LOCATION	GROUP	LANGUAGE	DATE	TIME (EST)	GROUP COMPOSITION	NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS
Newfoundland and Labrador	1	English	Jan. 6	4:30-6:30 pm	Former CERB Recipients	7
Quebec City	2	French	Jan. 7	6:00-8:00 pm	6:00-8:00 pm Former CERB Recipients	6
Ontario – Major Centres	3	English	Jan. 12	6:00-8:00 pm	Vaccine Hesitant	7
Manitoba/ Saskatchewan	4	English	Jan. 12	8:00-10:00 pm	Indigenous	7
Alberta – Mid-size and Major Centres	5	English	Jan. 13	8:00-10:00 pm	Racialized Canadians	8
Greater Montreal Area (GMA)	6	French	Jan. 14	6:00-8:00 pm	Vaccine Hesitant	6
Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick	7	French	Jan. 18	6:00-8:00 pm	Francophones – General Population	8
Vancouver Island	8	English	Jan. 20	9:00-11:00 pm	Seniors (aged 55+)	7
New Brunswick	9	English	Jan. 21	6:00-8:00 pm	General Population	7
Greater Toronto Area (GTA)	10	English	Jan. 25	6:00-8:00 pm	Parents – Children in daycare and/or considering daycare	7
Saskatchewan – Mid-size and Major Centres	11	English	Jan. 26	8:00-10:00 pm	General Population	8
Interior B.C.	12	English	Jan. 28	9:00-11:00 pm	General Population	8
Total number of participants	86

Detailed Findings – Part I: COVID-19

Timeline of January Announcements

To help place the focus group discussions within the context of key events which occurred during the continuing COVID-19 pandemic, below is a brief synopsis for the period beginning at the end of December 2020 and throughout the month of January 2021.

At the end of December
- There had been 489,811 cases of COVID-19 in Canada with 15,606 deaths.
- COVID-19 infection rates continued to increase quickly across much of Canada and varying public health control measures were continued and elevated.
- Canada’s border controls with the U.S. were extended again and ordered to remain in place and in effect until February 21^st.
January 1-10
- Focus groups were held with former Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) recipients residing in Newfoundland and Labrador (Jan. 6) and Quebec City (Jan. 7).
- January 6. Government of Canada requirements came into effect that all air travellers from abroad, five years of age or older, must provide proof of a negative test result for COVID-19 before boarding their flights into Canada.
January 11-17
- Focus group was held with those who were vaccine hesitant in major centres in Ontario (Jan. 11).
- January 11. Canadians began receiving T4A slips from Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for COVID-19 financial support programs to support their tax filing.
- Focus group was held with Indigenous people from Manitoba and/or Saskatchewan (Jan. 12).
- January 12. Government of Canada announced investment of $39.8 million to allow for continued efforts to prevent and mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on people who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness.
- Focus groups were held with racialized Canadians in mid-size and major centres in Alberta (Jan. 13) and those who were vaccine hesitant in the Greater Montreal Area (GMA) (Jan. 14).
January 18-24
- Focus groups were held with the general population of Francophones residing in New Brunswick, Ontario and Manitoba (Jan. 18), with seniors (aged 55 and older) residing on Vancouver Island (Jan. 20) and the general population in New Brunswick (Jan. 21).
January 25-31
- Focus group was held with parents of children in daycare and/or considering daycare in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) (Jan. 25).
- January 26. Government of Canada announced the launch of the Highly Affected Sectors Credit Availability Program (HASCAP) to provide financial support to businesses that have been hardest hit by the pandemic, such as restaurants, businesses in the tourism and hospitality sectors, and those that rely on in-person service.
- Focus groups were held with the general population in mid-sized and large centres in Saskatchewan (Jan. 26) and in Interior British Columbia (B.C.) (Jan. 28).
- January 29. Government of Canada announced that air travellers who decide to travel for non-essential reasons will face new expenses when they return to Canada. The new expenses include taking a COVID-19 test on arrival at their own cost, reserving a room in a Government of Canada-approved hotel for three nights at their own cost, and quarantining in the hotel while they await their test results.
- January 29. Government of Canada introduced new travel restrictions, including the suspension of flights by major airlines to and from the Caribbean and Mexico beginning January 31 until April 30.
- January 31. There had been 705,659 cases of COVID-19 in Canada with 20,032 deaths.

Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)

To begin each group in January, participants were asked what they had seen, heard or read about the Government of Canada in recent days. Overall, participants recall was somewhat limited. Across the groups what most had heard about and were engaged on was the topic of COVID-19 vaccinations. With respect to vaccines, participants mentioned a slow distribution rate initially and a commitment from the Government of Canada to push the rate to 10,000 inoculations a day. It was mentioned that both the federal and provincial levels of government were meeting on the distribution issue, but that lockdowns were continuing in the meantime.

A few other issues were mentioned briefly. Earlier in the month several participants mentioned the fact that some government officials travelled for personal reasons seemingly in contravention of public health guidelines, and later in the month there were comments in a few groups about the resignation of the Governor General. Unrelated to COVID-19, the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline by the U.S. President was also referred to in groups among those in Alberta and major Francophone centres.

Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

Unprompted, most participants had not heard anything about the Government of Canada’s recent announcement to reduce greenhouse gases by 2030. In fact, across the six groups in which this question was asked only a handful of participants had heard of the announcement. Among those that had heard, the only ones to comment were in the Alberta group where they discussed possible impacts on the GST and PST, as well as concerns about attracting investment to the province.

Three of the groups (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians and GMA Vaccine Hesitant) were then provided with the following clarification and asked for their reactions.

Recently the Government of Canada announced proposed measures aimed to help Canada cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and get the country to net-zero emissions by 2050. One of these measures includes increasing the carbon price through to 2030. The carbon pricing system returns all proceeds to individuals, families and businesses.

On balance, participants were supportive of these measures but many were looking for more information. Almost all participants indicated that they were more supportive of the idea of an increasing price on carbon, pending answers to questions that they raised which focused on who was going to be taxed and by how much, as well as what the proceeds of this carbon levy would be used for. There were also questions about how the level of the carbon price would be set and by whom. One idea that was raised was the possibility of it being demonstrated that the cost of increased carbon pricing could be shown to be less than any disaster relief spending required to deal with climate change related severe weather events. In Alberta, participants hoped that increased carbon pricing would encourage further investments in renewable energy, but there was also a clear interest that it should be progressive in nature and focus more on higher income earners.

Racialized Canadians in mid-sized and major centres in Alberta and vaccine hesitant people residing in the GMA were asked if they had heard of the Climate Action Incentive Payment. Awareness across all groups was very low and no participant was able to explain what it was or how much it was. The following clarification was then given to participants in these two groups:

The carbon pricing system returns all proceeds to individuals, families and businesses. For individuals and families, this is in the form of a Climate Action Incentive Payment.

Lastly, participants were asked if they thought that the carbon pricing payment that they would receive would be more, less or roughly the same as what they would pay in costs associated with the price on pollution. Responses varied and were based on personal circumstances. Most thought that they would receive less but many said that they simply did not know. Several said that the situation would vary greatly depending upon how much they drove and upon billing by utilities. Others said that they did not think that it would apply to them for various reasons.

COVID-19 Outlook (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

In several groups participants discussed the evolving situation with respect to COVID-19 and the impact of the pandemic on their lives. The focus of the discussion varied somewhat from group to group, but included coverage of issues such as how, if at all, participants’ behaviours have changed throughout the pandemic and the challenges for parents, specifically for those with children in daycare. These discussions also broached perceptions of the Government of Canada’s performance during the pandemic as well as the topic of international travel.

Behaviours (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

When asked whether they had changed their behaviours in the last few weeks, most participants indicated they had not. Many were continuing to adhere to public health measures such as mask wearing, hand sanitizing and physical distancing. Those who said they had made few, if any, changes in their behaviours felt that rates of transmission of the virus remained high. They remained cautious about their interactions with others and continued to follow the guidelines as they had since the beginning of the pandemic. They saw no change in the situation which would permit them a significant change in their routine, although a few acknowledged that they had been somewhat more relaxed through the summer months.

