building
85 Sparks Street, Room 228
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A3

Catalogue Number:

CP22-185/26-2022E-PDF

International Standard Book Number (ISBN):

978-0-660-43313-4

Related publications (registration number: POR-005-19):

CP22-185/26-2022F-PDF (Final Report, French)
978-0-660-43314-1
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2022

Political Neutrality Certification

I hereby certify as a Senior Officer of The Strategic Counsel that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Policy on Communications and Federal Identity and the Directive on the Management of Communications – Appendix C – Mandatory Procedures for 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.
Signed: __________________________________
Date: April 22, 2022
Donna Nixon, Partner
The Strategic Counsel

Table of Contents

Executive Summary
1
Introduction
1
Methodology
2
Key Findings
4
Part I: COVID-19 Related Findings
4
Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)
4
COVID-19 Outlook and Vaccines (All Locations)
6
COVID-19 Vaccine Ad Testing (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)
9
Part II: Other Issues
10
Child Care (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Nunavut)
11
Healthcare (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Central and Southern Quebec)
12
Housing and Home Renting (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg)
13
Indigenous Issues (Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)
15
Canadian Content (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)
17
Youth and Post-Secondary Issues (Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students)
18
Official Language Minority Communities (Sudbury Region Francophones)
19
Mobile Phones (Winnipeg)
20
Local Issues (Nunavut)
20
Local Issues (Prince Edward Island)
21
Detailed Findings – Part I: COVID-19
24
Timeline of February Announcements
25
Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)
28
COVID-19 Outlook and Vaccines (All Locations)
32
COVID-19 Performance Evaluation (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)
32
COVID-19 Public Health Measures and Forecast (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)
36
COVID-19 Vaccine Ad Testing (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)
40
Concept A: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine
40
Concept B: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine
43
Detailed Findings – Part II: Other Issues
45
Child Care (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Nunavut)
46
Healthcare (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Central and Southern Quebec)
48
Housing and Home Renting (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg)
52
Indigenous Issues (Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)
57
Canadian Content (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)
62
Youth and Post-Secondary Issues (Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students)
65
Official Language Minority Communities (Sudbury Region Francophones)
68
Mobile Phones (Winnipeg)
70
Local Issues (Nunavut)
71
Local Issues (Prince Edward Island)
73
Appendix A – Recruiting Scripts
78
English Recruiting Script
79
French Recruiting Script
90
Appendix B – Discussion Guides
99
English Moderator’s Guide
100
French Moderator’s Guide
122
Appendix C – Advertising Concepts
146
Concept A: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)
147
Concept B: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)
148
Water Advisory Chart (Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)
149

Executive Summary

Introduction

The Communications and Consultation Secretariat of the Privy Council Office (PCO) commissioned The Strategic Counsel (TSC) to conduct continuous cycles of focus group research across the country with members of the public on key national issues, events, and policy initiatives related to the Government of Canada.

The broad purpose of this ongoing qualitative research program is three-fold: to explore the dimensions and drivers of public opinion on the most important issues facing the country; to assess perceptions and expectations of the federal government’s actions and priorities, and; to inform the development of Government of Canada communications so that they continue to be aligned with the perspectives and information needs of Canadians, while remaining both clear and easy-to-understand.

The research is intended to be used by the Communications and Consultation Secretariat within PCO in order to fulfill its mandate of supporting the Prime Minister’s Office in coordinating government communications. Specifically, the research will ensure the PCO has an ongoing understanding of Canadians’ opinions on macro-level issues of interest to the government, as well as emerging trends.

This report includes findings from 12 online focus groups which were conducted between February 2nd and 28th, 2022 in multiple locations across the country including Atlantic Canada, Quebec, Ontario, Nunavut, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia. Details concerning the locations, recruitment, and composition of the groups are outlined in the section below.

The research for this cycle of focus groups focused primarily on COVID-19, as the pandemic continued in Canada. The research explored a wide range of related issues in depth. Regarding what Canadians were hearing about the Government of Canada in the news, many discussed the removal of border entry requirement exemptions for certain categories of travellers entering Canada, protests regarding pandemic-related mandates, and the federal government’s decisions to invoke (and subsequently revoke) the Emergencies Act in order to put an end to the protests. Unrelated to the pandemic, many also referenced hearing about the emerging conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

Participants were also asked for their general outlooks on COVID-19, including whether restrictions should be lifted or remain in place, forecasts regarding the spread of COVID-19 in the near and long-term, perspectives related to regional public health restrictions, as well as the ongoing campaign encouraging Canadians to receive their third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Indigenous peoples living on reserve in Saskatchewan and Manitoba and parents of children under the age of 12 residing in the Durham region of Ontario and mid-size centres in Saskatchewan were additionally asked for their views on COVID-19 vaccines for children aged 5-11. Related to this, the group from the Durham region were also shown two potential digital advertising concepts created by the Government of Canada, encouraging parents with children in this age group to get their kids vaccinated.

In addition to the pandemic, non-COVID-19 related discussions were undertaken on a range of topics including child care and recent agreements reached between the federal government and numerous provinces and territories, provincial/territorial healthcare systems, as well as potential actions by the Government of Canada related to affordable housing and home renting. Additionally, Indigenous peoples living on reserve in Saskatchewan and Manitoba discussed issues related to their local communities and Indigenous peoples more broadly. Conversations were also held regarding youth and post-secondary issues, official language minority communities, and the affordability of mobile phone plans within Canada. Other topics included Canadian content (focusing on film, television, and music) as well as local issues specific to Nunavut and Prince Edward Island respectively.

As a note of caution when interpreting the results from this study, findings of qualitative research are directional in nature only and cannot be attributed quantitatively to the overall population under study with any degree of confidence.

Methodology

Overview of Groups

Target audience:

  • Canadian residents, 18 and older.
  • Groups were split primarily by location.
  • Some groups focused on specific subgroups of the population including parents of children under 12, renters, post-secondary students, individuals who had previously tested positive for COVID-19, Francophones, and Indigenous peoples living on reserve.

Detailed Approach

  • 12 focus groups across various regions in Canada.
  • Five groups were conducted with the general population in the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, Côte-Nord regions of Quebec, central and southern Quebec, Nunavut, Winnipeg, and Prince Edward Island.
  • Seven groups were conducted with key subgroups including:
    • Parents of children under 12 residing in the Durham region in Ontario and mid-size centres in Saskatchewan;
    • Renters residing in the Okanagan region of British Columbia;
    • Post-secondary students residing in the Hamilton and Niagara region of Ontario;
    • Individuals who had tested positive for COVID-19 residing in Edmonton;
    • Francophones residing in the Sudbury region of Ontario; and
    • Indigenous peoples living on reserve in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
  • The groups in Quebec were both conducted in French as was the group comprised of Francophones in the Sudbury region. All other groups were conducted in English.
  • All groups for this cycle were conducted online.
  • A total of 8 participants were recruited for each group, assuming 6 to 8 participants would attend.
  • Across all locations, 84 participants attended, in total. Details on attendance numbers by group can be found below.
  • Each participant received an honorarium. The incentive ranged from $100 to $125 per participant, depending on the location and the composition of the group.

Group Locations and Composition

LOCATION GROUP LANGUAGE DATE TIME (EST) GROUP COMPOSITION NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS
Durham Region – Ontario 1 English Feb. 2 6:00-8:00 pm Parents of Children under 12 7
Bas-Saint-Laurent / Gaspésie / Côte-Nord regions – Quebec 2 French Feb. 3 6:00-8:00 pm General Population 6
Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan 3 English Feb. 8 7:00-9:00 pm Parents of Children under 12 7
Okanagan Region – British Columbia 4 English Feb. 9 9:00-11:00 pm Renters 8
Nunavut 5 English Feb. 10 6:00-8:00 pm General Population 8
Hamilton & Niagara Region – Ontario 6 English Feb. 15 6:00-8:00 pm Post-Secondary Students 7
Edmonton 7 English Feb. 16 8:00-10:00 pm Tested Positive for COVID-19 7
Winnipeg 8 English Feb. 17 7:00-9:00 pm General Population 8
Prince Edward Island 9 English Feb. 22 5:00-7:00 pm General Population 7
Sudbury Region – Ontario 10 French Feb. 23 6:00-8:00 pm Francophones 8
Central/Southern Quebec 11 French Feb. 24 6:00-8:00 pm General Population 6
Saskatchewan & Manitoba 12 English Feb. 28 8:00-10:00 pm Indigenous Peoples Living on Reserve 5
Total number of participants 84

Key Findings

Part I: COVID-19 Related Findings

Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)

Among recent federal announcements and initiatives in the news in the month of February, items related to the COVID-19 pandemic were once again top of mind among participants. Regarding the pandemic, the most commonly cited issue, by far, was the trucker convoy protests taking place in Ottawa and at several Canada/U.S. border crossings in other parts of the country. Among the groups held later in the month, most recalled the federal government’s implementation (and subsequent removal) of the Emergencies Act, particularly focusing on aspects of the legislation such as the ability of law enforcement to temporarily freeze the bank accounts of some of those participating in or financially supporting the protests.

Among other domestic issues, some mentioned the decision by the Bank of Canada to hold off on raising interest rates for the time being, as well as concerns regarding inflation and a perceived rapid increase of oil and gas prices in many parts of the country.

On the international stage, many groups discussed the emerging conflict between Russia and Ukraine. This was especially the case in those groups conducted near the end of February in the days just prior to and directly following the Russian invasion on February 24th, 2022. Participants recalled a number of news stories, actions, and announcements related to the Government of Canada’s response to this situation, including the provision of financial aid and military supplies to Ukraine, the deployment of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) troops to Eastern Europe, and the imposition of sanctions on numerous Russian individuals and entities.

Convoy Protests (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

In the groups held earlier in February, few participants initially recalled hearing anything about the Government of Canada removing the exemption from federal border entry requirements for certain categories of travellers, including truck drivers. After receiving further details regarding this decision and its implications, several expressed a greater understanding of the connection between this issue and the protests taking place in Ottawa and several other parts of the country.

Many were aware that protestors had travelled from all across the country to participate in these demonstrations, which had led to the blockade of major roadways in the City of Ottawa as well as at numerous Canada-U.S. border crossings. In addition, a number of participants had heard accounts of protestors creating large-scale noise disturbances in Ottawa, as well as accosting healthcare workers and other individuals choosing to wear facemasks as they went about their daily activities. Many were aware that the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) had encountered great difficulty in clearing the protests and felt they lacked the necessary resources to do so.

Participants shared a wide variety of views regarding the protests, though on balance more were opposed to than supportive of these demonstrations. Many expressed disapproval of what they viewed as the harassment of Ottawa residents by the protestors, feeling this had discredited the movement as a whole. A number of participants also felt the protests had become somewhat directionless as they went on and were no longer about ending COVID-19 related mandates, especially given that many public health measures had been (or would soon be) lifted in several provinces and territories throughout Canada. A significant number, however, identified with the frustration expressed by the protestors regarding ongoing public health measures, even if they disagreed with some of their methods. Among participants who were more supportive of the protests and their aims, it was felt the protests had been mostly peaceful and that these individuals had the right to express their opinion via public protest.

Government of Canada Response and Emergencies Act (Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

Five groups held in the latter half of February discussed the enactment of the Emergencies Act by the federal government on February 14th, 2022.

Almost all participants in these groups recalled hearing at least something about the Emergencies Act, with many specifically mentioning the aspect of the legislation allowing law enforcement to temporarily freeze the bank accounts of those participating in or financially associated with the protests. While several felt these enhanced law enforcement powers would likely be effective in clearing the protests, a smaller number were worried the use of this Act would cause further conflict or potential for violence by escalating the tensions between protestors and law enforcement.

Though a small number of participants felt implementing the Emergencies Act was a necessary step given the disturbance caused by the seemingly indefinite nature of the protests, most felt this action represented significant ‘overreach’ by the federal government, as they interpreted this as limiting the right of these Canadians to peaceful protest. Among those who supported the federal government’s use of the Emergencies Act, it was generally viewed as the most straightforward way to clear the blockade in Ottawa, where many felt local law enforcement had lost control of the situation. Asked how they felt the Government of Canada should have responded, those opposed to the use of the Emergencies Act suggested more steps could have been taken by federal officials to open up a dialogue with the protestors and hear their concerns.

Taking place after the protests had been cleared and the revocation of the Emergencies Act on February 23rd, 2022, the groups from the Sudbury region and southern and central Quebec were asked for their views regarding this decision. While most were happy to see these emergency measures removed, participants reached different conclusions about what this decision implied. Some viewed the revocation of the Act as a reasonable decision and sign of good faith by the federal government as well as proof the legislation had worked as intended. In contrast, others viewed the quick removal as evidence the law should never have been used in the first place, feeling the Government of Canada was essentially retracting its initial decision to invoke the Act.

COVID-19 Outlook and Vaccines (All Locations)

Participants in all groups discussed a wide range of issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the Government of Canada’s ongoing response. These conversations focused on federal performance over the course of the pandemic, ongoing public health measures, COVID-19 vaccinations for children, and the ongoing campaign encouraging Canadians to get their third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, otherwise known as the ‘booster dose’.

COVID-19 Performance Evaluation (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

To begin, participants were asked to recall anything they thought the Government of Canada had done well in its handling of the pandemic. This prompted a number of responses, including the implementation of and continued encouragement towards following public health measures, consistent communication from federal officials throughout the pandemic, restricting non-essential travel early in the pandemic, a willingness to adapt border entry requirements as new variants of concern were detected, the provision of financial supports such as the Canadian Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), the widespread and efficient distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, and the provision of food supplies in Northern communities through the Nutrition North Canada program.

Asked to identify areas where the Government of Canada’s response could have been improved, participants also put forward a number of opinions. These included what was felt to be a lack of transparency regarding the scientific basis for ongoing mandates and public health requirements, the need for clearer goals and criteria regarding steps to return to greater normalcy, perceived delays in closing international borders and halting non-essential travel in the early months of the pandemic, limited testing availability during the recent Omicron wave of the pandemic, and perceived inefficient management of the CERB and other financial supports.

Discussing whether they felt the federal government’s handling of the pandemic was currently better, worse, or about the same compared to earlier on in the pandemic, many felt the Government of Canada’s performance had worsened as the pandemic had drawn on. A significant number believed there to be a general lack of direction in the current federal approach, especially in regards to lifting restrictions (which some conflated with provincial/territorial measures). A number of participants also thought current messaging from the federal government was somewhat negative at times, and that more could be done to reassure Canadians and communicate appreciation for their efforts to help contain the spread of the virus for almost two years. Many participants also thought more needed to be done to address the mental health implications of the pandemic and related public safety measures, which they viewed as a rapidly growing concern among Canadians that had the potential to be more damaging than the virus itself. A number of participants felt the Government of Canada could help address this by placing a greater focus on lifting mandates and public health requirements wherever possible (with some again seeming to refer to provincial/territorial measures).

For the smaller number who thought the federal government’s performance was better now compared to earlier in the pandemic, the general sense was that policymakers now had a better understanding of COVID-19 and were able to handle the pandemic more effectively as a result. Among those who felt the Government of Canada’s performance had remained about the same throughout the pandemic, the general sense was that the government had performed fairly well overall, despite some missteps along the way, and that a consistent effort had been made to follow the science and adapt to new information and knowledge as it became available.

COVID-19 Public Health Measures and Forecast (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

Ten groups discussed COVID-19 public health measures in their regions, as well as their opinions regarding how the pandemic may evolve going forward.

Asked if they felt restrictions should be loosened in their regions, participants were mixed in their views. While a larger number felt the majority of public health requirements should be lifted in the near future, some favoured either a more gradual removal or even keeping some requirements in place, such as proof of vaccination systems, for the time being. A smaller number of participants were opposed to removing restrictions at this juncture, believing it would put vulnerable groups, such as seniors, immunocompromised individuals, and young children, at risk. While acknowledging the negative impact and inconvenience of public health restrictions, these participants tended to view them as necessary in the short-term to keep Canadians safe.

Most participants felt the worst of the pandemic had likely passed, given the perceived mildness of the recent Omicron variant, the high vaccination rate among Canadians, and the natural immunity to the virus they felt had likely been acquired by many following the most recent wave of the pandemic. A smaller number were more pessimistic, believing it was still possible for more severe variants to emerge. Asked whether they felt COVID-19 would still be an issue one year from now, almost all participants believed the virus would still be around in some form or another for many years to come, however most also believed it would begin to fade into the background and become an ‘endemic’ issue similar to influenza and other seasonal viruses. Many expected an annual booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine may be required going forward.

The groups from Winnipeg, Sudbury, and southern and central Quebec, as well as the group comprised of Indigenous peoples in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, were asked an additional question regarding the impact of public health measures and if they felt they had been effective in curbing the spread of COVID-19. Many felt they had, especially in the early stages of the pandemic, however others were more skeptical and pointed to shifting opinions among public health officials about what worked and what did not. More prominently, a large number of participants said they were more concerned about the negative consequences of these public health measures, especially in regards to social isolation and its effects on the mental wellbeing of Canadians, particularly elders and young people, as well as the financial impacts of temporary business closures and capacity restrictions.

The group in Winnipeg was also asked an additional question regarding how the pandemic and related public health measures had impacted the downtown area and small businesses within the community. All participants felt the pandemic had negatively impacted local businesses, believing the majority of the businesses in the downtown core had been hurt by the pandemic, with many closing permanently as a result.

COVID-19 Vaccines for Children (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

Three groups were asked a series of questions related to the COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5-11. On balance, fewer participants reported having gotten their children vaccinated relative to those who had chosen to hold off for the time being. Among those who had vaccinated their children, many had done so out of the desire to protect their kids against COVID-19 as well as provide additional security for more vulnerable family members with whom they frequently interact, such as grandparents. Among those who had not yet had their children vaccinated, few were against it in principle or on the basis of any ideological opposition to vaccines in general. Many, however, relayed concerns about the potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine, particularly regarding its relatively short track record of use and what they felt to be a lack of assurance on the part of medical experts regarding possible long term impacts. Some also felt the risk of COVID-19 to young children was quite low and cited this as the primary factor in their decision to hold off vaccinating their children for the time being.

COVID-19 Booster Dose (Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

Asked whether they had received a third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, also known as the ‘booster dose’, slightly less than half of participants in these groups said they had done so. Of those who had received their booster dose, almost all said they had done so in order to protect themselves as well as family members, friends, and others they interact with who may be more vulnerable. Among those who had not yet received their booster, the primary driver behind this decision was a lack of confidence in the efficacy of the vaccine and whether it would have a tangible impact on preventing them from contracting or spreading COVID-19. A number of participants clarified that while they had gotten their initial vaccines, the massive increase of transmissibility and positive cases among both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals during the recent Omicron wave had limited their desire for a third dose, believing it would have little effect.

COVID-19 Vaccine Ad Testing (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)

Parents with children under the age of 12 residing in the Durham region in Ontario were shown two concepts under development by the Government of Canada for possible advertising regarding COVID-19 vaccines. Prior to evaluating the concepts participants were asked whether their children had been vaccinated. Roughly an equal amount had gotten their children vaccinated as those who had decided to hold off for the time being.

Participants were then asked to review the two concepts (Concept A and Concept B), presented to the group in storyboard format. The group was also informed these advertisements were specifically designed to air on social media and digital platforms.

Concept A: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine

Concept A showed a line drawing of a family holding hands, with the line changing into different scenarios and eventually turning into the vaccine icon. Initial reactions to this concept were generally positive, with most finding the tone to be uplifting and hopeful. It was also felt the concept was direct and to the point, focusing on the benefits of getting children vaccinated and, as a result, being able to resume the kinds of activities that children and families enjoyed prior to the onset of the pandemic. Participants specifically liked the use of familiar imagery to which they could relate, commenting positively on the images of mothers, fathers, and children hugging, playing, and enjoying themselves as a family.

At the same time, several were critical of certain elements or aspects of this concept. Some found the visuals of the concept to be somewhat ‘generic’ due to the use of the stylized line drawing approach, feeling it to be somewhat aloof. The suggestion was also made that the narrative could have acknowledged what parents and children had endured over the course of the pandemic prior to focusing on the activities they were now able to enjoy. Some also felt this concept would likely not speak to those parents more skeptical of the vaccine, believing it did little to assuage any doubts they may be harbouring regarding its safety or efficacy.

When asked to describe the main message of this concept, most participants reiterated earlier comments that the ad was focused on promoting vaccinations for children as well as conveying the accompanying benefits of being vaccinated. Though participants understood the concept was intended to be a short 30-second video, they felt the explanation as to why the vaccine was necessary for children to be somewhat lacking. Related to this, several participants commented that the decision to get their children vaccinated was a highly personal one, and should be left up to parents based on their own personal assessment of the risks given their specific circumstances.

Overall, few participants indicated that Concept A would entice them to go to the website for more information or that it would prompt them to consider getting their children, aged 5 to 11 years, vaccinated. Recommendations to improve the effectiveness of this concept included acknowledging the isolating and devastating effects of the pandemic prior to shifting to a more upbeat message, as well as providing greater transparency regarding vaccines for children, specifically concrete data and statistics with respect to efficacy as well as any possible side effects.

Concept B: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine

Concept B showed parents protecting their children in different kinds of scenarios. Reactions to this concept were generally more positive, relative to Concept A. Many felt this concept was more effective at tapping into the protective nature of parents and extending this idea to vaccinations. They also found this concept more relatable both from the standpoint of the imagery, but also with respect to the emotions one feels as a parent wanting to protect their children in a range of day-to-day situations.

Most felt the main message or key takeaway from this concept was that parents should take steps to better protect their children by having them vaccinated for COVID-19. Participants responded positively to the creative approach, describing this concept as more ‘real’, and feeling it spoke in a more relevant and relatable way to them as parents of young children. Many did, however, suggest several possible improvements, including placing greater emphasis on the notion of vaccinations as a path to greater normalcy (as was the theme for Concept A) and the inclusion of other examples of actions parents take to keep their children safe, such as visits to the dentist or optometrist.

All participants expressed a preference for Concept B, believing it featured more engaging visuals as well as a realistic and relatable approach. Given the seriousness of COVID-19, participants also commented that messaging focused more clearly on protecting children from the possible negative impacts of the virus was more meaningful relative to the idea of lifting restrictions and a return to normalcy. Ultimately, most believed that emphasizing the idea of safety was the more effective approach.

Part II: Other Issues

Child Care (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Nunavut)

Three groups engaged in discussions regarding child care, particularly focusing on affordability. To begin, participants were asked to describe what they felt to be the biggest challenge related to child care in their respective province or territory. A number of common themes emerged including cost and affordability, low availability, a lack of qualified staff, limited flexibility/accessibility, as well as a lack of regulation, particularly regarding ‘unlicensed’ child care providers. Participants in the group from Nunavut also described major challenges related to recruiting early childhood educators to Northern communities, including difficulty finding adequate, affordable housing for these individuals.

A few participants in each group currently had children in child care. These participants were asked to describe their personal experiences related to cost and availability. Among these participants, most reported paying high fees, often of $50 a day/per child or more, as well as finding it incredibly difficult to secure a space, even for those who could afford the high costs. All participants felt child care to be an important priority and one the Government of Canada should place increased focus upon.

Participants were asked a series of questions related to the federal government’s child-care initiative, specifically related to their particular province or territory.

Many in the group from Ontario were aware of recent agreements between the federal government and provinces/territories to implement an affordable child care program across the country, with some recalling the average of $10 a day, per child target. Unprompted, a number of participants also recalled hearing that Ontario was the only province/territory at the time this group was held to have not yet reached an agreement with the federal government. Some expressed frustration, feeling the delay was possibly a negotiating tactic on the part of the provincial government. Others felt the size of Ontario compared to other provinces and territories may have made the negotiations for their province more complex or time-consuming.

Only a few in the group from Saskatchewan reported any awareness of the affordable child care agreement reached between Saskatchewan and the Government of Canada. Among current and potential users of child care, most believed the program would benefit them in a number of meaningful ways, including reducing the financial worries and challenges related to securing child care, enabling them to return to work or school, and even providing them with the confidence to have additional children by lowering associated costs. Among those whose children no longer required child care or would be too old by 2025-26 when the agreement would be fully implemented, most felt that even if they would not personally benefit, this deal was important and would offer much needed assistance to many Saskatchewan families.

Most participants in the group from Nunavut were aware of the recent affordable child care agreement reached by the Government of Canada and their territory in January. As in the Ontario group, there was specific recall of the $10-a-day target. A few also reported hearing there would be additional funding for infrastructure upgrades to child care facilities as well as increased financial support for child care providers and their employees. While most felt this agreement would be helpful for Nunavut families, some reiterated their concern that child care issues may continue to persist given the lack of physical space and problems recruiting qualified staff to the region. A few were also doubtful the agreement could be implemented within the timeline provided, believing that necessary infrastructure upgrades and other challenges, such as providing housing for child care workers, may take longer to address.

Healthcare (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Central and Southern Quebec)

Five groups discussed the subject of healthcare in their region. While several participants expressed positive views about the standard of care they typically receive, a significant number cited a widespread lack of family doctors in their area as a major concern. In addition, many in rural communities reported difficulty finding specialists in their areas, often forcing them to travel long distances to undergo certain treatments or procedures.

Regionally, participants in both groups from Quebec as well as those in Saskatchewan spoke highly regarding the quality of care they typically received, with most feeling the system in their area was currently working quite well. The group in Edmonton were more mixed, with some feeling that while under ‘normal’ circumstances the system operated relatively efficiently it had experienced a great deal of strain due to the COVID-19 pandemic and had since been unable to properly meet the demand of patients. Only those in the Okanagan spoke particularly negatively about their health care system, feeling there were very few options for family doctors in many communities and, in some cases, needing to travel to the Greater Vancouver Area (GVA) to consult with specialists. While most other groups felt only minor changes, such as greater accessibility and increased mental health services, were needed to improve their healthcare system, many participants in the Okanagan group called for a major overhaul.

Asked directly to identify the most pressing challenges for healthcare in their community (apart from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic) participants pointed to a number of common issues, including accessibility, a backlog of delayed/cancelled appointments and procedures resulting from the pandemic, overworked healthcare professionals, a lack of healthcare workers in remote communities, high costs for certain procedures and medications, limited mental health resources, and ongoing visitor restrictions in hospitals stemming from the pandemic.

Asked if they had recently heard about any announcements or initiatives from the federal government related to healthcare, very few participants could recall anything. Discussing federal transfer payments, most participants thought greater investments in healthcare were needed from the federal government and felt the amount allocated to healthcare transfers should be increased. Questioned as to whether the federal government should attach conditions to increased transfer payments (such as stipulating that the money be allocated to specific priorities like mental health services, doctor shortages, or long-term care reforms) most participants were in favour of this approach, believing it would go a long way towards addressing key priorities, and ensuring greater consistency in care across the country, especially in rural areas. Among the smaller number of participants who felt that no conditions should be attached, the general sentiment was that healthcare spending decisions should be left to the discretion of provincial/territorial governments and that federal directives could potentially hinder the ability of these governments to meet the specific needs of their respective populations.

Prompted to consider which specific healthcare issues they would like to see prioritized if the federal government were to add conditions to increased transfer payments, participants identified areas such as the construction of more healthcare facilities, training and hiring more doctors and nurses, incentivizing healthcare workers to practice in rural and Northern communities, further investments into long-term care, and an increased focus on mental health. Asked specifically about mental health treatment, almost all participants felt increased funding for this area should be prioritized. Many were of the view that Canadians across the country currently lacked sufficient access to therapy or medication, and that a continued stigma regarding mental health concerns prevented many from seeking out proper care.

Housing and Home Renting (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg)

Seven groups discussed issues related to housing, specifically focusing on home renting. The number of participants identifying as renters varied greatly across the groups. All participants in the groups from the Okanagan and Hamilton and Niagara region were renters, as were most in Edmonton and roughly half in Winnipeg. By contrast, very few in the groups based in Quebec, Ontario’s Durham region, and Saskatchewan were renters. The four groups with a larger number of renters were asked how challenging it was to find affordable rental accommodations in their respective areas. Most described it as very difficult, with some in the Okanagan group feeling it was next to impossible due to the limited rental options in their area. Those from Edmonton and Winnipeg also recalled experiencing considerable difficulties, citing increasing costs, high demand, and the generally poor condition of affordable rental units in their areas. In all groups, a number of participants felt it was especially difficult for those living on their own to find affordable housing options.

Asked whether the federal government had a role to play in regulating the cost of rent in Canada, more were in favour of this notion than opposed to it, however, a significant number remained unsure. For those in support of rental regulation, many felt it made sense for the Government of Canada to play a role on this issue, similar to action it would take to address other economic issues such as inflation. Others were of the opinion that affordable and safe housing was a fundamental human right, and that for this reason the federal government had a responsibility to ensure the availability of housing for its citizens. Discussing what regulatory actions the federal government could reasonably take towards ensuring affordable rental housing throughout Canada, participants in favour of federal intervention suggested measures such as further limiting annual rent increases, the implementation of ‘rent caps’, or limiting the number of properties an individual landlord could own. Among those more opposed to federal regulation of the rental market, there were concerns about the negative impacts such action could have on landlords, especially with regard to their freedom to utilize their properties as they saw fit. A number of these participants felt it was important to consider the circumstances of landlords who depended on their rental income to get by and may periodically need to increase rents to cover costs related to rising inflation, interest rates, as well as repairs and maintenance of their properties.

Discussing whether the Government of Canada should provide subsidies or incentives to owners of rental housing in exchange for binding commitments to not raise rents, while some were in favour of this proposal, more were either uncertain or opposed to the idea. Of those in favour, some felt it was realistically achievable and may appeal to landlords who would otherwise be hesitant towards federal regulation. For those more skeptical regarding this proposal, some were concerned there would be relatively low uptake by landlords to ‘opt-in’ to such an agreement, feeling there was not enough incentive for them to do so. Others were concerned about subsidies being provided to landlords, whom they felt were already privileged by virtue of owning rental properties in the first place.

Focusing on another potential initiative, participants were asked whether the Government of Canada should pass legislation prohibiting landlords from raising rents beyond a certain rate. Participants were again mixed in their views. While some generally reacted more positively to this idea than the previous one, many had reservations about the viability of this proposal. Those in favour of a federal ‘rental cap’ felt such action was necessary to stop rents from continuing to rise at such a rapid rate, and that if left to the ‘free market’ landlords would naturally try to maximize their profits. A number of participants, while supportive of the initiative, felt that any cap on rent would have to be tailored to the local rental market in each individual city or region and would have to be frequently updated to account for additional factors such as inflation.

Among the significant number opposed to this proposal, many felt it could potentially be unfair to landlords, limiting their ability to profit off their properties and failing to account for costs related to renovations, property taxes, and general maintenance. Many were also concerned the implementation of such legislation could end up unintentionally decreasing the rental supply, with landlords no longer feeling it was financially worthwhile to rent out their properties.

Housing Affordability (Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg)

Participants in these four groups discussed housing affordability more generally. To begin, the groups were shown a number of potential federal housing initiatives and then asked to identify and discuss the ones they believed would be most effective in increasing housing affordability for Canadians. All initiatives received at least some level of support, with the First-Time Homebuyer Incentive and the Affordable Housing Innovation Fund generally viewed as potentially having the greatest impact. With respect to the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, many felt this initiative would be helpful for first-time buyers, particularly younger Canadians, who were currently working full-time but struggling to save up a sufficient down-payment, especially in light of ever-increasing prices. Several also felt the Affordable Housing Innovation Fund could foster viable, longer-term solutions to housing issues in Canada, leveraging the creativity of individual Canadians to devise innovative housing strategies.

Among the other proposals, the Federal Lands Initiative was also viewed as a potentially effective strategy, with many seeing it as an intuitive way for the Government of Canada to aid in making housing more affordable, while also putting unused federal lands to good use. While additional rental construction financing and the National Housing Co-Investment Fund generally received a lower level of support among participants relative to other initiatives, many felt they could also potentially aid in addressing a number of housing challenges. Though receiving relatively little attention from participants, a few also spoke positively of the Housing Accelerator Fund, particularly regarding its stated goal of increasing density in major urban centres. Some participants expressed concern, however, that too much of a focus was being placed on creating housing solutions for larger cities and were worried this would lead to a lack of attention towards smaller cities and towns.

Indigenous Issues (Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

The group comprised of Indigenous participants living on reserve discussed a range of issues specific to their local communities and Indigenous peoples across Canada more broadly. Asked to identify the most important sectors and industries on their reserve, a number of responses were provided including oil, hospitality and entertainment, and the cultivation and sale of cannabis.

Discussing what the Government of Canada could to do to help spur economic development in their communities, participants offered three key suggestions: providing Indigenous communities the opportunity to purchase Crown land and/or land-use rights surrounding their reserve, fostering an open dialogue between individual Indigenous communities and the federal government to determine the specific needs of each reserve, and reducing perceived administrative burdens and barriers for starting new ventures.

Participants next shared what they felt to be the greatest concerns currently facing their reserves. Responses tended to focus on problems related to poverty, discrimination, and inter-generational trauma, such as addiction, poor mental health, and domestic abuse. More pointedly, however, participants identified a number of structural issues contributing to the existence and perpetuation of these problems, including insufficient healthcare services, a lack of supports for victims of abuse, high food costs and food insecurity, and a dearth of affordable housing. With respect to infrastructure projects on reserve that participants thought the Government of Canada should be assisting in funding, a core set of social priorities were identified, including housing, healthcare and treatment facilities, shelters for those experiencing domestic abuse, and multipurpose community/recreational/sports facilities, especially for youth.

Asked about Indigenous issues more broadly and where the Government of Canada should be focusing its attention, participants identified a number of key priorities. These included greater efforts towards reconciliation, the provision of clean drinking water to all Indigenous communities, addressing food scarcity and exorbitant prices, a greater focus on educational equality relative to the rest of Canada, and an emphasis on developing community-based healthcare options, allowing those requiring treatment to remain on-reserve.

No participants felt the Government of Canada was focusing enough attention on Indigenous issues at present. It was believed by some that Indigenous issues and voices were rarely prioritized and that many actions taken by the federal government to address Indigenous concerns had little tangible impact on their communities. Asked if the Government of Canada had done anything particularly well as of late related to Indigenous issues, very few participants felt that it had. Few could recall any recent actions taken by the Government of Canada specifically towards addressing reconciliation. Related to this, a number felt that while attention was often devoted to Indigenous issues when they were making headlines, tangible actions were rarely taken to address the root causes of these problems, including the historical relationship between the Government of Canada and Indigenous peoples. Describing what they would expect to see from a federal government serious about addressing reconciliation, a number of actions were suggested. These included a more all-encompassing effort towards addressing the numerous perceived historical injustices towards Indigenous peoples, continued federal participation at the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Special Chiefs Assembly, greater representation of Indigenous peoples at all levels of elected government, and the removal of existing barriers currently limiting the extent to which Indigenous peoples can determine their own affairs.