The extent to which behaviours had changed generally reflected the situation in the location or region in which participants resided. And, for those few who had made any changes, most were taking more rather than fewer precautions to adapt to the evolving conditions and guidelines for their area. In some cases, this meant:

Reducing outings and errands, and reverting to online shopping or curbside pick-up, for example. Participants were trying to plan their time and set a good example. Some were also stocking up on items to avoid potential shortages, as they had during the early weeks of the pandemic, and to restrict the necessity of having to shop more frequently. Others had designated one member of the household to run errands to limit contact with others outside their bubble;
Strict isolation, either continuing a pattern of limiting interactions with other friends or family members and the size of their bubble, or tightening their social circle;
Stronger adherence to specific guidelines such as hand washing and mask wearing in particular;
Checking various websites for up-to-date information on the situation in their province more frequently;
Respecting stay-at-home orders and, for some, working full-time from home.

The motivations for behaviour change were attributed to one or more of several factors:

Personal health status or the health status of a member of the household which left them more vulnerable to contracting the virus;
Knowing others who had contracted COVID-19;
A change to the threat level and/or the COVID-19 colour zone in their region; and
Concerns about the onset of a second wave.

While participants were mostly hibernating, some did indicate that they were attempting to get outside more and to exercise (e.g., walking and cycling). Some parents were homeschooling their children while others had sent them back to school when they reopened. Their children’s overall mental and physical health was a key concern.

Impact of COVID-19 (GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-sized and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

In a few groups throughout the month, participants were asked how COVID-19 and COVID-19 related restrictions have impacted them. Most indicated they were adapting and that, while they had initially been quite fearful in the early days of the pandemic, they were becoming more normalized to the evolving situation. While a few commented that they felt restrictions were more lax in the summer, they were of the view that the public was paying more attention since October and the onset of the flu season. Several mentioned that they were more acclimatized to ‘pandemic living’ at this point. A few pointed out that they trusted that close adherence to public health guidelines would bring about a quicker end to the pandemic.

Nevertheless, some were finding the restrictions wearing, particularly the inability to visit elderly relatives. They felt especially worried about the impact of COVID-19 on grandparents who had been unable to visit with grandchildren and, the inability of some elderly people to adapt to virtual communications. Others spoke about the changes to the size of social circles, the increased use of masks (particularly among those for whom workplaces required mandatory mask-wearing), and the cancellation of group activities, specifically recreational and sporting activities. They were looking forward to the opportunities that vaccines would afford for people to get back to their usual routines and social interactions.

While a minority viewpoint, some protested increased restrictions being put in place and lamented that the situation had in fact worsened during the year since the pandemic began. A few others expressed similar concerns at the length of time Canadians have been dealing with pandemic conditions, particularly as they had high hopes in the early days that it could be dealt with swiftly (e.g., within a month). The duration was adding to some degree of frustration. A few commented that they were becoming increasingly irritated and were anxious to resume their lives, move freely and visit with other family members. Some were also having a difficult time understanding the rationale behind certain restrictions (e.g., permitting fairly large numbers of customers in Big Box stores while limiting visits between households).

Parents found the situation equally frustrating, but also mentioned other specific issues many of which were related to caring for their children during this time:

Difficulty in managing and navigating personal relationships;
Balancing work-life issues while working from home;
Noticeable changes in their children’s behaviours – some commented that their young children did not understand why they could not see their friends, while others worried about how limited contact with people other than immediate family would affect their children’s development;
Confinement at home; and
Cancellation of programming (e.g., swimming lessons for children, mother and baby groups, etc.).

Participants missed seeing grandparents, other than virtually. Frustrations with gray areas in the restrictions were discussed. For example, while some had grandparents helping with childcare during work hours in the early days, as parents shifted to working from home, subsequent rules restricting mingling between households (except for childcare purposes) meant that, technically, the children were allowed at the grandparents’ home but the parents could not then join them for dinner at the end of the day.

Parents also worried about their children not being able to focus, becoming addicted to screen time, and not developing longer attention spans. Some observed that they had less patience with their children.