Asked whether they were aware of a federal court case related to the compensation of Indigenous children who had been harmed by historical federal child and family services (CFS) policies, a few participants had heard some details, however, many were unfamiliar with the specifics of the case. While some participants were happy to see compensation provided for those who had suffered from past CFS policies, many were concerned there would be conditions attached to how this money could be utilized by the recipients. In addition, it was reiterated by some that in addition to financial compensation there needed to be a greater focus on holistic healing, including on-reserve treatment options and ways to keep those seeking care in the same community as their loved ones.

Participants were also asked whether they were aware of a recent agreement between the Government of Canada and the Cowessess First Nation related to support for child and family services. While a few had heard something about an understanding being reached, no participants were aware of any specific details. It was clarified that as part of a recent agreement the Government of Canada would invest $38.7 million over the next two years to support the Cowessess First Nation in the implementation of its own child and family services system. While a number of participants supported greater Indigenous self-determination in this area, many felt the transition to an Indigenous-led system should be undertaken very gradually and with great care. It was strongly felt there needed to be a larger, Indigenous-led regulatory body that each individual system would be accountable to.

Focusing on issues related to clean drinking water, participants were asked if they had heard anything about efforts by the Government of Canada to lift long-term drinking water advisories on Indigenous reserves. While some recalled having seen headlines about this, few were aware of any specific actions the federal government had recently taken towards resolving this issue. Participants were provided information in the form of an infographic detailing recent efforts by the federal government to lift long-term drinking water advisories in Indigenous communities throughout Canada. Asked to rate the progress of the Government of Canada on this issue now that they had reviewed this information, most still felt that not enough progress had been made, and that this basic duty of the federal government to its citizens would not be met until all Indigenous communities had clean drinking water.

Asked about the housing situation on their respective reserves, most participants identified this as a major concern. Adequate housing, they said, was in extremely short supply, leading to long waiting lists and overcrowding, which, some pointed out, had compounded the challenges posed by the pandemic, making it very difficult for individuals who had tested positive or otherwise felt unwell to find a place to safely self-isolate. The few participants who felt the housing situation on their reserves had improved as of late credited the creation of smaller ‘bachelor pad’ style homes in their communities as well as the hiring of on-reserve contractors to undertake the construction work.

Canadian Content (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

Six groups discussed the subject of Canadian content, specifically focusing on the Canadian television, film, and music industries. Asked what they initially thought of when they heard the phrase ‘Canadian content’, a number of responses were provided including Canadian television channels, Canadian-produced films and television series, Canadian artists and creators, and educational or cultural content focusing on Canadian history, culture, and heritage.

With respect to any preferences for Canadian content over productions emanating from other countries, participants were somewhat split. While some said they would be more likely to watch film and television content if they knew it was Canadian, others said the subject matter and content were more likely to determine their interest in watching a film or television series rather than where it was produced. Most participants, regardless of preference, said the quality of the production was ultimately the determining factor as to whether they would continue watching. Regarding music by Canadian artists, while some based their listening preferences primarily on genre and style, many in these groups felt they would be more likely to seek out and listen to content they knew to be Canadian. Many felt that the quality of Canadian music was high, as good as anywhere, and featured a diverse array of talented artists.

Focusing on the state of the Canadian television and film industry, participants were somewhat split as to whether they felt the sector was currently at risk, with slightly more believing it to be in relatively healthy shape than those more worried about the industry’s future. Those who felt the Canadian film and television industry was at risk were most notably concerned about the impact of COVID-19 on production, finances, and employment.

Participants generally wanted to see the federal government support Canadian artists and creators, as well as protect Canadian content and stories. Across all groups, there was a consistently high level of support for these goals. A number of participants also felt there should be greater investment in Canadian creators and artists to ensure they had access to the resources and opportunities necessary to establish their careers in Canada rather than having to leave for other jurisdictions such as the United States. Many also supported the idea of web giants making Canadian content more discoverable on their platforms. In addition, a slightly smaller number of participants felt more needed to be done to showcase Canadian content, particularly on larger digital platforms. Some participants also felt taking steps towards modernizing the rules governing online content was an important priority, given how rapidly the digital media landscape was changing.

Asked if they were aware of proposed federal legislation to amend the Broadcasting Act, otherwise known as Bill C-10, a few participants recalled seeing headlines concerning the Bill but none could provide any specific details. Discussing whether they felt the Government of Canada should play a role in regulating non-user generated content on major digital platforms such as Netflix and Spotify, most participants felt these decisions should primarily be left to the viewer/listener and that the federal government should not be responsible for regulating content for Canadian audiences.

Youth and Post-Secondary Issues (Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students)

The group comprised of post-secondary students from the Hamilton and Niagara region discussed issues related to post-secondary education in Canada as well as those impacting younger Canadians more generally.

Asked about where they typically receive their news, almost all participants mentioned social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat, and several mentioned Google news. Many also clarified that they would often look to trusted news sources and authoritative outlets, such as CBC and other national or international media of record, to obtain further details and verify the accuracy of any stories they initially encountered on social media that did not originate from or link to coverage.

In regards to sources of news and information specifically related to the COVID-19 pandemic, participants again described receiving the majority of their news first from social media and Google news, or through word of mouth from friends and family. Asked whether they typically sought out news related to COVID-19, most said that while they had in the past, they rarely did so at this stage of the pandemic. Very few reported regularly looking for information related to or originating from the federal government. Discussing whether they had recently seen any advertising from the Government of Canada, a number of participants mentioned having encountered communications from the federal government on platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, and Snapchat, as well as more traditional media such as television and radio. In most cases, the content of these advertisements was primarily related to the pandemic, often specifically focusing on the ongoing vaccination campaign encouraging Canadians to get their third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Very few participants felt the Government of Canada was actively making an effort to reach out to students or prioritizing youth when making decisions. It was thought by some that while the federal government was aware that students and young people had struggled throughout the pandemic, they did not understand the nature of the struggle, particularly in terms of mental health. Discussing ways the federal government could more effectively reach out to students and youth, many felt social media was key and that federal officials needed to do more to tailor their messaging and approach to each individual platform. Several participants also felt the Government of Canada could work with colleges and universities more effectively to communicate important messages to young people.

Asked what the most important issues were to them personally that the Government of Canada should be focusing on, participants identified a number of key themes, including housing affordability, high food prices, the need for increased wages due to rising inflation, and lowering costs related to post-secondary education. To further explore priorities, participants were shown a list of potential initiatives geared towards assisting students/youth and were asked to select any that stood out to them as particularly promising. All participants felt the federal government should work to permanently eliminate federal interest on Canada Student Loans and Canada Apprentice Loans, with several describing anxiety associated with this debt and the difficulty of paying it off. Participants also reacted positively to proposals related to pausing repayments of federal student loans for parents of young children and increasing the repayment assistance threshold. It was felt these could be helpful initiatives, though far less so than measures to reduce large educational debt in the first place. Almost all participants were in support of continuing to scale up youth and student skills as well as providing a wider array of youth employment programming initiatives. Most were also in favour of the creation of a new stream of the Youth Employment and Skills Strategy for Canadians with disabilities and felt this group of young Canadians deserved a better chance than they were currently being given to fulfil their potential, participate in the workforce, and contribute to the Canadian economy.

Discussing additional actions the Government of Canada could take to support students and youth with respect to education, a number of participants felt more could be done to support those enrolled in colleges and universities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many were frustrated at having to pay full tuition and fees for what they felt to be a limited academic experience due to the lack of in-person classes and on-campus activities. In addition, some were also concerned about entering the labour market after graduation, feeling that as ‘COVID-19’ students, prospective employers may feel their education and skills would be less developed than those who enjoyed a more ‘normal’ post-secondary experience.

Official Language Minority Communities (Sudbury Region Francophones)

A discussion on the topic of official language minority communities was held among Francophones residing in the Sudbury region in Ontario. Participants were concerned about the state of the French language in Sudbury, more specifically regarding the ability to pass on the language, culture, and heritage to future generations. Many felt it was a particular challenge for youth with French-speaking parents to maintain their language skills in communities where English is the dominant language on a day-to-day basis, especially among many of their peers. It was felt this was a challenge for youth within their homes as well as in schools and various social activities.

When asked about specific challenges facing Francophones living in the region, participants focused on three areas in particular: obtaining child care services in French, accessing French-language media content, and transmitting the French language and culture to the next generation.

Many felt the Government of Canada could be doing more to protect the French language in communities like their own. A number of potential actions were mentioned, including ensuring the presence of more French programming and content in the media, enabling community groups to offer more programs and activities in French, promoting the speaking of French within the Francophone school system, and increasing opportunities for those interested in undertaking educational studies in French at the primary, secondary, and post-secondary level. Some also suggested more should be done to attract a greater number of Francophone workers to their local community.

Mobile Phones (Winnipeg)

Issues pertaining to mobile phones and the cost of cell phone plans in Canada were discussed among participants in the group from Winnipeg. Many participants remarked upon the rising costs associated with cellular phones, including the high cost of voice and data plans, which they felt were becoming increasingly unaffordable for the average Canadian. While some were attempting to manage their costs by bundling services for family members under one bill, for example, the general view was that costs would continue to increase over the next few years.

Participants were aware of some actions the Government of Canada had taken to reduce the cost of cell phone plans, including reducing costs and restrictions for customers wishing to cancel their contract or shift from one provider to another as well as ensuring that mobile devices could be unlocked free of charge, upon request. At the same time, additional suggestions were provided in terms of what more the federal government could do to help with rising cell phone bills, such as ensuring that all telecom carriers offer a basic, low cost plan as a standard option, encouraging greater competition within the telecom sector, and taking action against what some perceived to be ‘price-fixing’ among major Canadian telecommunications corporations.

Local Issues (Nunavut)

Participants in the group from Nunavut discussed a number of issues specifically relevant to their region and local communities. To begin, participants were asked if they had been following the issue related to water contamination in Iqaluit. Most were aware of the issue, with some saying it had been a long-standing concern facing the community, dating back to the latter half of 2021. While some were under the impression that the issue had been resolved in recent months, others had heard that the community’s water supply had once again become contaminated. Several recalled the presence of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel as well as the provision of federal government supplies and financial assistance towards resolving the issue. A few participants felt there should have been a greater effort by public officials to work with members of the community, including Inuit elders, who, it was felt could have provided useful advice, especially regarding operating in the extreme cold weather frequently experienced in the region.

Asked what additional steps the Government of Canada could take to assist in providing a long-term solution to clean drinking water issues in Iqaluit and the region more generally, a number of responses were provided. These included working with the municipal and territorial governments to construct a new water treatment facility in the community, greater work towards resolving drinking water issues throughout the North as well as the rest of Canada, and infrastructure upgrades throughout the region in order to prevent future issues from emerging in other Indigenous communities.

Discussing housing in the region, all participants felt there were serious issues concerning the availability of affordable dwellings in Iqaluit as well as a large number of other Northern communities. This perceived lack of housing in the territory was felt to disproportionately affect Inuit families and those originally from the area compared to individuals recruited to Nunavut to work for private companies. All participants felt more needed to be done by the federal government to provide affordable housing options for those living in the North. Some were of the opinion that a housing crisis had existed since the inception of the territory and had only worsened in the decades that followed. It was believed there needed to be a greater emphasis on ‘grassroots’ solutions to the housing situation, including the greater incorporation of Inuk voices in the process.

Most participants felt that mental health problems represented a serious and significant issue in many Northern communities. Asked to identify the largest challenges contributing to this issue, participants mentioned a number of factors such as a lack of mental health services, stigma around receiving treatment, and poor living standards which it was felt only served to exacerbate existing mental health issues among many individuals. Most felt that mental health challenges among youth, in particular, constituted an especially widespread and difficult problem in the territory. Many felt a lack of extracurricular activities for youth, such as organized sports, cultural education, arts and music classes, and other programming, was a major contributing factor, hindering social opportunities, goal-setting, confidence, and the development of practical skills among young people.

Most participants felt that services and care for seniors in Nunavut were also significantly lacking. A number of participants thought many communities, including Iqaluit, faced accessibility issues, with many buildings built above ground and only reachable by stairway, making them difficult for those with mobility issues to access. It was also felt that in-community care was essential for protecting both the physical and mental wellbeing of elders, and that the ability to interact with loved ones was an important component of the healing process. Related to this, several participants alluded to the situation of an elder from Coral Harbour who had travelled to Ottawa for treatment and was now facing difficulty returning to their local community. Many thought the transportation of elders away from their communities was not only having a negative impact on elders but on their loved ones, as well, who experienced guilt and anxiety for being unable to provide adequate care. Most participants felt strongly that more needed to be done to keep elders in their communities whenever possible.

Local Issues (Prince Edward Island)

Participants in the group from Prince Edward Island (PEI) discussed a number of issues specific to the province, including those related to the United States denying entry of shipments of PEI potatoes, the hiring of PEI nurses by Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC), and immigration within the province.

To begin, participants were asked if they had seen, read, or heard anything about recent developments related to the trade of PEI potatoes. All were at least somewhat aware of an issue related to a the United States temporarily denying entry of shipments of PEI potatoes due to the discovery of potato wart in some potato crops within the province. Most felt the Government of Canada had an important role to play in resolving this issue and resuming potato exports from PEI to the United States. Some thought the federal government needed to be firmer in its negotiations with U.S. counterparts and put greater effort into finding a solution. A few mentioned having heard the initial trade suspension had been ‘self-imposed’, with some believing that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) had suspended potato exports in the first place. Some were critical of these actions by the U.S. and thought it had been unnecessarily ‘heavy-handed’ given the perceived low health risk of potato wart. While no participants reported being personally affected by this issue, many felt it could potentially have numerous negative economic consequences for the province, given the status of PEI potatoes as a major provincial export, and the economic damage already incurred by the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in lost income to vital sectors such as the tourism industry.

Discussing the CFIA’s role more generally, most felt the agency was of critical importance, particularly in terms of ensuring public health and the safety of food products consumed by Canadians as well as international trade partners. It was believed the maintenance of high food-safety standards in Canadian exports was crucial in protecting Canada’s international reputation as a safe exporter. Asked how they felt the CFIA was performing in terms of fulfilling its mandate, participants were largely split on this issue with roughly an equal number of individuals feeling the CFIA was doing a good job as those who felt performance had been poor. Some thought that, while frustrating at times, the CFIA was upholding its responsibility to the Canadian people and protecting the international reputation of Canadian exports by identifying and taking action regarding issues such as potato wart. Others, however, were of the view that the initial potato wart issue had been minimal and primarily limited to only a few potato fields. As such, they felt this matter had been blown somewhat out of proportion and that the CFIA should have worked harder to reassure U.S. trade counterparts regarding the safety of PEI potatoes and promote confidence in the thoroughness of Canadian food safety standards and regulations.

Very few had heard about Government of Canada business risk management (BRM) programs, including the AgriStability initiative. Asked, more specifically, if they were aware of a $28-million plan from the federal government to assist PEI farmers affected by the trade suspension of potatoes to the United States, many participants had heard about this program, though few could recount any specific details. Most participants thought these financial supports would likely have a positive effect on helping PEI farmers and keeping their businesses viable in the short-term. Some, however, were skeptical that $28 million would be enough to offset the potential financial losses incurred by potato farmers, and felt additional funding may need to be allocated. Discussing what they felt would be the long-term impact of this situation on the potato industry on PEI, many felt the ‘PEI potatoes’ brand would be significantly damaged. From an economic perspective, some were also concerned about the province potentially losing what they felt to be its competitive advantage in the sector.

Discussing the recent announcement on February 8th, 2022 that the United States would be allowing the resumption of shipments of PEI potatoes to the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico, almost all participants had heard about this development, with many feeling this was great news for the province and its farmers. While a small number felt this represented something of a ‘double standard’ in that the potatoes were being accepted in Puerto Rico but not the U.S. mainland, most felt this decision was also related to increased demand for food stuffs in Puerto Rico. Some felt that potato wart, seen by most as primarily an aesthetic issue, would be of less concern relative to the nutritional value these potatoes could provide to the citizens of Puerto Rico. Most believed the CFIA likely played a role in accomplishing this partial reopening of trade, feeling this announcement represented a ‘win’ for both Canada and the United States and was a positive step towards fully resuming the trade of PEI potatoes.

Participants were also asked whether they had seen, read, or heard anything recently about Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC). Unprompted, several participants mentioned hearing about VAC hiring away a number of nurses who had previously been working for Health PEI, which some felt had caused a nursing shortage in the province, with the remaining nursing staff unable to meet the current demand of PEI residents. Asked specifically about the nursing issue, many felt that while VAC hiring these nurses may have negatively impacted the provincial health system, the switch may have been a beneficial one for nurses burnt out after working through almost two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Some suspected that many of these nurses may have actively sought out this temporary change. Rather than finding fault with the nurses, however, many believed provincial officials needed to take a closer look at why nurses were leaving Health PEI as well as potential actions the provincial government could take to improve working conditions for nurses to avoid further departures.

Participants also discussed whether they had recently seen, read, or heard anything about immigration specifically relating to PEI. While few had heard any specific details, it was generally felt that immigration to PEI had recently increased. To some, this was both a positive and negative development that might benefit the economy in some areas, such as the workforce, while creating challenges in others, such as increasing the demand for and cost of housing. Speaking on immigration more broadly, a number of participants recalled hearing about recent delays for applicants seeking to obtain permanent residency or Canadian citizenship, though few could recall any specific details. A few had also heard about delays in processing family reunifications due to a ‘backlog’ of applications built up over the course of the pandemic. Generally, it was felt by many that the process for obtaining permanent residency or Canadian citizenship was quite onerous for applicants.


MORE INFORMATION

The Strategic Counsel

Contract number: 35035-182346/001/CY

Contract award date: December 16, 2021

Contract value: $2,428,991.50


Detailed Findings – Part I: COVID-19

Timeline of February Announcements

To help place the focus group discussions within the context of key events occurring during the continuing COVID-19 pandemic as well as other domestic and international developments, below is a brief synopsis for the period beginning at the end of January and throughout the month of February 2022:

  • At the end of January
    • There had been 2,998,329 cases of COVID-19 in Canada with 33,373 deaths.
    • Daily case counts decreased to 13,977 across Canada, a 24% decrease from the previous week.
    • There were 180,492 active cases of COVID-19 in Canada.
    • Over 76 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines had been administered across Canada.
  • February 1-7
    • February 1. The Government of Canada announced details on the Surplus Potato Management Response plan. As part of this plan, the Government of Canada will provide up to $28 million and the Province of Prince Edward Island up to $12.2 million.
    • Focus groups were held with parents of children under 12 in Durham region in Ontario (February 2) and the general population in the Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord regions in Quebec (February 3).
    • February 3. The Government of Canada announced over $929,000 in funding to bring high-speed Internet to 528 households in North West River and the Sheshatshiu Innu First Nation in Newfoundland and Labrador, as part of the federal government’s initiative to ensure that 98% of Canadians have access to high-speed Internet by 2026.
    • February 3. The Government of Canada announced the first wave of 60 approved projects under the Agricultural Clean Technology (ACT) Program, a program with $17.9 million in funding for projects across Canada to ensure farmers and agri-businesses will have access to the latest clean technologies.
    • February 4. The Government of Canada announced immediate non-lethal military aid to support Ukraine, including personal protective and load carriage equipment, as well as surveillance and detection equipment.
  • February 8-14
    • February 8. The Government of Canada announced $555,777 in funding to bring high-speed Internet to 136 households in rural areas near North Bay, Ontario.
    • February 8. The Government of Canada introduced several proposed changes to the Criminal Code, the Identification of Criminals Act and other federal legislation to help address the challenges that criminal courts encounter as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to modernize the criminal justice system.
    • Focus groups were held with parents of children under 12 in mid-size centres in Saskatchewan (February 8) and renters in the Okanagan region in British Columbia (February 9).
    • February 9. The Government of Canada announced over $41 million in funding for 21 projects that will bring high-speed Internet to 5,806 households in rural Alberta.
    • Focus group was held with the general population in Nunavut (February 10).
    • February 10. The Minister of Health announced an additional $68.4 million in funding to be provided for safe voluntary isolation sites across Canada within the next year to improve access to safe isolation accommodations.
    • February 10. The Government of Canada announced an investment of $800,000 for two projects addressing mental health supports for Black Canadians.
    • February 14. The Government of Canada launched the Output-Based Pricing System Proceeds Fund, a new program that aims to support industrial initiatives that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and deploy clean technology and green energy.
    • February 14. The Government of Canada announced that it has authorized the provision of additional military assistance to the Government of Ukraine to support Ukrainian security forces against escalating aggression against Ukraine. Over $7 million of lethal weapons and assorted support items will be donated to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
    • February 14. The Government of Canada announced the declaration of a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act, to end disruptions, border blockades and the occupation of Ottawa’s downtown core.
    • February 14. The Government of Canada announced that it will offer a loan of up to $500 million to the Government of Ukraine through the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act (BWRAA), in addition to Canada’s offer for a loan up to $120 million, announced on January 21, 2022.
  • February 15-21
    • February 15. The Government of Canada announced several adjustments to the border measures to begin the ease of travel restrictions, effective February 28, 2022:
      • Travellers arriving to Canada from any country, who qualify as fully vaccinated, will be randomly selected for arrival testing.
      • Travellers will have the option of using a COVID-19 rapid antigen test result or a molecular test result to meet pre-entry requirements.
      • The Government of Canada will adjust its Travel Health Notice from a Level 3 to a Level 2, meaning the Government will no longer recommend that Canadians avoid non-essential travel.
    • Focus groups were held with post-secondary students in the Hamilton and Niagara region in Ontario (February 15) and those who tested positive for COVID-19 in Edmonton (February 16).
    • February 16. The Government of Canada announced $19.5 million in international assistance for 4 projects dedicated to reconstruction efforts in Haiti.
    • Focus group was held with the general population in Winnipeg (February 17).
    • February 17. Health Canada authorized Novavax’s Nuvaxovid COVID-19 vaccine, a protein-based vaccine that is administered as a two-dose regimen, for the prevention of COVID-19 in adults 18 years of age and older.
    • February 17. The Government of Canada announced up to $80 million to lead the Cyber Security Innovation Network (CSIN) to foster a strong national cyber security ecosystem in Canada.
    • February 17. The Government of Canada announced approximately $6.6 million in funding for 10 projects that will bring high-speed Internet to more than 2,500 households in rural Saskatchewan.
    • February 19. The Government of Canada announced an investment of up to $20 million to provide non-repayable contributions to Ottawa businesses impacted by the illegal demonstrations and blockades.
  • February 21-28
    • February 22. The Government of Canada announced nearly $98 million in funding over 4 years to support and strengthen Manitoba’s regulated child care services and offer support for the recruitment and retention of the child care workforce.
    • February 22. The Government of Canada announced federal funding of up to $182.7 million for 12 recipient organizations to deliver the On-Farm Climate Action Fund across Canada.
    • Focus groups were held with the general population in Prince Edward Island (February 22) and with Francophones in the Sudbury region in Ontario (February 23).
    • February 23. The Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Youth announced over $1.3 million for 3 projects to promote the empowerment of Black women and girls across Canada.
    • Focus group was held with the general population in central and southern Quebec (February 24).
    • February 24. Health Canada authorized Medicago’s Covifenz COVID-19 vaccine, the first authorized COVID-19 vaccine developed by a Canadian-based company, for the prevention of COVID-19 in adults 18 to 64 years of age.
    • February 25. The Government of Canada announced that Canada will match every donation made by individual Canadians to the Canadian Red Cross between February 24, 2022, and March 18, 2022, up to a maximum of $10 million.
    • Focus group was held with Indigenous peoples living on reserves in Saskatchewan and Manitoba (February 28).
    • February 28. The Government of Canada announced an additional $25 million in military aid to support Ukraine in its efforts to retain sovereignty and territorial integrity.
    • February 28.  The Government of Canada announced that it would ban crude oil imports from Russia.
    • February 28. There had been 3,288,006 cases of COVID-19 in Canada with 36,099 deaths. Over 81 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines had been administered in Canada.
      • A downward trend in cases was reported, with 5,663 reported during the latest 7-day period in February (Feb. 23-Mar. 1), a 5% decrease from the week prior.

Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)

At the beginning of each group, participants were asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the Government of Canada in recent days. Across all groups, participants most commonly mentioned federal government news related to the COVID-19 pandemic, especially the ‘trucker convoy’ protests, as well as the recent Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Regarding the pandemic, while participants shared a number of comments related to vaccines, mandates, and evolving travel restrictions, the most top of mind issue, by far, was the trucker convoy protests taking place in Ottawa and at several Canada-U.S. border crossings in other parts of the country. This issue was noted in all groups and with increasing frequency as the month (and the protests) wore on. Among the groups held later in the month, most recalled following the federal government’s implementation (and subsequent removal) of the Emergencies Act. Several also mentioned hearing about specific aspects of the legislation and how it could be deployed, including the ability of law enforcement to temporarily freeze the bank accounts of some of those participating in or financially supporting the protests.

Also related to the pandemic, a number of participants in the group from Nunavut mentioned hearing about recent federal support to their region, including the provision of financial relief as well as the deployment of out-of-province health care workers.

Among other domestic issues, a few participants mentioned the decision by the Bank of Canada to hold off on raising interest rates for the time being, as well as concerns regarding inflation and a perceived rapid increase of oil and gas prices in many parts of the country. In Nunavut, participants were widely aware of the recent agreement between the territorial and federal government on affordable child care as well as ongoing efforts to resolve drinking water issues in Iqaluit. Participants recalled having seen many federal planes carrying potable drinking water arriving in their community, as well as Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and other federal personnel on site to assist in alleviating the problem.

On the international stage, many groups were also aware of growing tensions between Russia and Ukraine. This was especially the case in those groups conducted near the end of February in the days just prior to and directly following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24th, 2022. Participants recalled a number of news stories, actions, and announcements related to the Government of Canada’s response to this situation, including:

  • The provision of financial aid and military supplies to Ukraine;
  • The deployment of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) troops to Eastern Europe;
  • The imposition of sanctions on Russian individuals and entities; and
  • The closure of Canadian airspace to Russian aircraft.

Convoy Protests (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

These ten groups were asked about the ‘convoy’ protests, which grew in size and scope throughout much of the month of February.  In the groups held earlier in the month, participants were first asked if they had heard anything about the Government of Canada recently removing the exemption from federal border entry requirements for certain categories of travellers, including truck drivers.  Few said they had.  After it was clarified that, as of January 15th, 2022, unvaccinated Canadian truck drivers entering Canada would need to meet requirements for pre-entry, arrival, day-8 testing, and quarantines, several participants recalled having heard something about this development and its connection to the protests.  While some had heard that unvaccinated truck drivers would now be limited to only domestic routes, a number of others were also concerned about potential supply chain issues resulting from these regulations.  In the group from the Okanagan, supply-related issues were of particular concern, with some participants recalling suffering through similar difficulties in the aftermath of the extreme flooding in the province in November of 2021.   A small number of participants expressed the opinion that the potential impact of this issue had been greatly exaggerated, being of the impression that the vast majority of truck drivers were fully-vaccinated and thus would not have been impacted by the removal of this exemption.

In groups held later in the month, following the entrenchment of protests in Ottawa and at several border crossings with the United States, participants recalled hearing a number of details, including:

  • People travelling from all across Canada to join these protests, with the overarching goal of ending COVID-19 related mandates as well as restrictions for those who had made the decision to not get vaccinated;
  • The blocking and subsequent closure of numerous roadways in Ottawa, impeding the ability of emergency services and essential workers to carry out their duties;
  • Blockades at several Canada-U.S. border crossings, halting the delivery of essential goods into Canada and potentially threatening the livelihoods of workers in sectors (such as the auto industry) dependent on expedient cross-border trade of parts and materials;
  • Doctors, nurses, and other health care workers in Ottawa being discouraged from wearing their scrubs in public for fear of potentially being harassed by protesters in the city;
  • Instances of Ottawa residents wearing facemasks being accosted or harassed by protesters while going about their daily activities;
  • Noise-related disturbances suffered by residents in Ottawa, primarily due to persistent and ongoing honking;
  • The presence of disturbing symbols, including Nazi and Confederate flags, at some of the protest sites; and
  • The difficulty law enforcement had encountered in clearing the protests.

Asked for their opinions of the protests, participants expressed a wide variety of views. On balance, more participants were opposed to the protests than supportive of them, given the types of issues identified above, though a significant number identified with the frustration expressed by the protesters regarding ongoing public health measures. Some supported the demonstrators, even if they disagreed with some of their methods, in their advocating for an end to COVID-related measures and vaccine mandates, which they felt to be long overdue. This diversity of viewpoints was present in all groups.

Among those more opposed to the protests, the general sense was that they had persisted for far too long, especially in downtown Ottawa. Many were concerned about the harms being caused to Ottawa residents in particular, with respect to noise, blockades of local streets, harassment, anxiety, and the curtailment of their freedom to live in peace. Participants widely felt these actions by the protestors were unfair and risked negatively impacting the physical and mental wellbeing of those living near Parliament Hill. A number of participants also felt the protests had become somewhat directionless as time went on and were no longer about ending mandates, especially given that many public health measures had been (or would soon be) lifted in several provinces and territories throughout Canada. Others voiced concern regarding the potential for violence or criminal activity related to the protests, with a few specifically mentioning the seizure by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) of a cache of weapons at the Coutts, Alberta protest site.

Among participants who were more supportive of the protests and their aims, it was felt the protests had been mostly peaceful and that these individuals had the right to express their opinion via public protest. While some were hesitant to condone the disruption caused by the protests, most of these participants felt the aim of the protest of ending COVID-19 mandates was justified and something they too supported. A few participants expressed excitement regarding what they perceived as Canadians standing up for their rights and freedoms and were passionate in their support for these protests. A small number also felt the media coverage of the protests had been primarily ‘one-sided’ and had unfairly portrayed the protests in a mostly negative light.

In addition to those solidly in support of or against the protests, a smaller number of participants expressed ambivalence. While some felt the right to peaceful protest was something that needed to be protected and upheld, they also expressed concern about the negative impact these demonstrations were having on those in Ottawa and elsewhere. Others said that while they initially supported the protests, they felt they had gotten out of hand and ‘lost their way’ in what they were seeking to accomplish. More generally, it was stated that the pandemic had been divisive on a number of fronts, making it difficult for some Canadians to find common ground with one another and further intensifying the protests.

Government of Canada Response and Emergencies Act (Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

These five groups also engaged in discussions regarding the federal response to the protests, including the declaration of a public order emergency and subsequent enactment of the Emergencies Act by the federal government on February 14th, 2022. All five groups were held after this date.

Almost all participants in these groups recalled hearing at least something about the Emergencies Act, with many specifically mentioning the aspect of the legislation allowing law enforcement to temporarily freeze the bank accounts of some of those participating in or financially associated with the protests. While several felt these enhanced law enforcement powers would likely be effective in ending the blockades, a smaller number were worried the use of this Act would cause further conflict or potential for violence by escalating the tensions between protestors and law enforcement.

Though a few participants felt that implementing the Emergencies Act was a necessary step given the disturbance caused by the seemingly indefinite nature of the protests, most participants felt this action represented significant ‘overreach’ by the federal government by limiting the right of these Canadians to peaceful protest. Regionally, participants in the groups from Edmonton and Winnipeg were mostly against the decision by the Government of Canada to utilize the Emergencies Act, while those in the Sudbury region, on Prince Edward Island, and from southern and central Quebec were more evenly split about whether they believed this action to be appropriate.

Among the smaller number of participants who supported the federal government’s use of the Emergencies Act, it was generally viewed as a necessary measure to clear the blockade in Ottawa, where many felt the Ottawa Police Service (OPS) had lost control of the situation. The use of this legislation was also seen by many as the most expedient method of dealing with the protests at numerous border crossings, ensuring that cross-border transportation could resume. A few thought the invocation of the Emergencies Act was the only realistic option towards ending the protests, feeling that the protests would just increase in size otherwise, and that negotiating with the protestors would likely solve little. Others were concerned about reports of foreign money being donated to the protests and felt the Emergencies Act was an effective way of putting an end to this. A small number clarified their views, saying that while they felt the Emergencies Act was an appropriate measure, this outcome could have been avoided if governments at the municipal, provincial, and federal level had done more to curtail the protests early on.

For those who felt the Emergencies Act was a disproportionate response on the part of the federal government, many thought there were other steps that could have been taken prior to invoking this legislation. Most of these participants believed the protests to be primarily legal and peaceful and did not represent a public order emergency. Several participants were particularly unnerved by the reports of protesters and their supporters having their bank accounts frozen and expressed anxiety at law enforcement being imbued with this power. A few expressed a growing lack of trust in the federal government, which they felt was limiting the rights of Canadians to protest in a peaceful manner and were concerned the Emergencies Act could be used routinely going forward to limit public dissent.

Asked how they felt the Government of Canada should have responded, those opposed to the use of the Emergencies Act suggested that more steps could have been taken by federal officials to open up a dialogue with the protestors and hear their concerns. A small number of these participants felt that rather than denouncing the protests, the federal government should have listened to them and dropped all federal COVID-19 related mandates, believing this to be the most prudent way to resolve the tensions and move forward from the pandemic. Irrespective of their support or opposition for the protests and the use of the Emergencies Act, many felt the federal government should have taken action far sooner than it did, and that this perceived lack of action was a major driver in enabling the protests to escalate.

Taking place after the protests had been cleared and the revocation of the Emergencies Act on February 23rd, 2022, the groups from the Sudbury region and southern and central Quebec were asked an additional question about this decision. While most were happy to see these emergency measures removed, participants reached different conclusions about what this decision implied. Some viewed the revocation of the Act as a reasonable decision and sign of good faith by the federal government and proof that the legislation had worked as intended. Others viewed the quick removal as evidence that the law should never have been used in the first place, feeling that the Government of Canada was essentially retracting its initial decision to invoke the Act. No participants expressed a desire to see the Emergencies Act extended for a longer period of time.

COVID-19 Outlook and Vaccines (All Locations)

Participants in all groups discussed a wide range of issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the Government of Canada’s ongoing response to it. These conversations focused on federal performance over the course of the pandemic, ongoing public health measures, COVID-19 vaccinations for children, and the ongoing campaign encouraging Canadians to get their third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, otherwise known as the ‘booster dose’.