When asked how the situation compared to restrictions last spring, most parents commented that they were finding it harder. While initially spending more time with their children was viewed as an unanticipated benefit, almost a year later living in such close quarters was leading to increased friction. Moreover, working from home with children was difficult. Limited social interaction was also causing concerns as some have restricted their children from playing inside or outside with a group of neighbourhood children. Some parents faced the added pressures of new babies, a change in jobs or working in an essential capacity, which meant they did not have the option of working from home.

Daycare (GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare)

Anumber of parents had children in daycare or were considering daycare as a childcare option. Relatively few were concerned about sending children to daycare, although some had experienced shutdowns and closures as a result of outbreaks. Parents were not overly-worried about their children passing COVID-19 on to them or other family members. The benefits of socialization seemed to outweigh the risks to the children’s mental health associated with isolation or confinement at home. Some parents did, however, comment that the only difficulty they faced in regards to daycare was not being able to go in to the daycare facility, talk with the staff or see what the facilities were like. These restrictions presented a stressor for parents with children going for the first time.

Participants discussed what they thought was most needed in order to make things safer in daycare facilities, including:

Smaller cohorts;
Higher staff to child ratio so that children can be spread out within the facility, although others felt that maintaining distance may be difficult for young children;
More testing of daycare staff at more frequent intervals; and
More cleaning of daycare facilities.

Performance of the Government of Canada (Major Francophone Centres, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Children in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan)

Participants in several groups were asked to comment on the Government of Canada’s performance during the pandemic. They noted a number of areas in which the federal government had performed well:

Closing the borders;
Encouragement to wear masks;
Financial support; and
Communications to the public – participants remarked on regular and timely updates provided by medical and public health professionals and scientists. They also noted regular sharing of COVID-19 data and statistics and indicated that it was clear where they should go to get information or for follow-up.

On balance, participants credited the Government of Canada with trying to do everything they could to keep people afloat and acknowledged that there was no existing ‘playbook’ for dealing with this situation. They also remarked positively on the federal government’s approach of providing information while letting communities take the lead in terms of communicating public health guidelines, testing and tracing.

When asked about areas in which the federal government could be doing better, comments were offered:

Implementing more rules and restrictions, especially in provinces like Ontario and Quebec where case counts are highest;
Standardizing rules and restrictions across the provinces – jurisdictional responsibilities were a point of confusion among participants. While it was understood that provincial governments are responsible for health care delivery, some participants thought that there should be some basic national guidelines in place (e.g., mask-wearing). Others held the opposite view that provinces needed to have flexibility to deal with the situation as they saw fit;
Treating the pandemic as more than a public health emergency to ensure that a holistic approach is taken with respect to managing and mitigating risk, including providing mental health supports;
Some participants felt that messaging on the severity of the pandemic was lacking. They suggested that the science related to infection control should be driving Canada’s response and that more people should be made aware of this;
Better supports for businesses to assist in economic recovery and to ensure that other actions being taken by the government (e.g., the Canada Emergency Response Benefit) are not adversely affecting the ability of businesses to hire staff; and
One perceived area of weakness was in preparation, especially with vaccine readiness, which participants thought could have been addressed more quickly in the early days of the pandemic. The capability of making a vaccine when it became available was seen as missing. Moreover, some suggested that the federal government should have initially procured more doses of the vaccine via several different avenues of supply.

A number of participants mentioned that they were quite happy with the response by the Government of Canada when the first wave of outbreaks began. However, they were less happy with how the second wave had been handled, feeling that actions and initiatives had been undertaken in a more haphazard manner. They felt that the Government of Canada should have been more prepared for the second wave.

Some participants mentioned that they had stopped paying attention to the news as closely as they had in the spring of 2020. As such, they were less aware of the response from the Government of Canada. Others found they were hearing more now from provincial officials and assumed that the federal government was placing a lower priority on communications relative to the approach taken at the beginning. While in the early days of the pandemic, participants were paying close attention to all the updates, now they mentioned they were now only paying attention to the most important things they felt they needed to know about such as stay-at-home orders. Some felt that this approach made life easier as fatigue with the pandemic was setting in.