COVID-19 Performance Evaluation (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

To begin, participants were asked to recall anything they thought the Government of Canada had done well in its handling of the pandemic. This prompted a number of responses, including:

  • The implementation of public health measures and continued encouragement regarding practices such as social distancing, wearing facemasks, and frequent hand sanitization, among others. Generally, it was felt the Government of Canada had consistently followed a ‘science-based’ approach in its handling of the pandemic. Related to federal efforts to track and contain the spread of COVID-19, some also mentioned the rapid procurement and distribution of molecular PCR tests by the federal government in the initial months of the pandemic;
  • Consistent communication and updates from federal representatives and public health officials. Participants generally felt that the Government of Canada had been effective at keeping Canadians informed throughout the pandemic, especially during the uncertainty of the initial waves of the pandemic;
  • Restricting non-essential travel early in the pandemic, strategically limiting travel from COVID-19 ‘hot spots’ at times of increased transmission, and adapting international travel measures, as needed. Some felt the federal government had performed fairly well, overall, in regard to its implementation of travel-related policies;
  • Financial supports such as the Canadian Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy (CERS), as well as more recent initiatives such as the Canada Worker Lockdown Benefit (CWLB). Several felt the federal government had been quick to act in providing financial supports to those impacted financially in the early months of the pandemic, and had continued to support Canadians in the months and years that followed. Even among those who felt the CERB had contributed negatively to issues such as higher inflation, it was acknowledged this financial assistance had been immensely helpful in supporting Canadians during the pandemic;
  • The widespread and efficient distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, particularly during the initial vaccination campaign. Some felt Canada had been a global leader in this regard, distributing vaccines throughout the country in a manner that was consistent, highly accessible, and met with exceptionally high uptake by the vast majority of the population; and
  • Food provision in Northern communities. Though not mentioned by name, some in the Nunavut group referred to the Nutrition North Canada program and the collaboration between the Government of Canada and various Indigenous groups to ensure food security in remote or isolated communities.

More generally, a number of participants felt the Government of Canada had done a good job in navigating the unprecedented and unpredictable nature of the pandemic. Some expressed the opinion that when it came time to look back upon the pandemic, many would say the federal government had performed well, overall, in managing and adapting to the ever-changing virus.

Asked to identify areas where the Government of Canada’s response could have been improved, participants also put forward a number of opinions. These included:

  • A perceived lack of transparency or explanation regarding the scientific basis for ongoing mandates and public health requirements. Some felt that proof of vaccination requirements for domestic and international flights, for instance, no longer made sense given the state of the pandemic and what was now known about the virus’ ability to transmit among vaccinated as well as unvaccinated individuals;
  • The need for clearer goals and criteria regarding how to ‘move on’ from the pandemic and return to greater normalcy. Some felt that vaccines had been presented by provincial and federal public health officials as the best way to end public health measures and were disappointed that despite high vaccine uptake throughout Canada many mandates and requirements remained in place. This had contributed to concern among some that these measures may continue in perpetuity;
  • Delays in closing international borders and barring non-essential travel, especially in the early stages of the pandemic. Some felt that, rather than being proactive, the federal government had been mostly reactive in its implementation of international travel restrictions to try to contain the spread of the virus. A few felt more should have been done to limit the number of travellers entering Canada, including the implementation of stricter requirements related to non-essential international travel;
  • Slow procurement of COVID-19 vaccines following their development and approval in late 2020 and early 2021. While many spoke highly of the federal government’s eventual roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccines, some felt Canadians had to wait several months longer than those in other jurisdictions, such as the United States, to receive their initial doses. This was attributed to a lack of supply and capability to manufacture vaccines domestically;
  • Limited PCR molecular testing capacity, especially during the recent Omicron wave. While some identified the procurement and distribution of PCR tests by the federal government as a strength earlier in the pandemic, many described encountering difficulties in getting tested during the recent rise in cases brought on by the Omicron variant. It was felt the federal government could have done more to procure additional testing kits and ensure that provinces and territories were able to increase their testing capacity to meet demand;
  • Perceived inefficient management of the CERB and other benefits. A number of participants expressed frustration at what they felt to be a lack of oversight related to the distribution of financial supports throughout the pandemic, believing that ineligible individuals had been able to receive this financial assistance. A few participants also felt more could have been done to educate Canadians, particularly seniors, regarding the implications of accepting these benefits. Some had heard accounts of seniors no longer qualifying for other benefits due to the additional taxable income they had received from the CERB; and
  • A small number of participants thought more needed to be done to financially assist those suffering from ‘long-COVID’ and unable to return to work.

Participants in Prince Edward Island (PEI) were asked an additional question about whether they felt the Government of Canada had been attuned to the needs of PEI residents throughout the pandemic. Most thought the federal government had been largely consistent in its handling of the pandemic across all provinces/territories, feeling PEI had been treated no better or worse than any other jurisdiction within Canada. While a small number voiced frustration that public health measures remained in place in PEI while being lifted in other provinces, such as Alberta, it was also acknowledged this was primarily the responsibility of the provincial government.

Among all groups, participants were asked whether they felt the federal government’s handling of the pandemic was currently better, worse, or about the same, compared to earlier on in the pandemic. While opinions varied, many felt the Government of Canada was performing worse at present compared to earlier in the pandemic, especially among groups in PEI, Quebec, and the Okanagan region of B.C. Views were more mixed in Sudbury, while in Edmonton most felt the federal government’s performance had remained about the same throughout. In Nunavut, by contrast, most felt the federal government’s response had improved as the pandemic progressed.

Among those who thought the federal government’s performance was better now compared to earlier in the pandemic, the general sense was that policymakers now had a better understanding of COVID-19 and were able to handle the pandemic more effectively as a result. A number of these participants characterized the early response to the pandemic as somewhat chaotic and uncertain, but also felt the federal government had done its best in navigating an unprecedented and extremely challenging situation.

Among those who believed the Government of Canada’s performance had worsened recently, many felt there to be a general lack of direction in the current federal approach, especially in regards to lifting restrictions (which some conflated with provincial/territorial measures). It was felt by some that there had been relatively little guidance from federal public officials during the recent Omicron wave, in particular. Some were also of the view that the federal government often waited too long to react to developments such as the discovery of new variants of concern. Related to this, a number of participants expressed a desire for a more proactive response on the part of the federal government towards its handling of the pandemic. A number of participants also thought current messaging from the federal government was somewhat negative at times, and that more could be done to reassure Canadians and communicate appreciation for their efforts to help contain the spread of the virus for almost two years. A few felt the federal government needed to do more to help mount an effective global response by donating more vaccines to developing countries with low vaccination rates. Many participants also thought more needed to be done to address the mental health implications of the pandemic and related public safety measures, which they viewed as a rapidly growing concern among Canadians that had the potential to be more damaging than the virus itself. A number of participants felt the Government of Canada could help address this by placing a greater focus on lifting mandates and public health requirements wherever possible (with some again conflating with provincial/territorial measures). Some also felt this would go a long way towards healing the increased divisiveness they felt had been brought on by the recent convoy protests in Ottawa and other parts of the country.

Among those who felt the Government of Canada’s performance had remained about the same throughout the pandemic, the general sense was that the government had performed fairly well overall, despite some missteps along the way, and that a consistent effort had been made to follow the science and adapt to new information and knowledge as it became available.

COVID-19 Public Health Measures and Forecast (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

These groups discussed COVID-19 public health measures in their regions, and opinions regarding how the pandemic may evolve going forward.

To begin, participants were asked to come up with a single word or phrase to describe their views regarding the COVID-19 restrictions in place within their regions. A wide range of responses were provided, roughly split between positive and negative, overall, with a significant number of participants also expressing ambivalence and uncertainty regarding public health measures. While most groups contained some diversity of opinion, participants in the Okanagan as well as southern and central Quebec were almost entirely negative in their opinions towards these measures.

Those expressing more positive views used words such as ‘satisfied’, ‘sufficient’, ‘pleased’, ‘acceptable’, and ‘fair’, feeling that the restrictions currently in place, while unfortunate, were necessary in the short term in response to rising case counts amidst the Omicron wave. A number of these participants also thought that certain practices, such as social distancing and masking, should likely continue even as other restrictions were lifted. While few expressed a desire for stricter public health measures in their regions, a number of participants in provinces such as Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba were somewhat anxious about recent announcements regarding what they viewed as a very rapid timeline for the lifting of public health measures in their respective provinces.

Among participants who felt more negatively about existing public health measures, words such as ‘relentless’, ‘constrained’, ‘excessive’, ‘angry’, and ‘nonsensical’ were used to describe their views. While a few were skeptical regarding the need or efficacy of public health measures, many more were of the view that these measures were simply no longer necessary given the increased transmissibility and perceived mildness of the Omicron variant, as well as the relatively high rate of vaccination among Canadians. Some were also concerned about restrictions becoming indefinite or cyclical, particularly in provinces such as Ontario and Quebec where lockdowns, temporary business closures, and strict capacity restrictions had been reintroduced in December 2021 following the emergence of the Omicron variant. Even as a number of provinces/territories announced the lifting of many public health measures throughout the month of February, some remained concerned that it would only be a matter of time until another variant of concern was identified and restrictions reimplemented.

Those more ambivalent or uncertain in their views used words such as ‘tired’, ‘inconsistent’, and ‘confusing’. Some said they felt worn down by public health measures and their impact on daily life, even while continuing to comply with them and feeling they were necessary. A few felt that provincial/territorial public health officials had, at times, been overly reactive in removing and then reimplementing restrictions in their area at different stages of the pandemic, expressing a desire for greater consistency on this front. Some also expressed confusion regarding existing public health restrictions across jurisdictions, particularly those related to international travel, which they felt had changed frequently in recent months.

Asked if they felt restrictions should be loosened in their regions, participants were again mixed in their views. While a larger number felt the majority of public health requirements should be lifted in the near future, a smaller yet still significant number favoured either a slower, gradual removal or keeping restrictions in place for the time being.

Many felt that, given the perceived lower risk of recent variants such as Omicron, it was time to lift restrictions, particularly for the sake of individuals and businesses economically impacted during the pandemic. A number of others thought removing restrictions was also important from a societal perspective, believing them to be a major source of contention amongst Canadians, especially in the wake of the convoy protests. A few participants from the group comprised of Indigenous peoples in Saskatchewan and Manitoba expressed a desire to see restrictions removed, feeling Indigenous leadership, rather than federal or provincial officials, should determine which requirements, if any, were appropriate for their communities. While also favouring the removal of restrictions at some point in the near future, several participants felt this should be done gradually rather than all at once. In addition, a few felt proof-of-vaccination requirements, in particular, should remain in place for the time being to encourage more Canadians to get vaccinated.

A smaller number of participants were opposed to removing restrictions at this juncture, believing that it would put vulnerable groups, such as seniors, immunocompromised individuals, and young children, at risk. While acknowledging the negative impact and inconvenience of public health restrictions, these participants tended to view them as necessary in the short-term to keep Canadians safe.

Regionally, all participants in the Okanagan and the Hamilton and Niagara groups wished to see restrictions lifted, as did most in the Sudbury and Quebec groups. By contrast, the groups from Winnipeg and Edmonton were mostly split on the issue. Only the group in Nunavut expressed a continued desire to see public health measures in their area remain in place, with a number particularly concerned about the recent return of children to in-person classes in late January 2022.

Most participants felt the worst of the pandemic had likely passed, given the perceived mildness of the recent Omicron variant, the high vaccination rate among Canadians, and the natural immunity to the virus they felt had likely been acquired by many following the most recent wave of the pandemic. A smaller number were more pessimistic, believing it was still possible for more severe variants to emerge, with a few specifically mentioning concerns regarding the BA.2 variant that had been identified in other jurisdictions such as Denmark and the United Kingdom. Asked whether they felt COVID-19 would still be an issue one year from now, almost all participants believed the virus would still be around in some form or another for many years to come, but most also believed it would begin to fade into the background and become an ‘endemic’ issue similar to influenza and other seasonal viruses. Many expected that an annual booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine may be required going forward, and that case counts could be expected to rise regularly in the fall and winter months as more people gathered indoors, creating conditions for increased transmission.

The groups from Winnipeg, Sudbury, and southern and central Quebec, as well as the group comprised of Indigenous peoples in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, were asked an additional question regarding the impact of public health measures and if they felt that hand washing, social distancing, and mask-wearing, among others, had been effective at curbing the spread of COVID-19. Many felt they had, especially in the early stages of the pandemic, but others were more skeptical and pointed to shifting opinions among public health officials about what worked and what did not. They pointed to masking, in particular, as a case in point, given the emerging view that only N95-type masks offered any real protection against transmitting or contracting the virus. More prominently, a large number of participants said they were more concerned about the negative consequences of these public health measures, especially in regard to social isolation and its effects on the mental wellbeing of Canadians, particularly elders and young people, as well as the financial impacts of temporary business closures and capacity restrictions. A number of participants in the group living on-reserve in Manitoba and Saskatchewan felt that social isolation related to the pandemic had exacerbated issues with substance abuse issues in their communities.

The group in Winnipeg was also asked an additional question regarding how the pandemic and related public health measures had impacted the downtown area and small businesses within the community. All participants felt the pandemic had negatively impacted local businesses, believing the majority of the businesses in the downtown core had been hurt by the pandemic, with many closing permanently as a result. While federal subsidies were seen to have been quite helpful in this respect, many also thought they had not been enough, in most cases, to ensure that businesses would be able to weather the financial difficulties brought on by the pandemic.

COVID-19 Vaccines for Children (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

These three groups were asked a series of questions related to the COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5-11. Two of the groups were entirely comprised of parents with young children, while about half of those in the group made up of Indigenous peoples in Saskatchewan and Manitoba had children in this age group.

A smaller number of participants reported having gotten their children vaccinated relative to those who had chosen to hold off for the time being. Among those who had vaccinated their children, many had done so out of the desire to protect their kids against COVID-19 as well as provide additional security for more vulnerable family members with whom they interact, such as grandparents. Some also mentioned having chosen to do so as a way to continue normal day-to-day activities, such as going to events or eating at restaurants with their children, as best as possible. Only some of these participants said they had discussed vaccination in depth with their children as part of their decision-making process. Relatively more said they had consulted with a trusted medical professional, such as a family doctor or personal contact working in health care, providing them with increased confidence in the safety of the vaccine.

Among those who had not had their children vaccinated, few were against it in principle or on the basis of any ideological opposition to vaccines in general. Many, however, had concerns about the potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine, particularly regarding its relatively short track record of use and what they felt to be a lack of assurance on the part of medical experts regarding possible long term impacts. Some also felt that the risk of COVID-19 to young children was quite low and cited this as the primary factor in their decision to hold off vaccinating their children for the time being. Some recalled recently contracting COVID-19 themselves and, having quickly recovered, now felt the overall impact of the virus was likely to be relatively mild if their children were to contract it. A small number also said that they were opposed to what they felt to be ‘coercive tactics’ to get their children vaccinated, such as proof of vaccination requirements and vaccine mandates implemented by provincial/territorial and federal governments, which had contributed to their decision to hold off.

The group consisting of Indigenous participants were asked an additional question regarding whether the approval of the vaccine for use in children had been a positive or negative development. Many felt ambivalent or uncertain about this topic. Some questioned why the vaccine for children was being so heavily promoted, which made them suspicious. Others reiterated their concerns about the potential side-effects for children, especially those who may have allergic reactions, and questioned whether the vaccine should be recommended to all children or just those who were immunocompromised and more vulnerable to the virus as a result.

COVID-19 Booster Dose (Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

Asked whether they had received a third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, also known as the ‘booster dose’, participants had mixed responses, especially by region. Most in the Winnipeg and southern and central Quebec groups had received their third dose, while many of those in the Edmonton and Sudbury groups had not. Very few in the Indigenous group from Saskatchewan and Manitoba had received their booster.

Among those who had received their booster dose, almost all said they had done so to protect themselves as well as family members, friends, or others they interact with who may be more vulnerable. A few mentioned having recently gone on vacation or intending to travel abroad in the near future and wanted to utilize as many safeguards as possible. In addition, some also recalled getting their booster after hearing that it had been recommended by trusted public health officials and medical professionals, choosing to defer to their expertise on the matter.

Among those who had not yet received their booster, the primary driver behind this decision was a lack of confidence in the efficacy of the vaccine and whether it would have a tangible impact on preventing them from contracting or spreading COVID-19.  A number of participants clarified that while they had gotten their initial vaccines, the massive increase of transmissibility and positive cases among both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals during the recent Omicron wave had limited their desire for a third dose, believing it would have little effect.  A few also mentioned experiencing a general fatigue related to the pandemic as a whole, expressing that they no longer wished to participate in most public health measures, including receiving any additional doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. 

COVID-19 Vaccine Ad Testing (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)

Parents with children under the age of 12 who resided in the Durham region in Ontario were shown two concepts under development by the Government of Canada for possible advertising regarding COVID-19 vaccines. Prior to evaluating the concepts they were asked whether their children had been vaccinated. The response was mixed – roughly an equal number of participants had gotten their children vaccinated as those who had decided to hold off for the time being. Among those whose children had not been vaccinated, most indicated they did not have any plans to vaccinate their children in the near future.

Participants were then asked to review the two concepts (Concept A and Concept B). It was explained that both concepts were in ‘storyboard’ format, meaning they were not in their finished form. Rather, the storyboard contained images, graphical illustrations, and a short narrative to give participants a sense of what it could look like as a professionally produced 30-second video. Participants were also informed that the ads would be aired on social media and digital platforms.

Concept A: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine

Above is a storyboard featuring six animated frames from a Public Health Ad Campaign. The first frame shows a simple line drawing of a mother and father holding up their child with their arms. The voiceover reads, “We all want to protect our children. So how does COVID-19 vaccination fit into that?” The second frame then shows the child starting to run as if they’re playing, with the voiceover saying, “COVID-19 vaccines can help keep kids safe from severe illness and potential long-term effects if they get the virus.” The third frame shows the line transform into an outline of a five year old playing with his father and an eleven year old hugging her mother. The voiceover says, “Doses for children 5 to 11 are smaller, which is all they need for good protection.” The next frame shows more kids appear, and they all start walking together. The voiceover reads, “Millions of children in Canada and around the world have already been safely vaccinated and severe reactions are very rare.” The fifth frame then shows one child holding hands with their parents, and the line then turns into the vaccine icon. The voiceover says, “Vaccination can help protect your child from getting seriously sick from COVID-19.”

Initial reactions to Concept A were generally positive, with most finding the tone to be uplifting and hopeful. They also felt the concept was direct and to the point, focusing on the benefits of getting children vaccinated and, as a result, being able to resume the kinds of activities that children and families enjoyed prior to the onset of the pandemic.

Participants specifically liked the use of familiar imagery to which they could relate. They commented positively on the images of mothers, fathers, and children hugging, playing, and enjoying themselves as a family.

At the same time, several were critical of certain elements or aspects of this concept, including the following:

  • Some found it to be generic and plain, referring to the creative approach which utilizes a continuous line to draw parents and children undertaking various activities. The ‘faceless’ images and overall artistic style employed in this concept were considered aloof by a few participants;
  • A few found the visuals and style of the concept to be uninspiring and felt the creative approach (e.g., the line drawings) would not appeal to an adult audience. These participants believed that a less abstract approach would be more effective;
  • While the ad depicted what were described as happy scenes, some felt the storyline itself could have been more motivational. The suggestion was made that the narrative could have acknowledged what parents and children have endured over the course of the pandemic before focusing on the activities that everyone could now once again begin to enjoy; and
  • Comments also suggested that participants did not believe the advertisement spoke directly to parents who may be skeptical about getting their children in this age group vaccinated. It was felt these parents would be unlikely to be swayed by the brief reference to the fact that severe reactions to the vaccine among children in Canada who have been vaccinated have typically been very rare. Most agreed this issue, along with other concerns parents have about the vaccine for children, needed to be emphasized more clearly.

When asked about the main message, most participants reiterated earlier comments that the ad primarily focused on promoting vaccinations for children and the accompanying benefits of being vaccinated. Although participants understood the concept was intended to be for a short 30-second video, they felt the explanation as to why the vaccine was necessary for younger children to be somewhat lacking.

The advertisement also prompted a number of other questions and comments:

  • Some wondered why the Government of Canada was emphasizing vaccines for children, given their understanding, based on information previously offered by public health officials, that children have not been affected by the virus as seriously as adults;
  • Others wanted to see more data on the number of children who have been seriously affected by COVID-19 and felt this type of information would help to underpin an argument for vaccinating children. They were interested in hearing and seeing more information on the risks to children of contracting COVID-19; and
  • As noted earlier, several mentioned that the ad seemed more directed to those parents who were already predisposed to vaccinating their children, but had not yet booked an appointment. They felt the imagery, tone, and narrative might spur them to action.

Several participants commented that the decision to get their children vaccinated was a highly personal one, and felt it should be left up to parents based on their own assessment of the risks given their personal circumstances. As such, relatively few participants felt the message of ‘keeping children safe’ would motivate parents. Most felt the majority of parents would feel any decision they make regarding vaccinations, both in the decision to get their children vaccinated or to hold off, would be made with the safety of their children in mind.

Overall, few participants indicated that Concept A would entice them to go to the website for more information or that it would prompt them to consider getting their children, aged 5 to 11 years, vaccinated. It was pointed out to participants that the ad specifically indicates that children in this age range receive a smaller dose and that this is all that is needed for sufficient protection. Parents, however, were not particularly swayed by this information. Most were already aware of this fact or assumed this would be the case given that the instructions on most standard, over-the-counter medications recommend smaller doses for children, compared to adults. While some took some comfort from knowing this, most in the group continued to question vaccine efficacy relative to the risks of children becoming seriously or fatally ill as a result of contracting COVID-19.

Recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the concept included:

  • Beginning the narrative by acknowledging the isolating and devastating effects of the pandemic prior to transitioning to a more upbeat message emphasizing that vaccines represent a path to increased freedom and improved quality of life for families; and
  • Providing more information on the vaccines for children, specifically concrete data and statistics with respect to the vaccine efficacy as well as any side effects. Some wanted more information on the experience in other countries where vaccines were available earlier for children in this age group.

Concept B: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine

Above is a storyboard featuring six animated frames from a Public Health Ad Campaign. The storyboard begins with an image of a parent putting a helmet on their child’s head before skating. The voiceover says, “We do everything we can to keep our kids safe. So, how can we help protect them against COVID-19?” The second frame transitions to another parent putting sunscreen on their child’s face before going outside, with the voiceover reading, “COVID-19 vaccines can help keep children safe from severe illness and potential long-term effects of the virus.” The third frame moves to another scene where a parent reaches to hold their child’s hand before safely crossing the street. In this frame, the voiceover says, “Millions of children in Canada and around the world have already been safely vaccinated and real world data shows that serious side effects are extremely rare.” The fourth frame then shows a parent and a child at a vaccine clinic, with the voiceover finishing with, “Help protect your child. Book their COVID-19 vaccination appointment.” The fifth frame, with no voiceover, is a white screen with bold, black text that reads, “Learn more and book your child’s appointment at Canada.ca/covid-vaccine”. The storyboard finishes with the Government of Canada logo on a white screen.

Participants were next shown Concept B and asked a similar series of questions. Reactions to this concept were generally more positive, relative to Concept A. Many felt this concept was more effective at tapping into the protective role of parents and extending this idea to vaccinations. They also found this concept to be more relatable both from the standpoint of the imagery, but also with respect to the emotions one feels as a parent wanting to protect their children in a range of day-to-day situations.

Most felt the main message or key takeaway from this concept was that parents should take steps to protect their children by having them vaccinated for COVID-19. Participants responded positively to the creative approach, which they preferred to Concept A, as well as to the scenarios presented of parents interacting with and protecting their children. They described this concept as more realistic, and commented that it spoke in a more relevant and relatable way to them as parents of young children. Participants resonated more so with a message which focused on their role to protect their children, rather than one which emphasized being able to participate in certain activities again once more children had been vaccinated.

Many did, however, suggest several possible improvements, including:

  • Putting more emphasis on the idea of vaccinations allowing families to resume more of their normal routines – they felt that this came across more clearly in Concept A; and
  • Including other examples of the things that parents do to keep their children safe, such as taking them to the dentist or optometrist regularly.

In the final part of this discussion, participants were asked to select which concept they felt was most effective at communicating the importance of getting children between the ages of 5 and 11 vaccinated. All participants selected Concept B. While participants felt the visuals were better, they also preferred the more realistic and relatable approach. Given the seriousness of COVID-19, participants also commented that messaging which focused more clearly on protecting children from the possible negative impacts of the virus was more meaningful relative to the idea of lifting restrictions and returning to normal. Ultimately, most believed that emphasizing the idea of safety was the more effective approach.

Detailed Findings – Part II: Other Issues

Child Care (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Nunavut)

Three groups engaged in discussions regarding child care, particularly focusing on affordability and availability. To begin, participants were asked to describe what they felt to be the biggest challenge related to child care in their respective province or territory. Across all groups, a number of common themes emerged, including:

  • Cost and affordability – Several participants described the costs of child care in their region as exorbitant and felt it was becoming increasingly prohibitive for many parents, especially mothers, to remain in the labour force. This was seen as a major challenge for younger families already struggling with the high cost of living;
  • Low availability – Many described a lack of available child care spots in their region, resulting in multi-year waiting lists even for those who could afford child care, making it increasingly difficult for parents to select a child care facility based on fit or find a spot at all. This lack of availability was also blamed for driving up prices even further by allowing child care operators to charge higher fees in the face of increased demand;
  • Lack of trained staff – A number of participants also felt there were too few well-trained early childhood educators (ECE) in their communities. They tended to attribute this to low compensation for this role, compared to other educators and care workers, and felt this was limiting the number of individuals interested in pursuing this career path;
  • Lack of flexibility/accessibility – Across groups, a number of participants also pointed to a lack of options for parents requiring child care outside of the traditional ‘9-5’ workday, creating accessibility issues for those who worked outside of these standard hours; and
  • Lack of regulation – A few participants also mentioned what they believed to be a lack of proper regulation and oversight of child care facilities. Some mentioned ‘unlicensed’ child care providers, in particular, as a concern, while others worried that some facilities were being guided by profit to take on more children than they could reasonably care for.

In Nunavut, participants also described major challenges related to recruiting ECE workers to Northern communities, including difficulty finding adequate, affordable housing for these workers. This was seen to be a major barrier to increasing the availability of affordable child care in the territory. In addition, some pointed to a lack of basic infrastructure, particularly in smaller communities, making it hard to find locations that could safely serve as child care facilities. It was felt that even if the cost of child care was brought down and more ECE workers were brought to the region, this lack of appropriate space would continue to create challenges for child care throughout many Northern communities.

A few participants in each group had children currently in child care. These participants were asked about their personal experience with costs and availability. While some were receiving financial support, either from their provincial governments or through student rebate programs, most reported paying high rates for child care, often of $50 a day/per child or more. A few reported paying lower costs, however these were typically for before-or after-school care, rather than the all-day care required for younger children. Asked about their experiences in securing a child care space, while some said that they had been fortuitous (either in terms of timing or by knowing someone who helped them secure a spot), most felt the process had been quite difficult. Among those who did not have children currently in child care, there was general agreement with the sentiments expressed by those who did, based on their recent experiences or what they were hearing from others they knew with first-hand experience.

Participants were asked a series of questions related to the federal government’s child-care initiative, specifically related to their particular province or territory.

Many in the group from Ontario were aware of recent agreements between the federal government and provinces/territories to implement an affordable child care program across the country, with some recalling the $10 a day on average, per child target. Unprompted, a number of participants also recalled hearing that Ontario was the only province or territory at the time this group was held to have not yet reached an agreement with the federal government. Asked for their opinion about this, responses were mixed. Some expressed frustration, feeling the delay was possibly a negotiating tactic on the part of the provincial government. Others felt the size of Ontario compared to other provinces and territories may have made the negotiations for their province more complex or time-consuming. A few also expressed a desire to see greater transparency from both the federal and provincial governments regarding the reasons an agreement had yet to be reached.

All participants in this group supported federal efforts to create more affordable child care and felt this was an important priority for the Government of Canada. Affordable child care was seen to bring a cascade of positive benefits, not just for parents but for society and the economy in general, by reducing the cost of living (and working) for families and enabling more people to return to or remain in the labour force. Though still supportive of the overall goal of providing more affordable child care, a small number of participants interpreted lower fees for parents as potentially lower revenues for child care providers, making it difficult for them to cover their expenses and continue to provide adequate care.

Only a few in the Saskatchewan group of parents reported any awareness of the affordable child care agreement reached between Saskatchewan and the Government of Canada. To aid in the discussion, they were provided with the following details about the agreement’s primary objectives:

  • Provide a 50% reduction in average parent fees by the end of 2022, reaching an average of $10/day by 2025/26 for all regulated child care spaces;
  • Create more high-quality, affordable regulated child care spaces, primarily through not-for-profit and public child, and family home-based care child care providers;
  • Address barriers towards providing inclusive and flexible child care; and
  • Value the early childhood workforce, providing them with training and development opportunities.

All participants felt this agreement would be helpful to Saskatchewan families. Among current and potential users of child care, most believed the program would benefit them in a number of meaningful ways, by reducing the financial worries and challenges related to securing child care, enabling them to return to work or school, and even providing them with the confidence to have additional children by lowering associated costs. For those whose children no longer required child care or would be too old by 2025-26 when the agreement would be fully implemented, most felt that even if they would not personally benefit, this deal was important and would offer a great deal of assistance to many Saskatchewan families. A small number of participants were concerned that ‘home-based’ child care facilities may not qualify for these additional supports, particularly those which were unlicensed.

Most participants in the group from Nunavut were aware of the recent affordable child care agreement reached by the Government of Canada and their territory in January. As in the Ontario group, there was specific recall of the $10-a-day (on average) target. A few also reported hearing there would be additional funding for infrastructure upgrades to child care facilities as well as increased financial support for child care providers and their employees. To clarify, participants were informed that the agreement was focused on a number of priorities, including:

  • Providing a 50% reduction in average parent fees by the end of 2022 and reaching an average of $10/day by 2024 for all licensed child care spaces;
  • Opening more childcare spots; and
  • Increasing the wages of child care workers.

While most felt this agreement would be helpful for Nunavut families, some reiterated their concern that child care issues may continue to persist given the lack of physical space and problems recruiting qualified staff to the region. A few were also doubtful the agreement could be implemented within the timeline provided, believing that necessary infrastructure upgrades and other challenges, like providing housing for child care workers, may take longer to address. Despite these potential concerns, participants remained largely positive regarding the potential of the agreement to make raising children more affordable for families in the region.

Healthcare (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Central and Southern Quebec)

Asked how they felt about the overall quality and availability of healthcare in their area, while several participants expressed positive views, a significant number cited a widespread lack of availability of family doctors as a major concern. In addition, a number of participants in more rural communities reported difficulties finding specialists in their areas, with many saying they typically had to travel to larger urban centres to receive the specific treatment they required.

Regionally, participants in both groups from Quebec spoke particularly highly regarding the quality of care they typically received, with most feeling the system in their area was currently working quite well. Some were especially pleased with the efficiency of emergency care and the availability of general practitioners in their area. Those from Saskatchewan were similarly positive, with many, particularly those in cities such as Moose Jaw and Lloydminster, describing a wide range of high-quality healthcare options in their area. A few, however, did mention what they felt to be a lack of mental health resources where they lived. While some in the group from Edmonton spoke positively of the system under ‘normal’ circumstances, many felt the COVID-19 pandemic had created a great deal of strain and was limiting the ability of healthcare professionals to meet the current demand of patients. Some also identified what they perceived to be a lack of family doctors and other medical professionals in the area, while a few believed the Government of Alberta had not provided sufficient support for the province’s health care system, particularly in areas such as mental health and addictions treatment.

Only the group from the Okanagan spoke more negatively than positively about the state of healthcare in their region. Virtually all participants in this group recalled difficulties finding a family doctor in their area, with some from cities such as Penticton having to travel several hours to the Greater Vancouver Area (GVA) to visit with a general practitioner. A few who had recently moved to B.C. from other provinces, such as Alberta, recalled being surprised at how difficult it was to find a family doctor and felt this was less of an issue in other parts of the country. Indeed, while most groups were primarily of the opinion that only minor changes were needed for their respective healthcare systems, a large number in the Okanagan group believed their system required major changes, with some calling for a complete overhaul. For those in other groups who hoped to see more minor changes to their healthcare systems, greater accessibility to family doctors, specialists, and mental health services were frequently identified as areas for improvement, and some wanted to see increased opportunities to communicate with healthcare professionals via other means such as email or text.

Asked directly to identify the most pressing challenges for healthcare in their community (apart from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic) participants pointed to a number of common issues, including:

  • Accessibility – Many reiterated previous comments concerning what they felt to be a lack of family doctors and specialists in their community. Several expressed the desire to see more walk-in clinics opened in their region, believing this would be helpful for those needing care who did not have a family doctor of their own. A few felt that at present it was difficult to receive expeditious care at a walk-in clinic or emergency room (ER) unless one was critically ill;
  • A backlog of delayed or cancelled appointments and procedures – A number of participants pointed to what they perceived to be a lengthy waiting list for surgeries, appointments, and other medical procedures which had been postponed or cancelled outright due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some recalled hearing of multi-year waiting lists for simple yet necessary surgeries, while others relayed concerns about potentially serious illnesses going untreated due to the inability of patients to consult with a specialist;
  • Overworking and ‘burnout’ of healthcare professionals – Many felt the demands placed upon the health care system, exacerbated by the pandemic, were creating stress and exhaustion for healthcare workers. Many were worried these working conditions could prevent medical professionals from providing adequate care, and some were concerned this could cause a mass exodus of healthcare workers from the field. Some felt this was an especially pressing concern for nurses, with a number of participants saying they personally knew nurses who had recently made the decision to leave healthcare altogether due to overwork and stress;
  • Recruiting healthcare professionals to rural communities – Some participants in more rural communities in Saskatchewan and Quebec felt more needed to be done to recruit and retain doctors in their areas;
  • High costs – A few participants mentioned what they felt were increasingly high costs for certain procedures or medications. This was thought to be a growing issue, particularly for those without extended benefits coverage through their employer;
  • Strain on the system – Some believed the healthcare system in their area to be under a great deal of strain and felt this had been the case even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. This was identified as a particular issue in communities such as Prince Albert, Saskatchewan where, in addition to the needs of the city’s own population, patients were routinely flown in to receive care from more remote communities in the North;
  • Mental health and addictions treatment – Several believed that mental health care in their area was inadequate, particularly for marginalized populations and those struggling with addiction and substance abuse; and
  • Visitor restrictions – A few participants felt that pandemic-related restrictions on hospital visitors were having a negative impact on patient care in their region, as they felt that being able to interact with loved ones was an important part of the healing process. A small number also expressed disappointment at not being allowed to accompany their partners to important appointments, such as maternity check-ups.

Asked if they had recently heard about any announcements or initiatives from the federal government related to healthcare, very few participants could recall anything, apart from the provision of pandemic-related materials such as rapid antigen test kits or N95 facemasks. To aid discussion, participants were informed that while healthcare provision is primarily a provincial responsibility, much of the funding for provincial healthcare systems comes from the federal government in the form of healthcare transfers. Asked whether they would like to see more federal money allocated to these transfer payments rather than other priorities, most participants felt greater investments in health care were needed and could help address the most pressing issues. While no participants were adamantly against increasing healthcare transfers, a few expressed worry about whether the federal government could afford this, especially given the high costs already associated with the pandemic and related financial supports. A small number also felt that inefficient spending by healthcare administrators was more likely to be an issue than a lack of available funds, and that greater oversight and accountability would be needed to ensure that any increases to federal transfers would be allocated properly.