Support for Seniors (Vancouver Island Seniors)

A group of seniors residing on Vancouver Island were asked specifically how they would rate the Government of Canada on the kinds of supports available for seniors. On the whole, participants felt that supports for seniors were fair and that most seniors had been well cared for through the pandemic.

That said, some participants commented on discrepancies in terms of assistance to the senior population, specifically noting that seniors in long-term care homes had been let down. There was also a concern regarding the availability of mental health supports for seniors.

With respect to the issues in long-term care facilities, some viewed these as structural – regulatory and systemic – and as preceding the pandemic. However, they noted that the pandemic had revealed a number of weaknesses or issues. They pointed to private ownership of these facilities as a key issue, along with inadequate inspections.

When asked whether long-term care was viewed as a federal or a provincial responsibility, participants were split. Some felt it was squarely in the purview of the provinces, while others thought there were opportunities for the federal government to apply a nationwide regulatory regime. These participants perceived it to be the responsibility of the federal government to provide funding for these facilities along with setting standards, while the provinces were required to adhere to these standards.

Travel Restrictions (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients)

Many participants were aware of recently announced guidelines on international travel, including: demonstrating a negative test for COVID-19 before being permitted to board a flight and the implementation of a quarantine period for travelers on their return to Canada. They had also heard that enforcement of the negative test result prior to boarding was being left up to the airlines. A few had the impression that some travelers (“business people, millionaires”) were able to avoid this requirement, flying in and out of the country at will.

For clarity, participants were then told that:

The Government of Canada has announced that all air passengers five years of age or older will be required to test negative for COVID-19 before traveling from another country to Canada. Documentation of a negative test result must be presented to the airline prior to boarding a flight to Canada. The test must be taken within 72 hours prior to the traveler’s scheduled departure to Canada. Anyone who receives a negative test result and is authorized to enter Canada must still complete the full, mandatory 14-day quarantine.

When asked for their reaction, most participants felt that restrictions were warranted and some were of the view that they should have been instituted earlier. There was general agreement that strict enforcement of the mandatory pre-flight test was required and that no one should be permitted to arrive who has not tested negative for COVID-19. Moreover, some felt that travel should be more strictly limited and that people should not be traveling at all unless it is deemed essential. A few participants commented that a negative test result 3 days before was not completely reliable and that symptoms may appear later. These participants were particularly concerned about the news of variants coming out of the United Kingdom, and were of the view that travel should be halted for a period of a least three or four months.

Those who suggested further limitations to travel were asked what more the Government of Canada should do. Suggestions included the following:

A total restriction on travel, especially on travelers from high risk countries where more widespread outbreaks are occurring (e.g., Germany, the U.S. and the U.K.);
In particular, participants felt that travel for personal reasons (e.g., pleasure) should not be permitted, and that any travel should be for essential purposes only. Some participants felt that there should not be any international travel; and
Some did favour more leniency for non-essential travel within Canada as long as testing and quarantining guidelines were met.

Vaccine Ads (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Vancouver Island Seniors)

During the second and third weeks of January, participants in five focus groups were shown a series of three advertising concepts. The concepts had been developed by the Government of Canada for possible advertising regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. After viewing each, participants were asked a series of questions to assess their overall reactions and their perceptions as to the effectiveness of each of the ads. At the conclusion of the discussion, participants selected which one of the three they felt was most effective in terms of addressing any concerns they may have about COVID-19 vaccines.

In all groups, with the exception of Vancouver Island Seniors, participants were shown two versions of each concept (i.e., six ads in total). It was explained to participants that these concepts were not in their finished form and that some were in ‘storyboard format,’ meaning that they were still in the early stages of development. The graphic illustrations, stock images and short narrative included in the storyboards were only intended to give participants a sense of what the ad might look like in its finished format which would ultimately be a 15-second, professionally-produced video for use on social media and online platforms. It should also be noted that the group of Indigenous participants, from Manitoba and Saskatchewan were shown an alternate version of each concept with slightly modified images. While the group of Vancouver Island seniors was also shown the three concepts, they saw banner images and one version of each concept only.