Asked directly if the federal government should attach conditions to increased transfer payments (such as stipulating that the money be allocated to specific priorities like mental health services, doctor shortages, or long-term care reforms) most participants were in favour of this approach, believing it would go a long way towards addressing key priorities, ensuring greater consistency in care across the country, especially in rural areas, and creating greater accountability. Among the smaller number of participants who felt that no conditions should be attached, the general sentiment was that healthcare spending decisions should be left to the discretion of provincial governments and that federal directives could potentially hinder the ability of provincial governments to meet the specific needs of their respective populations. Regionally, the groups from Edmonton and Saskatchewan were overwhelmingly in favour of attaching at least some conditions to increased federal healthcare transfers, while those in the Okanagan and Quebec groups had more mixed opinions.

Asked to consider which specific healthcare issues they would like to see prioritized if the federal government were to add conditions to increased transfer payments, participants identified the following:

  • The construction of more healthcare facilities, including walk-in clinics;
  • Hiring more doctors and nurses, including a greater emphasis on attracting foreign born doctors and simplifying the foreign credential recognition process;
  • Further incentives to recruit and retain health care workers in rural and northern communities;
  • Greater support for ‘in-province’ care for chronic health issues;
  • More investments in long-term care;
  • Greater care options specifically targeted towards younger Canadians and children; and
  • An increased focus on mental health.

Asked specifically about mental health treatment, almost all participants felt increased funding for this area should be prioritized. Many were of the view that Canadians across the country did not have sufficient access to therapy or medication, and that a continued stigma regarding mental health concerns prevented many from seeking out proper care. A significant number also believed that mental health concerns had been exacerbated by almost two years of public health measures, isolation, and anxiety related to the COVID-19 pandemic. A number of participants expressed concern for younger Canadians, in particular, as well as young parents who may be feeling increased pressure to provide for their families while keeping their loved ones healthy and safe amidst the pandemic. In addition to traditional mental health treatment options, some thought there should be increased funding for athletic and recreational programs for those suffering from mental health issues, such as organized sports, yoga, meditation, and other group-oriented activities. Several also believed that expanding the use of virtual one-on-one counselling could be helpful, particularly for those in smaller communities who lacked in-person access to mental health professionals. A few participants also were of the view that more could be done to reduce the costs related to mental health treatment, both in terms of therapy and counselling, as well as assessments for issues such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) which were seen to be quite costly. A small number also felt there needed to be a greater focus on mental health issues within marginalized groups such as those experiencing homelessness or suffering from addiction. In addition, some commented that more needed to be done for populations, such as Indigenous peoples, who continued to experience ongoing inter-generational trauma.

Housing and Home Renting (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg)

Seven groups discussed issues related to housing, specifically focusing on home renting. The number of participants identifying as renters varied greatly across the groups. All participants in the groups from the Okanagan and Hamilton and Niagara region were renters, as were most in Edmonton and roughly half in Winnipeg. By contrast, very few in the groups based in Quebec, Ontario’s Durham region, and Saskatchewan were renters.

The four groups with a larger number of renters were asked how challenging it was to find affordable rental accommodations in their respective areas. Most described it as very difficult, with some in the Okanagan group feeling it was next to impossible due to the limited rental options in their area. Those from Edmonton and Winnipeg also recalled experiencing considerable difficulties, citing increasing costs, high demand, and the generally poor condition of affordable rental units in their areas. While some post-secondary students from the Hamilton and Niagara region felt there were some affordable rental options available in cities such as St. Catherine’s or Hamilton, it was still felt that one would have to have multiple roommates or live further away from campus in order to afford these accommodations. In all groups, a number of participants felt it was especially difficult for those living on their own to find affordable housing options. In addition, it was felt renters with children or pets tended to face additional difficulties in that even fewer options were available to them due to the regulations imposed by many landlords on their rental properties.

Asked whether the federal government had a role to play in regulating the cost of rent in Canada, more were in favour of this notion than opposed to it, however, a significant number remained unsure. Regionally, participants from Quebec as well as Ontario’s Hamilton and Niagara region were overwhelmingly in favour of federal rental regulation. Those in the groups from Saskatchewan, the Okanagan, Edmonton, and the Durham region in Ontario were more divided or unsure, while participants from Winnipeg were mostly opposed to the idea of federal regulation of residential rents.

For those in support of federal rental regulation, many felt it made as much sense for the Government of Canada to play a role on this issue as it did for it to take action to address other economic issues such as inflation. Others were of the opinion that affordable and safe housing was a fundamental human right, and that for this reason the federal government had a responsibility to ensure the availability of housing for its citizens.

Asked what regulatory actions the federal government could reasonably take towards ensuring affordable rental housing throughout Canada, participants in favour of federal intervention suggested measures such as further limiting annual rent increases, the implementation of ‘rent caps’, or a limit on the number of properties an individual landlord could own. Some wanted to see actions taken to help renters that would not negatively impact the finances of landlords, such as the creation of rent subsidies or tax breaks for landlords who offered affordable rentals. A few participants believed that rental regulation should be limited to certain areas where housing was felt to be particularly expensive, including major urban centres such as Toronto or Vancouver as well as communities in the North.

Among those more opposed to federal regulation of the rental market, there were concerns about the negative impacts such action could have on landlords, especially with regard to their freedom to utilize their properties as they saw fit. A number of these participants felt it was important to consider the circumstances of landlords who depend on their rental income to get by and may need to increase rents to cover costs related to rising inflation, interest rates, and costs related to repairs and maintenance of properties. Some thought that current housing issues experienced throughout much of Canada had more to do with a lack of housing supply and felt the federal government should put a greater emphasis on increasing the number of available dwellings rather than regulating rents. Related to this, a few felt the Government of Canada could pursue a strategy utilized in other jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom, of creating a supply of ‘social housing’ that would be fully funded and operated by the federal government, providing greater public control of the cost of rent for these properties. A small number of participants, primarily in the groups from Winnipeg, Edmonton, Saskatchewan, and the Okanagan, felt the Government of Canada should not play a role in regulating the price of rent at all, believing this would interfere with the fundamentals of the ‘free market’. A few others felt this responsibility should be left primarily to provincial/territorial governments, believing public officials at this level would have a better understanding of the unique housing situations in each province or territory.

Asked if the Government of Canada should provide subsidies or incentives to owners of rental housing in exchange for binding commitments to not raise rents, while some were in favour of this proposal, more were either uncertain about it or opposed to the idea, especially among those in Edmonton and Winnipeg. Of those in favour of the idea, some felt it was realistically achievable and may appeal to landlords who would otherwise be hesitant towards federal regulation. Some liked the idea of creating an incentive for more people to invest in long-term affordable rentals, which they felt would benefit Canadians in the long run. A few, however, raised concerns and questions about the details of this plan. Some felt these types of agreements would have to be for multi-year terms, in order to provide renters with a sense of security that their rent would not skyrocket if/when the agreement expired. Some also thought there would need to be a great deal of accountability and trust between landlords and renters in order for this initiative to be successful.

For those more skeptical regarding this proposal, some were concerned there would be relatively low uptake by landlords to ‘opt-in’ to such an agreement, feeling there was not enough incentive for them to do so. In addition, others expressed concern about how such a system could be regulated, believing the private rental market would be immensely difficult to properly oversee. Others were concerned about subsidies being provided to landlords, whom they felt were already privileged by virtue of owning rental properties in the first place. Related to this, a few participants expressly did not wish to see foreign-owned rental properties included in this sort of agreement, feeling foreign buyers had greatly contributed to high housing costs and had already benefitted greatly at the expense of the Canadian housing market. Concerns were also raised that some landlords may try to circumvent these agreements by raising related housing costs such as utilities and parking, even if the base rent cost remained stable.

Among those who were more ambivalent toward the idea of federal subsidies for landlords, several were concerned about the mechanics of such a program and how it would work in practice. Some were of the view that these agreements would need to be updated quite frequently to account for rising costs, particularly given what they perceived to be a high rate of inflation at present. Some were also curious as to whether the same rules would apply to rental corporations as to individual landlords renting out rooms in their homes as a way to earn extra income. A small number of these participants felt there may be better, more workable options for the Government of Canada to get involved in making housing more affordable, such as creating a pathway for a greater number of Canadians to purchase their own homes. Related to this, a few suggested the federal government should focus on encouraging greater density in urban centres, believing such a strategy would significantly increase the housing supply in areas and help stem the rapid rise in housing costs.

Asked if the Government of Canada should pass legislation prohibiting landlords from raising rents beyond a certain rate, participants were similarly mixed in their views. While participants generally reacted more positively to this idea than the previous one, many had reservations about the viability of this proposal. Regionally, mixed opinions were present in most groups, except for those in Saskatchewan and Winnipeg where participants tended to be mostly opposed to the idea.

Those in favour of a federal ‘rental cap’ felt such action was necessary to stop rents from continuing to rise at such a rapid rate, and that if left to the ‘free market’ landlords would naturally try to maximize their profits. Some thought this strategy would be particularly effective in curbing the behaviour of larger rental corporations or wealthy individuals who owned multiple properties and charged what were felt to be exorbitant rents. A number of participants, while supportive of the initiative, felt that any cap on rent would have to be tailored to the local rental market in each individual city or region and would have to be frequently updated to account for additional factors such as inflation.

Among the significant number opposed to this proposal, many felt it could potentially be unfair to landlords, limiting their ability to profit off their properties and failing to account for costs related to renovations, property taxes, and general maintenance. Many were concerned that the implementation of such legislation could end up unintentionally decreasing the rental supply, with landlords no longer feeling it was financially worthwhile to rent out their properties. Related to this, many were concerned that rather than using their properties for long-term rentals, landlords would instead focus more on short-term rentals through platforms such as Airbnb, allowing them to charge substantially higher rates for their properties while also decreasing the rental supply.

Housing Affordability (Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg)

Participants in these four groups discussed housing affordability more generally. To begin, the groups were shown a number of potential federal housing initiatives and then asked to identify and discuss the ones they believed would be most effective in increasing housing affordability for Canadians. The list of initiatives included the following:

  • Affordable Housing Innovation Fund: Funding for unique ideas and innovative building techniques that revolutionize the affordable housing sector;
  • Federal Lands Initiative: Use of surplus federal lands and buildings to create affordable, sustainable, accessible, and socially inclusive developments;
  • First-Time Home Buyer Incentive: A program that allows one to borrow 5 or 10% of the purchase price of a home to put toward a down payment. The program recipient pays back the same percentage of the value of the home when selling it or within a 25-year window;
  • Housing Accelerator Fund: Funding available to municipalities to increase the housing supply in Canada’s largest cities through measures such as inclusionary zoning, increased densification, reductions in construction approval timelines and the rapid development of vacant or underused lands;
  • National Housing Co-Investment Fund – New Construction Stream: Low-cost repayable loans and forgivable loans for building new affordable housing shelters, transitional and supportive housing; and
  • Rental Construction Financing: Low-cost loans encouraging the construction of sustainable rental apartment projects across Canada.

All initiatives received at least some level of support, with the First-Time Homebuyer Incentive and the Affordable Housing Innovation Fund generally viewed as potentially having the greatest impact.

With respect to the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, many felt this initiative would be helpful for first-time buyers, particularly younger Canadians, many of whom were currently working full-time but struggling to save up a sufficient down-payment, especially in light of ever-increasing prices. A few participants, however, voiced concerns that this initiative did not go far enough to assist Canadians in purchasing their first homes, and that more needed to be done to curb the underlying problem of rapidly rising house prices throughout much of the country. The groups from Edmonton, Winnipeg, and the Hamilton and Niagara region were also asked whether there should be a First-Time Home Buyer Incentive specifically targeted to young, single Canadians. Most felt this would be a useful initiative, particularly for those who were working full-time but did not have a partner to help them in saving up for a down payment. A few participants suggested that those utilizing this program should be required to demonstrate stable, reliable income to ensure they could afford their monthly mortgage payments and would not default on their homes. A small number were more skeptical about the utility or relevance of this kind of program, feeling that home ownership might not be the best option for many younger Canadians who may wish to travel, relocate, or switch careers, all of which would be substantially more difficult if they had a mortgage to worry about.

The Affordable Housing Innovation Fund was also viewed as a particularly promising initiative, with several feeling it could foster viable, longer-term solutions to housing issues in Canada, leveraging the creativity of individual Canadians to devise innovate housing strategies. It was added that this initiative could also be effective in engaging younger Canadians in the housing process as well as encouraging individuals to come up with locally-based solutions specific to the unique housing challenges facing their region.

Among the other proposals, the Federal Lands Initiative was also viewed as a potentially effective strategy, with many seeing it as an intuitive way for the Government of Canada to aid in making housing more affordable, while also putting unused federal lands to good use. Some felt this initiative could make effective use of unused Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) bases which, in many cases, already included housing units and would likely be relatively straightforward to convert into affordable housing. A few others also appreciated the focus on creating ‘socially inclusive’ developments. A small number expressed a desire for a clearer definition on what constituted ‘unused’ lands, believing there may be some federal lands that should not be developed upon, particularly areas in which environmental conservation needed to be prioritized.

While additional rental construction financing and the National Housing Co-Investment Fund generally received a lower level of support among participants relative to the other initiatives, many felt they could also potentially aid in addressing a number of housing challenges. In particular, the National Housing Co-Investment Fund was seen as a viable way to provide housing for low-income Canadians as well as marginalized populations with few resources to secure housing on their own. Similarly, placing an emphasis on constructing affordable rental units was viewed as a useful method to address the housing needs of those who may not be able to purchase a home of their own in the foreseeable future.

Though receiving relatively little attention from participants, a few also spoke positively of the Housing Accelerator Fund, particularly regarding its stated goal of increasing density in major urban centres. Some participants expressed concern, however, that too much of a focus was being placed on creating housing solutions for larger cities and were worried this would lead to a lack of attention towards smaller cities and towns. Others were concerned about reducing construction approval timelines and ‘rapid’ development, feeling this could lead to omissions or mistakes in the planning and construction phases.

Participants in Winnipeg were asked an additional question regarding homelessness in their area. Most felt this was a major problem in their region and had only been exacerbated following the COVID-19 pandemic and its negative financial impacts on many Canadians. Some expressed concern that this problem would only continue to grow given the perceived high rate of inflation at present. Few participants recalled being aware of any recent actions by the Government of Canada to address homelessness, though a small number recalled an announcement by the federal government that it planned to allocate additional funding to assist these individuals in finding affordable housing. Asked if they had heard of the Rapid Housing Initiative, no participants were familiar with the program.

Indigenous Issues (Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

The group comprised of Indigenous participants living on reserve discussed a range of issues specific to their local communities and Indigenous peoples across Canada more broadly.

To begin, participants were asked to identify the most important sectors and industries on their reserve. A number of responses were provided by those from different reserves, including oil, hospitality and entertainment, and the cultivation and sale of cannabis. A few participants also indicated, however, that there was little in the way of industry on their reserves. This was generally attributed to a lack of control over resources, poor local leadership, administrative difficulty in getting initiatives and projects approved by the federal government, and a lack of opportunity. These participants felt there were currently too many barriers towards economic development on their reserves and that the federal and provincial governments needed to do more to enable their communities to become self-sustaining.

Asked what the Government of Canada could to do to help spur economic development in their communities, participants offered three key suggestions:

  • Provide Indigenous communities the opportunity to purchase Crown land and/or land-use rights surrounding their reserve, and prioritize Indigenous-led bids over those from non-Indigenous private companies;
  • Open up a direct dialogue with Indigenous communities to determine their specific wants and needs from the federal government, instead of prescribing solutions, and doing this on a community-by-community basis; and
  • Reduce administrative burdens and barriers (e.g., “red tape”) for starting new ventures.

Participants next shared what they felt to be the greatest concerns currently facing their reserves. Responses tended to focus on problems related to poverty, discrimination, and inter-generational trauma, such as addiction, poor mental health, and domestic abuse. More pointedly, however, participants identified a number of structural issues contributing to the existence and perpetuation of these problems, including:

  • Insufficient healthcare services – This was mentioned by a number of participants especially with respect to an absence of much-needed supports and services for those experiencing mental healthcare issues and addiction, which was seen by a number of participants as a major problem for members of their community. It was felt that the standard of care on reserves was far below that received in most other Canadian communities, and that more on-reserve services, such as detox centres, were needed to accommodate the many people who wanted to get help but could not without leaving their community, which created an enormous barrier;
  • Lack of supports for victims of abuse – This was also identified as a major issue for those facing domestic, sexual, and child abuse, which some felt had been worsened by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and increased social isolation. Shelters and in-community supports that would allow people to get help and heal in a familiar setting were seen as essential;
  • High food costs – For communities already dealing with high rates of poverty, high food costs and food insecurity were viewed as an enormous burden (and barrier to health and well-being), requiring a solution, such as placing a cap on how much basic necessities can cost; and
  • Lack of housing – This was also identified as a major issue faced by communities on reserve. There were mentions of several families having to share a single dwelling, leading to upwards of 15-20 individuals residing together, often in substandard housing in poor condition.

With respect to infrastructure projects on reserve that participants felt the Government of Canada should be assisting in funding, a core set of social priorities were identified, including:

  • Housing;
  • Healthcare and treatment facilities;
  • Shelters for those experiencing domestic abuse; and
  • Multipurpose community/recreational/sports facilities, especially for youth.

Asked about Indigenous issues more broadly and where the Government of Canada should be focusing its attention, participants identified a number of key priorities, including:

  • Reconciliation – A large number of participants thought the federal government needed to take greater steps towards reconciliation with the Indigenous peoples living within Canada. Some felt there needed to be major changes in the relationship between the Government of Canada and Indigenous peoples, including revisiting the Indian Act and working to provide ways for Indigenous communities to exert greater control over their own affairs;
  • Clean drinking water – Many felt that a lack of potable drinking water on reserves and in northern Indigenous communities represented an ongoing issue affecting a large number of Indigenous communities. Some pointed to problems with the upkeep of water treatment facilities on many reserves and felt these were not being adequately funded by the federal government. Most felt the provision of this basic necessity was primarily a responsibility of the federal government and one that needed to be addressed with immediate urgency;
  • Food scarcity and costs – This was seen as an especially prevalent and problematic issue for those living in more remote northern communities;
  • Community-based health care – Several participants mentioned the lack of healthcare and treatment facilities within Indigenous communities, both for complex medical issues as well as addiction and mental health services, requiring those in need of care to travel outside of their community to get it, which was felt to have a further negative impact on their overall health; and
  • Educational equality – A few felt the quality of education on reserves, both in terms of resources and personnel, was well below the standard of other communities throughout Canada. It was felt the federal government needed to place a greater emphasis on ensuring those on reserve were receiving the same quality of education as those in other parts of the country.

No participants felt the Government of Canada was focusing enough attention on Indigenous issues at present. It was believed by some that Indigenous issues and voices were rarely prioritized and that many actions taken by the federal government to address Indigenous concerns had little tangible impact on their communities. A few expressed frustration that the Government of Canada was devoting what they perceived to be a large amount of resources to foreign aid initiatives while many Indigenous communities within Canada continued to lack basic necessities. Asked if the Government of Canada had done anything particularly well related to Indigenous issues, very few participants felt that it had. While the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) was mentioned somewhat positively, many were of the opinion that a large number of the ninety-four ‘calls to action’ put forward by the TRC had yet to receive adequate attention from the federal government.

Few could recall any recent actions taken by the Government of Canada to address reconciliation. Related to this, a number felt that while attention was often devoted to Indigenous issues when they were making headlines, tangible actions were rarely taken to address the root causes of these problems, including the historical relationship between the Government of Canada and Indigenous peoples. Many thought the federal government needed to acknowledge the role it had played in the operation of the historical residential school system, in particular, and that without this admission of responsibility on the part of the Government of Canada very little progress could be made towards reconciliation. A small number of participants also expressed disappointment at what they felt to be a lack of participation by federal officials, including the Prime Minister, during the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, which took place on September 30th, 2021.

Describing what they would expect to see from a federal government serious about addressing reconciliation, a number of actions were suggested, including:

  • A more all-encompassing effort towards addressing the numerous perceived historical injustices towards Indigenous people, extending beyond financial compensation, and focusing on healing the intergenerational trauma still suffered by many Indigenous individuals;
  • Continued participation by the federal government at the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) Special Chiefs Assembly, with the Prime Minister continuing to attend and directly participate in question-and-answer sessions with the delegates;
  • Greater future representation of Indigenous peoples at all levels of elected government, up to and including the role of Prime Minister; and
  • Removal of existing barriers currently limiting the extent to which Indigenous peoples can determine their own affairs. A few participants reiterated their desire for the federal government to revisit and update existing legislation such as the Indian Act.

Asked whether they were aware of a federal court case related to the compensation of Indigenous children who had been harmed by historical federal child and family services (CFS) policies, a few participants had heard some details, but many were unfamiliar with the specifics of the case. Those who felt they had heard something about this were under the impression the case was related to the mass removal of Indigenous children from their families and placement into the child welfare system, also known as the ‘Sixties Scoop’. To aid in discussion, it was clarified for participants that in early January 2022 it was announced that Indigenous groups and the Government of Canada had reached agreements-in-principle on compensation and long-term reform of First Nations child and family services. In addition, participants were shown the following details regarding the compensation awarded through this agreement:

  • $20 billion for First Nations children (and their parents and caregivers) who were removed from their homes from 1991 to March 2022. The compensation also covers those children who were negatively impacted by a narrow interpretation of Jordan’s Principle from 2007 to 2017, as well as children who did not receive or were delayed receiving an essential public service or product between April 1, 1991 and December 11, 2007; and
  • $20 billion to reform the First Nations Child and Family Services program. This will include funding to support children aging out of the system and prevention services, including mental health and cultural supports, to help ensure families stay together.

While some participants were happy to see compensation provided for those who had suffered from past CFS policies, many were concerned there would be conditions attached to how this money could be utilized by the recipients. A number of participants felt that the terms of financial assistance and compensation were often determined by the federal government rather than Indigenous peoples being free to decide which priorities were most important towards addressing their unique needs. A few were also concerned about the potential negative impact of this financial compensation, believing a sudden influx of money may exacerbate the substance abuse and addiction issues prevalent in their communities, as individuals would have more disposable income to spend on alcohol and illicit drugs. It was reiterated by some that in addition to financial compensation there needed to be a greater focus on holistic healing, including on-reserve treatment options and ways to keep those seeking care in the same community as their loved ones. A few also felt that in order for progress to be made regarding reconciliation there needed to be consistent ongoing dialogue between Indigenous and federal leaders.

Participants were also asked whether they were aware of a recent agreement between the Government of Canada and the Cowessess First Nation related to support for child and family services. While a few participants had heard something about an understanding being reached, no participants were aware of any specific details. It was clarified that as part of a recent agreement the Government of Canada would invest $38.7 million over the next two years to support the Cowessess First Nation in the implementation of its own child and family services system. While a number of participants supported greater Indigenous self-determination in this area, many felt the transition to an Indigenous-led system should be undertaken very gradually and with great care. Though a number of participants were open to seeing this sort of approach expanded to other Indigenous bands, it was strongly felt there needed to be a larger, Indigenous-led regulatory body that each individual system would be accountable to. A few participants mentioned already having their own ‘on-reserve’ child and family services type programs which they felt had been successful in assisting their communities thus far. Generally, it was felt that so long as proper regulations and accountability could be established regarding how these systems operate, Indigenous self-governance in this area would be a useful priority for the federal government to pursue.

Focusing on issues related to clean drinking water, participants were asked if they had heard anything about efforts by the Government of Canada to lift long-term drinking water advisories on Indigenous reserves. While some recalled having seen headlines about this, few were aware of any specific actions the federal government had recently taken towards resolving this issue. Though a small number recalled hearing progress had been made on this front in some communities in British Columbia, most were of the view that little in the way of tangible action had been taken towards lifting these advisories. Some felt a key issue at present was the difficulty federal and Indigenous representatives were experiencing in determining which communities required repairs to their water treatment centres or brand new facilities altogether. It was added that a number of existing water treatment facilities in Indigenous communities were technically in ‘working’ condition but could easily fall into disrepair without proper maintenance. It was felt more Indigenous voices needed to be included in determining the proper course of action for each individual community.

Participants were provided information in the form of an infographic detailing recent efforts by the federal government to lift long-term drinking water advisories in Indigenous communities throughout Canada:

Asked for their initial reactions to this information, while a few felt it represented some progress, they wanted to ensure the problems in these communities regarding clean drinking water had been resolved permanently rather than just temporarily fixed. A few others mentioned that a number of these advisories had been lifted in 2021 at a time when Indigenous issues were frequently in the news. It was hoped that this same rate of progress would continue even if issues related to Indigenous peoples were less prominent in the public eye. Asked to rate the progress of the Government of Canada on this issue now that they had reviewed this information, most still felt that not enough progress had been made, and that this basic duty of the federal government to its citizens would not be met until all Indigenous communities had clean drinking water.

Asked about the housing situation on their respective reserves, most participants identified this as a major concern. Adequate housing, they said, was in extremely short supply, leading to long waiting lists and overcrowding, which, some pointed out, had compounded the challenges posed by the pandemic, making it very difficult for individuals who had tested positive or otherwise felt unwell to find a place to safely self-isolate.

The few participants who felt the housing situation on their reserves was generally much better credited the creation of smaller ‘bachelor pad’ style homes in their communities as well as the hiring of on-reserve contractors to undertake the construction work. Others felt that creative solutions like this needed to be considered by reserves like their own, so that more housing units could be built more quickly to meet the largescale demand in their communities. Some participants also felt that there needed to be greater flexibility on the part of the federal government in allowing Indigenous communities to allocate a higher percentage of their federal funding towards developing more housing on reserves.

Canadian Content (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec)

These six groups discussed the subject of Canadian content, specifically focusing on the Canadian television, film, and music industries.

To begin, participants were asked what they initially thought of when they heard the phrase ‘Canadian content’. A number of responses were provided, including:

  • Canadian television channels such the CBC, CTV, and CP24;
  • Films and television shows produced by Canadian creators and filmed in Canada, including series such as Letterkenny, Trailer Park Boys, and Corner Gas;
  • Canadian artists and creators;
  • Content creators on social media platforms, such as TikTok and Instagram, especially those representing Indigenous, Métis, and Inuit cultures; and
  • Educational or cultural content focused on Canadian history, culture, and heritage.

Other comments reflected a mix of perspectives regarding the quality of Canadian content. A few participants felt that Canadian content in most cases was difficult to distinguish from content produced in the United States, while others were of the opinion that it tended to be of lower production quality. While some were of the view that Canadian content featured a diverse array of creators and stories, others felt greater efforts were needed to increase diversity in Canadian productions.

The two groups from Quebec, as well as the group made up of Francophones from Ontario’s Sudbury region, were asked a series of additional questions about the perceived quality of Canadian content. Overall, some felt that Canadian content was generally of a high quality, but more felt it lacked the kind of funding available in countries like the United States and tended to have noticeably lower quality as a result. A few were more ambivalent and felt the quality of Canadian productions, especially film and television, varied greatly depending on the production.

With respect to any preferences for Canadian content over productions from other countries, participants were somewhat split. While some said they would be more likely to watch film and television content if they knew it was Canadian, others said the subject matter and content were more likely to determine their interest in watching a film or television series rather than where it was produced. Most participants, regardless of preference, said the quality of the production was ultimately the determining factor as to whether they would continue watching. In the group from central and southern Quebec, a few participants mentioned while they would typically seek out ‘Quebecois’ content, they were less interested in Canadian content more broadly.

Regarding music by Canadian artists, while some based their listening preferences primarily on genre and style, many in these groups felt they would be more likely to seek out and listen to content they knew to be Canadian. Many also felt the quality of Canadian music was high, as good as anywhere, and featured a diverse array of talented artists. Some noted that production financing mattered less when it came to music, and that great music could be produced from anywhere. There was also a sense among these groups that Canadian music was more distinctively Canadian than Canadian film or television, and that it was easier to transmit Canadian culture and values through music by allowing artists to incorporate the uniqueness of the Canadian experience into their work. Some specifically identified French-language music as a sub-genre of Canadian music they would be highly likely to seek out and listen to.

Focusing on the state of the Canadian television and film industry, participants were somewhat split about whether they felt the sector was currently at risk, with slightly more believing it to be in relatively healthy shape than those more worried about the industry’s future. Regionally, while no participants in the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, and Côte-Nord regions of Quebec felt the industry was under threat, those in the Sudbury region of Ontario as well as southern and central Quebec were more evenly divided in their views.

Those who felt the Canadian film and television industry was at risk were most notably concerned about the impact of COVID-19 on production, finances, and employment. Among participants more optimistic about the industry’s health, some acknowledged challenges, like the dominance of U.S. productions and increased competition, however few felt these were existential threats to the Canadian film and television industry as a whole. Some also thought there would be increased opportunities and a healthy market for Canadian content for a long time to come, given high demand for new content on streaming platforms such as Netflix (among a multitude of others).

Shown a number of statements describing potential actions the Government of Canada could take to support Canadian content, participants in all groups were asked to identify the ones they most strongly supported from the list below:

  • The Government of Canada needs to protect Canadian content and stories;
  • The Government of Canada needs to support Canadian artists and creators;
  • Web giants need to make Canadian content more discoverable on their platforms;
  • Web giants need to do more to showcase Canadian content on their platforms;
  • Rules for online content are outdated and we need to modernize them;
  • The Government of Canada needs to level the playing field between traditional broadcasters and foreign web giants; and
  • Foreign web giants need to pay their fair share to support Canadian creators.

Participants generally wanted to see the federal government support Canadian artists and creators, and protect Canadian content and stories. Across all groups, there was a consistently high level of support for these goals. A number of participants also felt there should be greater investment in Canadian creators and artists to ensure they had access to the resources and opportunities necessary to establish their careers in Canada rather than having to leave for other jurisdictions such as the United States. In regard to Canadian stories and content, there was some desire to see the federal government not only protect, but nurture ‘uniquely Canadian’ perspectives, including those reflecting the French language or Indigenous culture.

Many also supported the idea of web giants making Canadian content more discoverable on their platforms. In addition, a slightly smaller number of participants felt more needed to be done to showcase Canadian content, particularly on larger digital platforms. Asked an additional question regarding what they felt to be the difference between making content more ‘discoverable’ versus ‘showcasing’ it, participants in the three French-language groups felt discoverability referred to the ability to find Canadian content if one searched for it, while showcasing meant that content was being actively spotlighted by the platform.

Some participants also felt taking steps towards modernizing the rules governing online content was an important priority, given how rapidly the digital media landscape was changing.

Relatively few participants felt the Government of Canada should work to ‘level the playing field’ between traditional broadcasters and foreign web giants. Neither were they particularly supportive of potential efforts to compel these digital platforms to pay their ‘fair share’ towards supporting Canadian content. While a small number in the two groups from Quebec indicated some openness towards these initiatives, believing Canadian creators and broadcasters were often at a competitive disadvantage compared to creators in the United States, those from Saskatchewan and British Columbia’s Okanagan region were primarily opposed to what they saw as undue interference in the ‘free market’.

Asked if they were aware of proposed federal legislation to amend the Broadcasting Act, otherwise known as Bill C-10, a few participants recalled seeing headlines concerning the Bill but none could provide any specific details. Discussing whether they felt the Government of Canada should play a role in regulating non-user generated content on major digital platforms such as Netflix and Spotify, most participants felt these decisions should primarily be left to the viewer/listener and that the federal government should not be responsible for regulating content for Canadian audiences. Though a number believed there should be ‘Canadian’ sections and a certain amount of Canadian content available to users, most were under the impression this was already occurring on most major streaming platforms available in Canada and did not require any additional regulation. While a small number were in favour of establishing some regulations, particularly those geared towards ensuring greater fairness for Canadian content creators and promoting and protecting Canadian stories, most felt it was the responsibility of the consumer to determine the type of content they wished to engage with, regardless of its country of origin. Regionally, while groups from the Sudbury region of Ontario and southern and central Quebec were somewhat more in favour of the federal government taking on this role, those in the groups from Saskatchewan, the Okanagan, Ontario’s Durham region, and the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, and Côte-Nord Regions of Quebec were primarily opposed to such a notion.

Youth and Post-Secondary Issues (Hamilton and Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students)

This group of post-secondary students from the Hamilton and Niagara region discussed issues related to post-secondary education in Canada as well as those impacting younger Canadians more generally.

Asked whether they were aware of any recent actions by the Government of Canada specifically related to students or young adults, few participants could recall anything. A small number of participants recalled the Canada Emergency Student Benefit (CESB), though not by name, describing the benefit as ‘grants’ received during the summer of 2020. Related to this, some expressed appreciation that the federal government had provided this assistance in the form of a grant, specifically, rather than a loan, feeling the need to repay these financial supports would likely have added to the anxieties of students during the pandemic.

Asked about where they received their news, almost all participants mentioned social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat, and several mentioned Google news. Many also clarified that they often looked to trusted news sources and authoritative outlets, such as CBC and other national or international media of record, to get further details and verify the accuracy of any stories they initially encountered on social media that did not originate from or link to coverage.

In regards to sources of news and information specifically related to the COVID-19 pandemic, participants again described getting the majority of their news first from social media and Google news, or through word of mouth from friends and family. A few also mentioned having tracked case counts and other statistics on websites such as Worldometer. Asked whether they typically sought out news related to COVID-19, most said that while they had in the past, they rarely did so at this stage of the pandemic. Very few reported regularly looking for information related to or originating from the Government of Canada. Of the small number who said that they did, the information they sought out typically related either to the industries in which they worked (such as construction) or a headline or story of particular interest to them personally.

Asked whether they had recently seen any advertising from the Government of Canada, a number of participants mentioned having encountered communications from the federal government on platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, and Snapchat, as well as more traditional media such as television and radio. In most cases, the content of these advertisements was primarily related to the pandemic, often specifically focusing on the ongoing vaccination campaign encouraging Canadians to get their third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. A few participants also recalled having seen advertisements from the federal government related to mental health resources for those struggling after almost two years of living in a pandemic.

Very few participants felt the Government of Canada was actively making an effort to reach out to students or prioritizing youth when making decisions. It was thought by some that while the federal government was aware that students and young people had struggled throughout the pandemic, it did not understand the nature of the struggle, particularly in terms of mental health. As such, some participants felt more needed to be done to incorporate younger voices into the policy and communications processes within the federal government.