The chart below illustrates which concepts were viewed in each of the five groups:

	Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant	Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples	Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians	GMA Vaccine Hesitant	Vancouver Island Seniors

Dose of Facts

Version A	X		X	X
Version B	X	X	X	X
Version C		X
Banner Ad					X

Ask an Expert

Version A	X		X	X
Version B	X	X	X	X
Version C		X
Banner Ad					X

Vaccine and You

Version A	X		X	X
Version B	X	X	X	X
Version C		X
Banner Ad					X

The sequence in which the concepts were shown was purposely varied in each group, to reduce any ordering bias.

Dose of Facts

Participants reacted to this concept with general indifference and, in some cases, with some degree of negativity. The exception was the banner ad shown to Vancouver Island Seniors which participants responded to positively.

A Dose of Facts A (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of six frames. The first frame is split vertically down the middle, on the left-hand side there is a dark grey background with large, white text reading ‘A dose of facts’ with the word ‘facts’ underlined. Below, in slightly smaller font, the text reads ‘COVID-19 vaccine’ with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. On the right-hand side of the frame, there is an image of a man with a young boy on his back, both of whom are smiling. The second frame is, again, dark grey and white font reads ‘The COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you’ with ‘protect you’ being in yellow font. The third frame is the same dark grey with white text reading ‘against serious illness, long-term health effects and even death.’ The fourth frame is the same image of the father and young boy as was seen in the first frame. The fifth frame is back to the dark grey background that reads ‘Get informed. Get vaccine-ready.’ In white, bold font with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. At the bottom of the frame, yellow text presents the URL ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame ends on a white background with the Canada Wordmark in the middle.

A Dose of Facts B (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of six frames. The first frame is split vertically down the middle, on the left-hand side there is a dark grey background with large, white text reading ‘A dose of facts’ with the word ‘facts’ underlined. Below, in slightly smaller font, the text reads ‘COVID-19 vaccine’ with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. On the right-hand side of the frame, there is an image of a man and a younger man both reading a document. The second frame is, again, dark grey and white font reads ‘You can trust that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe’ with ‘safe’ being in yellow font. The third frame is the same dark grey with white text reading ‘because they meet the highest standards of safety, efficacy and quality’ with ‘highest standards’ in yellow font. The fourth frame is the same image of the man and a younger man both reading a document as was seen in the first frame. The fifth frame is back to the dark grey background that reads ‘Get informed. Get vaccine-ready.’ In white, bold font with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. At the bottom of the frame, yellow text presents the URL ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame ends on a white background with the Canada Wordmark in the middle.

A Dose of Facts C (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

The above figure consists of six frames. The first frame is split vertically down the middle, on the left-hand side there is a dark grey background with large, white text reading ‘A dose of facts’ with the word ‘facts’ underlined. Below, in slightly smaller font, the text reads ‘COVID-19 vaccine’ with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. On the right-hand side of the frame, there is an image of a man in a plaid shirt who is drawing. The second frame is, again, dark grey and white font reads ‘The COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you and your community’ with ‘protect you and your community’ being in yellow font. The third frame is the same dark grey with white text reading ‘against serious illness, long-term health effects and even death.’ The fourth frame is the same image of the man in a plaid shirt who is drawing as was seen in the first frame. The fifth frame is back to the dark grey background that reads ‘Get informed. Get vaccine-ready.’ In white, bold font with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. At the bottom of the frame, yellow text presents the URL ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame ends on a white background with the Canada Wordmark in the middle.

A Dose of Facts D (Vancouver Island Seniors)

The above figure consists of three frames. The first frame is split horizontally across the middle, the top half has a brown background with large, white text reading ‘A dose of facts’ with the word ‘facts’ underlined. To the right, in slightly smaller font, the text reads ‘COVID-19 vaccine’ with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial above the text. On the bottom half of the image, there is an image of an elderly man with a child on his lap and they are looking down and pointing at a document. The second frame is, again, brown and white font reads ‘The COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you against serious illness, long-term health effects and even death’ with ‘protect you’ being in yellow font. The third frame is the same brown with white text reading ‘Get informed. Get vaccinated.’ with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial above the text. Below the text, there is a white, callout box that reads ‘Learn more’ with an arrow in green font. At the bottom of the frame, there is a white strip that has the Canada Wordmark on the bottom right.