Others said that while they often encountered advertisements from the Government of Canada, these rarely felt like they were geared towards students or young Canadians. A few participants felt the federal government was likely trying to reach younger Canadians but were not effectively leveraging social media platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and others to a large enough degree. Discussing ways the federal government could more effectively reach out to students and youth, many felt that social media was key, and more needed to be done to tailor their messaging and approach to each individual platform. Several participants also felt the Government of Canada could work with colleges and universities more effectively to communicate important messages to young people, believing most students typically paid attention to communications from their respective schools and would likely pay closer to attention (and attach greater legitimacy) to messaging from the federal government communicated via academic institutions.

Asked what the most important issue was to them personally that the Government of Canada should be focusing on, participants identified a number of key themes, including:

  • Housing affordability – Several participants expressed concerns about the increasing costs of housing throughout much of the country, feeling that younger Canadians in particular would face immense barriers to home ownership if action was not taken soon;
  • Food prices – Others were of the view that prices for essential goods such as food supplies had gone up substantially in recent months, especially for healthier food, leaving younger Canadians on tight budgets with few healthy eating options;
  • Higher wages – It was felt more could be done to increase wages, particularly for young people working in the service or hospitality industry. That said, it was also acknowledged that this may be a provincial issue more so than a federal one; and
  • Lower post-secondary costs – In addition to high tuition prices, participants also noted higher related costs such as student fees, parking passes, text books, and other expenses commonly incurred by students. This was felt to be particularly difficult to manage during the pandemic as students were still required to pay full price despite being unable to utilize many of these services due to classes being primarily online.

To further explore priorities, participants were shown a list of potential initiatives meant to assist students/youth and were asked to select any that stood out to them as particularly promising:

  • Allow new parents to pause repayment of their federal student loans until their youngest child reaches the age of five;
  • Continue scaling up youth and student skills and employment programming and initiatives for Canadian youth;
  • Create a new stream of the Youth Employment and Skills Strategy for Canadians with disabilities;
  • Expand pathways to Permanent Residence for international students through the Express Entry system (used to manage immigration applications from skilled workers);
  • Increase the repayment assistance threshold to $50,000 for Canada Student Loan borrowers who are single and make appropriate adjustments to the thresholds for other family sizes; and
  • Permanently eliminate federal interest on Canada Student Loans and Canada Apprentice Loans.

All participants felt the federal government should work to permanently eliminate federal interest on Canada Student Loans and Canada Apprentice Loans. Several participants described anxiety associated with this debt and the difficulty of paying it off, especially among those who wanted to pursue advanced degrees or career training. Related to this, some felt it was in the interests of the federal government to have a well-educated population and workforce, and that charging interest on student loans was unfairly punitive to those following this path. The general sense in this group was that the Government of Canada should be doing more to encourage students to pursue education and training by providing increased student grants and other financial supports not requiring repayment.

Participants also liked the proposals related to pausing repayments of federal student loans for parents of young children and increasing the repayment assistance threshold. They felt these could be helpful initiatives, though far less so than measures to reduce large educational debt in the first place.

Almost all participants were in support of continuing to scale up youth and student skills as well as providing a wider array of youth employment programming initiatives. While some had questions about the specific details of these programs, it was generally felt that they could be helpful for many entering early adulthood, especially programs targeted towards developing ‘real life’ skills such as the management of personal finances. Most were also in favour of the creation of a new stream of the Youth Employment and Skills Strategy for Canadians with disabilities and felt this group of young Canadians deserved a better chance than they were currently being given to fulfil their potential, participate in the workforce, and contribute to the Canadian economy. Relatively few participants showed any interest in the initiative aimed at expanding pathways to Permanent Residence for international students through the Express Entry system.

Discussing additional actions the Government of Canada could take to support students and youth with respect to education, a number of participants felt more could be done to support those enrolled in colleges and universities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many were frustrated at having to pay full tuition and fees for what they felt to be a limited academic experience due to the lack of in-person classes and on-campus activities. In addition, some were also concerned about entering the labour market after graduation, feeling that as ‘COVID-19’ students, prospective employers may feel their education and skills would be less developed than those who enjoyed a more ‘normal’ post-secondary experience. Participants generally felt it would be a good idea for the federal government to provide greater financial assistance and employment opportunities for those who had pursued higher education over the course of the pandemic.

Official Language Minority Communities (Sudbury Region Francophones)

A discussion on the topic of official language minority communities was held among Francophones residing in the Sudbury region in Ontario. Some concern was expressed about the state of the French language in Sudbury by several participants, particularly with respect to ensuring the next generation retained fluency in a community where English was the dominant language. A few participants commented on some of the practical day-to-day challenges for youth in particular:

  • In families with an Anglophone parent, children often default to speaking English at home;
  • Even in French language schools, English still tended to be spoken quite widely in conversation, limiting the ability of students to completely immerse themselves in French; and
  • The dominance of Anglophone culture, especially in the media/social media and online, meaning that Francophone youth were heavily immersed in English for a great portion of their day.

Most participants felt the French language was under threat in Canada outside of Quebec. Expanding upon this perspective, some also commented that the idea of Canada as a country with two ‘equal’ official languages seemed more theoretical rather than a reality at present. Participants spoke about their tendency to conduct most of their day-to-day activities in English, including at work, despite French being their first language. A few noted that their colleagues in the workplace were often surprised to discover they spoke French.

The group was shown a series of items related to living as a Francophone in the region and asked to select up to three from the list that they believed represented the most pressing challenges for French-speaking residents:

  • Accessing child care services in French;
  • Accessing information from the Government of Canada in French;
  • Accessing media content (e.g., radio, television, Internet, newspapers) in French;
  • Attracting Francophones from outside the region to move here;
  • Ensuring the Francophone community remains strong in the future;
  • Feeling part of the Francophone community here;
  • Keeping young Francophones in the region;
  • Living in French in your region (e.g., participating in sports/activities, shopping, etc.);
  • Speaking in French to a Government of Canada representative; and
  • Transmitting the French language and culture to the next generation.

Participants focused primarily on three areas: accessing French language child care services, fostering the creation of French language media content, and transmitting the French language and culture to the next generation. A number of participants spoke about the challenges of accessing French language child care services, describing a lack of French-speaking child care workers in their area. In terms of French media content, several participants noted the predominance of Anglophone media outlets, broadcasters, and programs, including local news, and the relative dearth of Francophone options. Several mentioned that they rarely encountered French-speaking individuals in their day-to-day activities in the Sudbury region. There was a general consensus among participants that the dominance of English in the community, particularly in schools, made it more challenging for parents to raise their children with a strong appreciation for the French language and culture.

On balance, participants thought the Government of Canada could be doing more to protect and promote the French language, especially in communities and regions outside of Quebec, where many felt provincial governments were not doing enough. Some were of the view that protecting the French language was vital as a means of honouring the Franco-Ontarian identity and experience, as well as protecting the heritage and history of this community within the province. It was also mentioned that the responsibility for protecting the French language fell not only to governments, but also to individuals (especially parents), to ensure fluency was passed on to younger generations.

When asked for specific suggestions about what the federal government could do to protect the French language, participants identified the following:

  • Encouraging more French programming and content in the media, specifically television;
  • Offering and/or supporting more activities in French within minority French-speaking communities;
  • Maintaining the integrity of Francophone schools by ensuring that the student body is connected to the Francophone community outside the school system; and
  • Increasing opportunities for those who speak French to utilize and maintain their language skills throughout their education, including offering more courses in French at the primary, secondary, and post-secondary levels.

Asked what the Government of Canada could do to support Francophone communities outside Quebec specifically, participants reiterated many of the suggestions above. Participants especially emphasized the need for more courses to be offered in the French language in schools and universities, for more before-and-after-school programs and extracurricular activities to be offered in the French language, and for more incentives to be put in place for school systems to hire more French-speaking teachers. Some also suggested that more should be done to attract Francophone workers to the local community.

Mobile Phones (Winnipeg)

Participants in this group discussed issues related to mobile phones/services and their costs. Discussing their personal experience with mobile services, most participants felt their cell phone bills had become more expensive in recent years. Some also were of the impression that Canadian cell phone providers charged considerably higher rates relative to providers in other jurisdictions. The general sense was that the cost of mobile phones and services were becoming increasingly unaffordable for the average Canadian. Several participants mentioned a few tactics they were employing in order to keep their cell phone bills manageable, including staying with the same provider for an extended period and purchasing a family plan. Many described cell phone bills as a frequent source of financial stress in their households.

Most participants expected cell phone bills would continue to increase over the next few years, in line with increases in the price of other basic household goods and services. Several commented that Canadian telecom companies had no real incentive to reduce the cost to customers, although they had thought that increased competition within the sector would put some downward pressure on prices.

Asked if they were aware of any recent actions the Government of Canada had taken to impact cell phone bills, participants mentioned the following:

  • Implementing regulations regarding the length of contracts and limiting the amount that telecom companies can charge for cancellation fees;
  • Instituting rules to ensure that customers are not ‘locked-in’ to a certain carrier1 ; and

1 As of December 1, 2017, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) announced that all individual and small business wireless service customers would have the right to have their cell phones and other mobile devices unlocked free of charge upon request and that all newly purchased devices must be provided unlocked.

  • Related to the above, ensuring that Canadians have options in terms of being able to move from one telecom carrier to another, should they so choose.

Several suggestions were also made regarding steps the Government of Canada could take to help with rising cell phone bills going forward, including:

  • Ensuring that all telecom carriers offer a basic plan, at a low cost, so that all Canadians can access cell phone services regardless of their income or ability to pay. The current perception among some participants was that even the low-cost plans currently being offered by some carriers were out of reach for some Canadians;
  • Encouraging greater competition within the telecom sector and taking steps to attract foreign carriers into the Canadian market. The view of some participants was that increased competition would lower prices for consumers; and
  • Taking action against ‘price-fixing’ by Canadian telecom carriers, which some felt was occurring due to a perceived lack of competition within the Canadian telecom market.

Local Issues (Nunavut)

Participants in this group discussed a number of issues specifically relevant to their region and local communities.

To begin, participants were asked if they had been following the issue related to water contamination in Iqaluit. Most were aware of the issue, with some saying it had been a long-standing concern facing the community, dating back to the latter half of 2021. While some were under the impression that the issue had been resolved in recent months, others had heard that the community’s water supply had once again become contaminated. The general sense was that a great deal of conflicting information was currently being circulated regarding the state of the water supply. A few participants were of the opinion that the federal government had performed well throughout the initial months of the water crisis in October and November 2021, transporting clean drinking water into the region as well as providing on-the-ground support from Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel. Some hoped to see this federal support continue in the form of assistance toward building a new water treatment facility in Iqaluit.

Looking back on the beginnings of the water crisis, participants were asked to explain in their own words what had precipitated the issue. While several participants were mostly unaware of the contributing factors to the water crisis, a few believed the problem had originated due to the gradual deterioration of an abandoned chemical tank that had ended up contaminating the water supply with arsenic. Asked if they were aware of the response from the federal government regarding this issue, several recalled the presence of CAF personnel as well as the provision of supplies and financial assistance towards resolving the issue. Many were of the view that the response had been a joint effort between the federal government and the Government of Nunavut. A few participants felt there should have been a greater effort by public officials to work with members of the community, including Inuit elders, who, it was felt could have provided useful advice, especially regarding operating in the extreme cold weather frequently experienced in the region.

Asked what additional steps the Government of Canada could take to assist in providing a long-term solution to clean drinking water issues in Iqaluit, a number of responses were provided, including:

  • Working with the city of Iqaluit and the Government of Nunavut to build a new water treatment facility in the community;
  • Greater work towards resolving drinking water issues in other Indigenous communities throughout the North as well as the rest of Canada, as this was seen as a pervasive issue presently impacting many Indigenous peoples; and
  • Infrastructure upgrades throughout the region. It was felt that many buildings and facilities in Iqaluit were currently falling into disrepair and were no longer able to sufficiently meet the needs of the region’s growing population. Some believed actions to pre-emptively repair existing infrastructure would be critical towards ensuring similar issues did not arise again in the future.

Discussing housing in the region, all participants felt there were serious issues concerning the availability of affordable dwellings in Iqaluit as well as a large number of other Northern communities. Several participants recalled having heard of situations where upwards of fifteen people lived in a single residence, and that this was a common practice given what they felt to be a critically insufficient lack of housing. Many were of the opinion that unless one worked for the Government of Nunavut and was provided housing, it was incredibly difficult to find an affordable and decent place to live in the region. It was added that while in some cases provincial government workers or teachers were provided housing through their employer, upon retirement they would often have to leave these homes and struggle with an increasingly expensive rental market. This perceived lack of housing in the territory was felt to disproportionately affect Inuit families and those originally from the area compared to individuals recruited to Nunavut to work for private companies. All participants felt more needed to be done by the federal government to provide affordable housing options for those living in the North. No participants could recall any recent actions taken by the Government of Canada related to addressing the housing situation in Nunavut apart from a few who felt some funding might have been provided. Some were of the opinion that while considerable funding for housing was available, neither Inuit-led organizations nor the federal or territorial governments wanted to take responsibility for developing and building it. It was also felt that a housing crisis had existed since the inception of the territory and had only worsened in the decades that followed. A few were of the opinion that there needed to be a greater emphasis on ‘grassroots’ solutions to the housing situation, including the greater incorporation of Inuk voices in the process.

Most participants felt that mental health problems represented a serious and significant issue in many Northern communities. Asked to identify the largest challenges contributing to this issue, participants mentioned a number of factors:

  • Lack of mental health services – Many believed there to be few mental health support options available in Nunavut, particularly for youth in the region. Moreover, a few felt that even where services did exist they were not adequately suited to the unique realities, challenges and intergenerational traumas faced by Indigenous people;
  • Stigma – The stigma associated with mental health issues was widely viewed as a significant barrier for many in seeking help and treatment; and
  • Poor living standards – Some felt that mental health issues in the North were exacerbated by food insecurity, a lack of financial resources, inadequate housing, and other basic necessities.

Most felt that mental health challenges among youth, in particular, constituted an especially widespread and difficult problem in the territory. Many felt a lack of extracurricular activities for youth, such as organized sports, cultural education, arts and music classes, and other programming, was a major contributing factor, hindering social opportunities, goal-setting, confidence, and the development of practical skills among young people. Without this, it was felt that many young people often ended up seeking out harmful substances, such as alcohol and illicit drugs, and engaging in potentially harmful activities. Asked specifically about the issue of youth suicide, participants felt the subject was too painful and sensitive to discuss in the short timeframe allotted.

Most participants felt that services and care for seniors in Nunavut were significantly lacking. A number of participants felt many communities, including Iqaluit, faced accessibility issues, with many buildings built above ground and only reachable by stairway, making them difficult for those with mobility issues to access. Many recalled hearing of elders being unable to receive care in their communities, requiring them to be transported to other regions of Canada, and separating them from their homes and support networks. Several participants expressed disappointment with this. They felt that in-community care was essential for protecting both the physical and mental wellbeing of elders, and that being able to interact with loved ones was an important component of the healing process. This issue was felt to have been especially prevalent during periods of the COVID-19 pandemic when lockdowns and other public health measures often left elders feeling isolated from their communities.

Related to this, several participants alluded to the situation of an elder from Coral Harbour who had travelled to Ottawa for treatment and was now facing difficulty returning to the local community. This had led to calls from many Nunavut residents for the federal government to provide assistance in transporting this elder home. Many thought the transportation of these elders away from their communities was not only having a negative impact on elders but on their loved ones, as well, who experienced guilt and anxiety for being unable to provide adequate care. Most participants felt strongly that more needed to be done to keep elders in their communities whenever possible, including building more specialized senior care facilities as well as incorporating more traditional Inuit healing methods into local health services. Asked which level of government should be responsible for elder care in the region, participants felt that both the federal and territorial governments had an important role to play.

Local Issues (Prince Edward Island)

Participants in the group from Prince Edward Island (PEI) discussed a number of issues specific to the province, including those related to a recent ban of PEI potatoes by the United States, the hiring of PEI nurses by Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC), and immigration within the province.

To begin, participations were asked if they had seen, read, or heard anything about recent developments related to the trade of PEI potatoes. All were at least somewhat aware of an issue related to the United States temporarily denying entry of shipments of PEI potatoes. Describing what they had heard, participants mentioned that potato wart had been found in a couple of potato fields in PEI and, as a result, all potato exports to the United States had been temporarily stopped, causing a number of economic issues for farmers and exporters in the province. Some were of the impression that this trade suspension had been ‘self-imposed’ by federal officials while others felt it was more related to decisions made by the U.S. federal government to no longer permit entry of shipments of PEI potatoes until it was satisfied the issue had been resolved. A few participants expressed frustration, believing that potato wart was primarily an aesthetic issue rather than one affecting the nutrition or safety of these crops and felt this trade suspension should not have been enacted in the first place. A small number also recalled hearing that while PEI potatoes were still being denied entry in the mainland U.S., trade had recently reopened to the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico earlier in the month.

Asked where they would typically seek out news regarding this issue, a number of participants mentioned traditional broadcasters such as CBC television and radio. Some also mentioned Google or social media, such as YouTube and Facebook, while others said they typically relied on word-of-mouth updates from friends, family, and colleagues.

Most felt the Government of Canada had an important role to play in resolving this issue and resuming potato exports from PEI to the United States. Some thought the federal government needed to be firmer in its negotiations with U.S. counterparts and put greater effort into finding a solution. A few reiterated having heard the trade suspension had been ‘self-imposed’, with some citing the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) as the agency responsible for suspending potato exports in the first place. It was felt by a number of participants that more needed to be done by both the federal and provincial governments to assist farmers, who were believed to be facing increasing financial difficulties due to this issue.

To aid in discussion, it was clarified that in October, 2021, the United States asked the CFIA to suspend the issue of export certificates for potatoes from PEI following the detection of potato wart in some fields. These export certificates are primarily used as confirmation from the CFIA that the product meets specific Canadian standards and requirements. On November 22nd, 2021, the United States instructed its border officials to deny shipments of PEI potatoes, regardless of whether they were certified by the CFIA. A number of participants felt this explanation clarified the situation by identifying the U.S. as the source of the decision. Some were critical of these actions by the U.S. and thought it had been unnecessarily harsh given the perceived low health risk of potato wart. A few thought that other trade issues, such as those related to the auto industry, may have influenced the U.S decision, resulting in PEI’s potatoes being used as a ‘bargaining chip’ by the United States in order to extract concessions from the Government of Canada on other, unrelated trade concerns.

While no participants reported being personally affected by this issue, many felt it could potentially have numerous negative economic consequences for the province, given the status of PEI potatoes as a major provincial export, and the economic damage already incurred by the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in lost income to vital sectors such as the tourism industry. Some were also concerned that this trade suspension of fresh potatoes from PEI could affect the export of other potato-based products (e.g., French fries) manufactured in the province by corporations such as McCain Foods and Cavendish Farms.

Discussing the CFIA’s role more generally, it was further clarified that the agency’s mandate was first and foremost to safeguard food, animals, and plants, in order to enhance the health and well-being of Canada’s people, environment, and economy, as well as to provide international market access for Canadian food exports. Most felt this to be a critically important role, particularly in terms of ensuring public health and the safety of food products consumed by Canadians as well as international trade partners. It was believed the maintenance of high food-safety standards in Canadian exports was crucial in protecting Canada’s international reputation as a safe exporter. Based on these additional clarifications, the group was asked how they felt the CFIA was performing in terms of fulfilling this mandate. Participants were largely split on this issue with roughly an equal number of individuals feeling the CFIA was doing a good job as those who felt performance had been poor. Some thought that, while frustrating at times, the CFIA was upholding its responsibility to the Canadian people and protecting the international reputation of Canadian exports by identifying and taking action regarding issues such as potato wart. Others, however, were of the view that the initial potato wart issue had been minimal and primarily limited to only a few potato fields. As such, they felt this matter had been blown somewhat out of proportion and that the CFIA should have worked harder to reassure U.S. trade counterparts regarding the safety of PEI potatoes and promote confidence in the thoroughness of Canadian food safety standards and regulations. A few others were more uncertain, feeling they did not know enough about the potential risks of potato wart to determine if the situation had been handled appropriately by the CFIA.

Very few had heard about Government of Canada business risk management (BRM) programs, including the AgriStability initiative. Asked, more specifically, if they were aware of a $28-million plan from the federal government to assist PEI farmers affected by the trade suspension of potatoes to the United States, many participants had heard about this program, though few could recount any specific details. To clarify, participants were presented with the following overview:

Government of Canada business risk management programs are tools that provide agricultural producers with protection against income and production losses, helping them manage risks that threaten the viability of their farms.

AgriStability is one of these programs. It protects Canadian producers against declines in farming income for reasons such as production loss, increased costs and trade issues. A PEI farmer can trigger a payment when his average farming income decreases by 15%.

In December 2021, the Government of Canada announced a potential $28-million plan to assist PEI farmers. Funding up to $28 million will partly be dedicated to getting surplus potatoes to processors, packers and food banks. Money will also be available for farmers who need to destroy surplus potatoes.

Most participants thought these financial supports would likely have a positive effect on helping PEI farmers and keeping their businesses viable in the short-term. Some, however, were skeptical that $28 million would be enough to offset the potential financial losses incurred by potato farmers, and felt additional funding may need to be allocated. A number of participants also were of the opinion that smaller farms should be prioritized for federal assistance relative to larger corporations, believing independent farmers would likely have fewer financial resources on hand to help them through this challenging situation. A few also raised concerns regarding the issues groups such as temporary foreign workers may face in accessing this assistance, given their assumptions that these workers were not officially employed by the farms on which they worked. No participants felt this program would be able to sufficiently address the challenges faced by PEI farmers, with many reiterating the opinion that the $28-million amount would be insufficient and that too high of a percentage of this funding was likely to be allocated to larger corporations and businesses. Discussing what they felt would be the long-term impact of this situation on the potato industry on PEI, many felt the ‘PEI potatoes’ brand would be significantly damaged. From an economic perspective, some were also concerned about the province potentially losing what they felt to be its competitive advantage in the sector.

Discussing the recent announcement on February 8th, 2022 that the United States would be allowing the resumption of shipments of PEI potatoes to Puerto Rico, almost all participants had heard about this development, with many feeling this was great news for the province and its farmers. While a small number felt this represented something of a ‘double standard’ in that the potatoes were being accepted in Puerto Rico but not the U.S. mainland, most felt this decision was also related to increased demand for food stuffs in Puerto Rico. Some felt that potato wart, seen by most as primarily an aesthetic issue, would be of less concern relative to the nutritional value these potatoes could provide to the citizens of Puerto Rico. Most believed the CFIA likely played a role in accomplishing this partial reopening of trade, feeling this announcement represented a ‘win’ for both Canada and the United States and was a positive step towards fully resuming the trade of PEI potatoes.

Evaluating the CFIA and the Government of Canada’s overall handling of the situation, a number of participants continued to question whether the issue ever should have arisen in the first place, believing it to be a minor concern that had been escalated unnecessarily. It was also felt that while the CFIA had been quick to respond to the discovery of potato wart, it had been much slower in advocating for the resumption of trade and restoring the confidence of the United States of the high safety standards of CFIA-certified exports.

Participants were also asked whether they had seen, read, or heard anything recently about Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC). Unprompted, several participants mentioned hearing about VAC hiring away a number of nurses who had previously been working for Health PEI, which some felt had caused a nursing shortage in the province, with the remaining nursing staff unable to meet the current demand of PEI residents. A few also recalled seeing more general communications such as information regarding entitlements for veterans who had suffered from tinnitus or hearing loss in part due to their service in the Canadian Armed Forces.

Asked specifically about the nursing issue, many felt that while VAC hiring these nurses may have negatively impacted the provincial health system, the switch may have been a beneficial one for nurses burnt out after working through almost two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Some suspected that many of these nurses may have actively sought out this temporary change. A few participants recalled personally being aware of nurses who had recently left their positions at Health PEI to work at VAC. Discussing the potential long-term impacts of these departures, some thought the health care system within PEI was already under considerable strain due to the pandemic and that a nursing shortage would only exacerbate the issue. Rather than finding fault with the nurses or VAC, however, many believed provincial officials needed to take a closer look at why nurses were leaving Health PEI as well as potential actions the provincial government could take to improve working conditions for nurses to avoid further departures. A few were also of the view that rather than solely recruiting nurses, VAC could also take steps to hire those with related backgrounds such as pharmacists, biologists, and others with health sciences related training.

Also related to VAC, participants discussed the economic impacts of federal employees, including those from VAC, working at home rather than in their offices in the downtown core of Charlottetown. Several felt ongoing ‘work from home’ policies had severely harmed many downtown businesses, particularly in the restaurant and hospitality sectors. Some personally recalled knowing of business owners of restaurants and cafes who had experienced a vast reduction in revenue or been forced to close their businesses altogether due to the decreased foot traffic in the area.

Participants were also asked whether they had recently seen, read, or heard anything about immigration specifically relating to PEI. While few had heard any specific details, it was generally felt that immigration to PEI had recently increased. To some, this was both a positive and negative development that might benefit the economy in some areas, such as the workforce, while creating challenges in others, such as increasing the demand for and cost of housing. Discussing temporary foreign workers in particular, some were of the impression these workers played an important role within the province’s agriculture and aquaculture sectors. A few also recalled ongoing discussions throughout the COVID-19 pandemic about whether temporary foreign workers should be classified as ‘essential’ workers and permitted to continue working in the province during the public health emergency.

Discussing immigration more broadly, a number of participants had heard about recent delays for applicants seeking to obtain permanent residency or Canadian citizenship, though few could recall any specific details. A few had also heard about delays in processing family reunifications due to a ‘backlog’ of applications built up over the course of the pandemic. Generally, it was felt by many that the process for obtaining permanent residency or Canadian citizenship was quite onerous for applicants. Some felt that lengthy processing times were impeding the ability of newcomers to fully settle and begin their new lives in Canada. Asked whether they had heard anything concerning the sponsorship of refugees within PEI, some had heard of a number of private and public groups who had been working to bring more refugees to the province, though few could recall any specific details.

Appendix A – Recruiting Scripts

English Recruiting Script

Privy Council Office

Recruiting Script – February 2022

English Groups

Recruitment Specifications Summary

  • Groups conducted online
  • Each group is expected to last for two hours
  • Recruit 8 participants. Recruit 9 for Nunavut group.
  • Incentives will be $100 per person and will be sent to participants via e-transfer following the group.
  • Incentive will be $125 per person for those participating in the Nunavut group and will be sent to participants via e-transfer following the group.

Specifications for the focus groups are as follows:

GROUP DATE TIME (EST) TIME (LOCAL) LOCATION COMPOSITION MODERATOR
1 Wed., February 2nd 6:00-8:00 6:00-8:00 (EST) Durham Region – Ontario Parents of Children Under 12 DN
3 Tues., February 8th 7:00-9:00 6:00-8:00 (CST) Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children Under 12 DN
4 Wed., February 9th 9:00-11:00 6:00-8:00 (PST) Okanagan Region – British Columbia Renters DN
5 Thurs., February 10th 6:00-8:00 6:00-8:00 (EST) Nunavut General Population TBW
6 Tues., February 15th 6:00-8:00 6:00-8:00 (EST) Hamilton & Niagara Region – Ontario Post-Secondary Students TBW
7 Wed., February 16th 8:00-10:00 6:00-8:00 (MST) Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19 DN
8 Thurs., February 17th 7:00-9:00 6:00-8:00 (CST) Winnipeg General Population TBW
9 Tues., February 22nd 5:00-7:00 6:00-8:00 (AST) Prince Edward Island General Population DN
12 Mon., February 28th 8:00-10:00 7:00-9:00 (CST) Saskatchewan & Manitoba Indigenous Peoples Living on Reserve TBW

Recruiting Script

INTRODUCTION

Hello, my name is [RECRUITER NAME]. I'm calling from The Strategic Counsel, a national public opinion research firm, on behalf of the Government of Canada/Bonjour, je m’appelle [NOM DU RECRUTEUR]. Je vous téléphone du Strategic Counsel, une entreprise nationale de recherche sur l’opinion publique, pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada.

Would you prefer to continue in English or French?/Préfériez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais? [CONTINUE IN LANGUAGE OF PREFERENCE]

RECORD LANGUAGE

English CONTINUE

French THANK AND END

On behalf of the Government of Canada, we’re organizing a series of online video focus group discussions to explore current issues of interest to Canadians.

The format is a “round table” discussion, led by an experienced moderator. Participants will be given a cash honorarium in appreciation of their time.

Your participation is completely voluntary and all your answers will be kept confidential. We are only interested in hearing your opinions - no attempt will be made to sell or market you anything. The report that is produced from the series of discussion groups we are holding will not contain comments that are attributed to specific individuals.

But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix/variety of people in each of the groups. May I ask you a few questions?

YesCONTINUE

NoTHANK AND END

SCREENING QUESTIONS

1. Have you, or has anyone in your household, worked for any of the following types of organizations in the last 5 years?

A market research firm
THANK AND END
A marketing, branding or advertising agency
THANK AND END
A magazine or newspaper
THANK AND END
A federal/provincial/territorial government department or agency
THANK AND END
A political party
THANK AND END
In public/media relations
THANK AND END
In radio/television
THANK AND END
No, none of the above
CONTINUE

1a. IN ALL LOCATIONS: Are you a retired Government of Canada employee?

YesTHANK AND END

NoCONTINUE

2. In which city do you reside?

LOCATION CITIES
Durham Region – Ontario Cities could include (but are not limited to): Oshawa, Whitby, Ajax, municipality of Clarington, Pickering, township of Scugog, township of Uxbridge, township of Brock.

NO MORE THAN TWO PER CITY. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.
CONTINUE - GROUP 1
Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Cities could include:
Prince Albert, Moose Jaw, Lloydminster, Swift Current, Yorkton.

NO MORE THAN TWO PER CITY. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION.
CONTINUE - GROUP 3
Okanagan Region – British Columbia Cities include:
Kelowna, Vernon, Penticton, Lake Country, Summerland, Coldstream, Peachland, Armstrong, Spallumcheen, Osoyoos.

NO MORE THAN TWO PER CITY. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.
CONTINUE - GROUP 4
Nunavut Cities could include (but are not limited to): Iqaluit, Arviat, Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake.

AIM FOR NO MORE THAN 4 FROM IQALUIT. AIM FOR A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.
CONTINUE - GROUP 5
Hamilton & Niagara Region – Ontario Cities include:
Hamilton.
Niagara Region: St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, Welland, Fort Erie, Grimsby, Lincoln, Thorold, Port Colborne, Niagara-on-the-lake, Pelham, Wainfleet.

ENSURE 4 PARTICIPANTS FROM HAMILTON AND 4 PARTICIPANTS FROM NIAGARA REGION. ENSURE A GOOD MIX ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.
CONTINUE - GROUP 6
Edmonton City includes:
Edmonton.

PARTICIPANTS SHOULD RESIDE IN THE ABOVE-NOTED CENTER PROPER.
CONTINUE - GROUP 7
Winnipeg City includes:
Winnipeg.

PARTICIPANTS SHOULD RESIDE IN THE ABOVE-NOTED CENTER PROPER.
CONTINUE - GROUP 8
Prince Edward Island Cities could include (but are not limited to): Charlottetown, Summerside, Stratford, Cornwall.

MAX 4 PARTICIPANTS FROM MAJOR CENTRES (CHARLOTTETOWN). ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.
CONTINUE - GROUP 9
Saskatchewan & Manitoba Cities could include (but are not limited to):
Saskatchewan: Saskatoon, Regina, Prince Albert, Moose Jaw, Swift Current, Yorkton, North Battleford, Lloydminster, Estevan, Warman, Weyburn, Martensville, Melfort, Humboldt, Meadow Lake.
Manitoba: Winnipeg, Brandon, Steinbach, Thompson, Portage la Prairie, Winkler, Selkirk, Morden, Dauphin, Flin Flon.

ENSURE 4 FROM EACH PROVINCE. MAX 2 PARTICIPANTS FROM MAJOR CITIES (SASKATOON/REGINA AND WINNIPEG/BRANDON). ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.
CONTINUE - GROUP 12

2a. How long have you lived in [INSERT CITY]? RECORD NUMBER OF YEARS.

Less than two years THANK AND END
Two years or more CONTINUE
Don’t know/Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX BY NUMBER OF YEARS IN CITY. NO MORE THAN 2 PER GROUP UNDER 5 YEARS.

3. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 1 OR 3Do you have any children under the age of 12?

Yes CONTINUE TO Q3a

NoTHANK AND END

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

3a. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 1 OR 3 Could you please tell me the ages of these children?

Child Age
1
2
3
4
5

ENSURE A GOOD MIX BY AGE AND NUMBER OF CHILDREN IN EACH GROUP. ALL MUST HAVE AT LEAST 1 CHILD BETWEEN THE AGES OF 5 AND 11.

4. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 4 Do you own or rent your current residence? IF ASKED/CLARIFICATION REQUIRED: You are considered a homeowner even if you have outstanding debt that you owe on your mortgage loan.

Own THANK AND END

RentCONTINUE

VOLUNTEERED Living at home THANK AND END

VOLUNTEERED Other THANK AND END

VOLUNTEERED Don’t know/not sure THANK AND END

5. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 6 Are you currently enrolled in a post-secondary program?

Yes CONTINUE
No THANK AND END
Don’t know/Prefer not to answer

5a. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 6 Which of the following post-secondary institutions are you enrolled in?

University – Undergraduate CONTINUE
University – Post graduate
College
Technical/Trade School
Fine Arts School
VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX BY POST-SECONDARY INSTITUTION.

6. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 7 Have you tested positive for COVID-19, either through a rapid antigen test or a PCR test?

Yes CONTINUE

No THANK AND END

Don’t know/not sure THANK AND END

7. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 7 Since the beginning of the pandemic, approximately how many times have you tested positive?

Once CONTINUE

Twice CONTINUE

Three or more times CONTINUE

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

8. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 7 Which of the following best describes the symptoms you experienced when you had COVID-19? IF ASKED/CLARIFICATION REQUIRED: If you tested positive more than once, please select the option that best describes the most severe symptoms you experienced.

I did not have any symptoms (was asymptomatic) CONTINUE

I had very mild symptoms CONTINUE

I felt bad for a few days CONTINUE

I felt bad for an extended period of time CONTINUE

I had very serious symptoms requiring treatment, but not hospitalization CONTINUE

I had to be hospitalized CONTINUE

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF NUMBER OF TIMES TESTED POSITIVE FOR COVID-19 AND SEVERITY OF SYMPTOMS.

9. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 12 Do you identify as…

First Nations CONTINUE

Métis THANK AND END

Inuit THANK AND END

None of the above THANK AND END

10. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 12 Do you currently live on a First Nations reserve?

Yes, which one? ________________ CONTINUE

No THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF RESERVATIONS.

11. Would you be willing to tell me in which of the following age categories you belong?

Under 18 years of age IF POSSIBLE, ASK FOR SOMEONE OVER 18 AND REINTRODUCE. OTHERWISE THANK AND END.
18-24 ALL OTHER LOCATIONS, CONTINUE
25-29
30-39
40-54
55+
VOLUNTEERED
Prefer not to answer
THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF AGES WITHIN EACH GROUP.
POST-SECONDARY STUDENTS IN GROUP 6 MAY SKEW YOUNGER (18-29).
PARENTS IN GROUP 1 & 3 MAY SKEW YOUNGER-MIDDLE AGED (30S/40S).

12. [DO NOT ASK] Gender RECORD BY OBSERVATION.

Male CONTINUE
Female CONTINUE

ENSURE A GOOD MIX BY GENDER IN EACH GROUP.
PARENTS IN GROUP 1 & 3 MAY SKEW FEMALE BUT TRY FOR A 50/50 SPLIT MALE/FEMALE.

13. Which of the following racial or cultural groups best describes you? (multi-select)

White/Caucasian

South Asian (e.g., East Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan)

Chinese

Black

Latin American

Filipino

Arab

Southeast Asian (e.g., Vietnamese, Cambodian, Thai)

Korean or Japanese

Indigenous

Other (specify)

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX.

FIRST GENERATION IMMIGRANTS IN GROUP 7 MAY SKEW TO NON-WHITE/CAUCASIAN

14. Which of the following best describes the industry sector in which you are currently employed?

Accommodation and Food Services

Administrative and Support, Waste Management and Remediation Services

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting

Arts, Entertainment and Recreation

Construction

Educational Services

Finance and Insurance

Health Care and Social Assistance

Information and Cultural Industries

Management of Companies and Enterprises

Manufacturing

Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction

Other Services (except Public Administration)

Professional, Scientific and Technical Services

Public Administration

Real Estate and Rental and Leasing

Retail Trade

Transportation and Warehousing

Utilities

Wholesale Trade

Unemployed

Full Time Student

Retired

Other, please specify: ______________

CONTINUE FOR ALL. ENSURE A GOOD MIX BY TYPE OF EMPLOYMENT FOR EACH GROUP. NO MORE THAN TWO PER SECTOR. NO INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS.
POST-SECONDARY STUDENTS IN GROUP 6 MAY SKEW TO FULL-TIME STUDENT.

15. Are you familiar with the concept of a focus group?

YesCONTINUE

No EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING “a focus group consists of six to eight participants and one moderator. During a two-hour session, participants are asked to discuss a wide range of issues related to the topic being examined.”

16. As part of the focus group, you will be asked to actively participate in a conversation. Thinking of how you engage in group discussions, how would you rate yourself on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means ‘you tend to sit back and listen to others’ and 5 means ‘you are usually one of the first people to speak’?

1-2THANK AND END

3-5CONTINUE

17. As this group is being conducted online, in order to participate you will need to have high-speed Internet and a computer with a working webcam, microphone and speaker. RECRUITER TO CONFIRM THE FOLLOWING. TERMINATE IF NO TO ANY.

Participant has high-speed access to the Internet

Participant has a computer/webcam

18. Have you used online meeting software, such as Zoom, Webex, Microsoft Teams, Google Hangouts/Meet, etc., in the last two years?

YesCONTINUE

NoCONTINUE

19. How skilled would you say you are at using online meeting platforms on your own, using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means you are not at all skilled, and 5 means you are very skilled?

1-2THANK AND END

3-5CONTINUE

20. During the discussion, you could be asked to read or view materials on screen and/or participate in poll-type exercises online. You will also be asked to actively participate online using a webcam. Can you think of any reason why you may have difficulty reading the materials or participating by video?
TERMINATE IF RESPONDENT OFFERS ANY REASON SUCH AS SIGHT OR HEARING PROBLEM, A WRITTEN OR VERBAL LANGUAGE PROBLEM, A CONCERN WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY, ANY CONCERNS WITH USING A WEBCAM OR IF YOU AS THE INTERVIEWER HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE PARTICIPANT’S ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE EFFECTIVELY.

21. Have you ever attended a focus group discussion, an interview or survey which was arranged in advance and for which you received a sum of money?

Yes CONTINUE

No SKIP TO Q.25

22. How long ago was the last focus group you attended?

Less than 6 months ago THANK AND END

More than 6 months ago CONTINUE

23. How many focus group discussions have you attended in the past 5 years?

0-4 groups CONTINUE

5 or more groups THANK AND END

24. On what topics were they and do you recall who or what organization the groups were being undertaken for?

TERMINATE IF ANY ON SIMILAR/SAME TOPIC OR GOVERNMENT OF CANADA IDENTIFIED AS ORGANIZATION

ADDITIONAL RECRUITING CRITERIA

Now we have just a few final questions before we give you the details of the focus group, including the time and date.

25. What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?

Grade 8 or less

Some high school

High school diploma or equivalent

Registered Apprenticeship or other trades certificate or diploma

College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma

University certificate or diploma below bachelor's level

Bachelor's degree

Post graduate degree above bachelor's level

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer

ENSURE A GOOD MIX.

26. Which of the following categories best describes your total household income in 2020? That is, the total income of all persons in your household combined, before taxes?

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

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX.

27. The focus group discussion will be audio-taped and video-taped for research purposes only. The taping is conducted to assist our researchers in writing their report. Do you consent to being audio-taped and video-taped?

Yes

NoTHANK AND END

INVITATION

I would like to invite you to this online focus group discussion, which will take place the evening of [INSERT DATE/TIME BASED ON GROUP # IN CHART ON PAGE 1]. The group will be two hours in length and you will receive $100 for your participation following the group via an e-transfer.

Please note that there may be observers from the Government of Canada at the group and that the discussion will be videotaped. By agreeing to participate, you have given your consent to these procedures.

Would you be willing to attend?

YesCONTINUE

NoTHANK AND END

May I please have your full name, a telephone number that is best to reach you at as well as your e-mail address if you have one so that I can send you the details for the group?

Name:

Telephone Number:

E-mail Address:

You will receive an e-mail from The Strategic Counsel with the instructions to login to the online group. Should you have any issues logging into the system specifically, you can contact our technical support team at support@thestrategiccounsel.com.

We ask that you are online at least 15 minutes prior to the beginning of the session in order to ensure you are set up and to allow our support team to assist you in case you run into any technical issues. We also ask that you restart your computer prior to joining the group.

You may be required to view some material during the course of the discussion. If you require glasses to do so, please be sure to have them handy at the time of the group. Also, you will need pen and paper in order to take some notes throughout the group.

This is a firm commitment. If you anticipate anything preventing you from attending (either home or work-related), please let me know now and we will keep your name for a future study. If for any reason you are unable to attend, please let us know as soon as possible at [1-800-xxx-xxxx] so we can find a replacement.

Thank you very much for your time.

RECRUITED BY: ____________________

DATE RECRUITED: ____________________

French Recruiting Script

Bureau du Conseil privé

Questionnaire de recrutement – février 2022

Groupes en français

Résumé des consignes de recrutement

  • Groupes tenus en ligne.
  • Durée prévue de chaque rencontre : deux heures.
  • Recrutement de huit participants.
  • Incitatifs de 125 $ par personne, versés aux participants par transfert électronique après la rencontre.

Caractéristiques des groupes de discussion :

GROUPE DATE HEURE (DE L’EST) HEURE (LOCALE) LIEU COMPOSITION DU GROUPE MODÉRATEUR
2 3 février 18 h-20 h 18 h-20 h (HNE) Région du Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord – Québec Population générale M. Proulx
10 23 février 18 h-20 h 18 h-20 h (HNE) Région du Grand Sudbury – Ontario Population générale M. Proulx
11 24 février 18 h-20 h 18 h-20 h (HNE) Centre-du-Québec/Québec du Sud Population générale M. Proulx

Questionnaire de recrutement

INTRODUCTION

Hello, my name is [RECRUITER NAME]. I’m calling from The Strategic Counsel, a national public opinion research firm, on behalf of the Government of Canada/Bonjour, je m’appelle [NOM DU RECRUTEUR]. Je vous téléphone du Strategic Counsel, une entreprise nationale de recherche sur l’opinion publique, pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada.

Would you prefer to continue in English or French?/Préféreriez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais?
[CONTINUER DANS LA LANGUE PRÉFÉRÉE]

NOTER LA LANGUE ET CONTINUER

Anglais REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Français CONTINUER

Nous organisons, pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada, une série de groupes de discussion vidéo en ligne afin d’explorer des questions d’actualité qui intéressent les Canadiens.

La rencontre prendra la forme d’une table ronde animée par un modérateur expérimenté. Les participants recevront un montant d’argent en remerciement de leur temps.

Votre participation est entièrement volontaire et toutes vos réponses seront confidentielles. Nous aimerions simplement connaître vos opinions : personne n’essaiera de vous vendre quoi que ce soit ou de promouvoir des produits. Notre rapport sur cette série de groupes de discussion n’attribuera aucun commentaire à une personne en particulier.

Avant de vous inviter à participer, je dois vous poser quelques questions qui nous permettront de former des groupes suffisamment diversifiés. Puis-je vous poser quelques questions?

OuiCONTINUER

NonREMERCIER ET CONCLURE

QUESTIONS DE SÉLECTION

1. Est-ce que vous ou une personne de votre ménage avez travaillé pour l’un des types d’organisations suivants au cours des cinq dernières années?

Une société d’études de marché REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Une agence de commercialisation, de marque ou de publicité REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Un magazine ou un journal REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Un ministère ou un organisme gouvernemental fédéral, provincial ou territorial REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Un parti politique REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Dans les relations publiques ou les relations avec les médias REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Dans le milieu de la radio ou de la télévision REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Non, aucune de ces réponses CONTINUER

1a. POUR TOUS LES LIEUX : Êtes-vous un ou une employé(e) retraité(e) du gouvernement du Canada ?

OuiREMERCIER ET CONCLURE

NonCONTINUER

2. Quelle langue parlez-vous le plus souvent à la maison ?

Anglais REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Français CONTINUER

Autre [Préciser ou non la langue, selon les besoins de l'étude] REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Préfère ne pas répondre REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

3. Dans quelle ville habitez-vous ?

LIEU VILLES
Région du Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/ Côte-Nord – Québec Les villes peuvent notamment comprendre :
Bas-Saint-Laurent : Rimouski, Rivière du Loup, Matane.
Gaspésie : Gaspé, Chandler, Sainte-Anne-des-Monts.
Côte-Nord : Sept-Îles, Baie-Comeau.

ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES VILLES DE LA RÉGION. PAS PLUS DE DEUX PARTICIPANTS PAR VILLE.
CONTINUER - GROUPE 2
Région du Grand Sudbury – Ontario Les villes de la région du Grand Sudbury peuvent notamment comprendre :
Sudbury, Val Therese, Chelmsford, Garson, Lively, Hanmer, Azilda, Val Caron, Espanola.

ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES VILLES DE LA RÉGION. PAS PLUS DE DEUX PARTICIPANTS PAR VILLE. RECRUTER DES RÉSIDENTS DE GRANDES ET DE PETITES COLLECTIVITÉS.
CONTINUER - GROUPE 10
Centre-du- Québec/Québec du Sud Les villes peuvent notamment comprendre :
Centre-du-Québec : Drummondville, Victoriaville, Bécancour.
Sud du Québec (Lanaudière, Laurentides, Montérégie, Chaudière-Appalaches) : Joliette, L’Assomption, Mascouche, Blainville, Boisbriand, Mirabel, Beloeil, Boucherville, Brossard, Lévis, Saint-Georges, Thetford-Mines.

ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES VILLES DE LA RÉGION. RECRUTER DES RÉSIDENTS DE GRANDES ET DE PETITES COLLECTIVITÉS.
CONTINUER - GROUPE 11
Autre lieu - REMERCIER ET CONCLURE
RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE Préfère ne pas répondre - REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

3a. Depuis combien de temps habitez-vous à [INSÉRER LE NOM DE LA VILLE]? NOTER LE NOMBRE D’ANNÉES.

Moins de deux ans REMERCIER ET CONCLURE
Deux ans ou plus CONTINUER
Ne sais pas/Préfère ne pas répondre REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION EN FONCTION DU NOMBRE D’ANNÉES DE RÉSIDENCE DANS LA VILLE. PAS PLUS DE DEUX PAR GROUPE DOIVENT Y VIVRE DEPUIS MOINS DE 5 ANS.

4. Seriez-vous prêt/prête à m’indiquer votre tranche d’âge dans la liste suivante?

Moins de 18 ans SI POSSIBLE, DEMANDER À PARLER À UNE PERSONNE DE 18 ANS OU PLUS ET REFAIRE L’INTRODUCTION. SINON, REMERCIER ET CONCLURE..
18 à 24 CONTINUER

ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES ÂGES DANS CHAQUE GROUPE.
25 à 29
30 à 39
40 à 54
55 ans ou plus
RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE Je préfère ne pas répondre REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

5. [NE PAS DEMANDER] Sexe NOTER SELON VOTRE OBSERVATION.

Homme

Femme

ASSURER UNE PROPORTION ÉGALE D’HOMMES ET DE FEMMES DANS CHAQUE GROUPE.

6. Êtes-vous un étudiant international?

Oui REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Non CONTINUER

RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE Préfère ne pas répondre REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

7. Parmi les choix suivants, lequel décrit le mieux le secteur d’activité dans lequel vous travaillez?

Administrations publiques

Agriculture, foresterie, pêche et chasse

Arts, spectacle et loisirs

Autres services, sauf les administrations publiques

Commerce de détail

Commerce de gros

Construction

Extraction minière, exploitation en carrière, et extraction de pétrole et de gaz

Fabrication

Finance et assurances

Gestion de sociétés et d'entreprises

Hébergement et services de restauration

Industrie de l'information et industrie culturelle

Services administratifs, services de soutien, services de gestion des déchets et services

d'assainissement

Services d'enseignement

Services immobiliers et services de location et de location à bail

Services professionnels, scientifiques et techniques

Services publics

Soins de santé et assistance sociale

Transport et entreposage

Sans emploi

Aux études à temps plein PAS D’ÉTUDIANTS ÉTRANGERS

À la retraite – DEMANDER : « DANS QUEL SECTEUR TRAVAILLIEZ-VOUS AVANT? » ET NOTER LA RÉPONSE

Autre situation ou autre secteur ; veuillez préciser : ______________

CONTINUER POUR TOUS LES RÉPONDANTS. ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES TYPES D’EMPLOI DANS CHAQUE GROUPE. PAS PLUS DE DEUX RÉPONDANTS PAR SECTEUR D’ACTIVITÉ.

8. Est-ce que vous connaissez le concept du « groupe de discussion »?

OuiCONTINUER

NonEXPLIQUER QUE : « un groupe de discussion se compose de six à huit participants et d’un modérateur. Au cours d’une période de deux heures, les participants sont invités à discuter d’un éventail de questions reliées au sujet abordé ».

9. Dans le cadre du groupe de discussion, on vous demandera de participer activement à une conversation. En pensant à la manière dont vous interagissez lors de discussions en groupe, quelle note vous donneriez-vous sur une échelle de 1 à 5 si 1 signifie « j’ai tendance à ne pas intervenir et à écouter les autres parler » et 5, « je suis habituellement une des premières personnes à parler » ?

1-2REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

3-5CONTINUER

10. Étant donné que ce groupe se réunira en ligne, vous aurez besoin, pour participer, d’un accès Internet haut débit et d’un ordinateur muni d’une caméra Web, d’un microphone et d’un haut-parleur en bon état de marche. CONFIRMER LES POINTS CI-DESSOUS. METTRE FIN À L’APPEL SI NON À L’UN DES TROIS.

Le participant a accès à Internet haut débit

Le participant a un ordinateur avec caméra Web

11. Avez-vous utilisé des logiciels de réunion en ligne tels que Zoom, Webex, Microsoft Teams, Google Hangouts/Meet, etc., au cours des deux dernières années ?

OuiCONTINUER

NonCONTINUER

12. Sur une échelle de 1 à 5 où 1 signifie que vous n’êtes pas du tout habile et 5 que vous êtes très habile, comment évaluez-vous votre capacité à utiliser seul(e) les plateformes de réunion en ligne ?

1-2REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

3-5CONTINUER

13. Au cours de la discussion, vous pourriez devoir lire ou visionner du matériel affiché à l’écran, ou faire des exercices en ligne comme ceux qu’on trouve dans les sondages. On vous demandera aussi de participer activement à la discussion en ligne à l’aide d’une caméra Web. Pensez-vous avoir de la difficulté, pour une raison ou une autre, à lire les documents ou à participer à la discussion par vidéo?
CONCLURE L’ENTRETIEN SI LE RÉPONDANT SIGNALE UN PROBLÈME DE VISION OU D’AUDITION, UN PROBLÈME DE LANGUE PARLÉE OU ÉCRITE, S’IL CRAINT DE NE POUVOIR COMMUNIQUER EFFICACEMENT, SI L’UTILISATION D’UNE CAMÉRA WEB LUI POSE PROBLÈME, OU SI VOUS, EN TANT QU’INTERVIEWEUR, AVEZ DES DOUTES QUANT À SA CAPACITÉ DE PARTICIPER EFFICACEMENT AUX DISCUSSIONS.

14. Avez-vous déjà participé à un groupe de discussion, à une entrevue ou à un sondage organisé à l’avance en contrepartie d’une somme d’argent?

Oui CONTINUER

Non PASSER À LA Q.18

15. À quand remonte le dernier groupe de discussion auquel vous avez participé ?

À moins de six mois,REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

À plus de six mois, CONTINUER

16. À combien de groupes de discussion avez-vous participé au cours des cinq dernières années?

0 à 4 groupes, CONTINUER

5 groupes ou plus REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

17. Quel était leur sujet, et vous rappelez-vous pour qui ou pour quelle organisation ces groupes étaient organisés?

TERMINER SI LE SUJET EST SEMBLABLE OU IDENTIQUE, OU SI L’ORGANISATION NOMMÉE EST LE GOUVERNEMENT DU CANADA

CRITÈRES DE RECRUTEMENT SUPPLÉMENTAIRES

Il me reste quelques dernières questions avant de vous donner les détails du groupe de discussion, comme l’heure et la date.

18. Lequel ou lesquels des groupes raciaux ou culturels suivants vous décrivent le mieux? (plusieurs choix possibles)

    Blanc

    Sud-asiatique (p. ex., indien, pakistanais, sri-lankais)

    Chinois

    Noir

    Latino-américain

    Philippin

    Arabe

    Asiatique du sud-est (p. ex., vietnamien, cambodgien, thailandais)

    Coréen ou japonais

    Autochtone

    Autre groupe racial ou culturel (préciser)

    RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE : Préfère ne pas répondre

    ASSURER UN BON MÉLANGE.

19. Quel est le niveau de scolarité le plus élevé que vous avez atteint ?

    École primaire

    Études secondaires partielles

    Diplôme d’études secondaires ou l’équivalent

    Certificat ou diplôme d’apprenti inscrit ou d’une école de métiers

    Certificat ou diplôme d’un collège, cégep ou autre établissement non universitaire

    Certificat ou diplôme universitaire inférieur au baccalauréat

    Baccalauréat

    Diplôme d’études supérieur au baccalauréat

    RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE : Préfère ne pas répondre

    ASSURER UN BON MÉLANGE.

20. Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux le revenu annuel total de votre ménage en 2020— c’est-à-dire le revenu cumulatif de l’ensemble des membres de votre ménage avant impôt?

    Moins de 20 000 $

    20 000 $ à moins de 40 000 $

    40 000 $ à moins de 60 000 $

    60 000 $ à moins de 80 000 $

    80 000 $ à moins de 100 000 $

    100 000 $ à moins de 150 000 $

    150 000 $ ou plus

    RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE : Préfère ne pas répondre

    ASSURER UN BON MÉLANGE.

21. La discussion sera enregistrée sur bandes audio et vidéo, strictement aux fins de la recherche. Les enregistrements aideront nos chercheurs à rédiger leur rapport. Est-ce que vous consentez à ce qu’on vous enregistre sur bandes audio et vidéo?

Oui

Non REMERCIER ET CONCLURE


INVITATION

J’aimerais vous inviter à ce groupe de discussion en ligne, qui aura lieu le [DONNER LA DATE ET L’HEURE EN FONCTION DU NO DE GROUPE INDIQUÉ DANS LE TABLEAU, PAGE 1]. La discussion durera deux heures et vous recevrez 125 $ pour votre participation. Ce montant vous sera envoyé par transfert électronique après la tenue du groupe de discussion.

Veuillez noter que des observateurs du gouvernement du Canada pourraient être présents au groupe et que la discussion sera enregistrée sur bande vidéo. En acceptant de participer, vous donnez votre consentement à ces modalités.

Est-ce que vous accepteriez de participer ?

OuiCONTINUER

NonREMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Puis-je avoir votre nom complet, le numéro de téléphone où vous êtes le plus facile à joindre et votre adresse électronique, si vous en avez une, pour vous envoyer les détails au sujet du groupe?

Nom :

Numéro de téléphone :

Adresse courriel :

Vous recevrez un courrier électronique du Strategic Counsel expliquant comment rejoindre le groupe en ligne. Si la connexion au système vous pose des difficultés, veuillez en aviser notre équipe de soutien technique à : support@thestrategiccounsel.com.

Nous vous prions de vous mettre en ligne au moins 15 minutes avant l’heure prévue, afin d’avoir le temps de vous installer et d’obtenir l’aide de notre équipe de soutien en cas de problèmes techniques. Veuillez également redémarrer votre ordinateur avant de vous joindre au groupe.

Vous pourriez devoir lire des documents au cours de la discussion. Si vous utilisez des lunettes, assurez-vous de les avoir à portée de main durant la rencontre. Vous aurez également besoin d’un stylo et de papier pour prendre des notes.

Ce rendez-vous est un engagement ferme. Si vous pensez ne pas pouvoir participer pour des raisons personnelles ou professionnelles, veuillez m’en aviser dès maintenant et nous conserverons votre nom pour une étude ultérieure. Enfin, si jamais vous n’êtes pas en mesure de participer, veuillez nous prévenir le plus rapidement possible au [1-800-xxx-xxxx] pour que nous puissions trouver quelqu’un pour vous remplacer.

Merci de votre temps.

RECRUTEMENT FAIT PAR : ____________________

DATE DU RECRUTEMENT : __________________

Appendix B – Discussion Guides

English Moderator's Guide

MODERATOR’S GUIDE – February 2022

MASTER

INTRODUCTION (10 minutes) All Locations

  • Moderator or technician should let participants know that they will need pen and paper in order to take some notes, jot down some thoughts around some material that we will show them later in the discussion.

GOVERNMENT OF CANADA IN THE NEWS (5-15 minutes) Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples

  • What have you seen, read or heard about the Government of Canada in the last few days?

Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters IF NOT MENTIONED:

  • Have you heard anything about the Government of Canada recently removing the exemption for certain categories of travellers entering Canada from border entry requirements? These include several essential service providers, including truck drivers.
    • IF YES: What have you heard?
    • PROMPT IF NECESSARY: As of January 15, unvaccinated Canadian truck drivers entering Canada need to meet requirements for pre-entry, arrival and Day 8 testing, as well as quarantine requirements.
      • Have you heard anything about this? What have you heard?

Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec IF NOT MENTIONED:

  • Have you heard anything about the protests taking place in various parts of the country?
    • What have you heard?
    • Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec What are your thoughts on these protests?
    • Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec Have you heard anything about how the Government of Canada has responded?
    • Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec How do you think the Government of Canada should respond?
  • Central and Southern Quebec Have you heard anything about the Government of Canada and the Emergencies Act?
    • What have you heard?

Central and Southern Quebec IF NOT MENTIONED:

  • The Government of Canada announced that it is revoking the Emergencies Act.
    • What do you think about that?
    • What do you think about the Government of Canada invoking the Emergencies Act in the first place – do you think this was an appropriate response?
  • Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones Have you heard anything about the Government of Canada announcing that it is invoking the Emergencies Act?
    • What have you heard?
    • How do you see things changing, if at all, as a result of this announcement?
    • What do you think about the Government of Canada invoking the Emergencies Act – do you think this is an appropriate response?
  • Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec What’s the most recent information, if any, that you’ve heard about the situation in Ukraine?

KIDS’ VACCINE ADS (25 minutes) Durham Region Parents of Children under 12

  • Have any of you gotten your kids under 12 vaccinated? (SHOW OF HANDS)
    • FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT: Have you made an appointment to get your kids vaccinated? (SHOW OF HANDS)

I’m now going to show you two concepts that are currently being developed by the Government of Canada for possible advertising regarding COVID-19 vaccines.

The first concept includes a storyboard. You will notice that it is not in finished form. Instead, the images look more like a comic strip (which we call a storyboard) and convey what you would see in each frame of the ad. A storyboard is something that advertisers develop early in the creative process so you get a graphical illustration and short narrative that gives a sense of what the ad might look like in its finished format. Note that the current images in the ad are just examples (what we call “illustrations or storyboards”) to give you an idea of what the ad would look like; these are not the ones that will be used. The final product will be a 30-second video produced professionally to be advertised through social media and digital platforms. Please keep this in mind as you are viewing the ad.

SHOW CONCEPT A ON SCREEN

  • What are your initial thoughts about this ad? What makes you say that?
  • What is the main message of this ad?
  • Does this ad effectively explain why a COVID-19 vaccine is recommended for kids aged 5-11?
  • Does it entice you to go to the website to get more information?
    • IF NO: Do you have any suggestions that would entice you to go to the website?
  • Does it get you thinking about the COVID-19 vaccine for kids aged 5-11 any differently?
    • IF YES: How so?

IF NOT RAISED:

  • The ad says “doses for children 5 to 11 are smaller, which is all they need for good protection”. Were you aware of that?
    • What do you think about that?
    • Does it get you thinking about the COVID-19 vaccine for kids aged 5-11 any differently?
    • Is there any other information about the COVID-19 vaccine for kids aged 5-11 that you think would be important to include?
  • What if it said “Clinical trial data showed the effectiveness of the vaccine to prevent symptoms in children aged 5 to 11 was 90.7%”? Does that get you thinking about the COVID-19 vaccine for kids aged 5-11 any differently? (NOTE TO MODERATOR: THIS IS TRUE; NOT A HYPOTHETICAL PERCENTAGE)
  • Do you have any other thoughts about what could make this ad more effective, including enticing you to go to the website to learn more?

Now, I’m going to show you a different concept. Again, this is not in finished form.

SHOW CONCEPT B ON SCREEN

  • What are your initial thoughts about this version?
  • Is the message easy to understand?
  • Does this version speak to you? Why or why not?
  • Do you have suggestions for other examples of things parents do to keep kids safe that you think would work well in an ad like this?

AD WRAP-UP

    • POLL: Which version do you feel is most effective in terms of communicating the importance of getting children aged 5-11 vaccinated?
      • CONCEPT A
      • CONCEPT B
    • What is it about XX concept that you prefer over the other one?

COVID-19 VACCINE FOR CHILDREN (15 minutes) Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12

Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 Now I’d like to focus more broadly on the approved COVID-19 vaccine for kids, not just the ad concepts we reviewed…

Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12 Now I’d like to focus on COVID-19 vaccination…

Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12 As you may be aware, Health Canada has approved a Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty vaccine made for children 5 to 11 years old.

  • Have any of you talked to your kids about the vaccine?

FOR THOSE WHO HAVE GOTTEN KIDS VACCINATED OR MADE AN APPOINTMENT:

  • What made you decide to get your kids vaccinated?

FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN’T GOTTEN KIDS VACCINATED OR MADE AN APPOINTMENT:

  • What are the factors that will influence your decision on whether or not to get your kids vaccinated?
  • Are there questions about administering COVID-19 vaccines to kids that you would like answers to?

CHILD CARE (20 minutes) Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Nunavut

Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12 I’d like to talk about child care…

  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 What is the biggest challenge with child care in Ontario?
  • Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12 What is the biggest challenge with child care in Saskatchewan?
  • Nunavut What is the biggest challenge with child care in Nunavut?
  • Do any of you have kids in child care? (SHOW OF HANDS)
    • How much does it cost you?
    • How easy or difficult was it to find and secure a spot?
  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 Have you seen, read or heard anything about the Government of Canada and child care?
    • PROMPT AS NECESSARY: Have you heard about any agreements between the Government of Canada and individual provinces and territories?

Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
The Government of Canada has reached agreements with various provinces and territories to make child care services more affordable.

  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 Do you know if there is an agreement between Ontario and the Government of Canada?
  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 When it comes to making child care services more affordable, do you know what the target is for these agreements (i.e., the targeted cost per child for parents), and when this is expected to be achieved?

Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
The Government of Canada’s plan is to lower to cost of child care to an average of $10/day by 2025-2026.

  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 When you think of various priorities, do you think investing to lower the cost of child care is an important one?

Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
Currently, the Government of Canada has reached agreements with all provinces and territories except Ontario.

  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12 How do you feel about no agreement being in place between the federal government and Ontario?
  • Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12 Have you heard about any child care agreement between the Government of Canada and Saskatchewan? What have you heard?

Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12 CLARIFY AS NECESSARY/SHOW ON SCREEN

The Government of Canada has reached an agreement with Saskatchewan that aims to make early learning and child care more affordable for Saskatchewan families. This agreement has the following objectives:

  • Providing a 50% reduction in average parent fees by the end of 2022 and reaching an average of $10/day by 2025/26 for all regulated child care spaces;
  • Creating more high-quality, affordable regulated child care spaces, primarily through not-for-profit and public child, and family home-based care child care providers;
  • Addressing barriers to provide inclusive and flexible child care; and
  • Valuing the early childhood workforce and providing them with training and development opportunities.
  • Nunavut Have you heard about any child care agreements between the Government of Canada and Nunavut? What have you heard?

Nunavut CLARIFY AS NECESSARY/SHOW ON SCREEN
The Government of Canada has reached an agreement with Nunavut that aims to make early learning and child care more affordable for Nunavut families. This agreement has the following objectives:

  • Providing a 50% reduction in average parent fees by the end of 2022 and reaching an average of $10/day by 2024 for all licensed child care spaces;
  • Opening more childcare spots; and
  • Increasing the wages of child care workers.
  • Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Nunavut Will this plan help you or anyone you know? Why/why not?

HOME RENTING (10-35 minutes) Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg

I’d like to shift now to a completely different topic…

  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg Do you currently rent the place you are living in?

Okanagan Region Home Renters When we invited you to this focus group, you each indicated that you rent your current residence.

  • Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg In general, how easy or difficult would you say it is to find affordable rental accommodations in your region? What makes you say that?
  • Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg Here are some things the Government of Canada could do to help make housing more affordable:

SHOW ON SCREEN

    • Affordable Housing Innovation Fund: Funding for unique ideas and innovative building techniques that revolutionize the affordable housing sector.
    • Federal Lands Initiative: Use of surplus federal lands and buildings to create affordable, sustainable, accessible and socially inclusive developments.
    • First-Time Home Buyer Incentive: A program that allows one to borrow 5 or 10% of the purchase price of a home to put toward a down payment. The program recipient pays back the same percentage of the value of the home when selling it or within a 25-year window.
    • Housing Accelerator Fund: Funding available to municipalities to increase the housing supply in Canada’s largest cities through measures such as inclusionary zoning, increased densification, reductions in construction approval timelines and the rapid development of vacant or underused lands.
    • National Housing Co-Investment Fund – New Construction Stream: Low-cost repayable loans and forgivable loans for building new affordable housing shelters, transitional and supportive housing.
    • Rental Construction Financing: Low-cost loans encouraging the construction of sustainable rental apartment projects across Canada.
  • Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg POLL: Now I’d like you to select any that you think stand out as being a really good initiative. You can select all of them, none of them, or anywhere in between.
    • Affordable Housing Innovation Fund
    • Federal Lands Initiative
    • First-Time Home Buyer Incentive
    • Housing Accelerator Fund
    • National Housing Co-Investment Fund – New Construction Stream
    • Rental Construction Financing
  • Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg Is there anything that stands out as either confusing or a cause for concern? What makes you say that?

Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg I’d like to focus on the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, but I want to get your thoughts on a variation of this:

  • What if there were a First-Time Home Buyer Incentive specifically for young, single Canadians to help them buy their first homes?
    • What do you think of that approach? Do you think it would be helpful? What makes you say that?
    • What would you expect to see in such an incentive?
  • Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12 Do you think the Government of Canada has a role to play in regulating the cost of rent in Canada?
  • Okanagan Region Home Renters, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg Now moving away from things like building more housing: do you think the Government of Canada has a role to play in regulating the cost of rent in Canada?
    • What should it do?
  • Recently, some have suggested the Government of Canada should provide subsidies or incentives to owners of rental housing in exchange for binding commitments not to raise the amount they are charging for rent. What do you think of this proposed approach?
  • Others have suggested that the Government of Canada should just pass legislation that makes it illegal to raise rent beyond a capped price instead. What do you think of this proposed approach?
  • Winnipeg And now I’d like to briefly talk about homelessness: what kind of issue is homelessness – is it a minor issue, a major issue or not really an issue?
    • IF MINOR/MAJOR ISSUE: Has there been any progress on this issue?
    • Have you heard about anything the Government of Canada has done to address homelessness?
    • IF NOT MENTIONED: Have you heard of the Government of Canada’s Rapid Housing Initiative?
      • IF YES: What have you heard?

CANADIAN CONTENT (20 minutes) Durham Region Parents of Children under 12, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec

I’d like to shift now to a completely different topic…

  • What comes to mind when I say the words “Canadian content”?
    • What are some examples of Canadian content?
  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec In general, how would you rate the quality of Canadian content - do you think it tends to be high quality or not?
    • If you know that a TV show or film is Canadian, does this make you more or less likely to watch it?
      • What about when it comes to music?
  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec Do you think the Canadian TV and film industry is at risk right now?
    • IF YES: From what?
  • POLL: I’m going to show you some statements and I’d like you to select the ones you agree with it. You can select all of them, none of them, or anywhere in between.
    • The Government of Canada needs to protect Canadian content and stories.
    • The Government of Canada needs to support Canadian artists and creators.
    • The Government of Canada needs to level the playing field between traditional broadcasters and foreign web giants.
    • Foreign web giants need to pay their fair share to support Canadian creators.
    • Rules for online content are outdated and we need to modernize them.
    • Web giants need to make Canadian content more discoverable on their platforms.
    • Web giants need to do more to showcase Canadian content on their platforms.

MODERATOR TO GO THROUGH SELECTIONS

  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec Are there any statements you disagree with? Why is that?
  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec What is the difference between making Canadian content “discoverable” versus “showcasing” it?
  • Have you heard about proposed federal legislation to amend the Broadcasting Act, known as Bill C-10?
    • IF YES: What have you heard?

I’d like to focus on online services, where content is streamed or accessed on demand on major online platforms, such as Netflix or Spotify. Note that I am not referring to user-generated content, such as individual users posting on sites such as YouTube or Facebook:

  • Do you think the Government of Canada should play a role in regulating what content is served to Canadians by major online platforms? What makes you say that?

COVID-19 OUTLOOK (15-30 minutes) Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples

  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec When it comes to how the Government of Canada has performed throughout the pandemic, what are some things you think they have been doing well?
    • What makes you say that?
    • What could they be doing better?
  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Prince Edward Island, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec Do you think that the Government of Canada is doing as good a job now as they did at the start of the pandemic, or are they doing better or worse?
    • Please explain.
  • Prince Edward Island And thinking now about Prince Edward Island in particular, do you think that the Government of Canada has been attune to the needs of PEI residents, or not? What makes you say that?
    • When the Government of Canada is making decisions related to COVID-19, do you think it considers PEI when making these decisions, or not? What makes you say that?
  • POLL: Please type in one word that describes how you feel about the current restrictions in place in your region? [PROMPT AS NECESSARY: Why did you choose that word?]
    • Should they be lifted? Should more things be opened up?
    • Should they be more restricted?
  • Winnipeg How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted, if at all, the downtown area and small businesses?
  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples Do you think that the spread of COVID-19 is going to get worse in the near term or is the worst behind us?
  • Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Nunavut, Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples And thinking ahead to a year from now, do you think we’ll no longer be in a pandemic, or do you think COVID-19 will still be an issue?
    • IF STILL AN ISSUE: Assuming COVID-19 is still an issue a year from now, what do you think daily life will be like? For example, mostly back to normal? Restrictions implemented whenever case counts climb? Something else?
  • Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples Have any of you gotten a third dose of a COVID-19 vaccine? (SHOW OF HANDS)
    • FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT: Have you made an appointment to get a third dose? (SHOW OF HANDS)

Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples FOR THOSE WHO HAVE GOTTEN THIRD DOSE OR MADE AN APPOINTMENT:

  • What made you decide to get a third dose?

Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN’T GOTTEN THIRD DOSE OR MADE AN APPOINTMENT:

  • Are there questions about COVID-19 vaccines in general or about the third dose specifically that you would like answers to?
  • What other information do you need to help you decide about getting a third dose?

Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples As you may be aware, Health Canada has approved a Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty vaccine made for children 5 to 11 years old.

  • Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples What are your thoughts on this – do you think this is a good thing or not? What makes you say that?

Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples For those of you with kids:

  • Have any of you talked to your kids about it?
  • Have any of you gotten your kids under 12 vaccinated? (SHOW OF HANDS)
    • FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT: Have you made an appointment to get your kids vaccinated? (SHOW OF HANDS)

Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples FOR THOSE WHO HAVE GOTTEN KIDS VACCINATED OR MADE AN APPOINTMENT:

  • What made you decide to get your kids vaccinated?

Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN’T GOTTEN KIDS VACCINATED OR MADE AN APPOINTMENT:

  • What are the factors that will influence your decision on whether or not to get your kids vaccinated?
  • Are there questions about administering COVID-19 vaccines to kids that you would like answers to?
  • Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Winnipeg, Sudbury Region Francophones, Central and Southern Quebec, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples In 2020, public health measures such as hand washing, mask-wearing and social distancing were introduced to help control the spread of COVID-19. What kind of impact do you think these public health measures have had?

HEALTHCARE PRIORITIES (25 minutes) Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions, Mid-size Centres Saskatchewan Parents of Children under 12, Okanagan Region Home Renters, Edmonton Tested Positive for COVID-19, Central and Southern Quebec

I’d now like to focus on healthcare more broadly; not specifically COVID-19…

  • In general, how do you feel about the quality and availability of healthcare in your area?
    • In general, do you think the healthcare system in your area is in need of major changes, minor changes or few to no changes?
  • Other than COVID-19, what are the most pressing challenges related to healthcare in your community?
  • Have you heard of anything the federal government has done recently related to healthcare?
  • While many healthcare issues are provincial issues, much of the funding for provincial healthcare systems comes from the federal government in the form of healthcare transfers. Do you think these transfers to provinces should to be increased right now to provide more funding for healthcare, or do you think it would be better for the federal government to allocate that money to other priorities?
    • Some people say the Government of Canada should transfer more money to provinces without conditions so that provincial government can decide what the best use of it is for the specific needs of their provinces or territories. However, others have said there are some health issues, like mental health care, doctor shortages or long term care reforms that need to be addressed across the country and the Government of Canada should add conditions to their transfers that ensure provincial governments will spend the extra money on these key priorities. Which approach would you agree with more?
  • Let’s imagine the Government of Canada added conditions to healthcare transfers. Are there any specific health priorities that you would want the federal government to make a condition for health transfers to your province?
  • And speaking specifically about mental health, do you feel there is a need for governments to focus on improving mental health care in Canada?
    • What could the Government of Canada do to help Canadians who are struggling with their own mental health during the pandemic?

WATER CONTAMINATION IN IQALUIT (15 minutes) Nunavut

  • Has anyone been following the water contamination issue in Iqaluit? What’s been going on?
    • To your knowledge, how did this happen? (PROMPT AS NEEDED: Who is responsible for what happened?)
  • Are you aware of how the Government of Canada has responded to this issue?
    • What has the Government of Canada done?
  • What do you think about what the Government of Canada has done?
    • Has it done enough to support those who were impacted?
    • What else could the Government of Canada do to help?

HOUSING (15 minutes) Nunavut, Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples

  • Nunavut What is the housing situation like in Nunavut?
    • What are the biggest challenges in housing? (e.g., affordability, quality, supply)
  • Nunavut Have there been any changes in the housing situation over the past several years?
  • Nunavut Are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to help with the housing situation in Nunavut?
    • What has the Government of Canada done?
  • Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples What is the housing situation like on your reserve?
    • What are the biggest challenges in housing? (e.g., quality, supply)
  • Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples Have there been any changes in the housing situation over the past several years?
  • Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples Are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to help with the housing situation on reserves?
    • What has the Government of Canada done?

MENTAL HEALTH (15 minutes) Nunavut

  • What are the biggest challenges related to mental health in Nunavut?
  • What about mental health in youth?
    • PROMPT AS NEEDED: What about youth suicide – is that an issue?
  • And now thinking specifically about youth suicide, what do you think are the main causes of this?
    • Why does the issue persist?
    • What needs to be done?

ELDER CARE (15 minutes) Nunavut

  • What is elder care like in Nunavut?
    • What kind of resources are available?

As you may be aware, many Nunavut elders with complex care needs are transferred to senior living facilities outside of Nunavut, such as Ottawa.

  • Does anyone know why this is?
  • What impacts does that have on the local community?
  • What would you like to see happen?

YOUTH ISSUES (25 minutes) Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students

  • Have you heard anything the Government of Canada has done recently to support students?
    • PROMPT AS NECESSARY: How about things the Government has done to help students financially during COVID?
  • Where do you normally hear about news first?
    • What about news related to COVID-19 – what are your main sources of information?
      • In terms of COVID-19, do you actively seek out new information about it?
    • And now thinking about Government of Canada information in general (not just related to COVID-19), including policies it implements or measures it implements: do you actively seek out this kind of information?
      • IF YES: Where do you seek it out?
    • Have you seen any advertising from the Government of Canada recently?
      • IF YES: What was the topic of the advertisement? Where did you see it?
    • Overall, do you feel that the Government of Canada makes an effort to reach out to students? Do you feel they prioritize youth when making decisions? Why or why not?
      • What could the Government of Canada do to more effectively reach out to students?
    • What is the most important issue for you that you think the Government of Canada should be focusing on the most? What makes you say that?
    • And what’s the most important issue facing students more broadly right now that the Government of Canada should be paying more attention to? What makes you say that?

POST-SECONDARY ISSUES (20 minutes) Hamilton/Niagara Region Post-Secondary Students

Now I’d like to focus on post-secondary issues specifically…

  • POLL: I’m going to show you some things the Government of Canada could do related to post-secondary education. I’d like you to select any that you think stand out as being a really good initiative. You can select all of them, none of them, or anywhere in between.
    • Allow new parents to pause repayment of their federal student loans until their youngest child reaches the age of five
    • Continue scaling up youth and student skills and employment programming and initiatives for Canadian youth
    • Create a new stream of the Youth Employment and Skills Strategy for Canadians with disabilities
    • Expand pathways to Permanent Residence for international students through the Express Entry system (used to manage immigration applications from skilled workers)
    • Increase the repayment assistance threshold to $50,000 for Canada Student Loan borrowers who are single and make appropriate adjustments to the thresholds for other family sizes
    • Permanently eliminate federal interest on Canada Student Loans and Canada Apprentice Loans

MODERATOR TO GO THROUGH SELECTIONS

  • Is there anything else that you think the Government of Canada should do related to post-secondary education?

MOBILE PHONE BILLS (15 minutes) Winnipeg

I’d like to end with a short discussion on cell phone bills…

  • Have any of you noticed any changes in your cell phone bills? That is, have they gotten cheaper or more expensive?
  • Are your cell phone bills a source of stress, or not?
    • IF YES: How so?
  • Do you expect cell phone bills to increase over the next few years, stay the same, or decrease? What makes you say that?
  • Are you aware of anything the Government of Canada is doing to impact cell phone bills?
  • What should the Government of Canada do, if anything, to help with (rising) cell phone bills?

PEI POTATO ISSUE (35 minutes) Prince Edward Island

Now I’d like to shift topics completely, and talk about issues more specific to PEI…

  • What have you heard, seen, or read about recent developments related to the trade of PEI potatoes?
    • What role, if any, does the Government of Canada have in this?
    • To the best of your knowledge, who is the lead department or agency for the Government of Canada when it comes to the trade of PEI potatoes?
    • IF AWARE OF ANY NEWS: What do you think is the main cause of this trade issue?
    • IF AWARE OF ANY NEWS: Where do you get your information about this issue?
      • PROMPT AS NECESSARY: TV news? Social media? Friends and/or family? Other sources?

CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
Last October, the United States requested that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), a Government of Canada agency, suspend issuing export certificates for potatoes from PEI following the most recent detections of potato wart. On November 22, 2021, the United States instructed their border officials to deny entry of shipments of PEI potatoes, regardless of certification by the CFIA.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR MODERATOR IF NEEDED:

The CFIA issues export certificates for countries that are importing PEI potatoes. The export certificate confirms that the product meets specific Canadian standards and requirements.

  • How do you feel about this decision?
    • In your view were there other options?
  • How big of an issue is this in PEI?
    • What are the impacts of this issue on PEI?
    • Are you personally impacted by the suspension of exports?

We’ve been talking about potatoes and the CFIA’s role. I’d like to focus on that aspect for a bit…

  • Prior to our discussion, were you aware of the CFIA’s mandate, and its role in this issue?

CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
The CFIA has a broad mandate that encompasses food safety, animal health, plant health and international market access. Its mission is to safeguard food, animals and plants, in order to enhance the health and well-being of Canada's people, environment and economy.

  • Overall, how important is this role to you?
  • Based on what you already knew and what we’ve discussed here, do you think the CFIA has been doing a good or poor job with this issue? What makes you say that?
    • Do you trust the Government of Canada and the CFIA to manage this issue well? What makes you say that?
    • Do you think the CFIA has been being overly cautious at the expense of industry or do you think that the CFIA has prioritized safety over industry?
  • What has the Government of Canada and the CFIA handled well with respect to this issue?
  • What has it handled poorly?
  • What else, if anything, should the Government of Canada or the CFIA do to address this issue?
  • Have you heard of Government of Canada business risk management programs?
    • IF YES: What have you heard? Can you explain what these programs are?
  • Have you heard of the AgriStability program?
    • IF YES: What have you heard? Can you explain what it is?
  • Have you heard about the Government of Canada’s $28-million plan to assist PEI farmers affected by the trade suspension of potatoes to the U.S.?
    • IF YES: What have you heard? Can you explain what this plan is?

CLARIFY/SHOW ON SCREEN
Government of Canada business risk management programs are tools that provide agricultural producers with protection against income and production losses, helping them manage risks that threaten the viability of their farms.

AgriStability is one of these programs. It protects Canadian producers against declines in farming income for reasons such as production loss, increased costs and trade issues. A PEI farmer can trigger a payment when his average farming income decreases by 15%.

In December 2021, the Government of Canada announced a potential $28-million plan to assist PEI farmers. Funding up to $28 million will partly be dedicated to getting surplus potatoes to processors, packers and food banks. Money will also be available for farmers who need to destroy surplus potatoes.

  • Has anyone heard this information before?
  • Do you think these programs will have an impact on those affected by the trade suspension of potatoes to the U.S.? How so?
  • Now that I’ve shown this information, does it change how you feel about the Government of Canada’s response? What makes you say that?

Earlier this month, the United States announced it will allow the resumption of shipments of PEI potatoes to Puerto Rico.

  • What do you think about this?
  • Do you think the CFIA and/or the Government of Canada more broadly played a role in the U.S. decision? What makes you say that?
  • Based on everything we’ve discussed so far, do you think the CFIA and/or the Government of Canada reacted quickly or not to address this issue? What makes you say that?
  • What do you think the long-term impacts will be on the PEI potato industry?

VAC (10 minutes) Prince Edward Island

Now I’d like to shift to a different topic…

  • Have you seen, read or heard anything about Veteran Affairs Canada (VAC) recently?
    • IF YES: What have you heard?
  • Have you seen, read or heard anything about nurses leaving their jobs at Health PEI to take positions with Veterans Affairs Canada?
    • IF YES: What have you heard?
    • IF YES: Are you following this story?
    • What impacts, if any, do you think this will have for PEI?
  • Many Government of Canada employees are currently working from home, including VAC employees. Has this had any noticeable impact on the local economy?
    • IF YES: What kind of impact?

IMMIGRATION (10 minutes) Prince Edward Island

  • Have you seen, read or heard anything about immigration recently, and more specifically how it relates to PEI?
    • IF YES: What have you heard?
    • PROMPT AS NEEDED: Have you heard anything about temporary foreign workers?
      • IF YES: What have you heard?
  • Have you seen, read or heard anything about delays in applicants obtaining permanent residence or Canadian citizenship?
    • IF YES: What have you heard?
  • Have you seen, read or heard anything related to sponsoring refugees?
    • IF YES: What have you heard?

OFFICIAL LANGUAGE MINORITY COMMUNITIES (25 minutes) Sudbury Region Francophones

Let’s shift our focus...

  • Thinking about the French language in Sudbury, how do you feel about the state of the French language?
    • Do you think it is threatened?
    • Is it threatened in other parts of Canada outside of Quebec?
  • Is the Government of Canada doing enough to protect the French language?
    • IF NO: What should they be doing?
    • IF NO: WHY should they be doing more to protect the French language in Canada?
  • POLL: I’m going to show you a list of items related to living as a francophone in your region. I’d like you to select the ones you feel are a major challenge. You can select up to 3; if you don’t think any are a challenge, then don’t select any.
    • Accessing child care services in French
    • Accessing information from the Government of Canada in French
    • Accessing media content (e.g., radio, television, Internet, newspapers) in French
    • Attracting Francophones from outside the region to move here
    • Ensuring the Francophone community remains strong in the future
    • Feeling part of the Francophone community here
    • Keeping young Francophones in the region
    • Living in French in your region (e.g., participating in sports/activities, shopping, etc.)
    • Speaking in French to a Government of Canada representative
    • Transmitting the French language and culture to the next generation

MODERATOR TO GO THROUGH SELECTIONS

  • Was there anything missing from this list?
  • Is there anything the Government of Canada should be doing to support the francophone community?

LOCAL ISSUES (20 minutes) Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples

Now I’d like to focus on your reserve and local community, and not specifically COVID-19…

  • What are the most important sectors and industries for your reserve or your local community?
  • Which local sectors and industries do you feel need the most help? Why do these sectors and industries need federal support?

NOTE TO MODERATOR: For two or three major sectors named, probe if the Government of Canada has done anything to support this sector? What else can the Government of Canada do to support these sectors?

  • Now, thinking specifically about your own reserve, what are some of the biggest local issues and concerns?
  • What are the most important infrastructure projects in or near your reserve that you think the Government of Canada should support?

INDIGENOUS ISSUES (30 minutes) Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples

I’d now like to shift our attention to Indigenous issues more broadly.

  • What important Indigenous issues do you think the Government of Canada should focus on?
  • Do you think the Government of Canada is focusing about the right amount of attention on Indigenous Issues, not enough or too much? What makes you say that?
  • Has the Government of Canada done anything well?
  • What can they improve on?
  • Have you heard anything the Government of Canada has done to address reconciliation?
  • Thinking back over the past decade, do you feel like the Government of Canada has moved in the right direction on reconciliation, or not?
  • What kind of actions would you expect from a government that is serious about addressing reconciliation?
  • Are you aware of a Federal Court case related to compensation to First Nations children who were harmed by child and family services policies? What have you heard?

SHOW ON SCREEN

In early January 2022 it was announced that Indigenous groups and the Government of Canada had reached agreements-in-principle on compensation and long-term reform of First Nations child and family services. The agreements include:

    • $20 billion for First-Nations children (and their parents and caregivers) who were removed from their homes from 1991 to March 2022. The compensation also covers those children who were negatively impacted by a narrow interpretation of Jordan’s Principle from 2007 to 2017, as well as children who did not receive or were delayed receiving an essential public service or product between April 1, 1991 and December 11, 2007.
    • $20 billion to reform the First Nations Child and Family Services program. This will include funding to support children aging out of the system and prevention services, including mental health and cultural supports, to help ensure families stay together.
  • What do you think about these agreements?
  • Are you aware of an agreement between the Government of Canada and Cowessess First Nation related to support for child and family services? What have you heard?

CLARIFY AS NEEDED:

As part of the agreement, the Government of Canada will invest $38.7 million over the next two years to support Cowessess First Nation in the implementation of its own child and family services system.

  • What do you think about this agreement?
  • Do you think the Government of Canada should continue with this approach – that is, should it try and reach agreements with other First Nations to implement their own child and family services systems? What makes you say that?

I’d now like to talk about drinking water for a bit…

  • Have you seen, read, or heard anything about actions the Government of Canada has taken to ensure access to clean drinking water on reserves? What has it done?
  • Have you heard about Government of Canada efforts to lift long-term drinking water advisories on reserves?

I’m going to show you an infographic about the work being done by the federal government to lift long-term drinking water advisories and I will ask you for your opinion about it afterwards.

SHOW ON SCREEN
Show the infographic ‘Long-term drinking water advisories on public systems on reserves’

  • What are your first reactions?
  • Now that you’ve seen this, how would you rate the progress the Government of Canada has made on this issue? Would you say they’ve made a lot of progress, a bit, none, or have they made things worse?

CONCLUSION (5 minutes)

French Moderator’s Guide

GUIDE DU MODÉRATEUR – FÉVRIER 2022

DOCUMENT MAÎTRE

INTRODUCTION (10 minutes) Tous les lieux

  • Le modérateur ou la personne responsable du soutien technique doit faire savoir aux participant(e)s qu’un stylo et du papier seront nécessaires afin de prendre des notes et d’écrire quelques réflexions au sujet des pièces de communication que nous leur montrerons plus tard au cours de la discussion.

LE GOUVERNEMENT DU CANADA DANS L’ACTUALITÉ (5 à 15 minutes) Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham, les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, le Nunavut, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba

  • Qu’avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu au sujet du gouvernement du Canada au cours des derniers jours ?

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham, les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan SI CE N’EST PAS MENTIONNÉ :

  • Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet du gouvernement du Canada qui a récemment éliminé l’exemption relative aux exigences d’entrée aux frontières pour certaines catégories de voyageurs entrant au Canada ? Parmi celles-ci figurent plusieurs fournisseurs de services essentiels, dont les camionneurs.
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
    • DEMANDER AU BESOIN : À compter du 15 janvier, les camionneurs canadiens non vaccinés devront répondre aux exigences de dépistage avant leur arrivée, à l’arrivée et au jour 8, et de quarantaine.
      • Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit à ce sujet ? Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

Élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec SI CE N’EST PAS MENTIONNÉ :

  • Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet des manifestations qui ont lieu à différents endroits au pays ?
    • Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
    • Élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Que pensez-vous de ces manifestations ?
    • Personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit quant à la réponse du gouvernement du Canada ?
    • Personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Quelle devrait être, selon vous, la réponse du gouvernement ?
  • Le centre et le sud du Québec Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet du gouvernement du Canada et de la Loi sur les mesures d’urgence ?
    • Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

Francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec SI CE N’EST PAS MENTIONNÉ :

  • Le gouvernement du Canada a annoncé qu’il révoquait la Loi sur les mesures d’urgence.
    • Qu’en pensez-vous ?
    • Que pensez-vous du fait que le gouvernement du Canada ait invoqué la Loi sur les mesures d’urgence en premier lieu — pensez-vous qu’il s’agissait d’une réponse appropriée ?
  • Personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit à propos de l’annonce du gouvernement du Canada selon laquelle il invoquait la Loi sur les mesures d’urgence ?
    • Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
    • Comment voyez-vous les choses changer, le cas échéant, en raison de cette annonce ?
    • Que pensez-vous du fait que le gouvernement du Canada ait invoqué la Loi sur les mesures d’urgence en premier lieu — pensez-vous qu’il s’agissait d’une réponse appropriée ?
  • L’Île-du-Prince-Édouard, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Quelle est l’information la plus récente que vous ayez entendue, le cas échéant, sur la situation en Ukraine ?

PUBLICITÉS SUR LES VACCINS POUR ENFANTS (25 minutes) Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham

  • Y en a-t-il parmi vous qui ont fait vacciner leurs enfants de moins de 12 ans ? (À MAIN LEVÉE)
    • POUR LES PERSONNES QUI NE L’ONT PAS FAIT : Avez-vous pris un rendez-vous pour faire vacciner vos enfants ? (À MAIN LEVÉE)

Je vais maintenant vous montrer deux concepts en cours de développement par le gouvernement du Canada pour une éventuelle publicité portant sur les vaccins contre la COVID-19.

Le premier concept comprend un scénarimage. Vous remarquerez qu’il n’est pas dans sa forme finale. Les images ressemblent plutôt à une bande dessinée (c’est ce que nous appelons un scénarimage) et illustrent ce que vous verriez dans chaque plan de la publicité. Un scénarimage est ce que les annonceurs produisent au début du processus de création afin d’obtenir des illustrations graphiques et une courte narration qui donnent une idée de ce à quoi la publicité pourrait ressembler dans sa version définitive. Veuillez noter que les images qui figurent dans la publicité que vous allez voir sont utilisées seulement à titre d’exemple (ce qu’on appelle des illustrations ou scénarimages) pour vous donner une idée de ce à quoi ressemblerait la publicité ; ce ne sont pas celles qui seront utilisées. Le produit final sera une vidéo de 30 secondes réalisée de manière professionnelle et qui sera diffusée par le biais des médias sociaux et des plateformes numériques. Veuillez garder cela à l’esprit pendant que vous regardez la publicité.

AFFICHER CONCEPT A À L’ÉCRAN

  • Quelles sont vos premières impressions de cette publicité ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire ça ?
  • Quel est le message principal de cette publicité ?
  • Cette publicité explique-t-elle efficacement pourquoi le vaccin contre la COVID-19 est recommandé pour les enfants âgés de 5 à 11 ans ?
  • Vous incite-t-elle à vous rendre sur le site Web pour obtenir plus d’informations ?
    • SI NON : Avez-vous des suggestions quant à ce qui pourrait vous inciter à vous rendre sur le site Web ?
  • Est-ce qu’elle vous fait réfléchir différemment au sujet du vaccin contre la COVID-19 pour les enfants âgés de 5 à 11 ans ?
    • SI OUI : Comment ?

SI CE N’EST PAS SOULEVÉ :

  • L’annonce dit que « les doses pour les enfants de 5 à 11 ans sont plus petites, ce qui est tout ce dont ils ont besoin pour une bonne protection ». Étiez-vous au courant de cela ?
    • Que pensez-vous de cela ?
    • Est-ce qu’elle vous fait réfléchir différemment au sujet du vaccin contre la COVID-19 pour les enfants âgés de 5 à 11 ans ?
    • Y a-t-il d’autres informations sur le vaccin contre la COVID-19 pour les enfants âgés de 5 à 11 ans qui, selon vous, seraient importantes à inclure ?
  • Et si elle disait : « Les données des essais cliniques ont montré que l’efficacité du vaccin pour prévenir les symptômes chez les enfants âgés de 5 à 11 ans était de 90,7 % » ? Est-ce qu’elle vous fait réfléchir différemment au sujet du vaccin contre la COVID-19 pour les enfants âgés de 5 à 11 ans ? (NOTE AU MODÉRATEUR : CELA EST VRAI, CE N’EST PAS UN POURCENTAGE HYPOTHÉTIQUE)
  • Avez-vous d’autres idées sur ce qui pourrait rendre cette publicité plus efficace, y compris vous inciter à vous rendre sur le site Web pour en apprendre davantage ?

Maintenant, je vais vous montrer un autre concept. Encore une fois, il n’est pas dans sa forme finale.

AFFICHER CONCEPT B À L’ÉCRAN

  • Quelles sont vos premières impressions de cette version ?
  • Est-ce que le message est facile à comprendre ?
  • Est-ce que cette version vous parle ? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas ?
  • Avez-vous des suggestions quant à d’autres exemples de choses que les parents font pour assurer la sécurité de leurs enfants et qui, selon vous, fonctionneraient bien dans une publicité de ce genre ?

RÉCAPITULATIF DE LA PUBLICITÉ

    • SONDAGE : Quelle version vous semble la plus efficace pour communiquer l’importance de faire vacciner les enfants de 5 à 11 ans ?
      • CONCEPT A
      • CONCEPT B
    • Que préférez-vous du concept X par rapport aux autres ?

VACCIN CONTRE LA COVID-19 POUR LES ENFANTS (15 minutes) Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham J’aimerais me concentrer plus largement sur le vaccin contre la COVID-19 approuvé pour les enfants, et pas seulement sur les concepts publicitaires que nous avons passés en revue…

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan Maintenant, je voudrais me pencher sur la vaccination contre la COVID-19…

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan Comme vous le savez peut-être, Santé Canada a approuvé un vaccin Pfizer-BioNTech, Comirnaty, développé pour les enfants de 5 à 11 ans.

  • Y’en a-t-il parmi vous qui ont parlé du vaccin à leurs enfants ?

POUR LES PERSONNES QUI ONT FAIT VACCINER LEURS ENFANTS OU QUI ONT PRIS UN RENDEZ-VOUS :

  • Qu’est-ce qui a fait que vous avez décidé de faire vacciner vos enfants ?

POUR LES PERSONNES QUI N’ONT NI FAIT VACCINER LEURS ENFANTS NI PRIS UN RENDEZ-VOUS :

  • Quels sont les facteurs qui influenceront votre décision de faire vacciner ou non vos enfants ?
  • Y a-t-il des questions sur la vaccination des enfants contre la COVID-19 auxquelles vous aimeriez obtenir des réponses ?

LA GARDE DE JEUNES ENFANTS (20 minutes) Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, le Nunavut

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan Je voudrais parler de garde de jeunes enfants…

  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham Quel est le plus grand défi en matière de garde de jeunes enfants en Ontario ?
  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan Quel est le plus grand défi en matière de garde de jeunes enfants en Saskatchewan ?
  • Le Nunavut Quel est le plus grand défi en matière de garde de jeunes enfants au Nunavut ?
  • Avez-vous des enfants en garderie ? (À MAIN LEVÉE)
    • Combien cela vous coûte-t-il ?
    • Dans quelle mesure a-t-il été facile ou difficile de trouver et d’obtenir une place ?
  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quoi que ce soit par rapport au gouvernement du Canada et la garde des jeunes enfants ?
    • DEMANDER AU BESOIN : Avez-vous entendu parler de quelconques ententes entre le gouvernement du Canada et des provinces et territoires individuels ?

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN :
Le gouvernement du Canada a conclu des ententes avec certaines provinces et certains territoires pour rendre les services de garde des jeunes enfants plus abordables.

  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham Savez-vous s’il existe une entente entre l’Ontario et le gouvernement du Canada ?
  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham Lorsqu’il s’agit de rendre les services de garde des jeunes enfants plus abordables, savez-vous quel est l’objectif de ces ententes (c.-à-d. le coût cible par enfant qu’assumeraient les parents), et quand on prévoit de l’atteindre ?

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN :
Le plan du gouvernement du Canada est de réduire le coût des services de garde des jeunes enfants à une moyenne de 10 $ par jour d’ici 2025-2026.

  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham Lorsque vous pensez à diverses priorités, pensez-vous qu’investir pour réduire le coût des services de garde des jeunes enfants en est une qui est importante ?

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN :
Actuellement, le gouvernement du Canada a conclu des ententes avec toutes les provinces et territoires sauf l’Ontario.

  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 de la région de Durham Que pensez-vous du fait qu’aucune entente entre le gouvernement fédéral et celui de l’Ontario n’ait été mise en place ?
  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan Avez-vous entendu parler d’une quelconque entente sur les services de garde de jeunes enfants entre le gouvernement du Canada et la Saskatchewan ? Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN/AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN :
Le gouvernement du Canada a conclu une entente avec la Saskatchewan qui vise à rendre les services d’apprentissage et de garde de jeunes enfants plus abordables pour les familles saskatchewanaises. Cette entente comporte les objectifs suivants :

  • Offrir une réduction de 50 % des frais moyens facturés aux parents d’ici la fin de 2022 pour atteindre une moyenne de 10 $ par jour d’ici 2025-2026 pour toutes les places en services de garde réglementés ;
  • Créer davantage de places en services de garde réglementés de grande qualité et abordables, principalement par l’intermédiaire de fournisseurs de services de garde d’enfants publics, à but non lucratif et en milieu familial ;
  • Remédier aux obstacles à la prestation de services de garde flexibles et inclusifs ;
  • Valoriser les éducatrices et éducateurs de la petite enfance et leur offrir des possibilités de formation et de perfectionnement professionnel.
  • Le Nunavut Avez-vous entendu parler d’une quelconque entente sur les services de garde de jeunes enfants entre le gouvernement du Canada et le Nunavut ? Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

Le Nunavut ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN/AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN :
Le gouvernement du Canada a conclu une entente avec le Nunavut qui vise à rendre les services d’apprentissage et de garde de jeunes enfants plus abordables pour les familles nunavummiut. Cette entente comporte les objectifs suivants :

  • Offrir une réduction de 50 % des frais moyens facturés aux parents d’ici la fin de 2022 pour atteindre une moyenne de 10 $ par jour d’ici 2024 pour toutes les places en services de garde agréés ; 
  • Créer plus de places en service de garde ;
  • Augmenter les salaires des travailleuses et des travailleurs en service de garde.
  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, le Nunavut Ce plan vous aidera-t-il ou aidera-t-il quelqu’un que vous connaissez ? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas ?

LOCATION DE LOGEMENT (10-35 minutes) Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham, les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg

Je voudrais passer à un tout autre sujet…

  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham, les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg Est-ce que vous louez actuellement le lieu où vous habitez ?

Locataires de la région de l’Okanagan Lorsque nous vous avons invité(e)s à ce groupe de discussion, vous avez toutes et tous indiqué être locataires de votre résidence actuelle.

  • Locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg De manière générale, dans quelle mesure est-il facile ou difficile, selon vous, de trouver des logements locatifs abordables dans votre région ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
  • Locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg Les suivantes sont certaines des choses que le gouvernement du Canada pourrait faire pour aider à rendre les logements plus abordables :

AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN :

    • Fonds d’innovation pour le logement abordable : Financement d’idées uniques et de techniques de construction novatrices qui révolutionnent le secteur du logement abordable.
    • Initiative des terrains fédéraux : L’utilisation de terrains et d’immeubles fédéraux excédentaires pour aménager des lieux d’habitation abordables, durables, accessibles et socialement inclusifs.
    • L’Incitatif à l’achat d’une première propriété : Un programme qui permet d’emprunter 5 ou 10 % du prix d’achat d’une habitation pour la mise de fonds. Les bénéficiaires du programme remboursent le même pourcentage de la valeur de la maison au moment de sa vente ou dans un délai de 25 ans.
    • Fonds d’accélération de la construction de logements : Fonds mis à la disposition des municipalités pour augmenter l’offre de logements dans les plus grandes villes du Canada au moyen de mesures telles que le zonage d’inclusion, la densification accrue, la réduction des délais d’approbation des projets de construction et la mise en valeur rapide de terrains vacants ou sous-utilisés.
    • Fonds national de co-investissement pour le logement — volet construction de logements : Prêts à faible coût remboursables et prêts-subventions à des fins d’immobilisations pour bâtir des logements abordables, des refuges, des logements de transition et des logements offrant du soutien.
    • Financement de la construction de logements locatifs : Prêts à faible coût pour encourager la construction d’immeubles d’appartements durables partout au Canada.
  • Locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg SONDAGE : Maintenant, je voudrais que vous choisissiez celles qui, selon vous, se distinguent comme étant une vraie bonne initiative. Vous pouvez toutes les choisir, n’en choisir aucune ou en choisir un nombre qui se situe entre ces deux extrêmes.
    • Fonds d’innovation pour le logement abordable
    • Initiative des terrains fédéraux
    • L’Incitatif à l’achat d’une première propriété
    • Fonds d’accélération de la construction de logements
    • Fonds national de co-investissement pour le logement — volet construction de logements
    • Financement de la construction de logements locatifs
  • Locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg Y a-t-il quoi que ce soit qui ressort comme étant une source de confusion ou de préoccupation ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

Élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg Je voudrais me pencher sur l’Incitatif à l’achat d’une première propriété, mais je souhaite avoir votre avis sur une variante de celui-ci :

  • Et s’il y avait un Incitatif à l’achat d’une première propriété spécifiquement pour les jeunes Canadiens célibataires afin de les aider à acheter leur première maison ?
    • Que pensez-vous de cette approche ? Pensez-vous qu’elle serait utile ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
    • À quoi vous attendriez-vous dans un tel incitatif ?
  • Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham, les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan Pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada a un rôle à jouer dans la réglementation du coût des loyers au Canada ?
  • Locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg Maintenant, si l’on s’éloigne des choses comme construire plus de logements : pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada a un rôle à jouer dans la réglementation du coût des loyers au Canada ?
    • Que devrait-il faire ?
  • Récemment, il a été suggéré que le gouvernement du Canada devrait offrir des subventions ou des incitatifs aux propriétaires de logements locatifs, en échange d’engagements contraignants à ne pas augmenter leurs loyers. Que pensez-vous de cette approche proposée ?
  • D’autres ont suggéré que le gouvernement du Canada devrait plutôt adopter une loi qui rend illégale une hausse de loyer au-delà d’un prix plafond. Que pensez-vous de cette approche qui est proposée ?
  • Winnipeg Et maintenant, je voudrais parler brièvement de l’itinérance : quel genre d’enjeu est l’itinérance — est-ce un enjeu mineur, un enjeu majeur ou n’est-ce pas vraiment un enjeu ?
    • SI C’EST UN PROBLÈME MINEUR OU MAJEUR : Y a-t-il eu des progrès sur cette question ?
    • Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit sur ce que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour lutter contre l’itinérance ?
    • SI CE N’EST PAS MENTIONNÉ : Avez-vous entendu parler de l’Initiative pour la création rapide de logements du gouvernement du Canada ?
      • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

CONTENU CANADIEN (20 minutes) Parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans de la région de Durham, les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec

Je voudrais maintenant passer à un tout autre sujet…

  • Qu’est-ce qui vous vient à l’esprit lorsque je prononce les mots « contenu canadien » ?
    • Quels sont des exemples de contenu canadien ?
  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec En général, comment évalueriez-vous la qualité du contenu canadien — pensez-vous qu’il tend à être de haute qualité ou non ?
    • Si vous savez qu’une émission de télévision ou un film sont des productions canadiennes, est-il plus probable ou moins probable que vous les regardiez ?
      • Qu’en est-il lorsqu’il s’agit de musique ?
  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Pensez-vous que l’industrie canadienne de la télévision et du cinéma est menacée à l’heure actuelle ?
    • SI OUI : Par quoi ?
  • SONDAGE : Je vais vous montrer des énoncés et je voudrais que vous choisissiez ceux avec lesquels vous êtes d’accord. Vous pouvez tous les choisir, n’en choisir aucun ou en choisir un nombre qui se situe entre ces deux extrêmes.
    • Le gouvernement du Canada doit protéger le contenu et les récits canadiens.
    • Le gouvernement du Canada doit soutenir les artistes et les créateurs canadiens.
    • Le gouvernement du Canada doit uniformiser les règles du jeu entre les radiodiffuseurs traditionnels et les géants étrangers du Web.
    • Les géants étrangers du Web doivent payer leur juste part pour soutenir les créateurs canadiens.
    • Les règles relatives au contenu en ligne sont désuètes et nous devons les moderniser.
    • Les géants du Web doivent rendre le contenu canadien plus découvrable sur leurs plateformes.
    • Les géants du Web doivent en faire davantage pour mettre en valeur le contenu canadien sur leurs plateformes.

LE MODÉRATEUR PASSERA EN REVUE LES CHOIX

  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Y a-t-il des énoncés avec lesquels vous êtes en désaccord ? Pour quelle raison ?
  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Quelle est la différence entre rendre le contenu canadien « découvrable » et le « mettre en valeur » ?
  • Avez-vous entendu parler du projet de loi fédérale modifiant la Loi sur la radiodiffusion, connu comme le projet de loi C-10 ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

Je voudrais qu’on se concentre sur les services en ligne où le contenu est diffusé en continu ou accédé sur demande sur les grandes plateformes en ligne telles que Netflix ou Spotify. Notez que je ne fais pas référence au contenu généré par les utilisateurs, comme les utilisateurs individuels qui publient sur des sites tels que YouTube ou Facebook.

  • Pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada devrait jouer un rôle dans la réglementation du contenu servi aux Canadiennes et aux Canadiens par les grandes plateformes en ligne ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

PERSPECTIVES SUR LA COVID-19 (15-30 minutes) Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, le Nunavut, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba

  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, le Nunavut, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec En ce qui concerne la performance du gouvernement du Canada pendant la pandémie, à votre avis, quelles sont les choses qu’il a faites de bien jusqu’à maintenant ?
    • Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
    • Que pourrait-il faire de mieux ?
  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, le Nunavut, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec Pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada fait un aussi bon travail aujourd’hui qu’au début de la pandémie, ou diriez-vous qu’il en fait un meilleur ou qu’il en fait un moins bon ?
    • Veuillez expliquer.
  • L’Île-du-Prince-Édouard Et en pensant maintenant à l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard plus précisément, pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada a été à l’écoute des besoins des résidents de l’Î.-P.-É., ou non ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
    • Lorsque le gouvernement du Canada prend des décisions liées à la COVID-19, pensez-vous qu’il tient compte de l’Î.-P.-É. au moment de prendre ces décisions, ou non ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
  • SONDAGE : Dans la case prévue à cet effet, veuillez saisir un mot qui décrit comment vous vous sentez par rapport aux restrictions en vigueur dans votre région. [DEMANDER AU BESOIN : Pour quelle raison avez-vous choisi ce mot ?]
    • Devraient-elles être levées ? Devrait-on rouvrir plus de choses ?
    • Devraient-elles être davantage resserrées ?
  • Winnipeg Comment la pandémie de COVID-19 a-t-elle affecté, le cas échéant, le centre-ville et les petites entreprises ?
  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, le Nunavut, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba Pensez-vous qu’à court terme la propagation de la COVID-19 va s’aggraver ou bien que le pire est derrière nous ?
  • Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, le Nunavut, élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba Et si l’on se projette dans un an, pensez-vous que nous ne serons plus en situation de pandémie, ou pensez-vous que la COVID-19 sera encore un problème ?
    • SI « ENCORE UN PROBLÈME » : En supposant que la COVID-19 soit toujours un enjeu dans un an, à quoi ressemblera la vie quotidienne selon vous ? Par exemple, la vie qui reviendra en grande partie à la normale ? Mettre en place des restrictions lorsqu’il y aurait une augmentation des cas ? Autre chose ?
  • Personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba Y en a-t-il parmi vous qui ont reçu une troisième dose du vaccin contre la COVID-19 ? (À MAIN LEVÉE)
    • POUR LES PERSONNES NE L’AYANT PAS REÇUE : Avez-vous pris un rendez-vous pour recevoir une troisième dose ? (À MAIN LEVÉE)

Personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba POUR LES PERSONNES QUI ONT REÇU UNE TROISIÈME DOSE OU QUI ONT PRIS UN RENDEZ-VOUS :

  • Qu’est-ce qui a fait que vous avez décidé de recevoir une troisième dose ?

Personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba POUR LES PERSONNES N’AYANT PAS REÇU UNE TROISIÈME DOSE OU QUI N’ONT PAS PRIS DE RENDEZ-VOUS :

  • Y a-t-il des questions liées aux vaccins contre la COVID-19 en général ou plus spécifiquement sur la troisième dose auxquelles vous aimeriez obtenir des réponses ?
  • De quelles autres informations avez-vous besoin pour vous aider dans votre décision de recevoir une troisième dose ?

Peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba Comme vous le savez peut-être, Santé Canada a approuvé un vaccin Pfizer-BioNTech, Comirnaty, développé pour les enfants de 5 à 11 ans.

  • Peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba Qu’en pensez-vous — est-ce une bonne chose ou non ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

Peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba Pour vous qui avez des enfants :

  • En avez-vous parlé à vos enfants ?
  • Y en a-t-il parmi vous qui ont fait vacciner leurs enfants de moins de 12 ans ? (À MAIN LEVÉE)
    • POUR LES PERSONNES QUI NE L’ONT PAS FAIT : Avez-vous pris un rendez-vous pour faire vacciner vos enfants ? (À MAIN LEVÉE)

Peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba POUR LES PERSONNES QUI ONT FAIT VACCINER LEURS ENFANTS OU QUI ONT PRIS UN RENDEZ-VOUS :

  • Qu’est-ce qui a fait que vous avez décidé de faire vacciner vos enfants ?

Peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba POUR LES PERSONNES QUI N’ONT NI FAIT VACCINER LEURS ENFANTS NI PRIS UN RENDEZ-VOUS :

  • Quels sont les facteurs qui influenceront votre décision de faire vacciner ou non vos enfants ?
  • Y a-t-il des questions sur la vaccination des enfants contre la COVID-19 auxquelles vous aimeriez obtenir des réponses ?
  • Personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, Winnipeg, francophones de la région de Sudbury, le centre et le sud du Québec, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba En 2020, des mesures de santé publique telles que le lavage des mains, le port du masque et la distanciation sociale furent introduites pour aider à contrôler la propagation de la COVID-19. Quel genre d’impact ces mesures de santé publique ont-elles eu, selon vous ?

PRIORITÉS EN MATIÈRE DE SOINS DE SANTÉ (25 minutes) Les régions du Bas-Saint-Laurent/de la Gaspésie/de la Côte-Nord, parents d’enfants de moins de 12 ans des centres de taille moyenne de la Saskatchewan, locataires de la région de l’Okanagan, personnes testées positives à la COVID-19 d’Edmonton, le centre et le sud du Québec

J’aimerais maintenant me pencher sur les soins de santé plus largement ; pas spécifiquement en lien avec la COVID-19…

  • En général, que pensez-vous de la qualité et de la disponibilité des soins de santé dans votre région ?
    • En général, pensez-vous que le système de santé dans votre région nécessite des changements majeurs, des changements mineurs ou peu à pas de changements ?
  • Outre la COVID-19, quels sont les défis les plus pressants en matière de soins de santé dans votre communauté ?
  • Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet de ce que le gouvernement fédéral a fait récemment en matière de soins de santé ?
  • Bien que de nombreux enjeux liés aux soins de santé relèvent des provinces, une grande partie du financement des systèmes de santé provinciaux provient du gouvernement fédéral sous la forme de transferts pour les soins de santé. Pensez-vous que ces transferts aux provinces devraient être augmentés dès maintenant afin de fournir davantage de fonds pour les soins de santé, ou pensez-vous que le gouvernement fédéral ferait mieux d’affecter ces sommes à d’autres priorités ?
    • Certaines personnes disent que le gouvernement du Canada devrait transférer plus d’argent aux provinces sans condition, de sorte que les gouvernements provinciaux puissent décider de la meilleure utilisation de ces fonds selon les besoins spécifiques de leurs provinces ou territoires. Cependant, d’autres ont dit qu’il existe certains enjeux en matière de santé comme les soins de santé mentale, la pénurie de médecins ou la réforme des soins de longue durée qui doivent être abordés dans tout le pays, et que le gouvernement du Canada devrait attacher des conditions à ses transferts afin de s’assurer que les gouvernements provinciaux dépenseront les sommes supplémentaires sur ces priorités clés. Avec laquelle de ces approches êtes-vous le plus d’accord ?
  • Imaginons que le gouvernement du Canada attachait des conditions aux transferts en matière de soins de santé. Y a-t-il des priorités précises en matière de santé que vous voudriez que le gouvernement fédéral impose comme condition aux transferts de santé à votre province ?
  • Et en ce qui concerne spécifiquement la santé mentale, pensez-vous qu’il est nécessaire que les gouvernements se penchent sur l’amélioration des soins de santé mentale au Canada ?
    • Que pourrait faire le gouvernement du Canada pour aider les Canadiennes et les Canadiens qui sont aux prises avec leur propre santé mentale pendant la pandémie ?

LA CONTAMINATION DE L’EAU À IQALUIT (15 minutes) Le Nunavut

  • Y’en a-t-il qui ont suivi la question de l’eau contaminée à Iqaluit ? Que se passe-t-il ?
    • À votre connaissance, comment cela s’est-il produit ? (DEMANDER AU BESOIN : Qui est responsable de ce qui s’est passé ?)
  • Savez-vous comment le gouvernement du Canada a réagi à la situation ?
    • Qu’a fait le gouvernement du Canada ?
  • Que pensez-vous de ce qu’a fait le gouvernement du Canada ?
    • En a-t-il fait assez pour soutenir les personnes affectées ?
    • Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada pourrait faire de plus pour aider ?

LOGEMENT (15 minutes) Le Nunavut, peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba

  • Quelle est la situation du logement [au/dans] [Nunavut/votre réserve] ?
    • Quels sont les plus grands défis en matière de logement ? [(p. ex., l’abordabilité, la qualité, l’offre)/(p. ex., la qualité, l’offre)]
  • Y a-t-il eu des changements dans la situation du logement au cours des dernières années ?
  • Savez-vous ce qu’a fait le gouvernement du Canada pour aider à remédier à la situation du logement [au Nunavut/sur les réserves] ?
    • Qu’a fait le gouvernement du Canada ?

LA SANTÉ MENTALE (15 minutes) Le Nunavut

  • Quels sont les plus grands défis liés à la santé mentale au Nunavut ?
  • Qu’en est-il de la santé mentale chez les jeunes ?
    • DEMANDER AU BESOIN : Qu’en est-il du suicide chez les jeunes — cela est-il un enjeu ?
  • Et maintenant, si l’on pense spécifiquement au suicide chez les jeunes, quelles en sont, selon vous, les principales causes ?
    • Pourquoi cet enjeu perdure-t-il ?
    • Que faut-il faire ?

SOINS AUX AÎNÉS (15 minutes) Le Nunavut

  • À quoi ressemblent les soins aux aînés au Nunavut ?
    • Quel genre de ressources existe-t-il ?

Comme vous le savez peut-être, de nombreux aînés du Nunavut nécessitant des soins complexes sont transférés dans des établissements de soins aux aînés à l’extérieur du Nunavut, comme à Ottawa.

  • Quelqu’un en connaît-il la raison ?
  • Quel impact cela a-t-il sur la communauté locale ?
  • Que souhaiteriez-vous voir se produire ?

ENJEUX SPÉCIFIQUES AUX JEUNES (25 minutes) Étudiant(e)s postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara

  • Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit sur ce que le gouvernement du Canada a fait récemment pour soutenir les étudiantes et les étudiants ?
    • DEMANDER AU BESOIN : Qu’en est-il des choses que le gouvernement a faites pour aider financièrement les étudiantes et les étudiants pendant la COVID ?
  • Quelle est habituellement la première source des nouvelles que vous entendez ?
    • Qu’en est-il des nouvelles concernant la COVID-19 — quelles sont vos principales sources d’information ?
      • En ce qui concerne la COVID-19, cherchez-vous activement de nouvelles informations à ce sujet ?
    • Et maintenant, si vous songez à l’information en général (pas seulement celle qui a trait à la COVID-19) qui concerne le gouvernement du Canada, y compris les politiques qu’il met en œuvre ou les actions qu’il prend, cherchez-vous activement ce genre d’information ?
      • SI OUI : Où cherchez-vous pour trouver ce genre d’information ?
  • Avez-vous vu de quelconques publicités du gouvernement du Canada récemment ?
    • SI OUI : Quel était le sujet de la publicité ? Où l’avez-vous vue ?
  • Dans l’ensemble, pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada fait un effort pour atteindre les étudiantes et les étudiants ? Pensez-vous qu’il privilégie les étudiantes et les étudiants lorsqu’il prend des décisions ? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas ?
    • Que pourrait faire le gouvernement du Canada pour atteindre les étudiantes et les étudiants ?
  • Quel est l’enjeu le plus important pour vous et celui sur lequel vous estimez que le gouvernement du Canada devrait se concentrer le plus ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
  • Et quel est l’enjeu le plus important auquel les étudiantes et les étudiants, plus largement, sont confronté(e)s à l’heure actuelle et auquel le gouvernement du Canada devrait accorder plus d’attention ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

ENJEUX LIÉS AUX ÉTUDES POSTSECONDAIRES (20 minutes) Élèves postsecondaires de la région Hamilton-Niagara

Maintenant, je voudrais me pencher plus particulièrement sur les enjeux liés aux études postsecondaires…

  • SONDAGE : Je vais vous montrer certaines choses que pourrait faire le gouvernement du Canada en matière d’éducation postsecondaire. Je voudrais que vous choisissiez celles qui, selon vous, se distinguent comme étant une vraie bonne initiative. Vous pouvez toutes les choisir, n’en choisir aucune ou en choisir un nombre qui se situe entre ces deux extrêmes.
    • Permettre aux nouveaux parents de suspendre le remboursement de leurs prêts étudiants jusqu’à ce que leur plus jeune enfant ait cinq ans
    • Continuer à élargir les initiatives et les programmes axés sur les compétences et l’emploi qui sont destinés aux jeunes
    • Créer un nouveau volet à la Stratégie emploi et compétences jeunesse pour les Canadiens en situation de handicap
    • Élargir les voies d’accès à la résidence permanente pour les étudiants internationaux et les travailleurs étrangers temporaires au moyen du système d’Entrée express (utilisé pour gérer les demandes d’immigration présentées par des travailleurs qualifiés)
    • Faire passer à 50 000 $ le seuil du Programme d’aide au remboursement pour les étudiants emprunteurs qui sont célibataires et apporter les modifications appropriées aux seuils pour les familles de diverses tailles
    • Éliminer définitivement les intérêts sur les prêts d’études canadiens et les prêts canadiens aux apprentis

LE MODÉRATEUR PASSERA EN REVUE LES CHOIX

  • Y a-t-il autre chose que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire, selon vous, en matière d’éducation postsecondaire ?

FACTURES DE TÉLÉPHONIE MOBILE (15 minutes) Winnipeg

Je voudrais conclure avec une brève discussion sur les factures de téléphone cellulaire…

  • Y en a-t-il parmi vous qui ont remarqué des changements dans leurs factures de téléphone cellulaire ? C’est-à-dire, sont-elles devenues moins chères ou plus chères ?
  • Vos factures de téléphone cellulaire sont-elles une source de stress, ou non ?
    • SI OUI : Comment ?
  • Vous attendez-vous à ce que les factures de cellulaire augmentent au cours des prochaines années, restent les mêmes ou baissent ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
  • Êtes-vous au courant de ce que fait le gouvernement du Canada pour agir sur les factures de téléphone cellulaire ?
  • Que devrait faire le gouvernement du Canada, le cas échéant, pour aider à faire face aux factures (à la hausse) de téléphone cellulaire ?

L’ENJEU DE LA POMME DE TERRE DE L’Î.-P.-É. (35 minutes) L’Île-du-Prince-Édouard

Maintenant, je voudrais changer complètement de sujet et parler d’enjeux qui touchent plus particulièrement l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard…

  • Qu’avez-vous entendu, vu ou lu au sujet des récents développements liés au commerce de la pomme de terre de l’Î.-P.-É. ?
    • Quel est le rôle, le cas échéant, du gouvernement du Canada dans ce dossier ?
    • Autant que vous sachiez, quel est le ministère ou l’agence du gouvernement du Canada qui est responsable du commerce de la pomme de terre de l’Î.-P.-É. ?
    • S’IL Y EN A QUI SONT AU COURANT DE QUELCONQUES NOUVELLES : Selon vous, quelle est la principale cause de cet enjeu commercial ?
    • S’IL Y EN A QUI SONT AU COURANT DE QUELCONQUES NOUVELLES : Où obtenez-vous vos informations au sujet de cet enjeu ?
      • DEMANDER AU BESOIN : Les informations télévisées ? Les médias sociaux ? Les amis ou la famille ? D’autres sources ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN :
En octobre dernier, les États-Unis ont demandé à l’Agence canadienne d’inspection des aliments (ACIA), une agence du gouvernement du Canada, de suspendre la délivrance de certificats d’exportation pour les pommes de terre de l’Î.-P.-É. en raison de la plus récente détection de la galle verruqueuse de la pomme de terre. Le 22 novembre 2021, les États-Unis ont donné l’ordre à leurs agents frontaliers de refuser l’entrée des cargaisons de pommes de terre de l’Î.-P.-É., indépendamment de la certification de l’ACIA.

INFORMATIONS SUPPLÉMENTAIRES POUR LE MODÉRATEUR SI NÉCESSAIRE :
L’ACIA délivre des certificats d’exportation aux pays qui importent des pommes de terre de l’Î.-P.-É. Le certificat d’exportation confirme que le produit répond à des normes et à des exigences canadiennes précises.

  • Que pensez-vous de cette décision ?
    • À votre avis, y avait-il d’autres options ?
  • Dans quelle mesure est-ce un enjeu d’envergure à l’Î.-P.-É. ?
    • Quels sont les impacts de cet enjeu sur l’Î.-P.-É. ?
    • La suspension des exportations vous touche-t-elle personnellement ?

Nous avons parlé de pommes de terre et du rôle de l’ACIA. Je voudrais me pencher sur cet aspect pour un moment…

  • Avant notre discussion, étiez-vous au courant du mandat de l’ACIA et de son rôle dans ce dossier ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN :
L’ACIA a un vaste mandat qui englobe la salubrité alimentaire, la santé des animaux, la protection des végétaux et l’accès au marché international. Sa mission est de veiller à la santé et au bien-être des Canadiens, à l’environnement et à l’économie en préservant la salubrité des aliments, la santé des animaux et la protection des végétaux.

  • Dans l’ensemble, quelle est l’importance de ce rôle en ce qui vous concerne ?
  • Sur la base de ce que vous saviez déjà et de ce dont nous avons discuté ensemble, pensez-vous que l’ACIA a fait du bon ou du mauvais travail dans ce dossier ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
    • Faites-vous confiance au gouvernement du Canada et à l’ACIA d’assurer la bonne gestion de ce dossier ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
    • Pensez-vous que l’ACIA a été excessivement prudente au détriment de l’industrie ou pensez-vous que l’ACIA a privilégié la sécurité plutôt que l’industrie ?
  • Qu’est-ce qui a été bien géré par le gouvernement du Canada et l’ACIA dans ce dossier ?
  • Qu’est-ce qui a été mal géré ?
  • Que devraient faire d’autre, le cas échéant, le gouvernement du Canada ou l’ACIA pour faire avancer ce dossier ?
  • Avez-vous entendu parler des programmes de gestion des risques de l’entreprise du gouvernement du Canada ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ? Pouvez-vous expliquer en quoi consistent ces programmes ?
  • Avez-vous entendu parler du programme Agri-stabilité ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ? Pouvez-vous expliquer en quoi il consiste ?
  • Avez-vous entendu parler du plan du gouvernement du Canada qui prévoit 28 millions de dollars pour soutenir les producteurs de l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard touchés par la suspension des échanges commerciaux de pommes de terre avec les États-Unis ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ? Pouvez-vous expliquer en quoi consiste ce plan ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN/AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN :
Les programmes de gestion des risques de l’entreprise (GRE) du gouvernement du Canada sont des outils qui offrent aux producteurs agricoles une protection contre les pertes de revenu et de production, et qui les aident à gérer les risques menaçant la viabilité de leur exploitation.

Agri-stabilité est l’un de ces programmes. Il protège les producteurs canadiens contre les baisses du revenu agricole attribuables notamment aux pertes de production, à la hausse des coûts et aux enjeux liés aux échanges commerciaux. Un producteur de l’Î.-P.-É. peut recevoir un paiement lorsque son revenu agricole moyen baisse de 15 %.

En décembre 2021, le gouvernement du Canada a annoncé un plan potentiel de 28 millions de dollars pour soutenir les producteurs de l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard. Le financement allant jusqu’à 28 millions de dollars sera en partie consacré au réacheminement des pommes de terre excédentaires vers les transformateurs, les emballeurs et les banques alimentaires. Des fonds seront également disponibles pour les producteurs qui doivent détruire leurs pommes de terre excédentaires.

  • Est-ce que quelqu’un avait déjà entendu cette information auparavant ?
  • Pensez-vous que ces programmes auront un impact sur ceux qui sont touchés par la suspension des échanges commerciaux de pommes de terre vers les États-Unis ? De quelle façon ?
  • Maintenant que je vous ai montré ces informations, votre impression à l’égard de la réponse du gouvernement du Canada a-t-elle changé ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

Au début du mois, les États-Unis ont annoncé qu’ils allaient autoriser la reprise des expéditions de pommes de terre de l’Î.-P.-É. vers Porto Rico.

  • Qu’en pensez-vous ?
  • Pensez-vous que l’ACIA ou plus largement le gouvernement du Canada ont joué un rôle dans la décision des États-Unis ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
  • Compte tenu de tout ce dont nous avons discuté jusqu’à présent, pensez-vous que l’ACIA ou le gouvernement du Canada a réagi rapidement ou non pour traiter cet enjeu ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
  • À votre avis, quelles seront les répercussions à long terme sur l’industrie de la pomme de terre de l’Î.-P.-É. ?

ACC (10 minutes) L’Île-du-Prince-Édouard

Je voudrais maintenant passer à un autre sujet…

  • Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet d’Anciens Combattants Canada (ACC) récemment ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
  • Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet du personnel infirmier qui quittent leur emploi à Santé Î.-P.-É. pour des postes au sein d’Anciens Combattants Canada ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
    • SI OUI : Est-ce que vous suivez cette histoire ?
    • Quels en seront les impacts, le cas échéant, pour l’Î.-P.-É. ?
  • Plusieurs fonctionnaires du gouvernement du Canada travaillent actuellement de la maison, y compris ceux et celles d’ACC. Cela a-t-il eu un impact notable sur l’économie locale ?
    • SI OUI : Quel genre d’impact ?

L’IMMIGRATION (10 minutes) L’Île-du-Prince-Édouard

  • Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet de l’immigration récemment, et plus particulièrement en ce qui concerne l’Î.-P.-É. ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
    • DEMANDER AU BESOIN : Avez-vous entendu parler des travailleurs étrangers temporaires ?
      • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
  • Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quoi que ce soit au sujet de retards dans l’obtention de la résidence permanente ou de la citoyenneté canadienne ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
  • Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quoi que ce soit en lien avec le parrainage de réfugiés ?
    • SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

LES COMMUNAUTÉS DE LANGUE OFFICIELLE EN SITUATION MINORITAIRE (25 minutes) Francophones de la région de Sudbury

Concentrons-nous sur un autre sujet…

  • En ce qui concerne la langue française à Sudbury, que pensez-vous de l’état de la langue française ?
    • Pensez-vous qu’elle est menacée ?
    • Est-elle menacée dans d’autres régions du Canada en dehors du Québec ?
  • Est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada en fait assez pour protéger la langue française ?
    • SI NON : Que devrait-il faire ?
    • SI NON : POURQUOI devrait-il en faire davantage pour protéger la langue française au Canada ?
  • SONDAGE : Je vais vous présenter une liste d’éléments qui ont trait à la vie en tant que francophone dans votre région. J’aimerais que vous choisissiez ceux qui, selon vous, représentent un défi majeur. Vous pouvez en choisir jusqu’à trois ; n’en sélectionnez pas si vous pensez qu’il n’y en a aucun qui représente un défi.
    • Accéder à des services de garde d’enfants en français
    • Accéder à l’information provenant du gouvernement du Canada en français
    • Accéder à du contenu médiatique (radio, télévision, Internet, journaux) en français
    • Attirer des francophones venant de l’extérieur de la région pour s’installer ici
    • S’assurer que la communauté francophone demeurera forte pour les années à venir
    • Avoir le sentiment de faire partie de la communauté francophone d’ici
    • Retenir les jeunes francophones dans la région
    • Vivre en français dans votre région (par exemple, participer à des sports/activités, faire les courses, etc.)
    • Parler en français à un(e) représentant(e) du gouvernement du Canada
    • Transmettre la langue et la culture française à la prochaine génération

LE MODÉRATEUR PASSERA EN REVUE LES CHOIX

  • Est-ce qu’il y avait quoi que ce soit qui manquait dans cette liste ?
  • Y a-t-il quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire pour soutenir la communauté francophone ?

ENJEUX LOCAUX (20 minutes) Peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba

Maintenant, je voudrais qu’on se concentre sur votre réserve et votre communauté locale, et pas spécifiquement sur la COVID-19…

  • Quels sont les plus importants secteurs et industries dans votre communauté locale ?
  • Quels sont, selon vous, les secteurs et les industries qui ont le plus besoin d’aide ? Pourquoi ces industries et secteurs ont-ils besoin d’un soutien fédéral ?

NOTE AU MODÉRATEUR : Pour deux ou trois des secteurs importants cités, demander si le gouvernement du Canada a fait quoi que ce soit pour soutenir ce secteur. Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire de plus pour soutenir ces secteurs ?

  • Maintenant, en pensant spécifiquement à votre réserve, quels sont les préoccupations et les enjeux locaux les plus importants ? 
  • Quels sont, à votre avis, les projets d’infrastructure les plus importants dans votre réserve ou dans ses environs que le gouvernement du Canada devrait soutenir ?

ENJEUX AUTOCHTONES (30 minutes) Peuples autochtones de la Saskatchewan et du Manitoba

Je voudrais maintenant que nous portions notre attention sur les enjeux autochtones de manière plus générale.

  • Quels sont les enjeux autochtones importants sur lesquels le gouvernement du Canada devrait, selon vous, se concentrer ?
  • En ce qui concerne les questions autochtones, pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada leur accorde l’attention qu’elles méritent, pas assez ou trop ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
  • Est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada a fait quoi que ce soit de bien ?
  • Que peut-il améliorer ?
  • Avez-vous entendu quelque chose au sujet de ce que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour aborder la réconciliation ?
  • Si l’on considère la dernière décennie, sentez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada a évolué dans la bonne direction sur le plan de la réconciliation, ou non ?
  • À quel genre d’actions vous attendriez-vous de la part d’un gouvernement qui veut sérieusement aborder la réconciliation ?
  • Êtes-vous au courant de l’affaire devant la Cour fédérale qui porte sur l’indemnisation des enfants des Premières Nations lésés par les politiques de services à l’enfance et à la famille ? Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN :
Au début du mois de janvier 2022, il a été annoncé que les groupes autochtones et le gouvernement du Canada avaient conclu des accords de principe sur l’indemnisation et la réforme à long terme des services à l’enfance et à la famille des Premières Nations. Ces accords comprennent :

    • 20 milliards de dollars d’indemnisation pour les enfants des Premières Nations (ainsi que pour leurs parents et leurs proches aidants) qui ont été retirés de leur foyer entre 1991 et le mois de mars 2022. L’indemnisation couvre également les enfants qui ont subi les conséquences négatives d’une interprétation étroite du principe de Jordan entre 2007 et 2017, ainsi que les enfants qui n’ont pas reçu ou ont été retardés dans la réception d’un service ou d’un produit public essentiel entre le 1er avril 1991 et le 11 décembre 2007.
    • 20 milliards de dollars pour réformer le programme des services à l’enfance et à la famille des Premières Nations. Cela comprendra des fonds pour soutenir les enfants qui, en raison de leur âge, sortent du système de protection de l’enfance et des services de prévention, y compris des services de soutien en santé mentale et de soutien culturel afin de s’assurer que les familles restent ensemble.
  • Que pensez-vous de ces accords ?
  • Êtes-vous au courant d’une entente conclue entre le gouvernement du Canada et la Première nation de Cowessess concernant des mesures de soutien aux services à l’enfance et à la famille ? Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN :
Dans le cadre de l’accord, le gouvernement du Canada investira 38,7 millions de dollars au cours des deux prochaines années pour aider la Première Nation de Cowessess à mettre en place son système de services à l’enfance et à la famille.

  • Que pensez-vous de cet accord ?
  • Pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada devrait poursuivre avec cette approche, c’est-à-dire qu’il devrait essayer de conclure des accords avec d’autres Premières Nations pour que celles-ci mettent en place leurs propres systèmes de services à l’enfance et à la famille ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

J’aimerais maintenant parler d’eau potable pour un petit moment…

  • Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quelque chose au sujet des actions prises par le gouvernement du Canada pour assurer l’accès à l’eau potable propre dans les réserves ? Qu’a-t-il fait ?
  • Avez-vous entendu parler des efforts déployés par le gouvernement du Canada pour lever les avis à long terme sur la qualité de l’eau potable dans les réserves ?

Je vais vous montrer un document infographique portant sur le travail qu’effectue le gouvernement fédéral afin de lever les avis à long terme sur la qualité de l’eau potable et ensuite je vous demanderai votre opinion à ce sujet.

AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN
AFFICHER LE DOCUMENT INFOGRAPHIQUE « Avis sur la qualité de l’eau potable à long terme touchant des systèmes publics dans les réserves »

  • Quelles sont vos premières réactions ?
  • Maintenant que vous avez vu cela, comment évaluez-vous les progrès réalisés par le gouvernement du Canada quant à cette question ? Diriez-vous qu’il a fait beaucoup de progrès, un peu, aucun, ou qu’il a aggravé la situation ?

CONCLUSION (5 minutes)

Appendix C – Advertising Concepts

Concept A: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)

Above is a storyboard featuring six animated frames from a Public Health Ad Campaign. The first frame shows a simple line drawing of a mother and father holding up their child with their arms. The voiceover reads, “We all want to protect our children. So how does COVID-19 vaccination fit into that?” The second frame then shows the child starting to run as if they’re playing, with the voiceover saying, “COVID-19 vaccines can help keep kids safe from severe illness and potential long-term effects if they get the virus.” The third frame shows the line transform into an outline of a five year old playing with his father and an eleven year old hugging her mother. The voiceover says, “Doses for children 5 to 11 are smaller, which is all they need for good protection.” The next frame shows more kids appear, and they all start walking together. The voiceover reads, “Millions of children in Canada and around the world have already been safely vaccinated and severe reactions are very rare.” The fifth frame then shows one child holding hands with their parents, and the line then turns into the vaccine icon. The voiceover says, “Vaccination can help protect your child from getting seriously sick from COVID-19.”

Concept B: Public Health Ad Campaign – Kids Vaccine (Durham Region Parents of Children under 12)

Above is a storyboard featuring six animated frames from a Public Health Ad Campaign. The storyboard begins with an image of a parent putting a helmet on their child’s head before skating. The voiceover says, “We do everything we can to keep our kids safe. So, how can we help protect them against COVID-19?” The second frame transitions to another parent putting sunscreen on their child’s face before going outside, with the voiceover reading, “COVID-19 vaccines can help keep children safe from severe illness and potential long-term effects of the virus.” The third frame moves to another scene where a parent reaches to hold their child’s hand before safely crossing the street. In this frame, the voiceover says, “Millions of children in Canada and around the world have already been safely vaccinated and real world data shows that serious side effects are extremely rare.” The fourth frame then shows a parent and a child at a vaccine clinic, with the voiceover finishing with, “Help protect your child. Book their COVID-19 vaccination appointment.” The fifth frame, with no voiceover, is a white screen with bold, black text that reads, “Learn more and book your child’s appointment at Canada.ca/covid-vaccine”. The storyboard finishes with the Government of Canada logo on a white screen.

Water Advisory Chart (Saskatchewan and Manitoba Indigenous Peoples)

The above image is of a water advisory chart. At the top, the image says “Updated February 24, 2022” in grey text. Under this, it reads “128 long-term drinking water advisories lifted since November 2015” in turquoise text, with “128” in significantly larger text and “lifted” in bold. Next to this statement is a graphic of a water droplet with a checkmark within a circle. To the right of this statement is a dotted line that separates the statement with another, reading, “36 long-term drinking water advisories in effect in 29 communities.” Similarly, the numbers “36” and “29” are in significantly larger text, along with “in effect in”. Beneath these two statements is a graph, with the y-axis labelled “Number of LT-DWAs lifted or added” and the x-axis starting from the year 2015, and going up to 2022. Under the x-axis is a legend, with “Total of LT-DWAs added”, with “added” in bold text and represented with a dark red colour, and “Total of LT-DWAs lifted”, with “lifted” in bold text and represented with a turquoise colour.