A number of participants commented that this ad simply didn’t resonate with them and that they would be likely to scroll past it or overlook it. Overall, the ad did not connect strongly at an emotional level with participants nor did they find it particularly informative.

Some remarked that it lacked warmth which they specifically attributed to the darker colour palette employed. A few, mainly Indigenous participants, described the tone of the ad as pushy, and felt that it was overly aggressive in promoting vaccine uptake. They took exception to this. Others, by contrast, found the ad to be somewhat generic to the point where they felt the message to inform oneself ahead of being vaccinated was somewhat diluted.

For those participants who had earlier expressed some degree of vaccine hesitancy, the ad did little to assuage their concerns, particularly with respect to enhancing perceptions of the reliability, efficacy and safety of the vaccine. Most did not find it convincing or reassuring. In the same vein, the point was made by some participants that the phrasing ‘vaccines can help protect you …’ was somewhat passive. The issue was the use of the word ‘can’ rather than something more definitive such as ‘will,’ for example. Others indicated that, rather than working from a premise that the vaccine was safe, they would have preferred the ad to have offered a stronger and more clearly stated rationale or reason to believe this was the case.

A main criticism centered on the ad’s opening statement or title ‘A dose of facts’ which led participants to believe it would contain more definitive, concrete facts as opposed to what they felt were broad statements about protecting one’s health and preventing deaths. For many participants, the statements reflected information of which they were already aware. As such, some felt it did not offer any new information. They expected the ad to be more informative and to provide information which would prompt interest and enthusiasm in the prospect of vaccinations. Moreover, some Indigenous participants reacted negatively to the use of the term ‘dose’ which tended to trigger associations with and memories of experiences within the residential school system.

There was also some confusion regarding the reference to ‘long-term health effects.’ Some participants commented that the ad did not sufficiently emphasize the importance of vaccinations for those with pre-existing conditions whom they understood would be especially vulnerable if they contracted the virus.

A few positive comments tended to focus on the clean look of the ad, the straightforward approach, and the prompt to ‘Get informed’ which then directed participants to a website. Several did indicate they were motivated to visit the website and expected there to be more information and facts available online which would support the claims that the vaccine was safe and reliable. The group of racialized Canadians (Alberta) expressed particular interest in what the website had to offer. They were intrigued to know more about the ‘high standards’ the vaccines were required to meet and expected the website would report the incidence rate of side effects among those receiving the vaccine. At the same time, some within this group also said that they would be more persuaded by hearing about the experience of others in their community who had received the vaccine, and not solely by the facts and data on the website.

In those groups where two versions of this concept were shown to participants, most preferred ‘B’ over ‘A.’ Most participants were drawn to the image showing an older and younger man who appear to be looking at something on a laptop. Participants assumed the image was of a grandfather and grandson. They felt that the older gentleman accurately reflected the demographic most at risk of contracting COVID-19 and generally felt the image was more heartwarming. A few did comment that the image of the father and son in version ‘A’ seemed more happy and upbeat, while the tone of version ‘B’ was more somber and sad, and prompted feelings of worry among some participants, especially among the vaccine hesitant groups. Comments also focused on the ethnicity of the pair shown in Version ‘B,’ with a few participants expressing concerns that it could inadvertently prompt a racist reaction from that group of the population who continue to blame China for the pandemic.

Participants were asked whether they would be more inclined to go to the website if the ad included the phrase “Learn more about how COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you.” The response was somewhat mixed. While a number of participants found this phrase to be more motivating, others sought more specificity in the ad itself or noted that they would be more inclined to seek advice from a medical professional, particularly a family doctor who knew their medical history, rather than a website.

In the GMA group only, participants were also asked about the tagline “Get informed. Get vaccine-ready.” They were shown two other options:

« Informez-vous. Soyez prêt pour le vaccin »
« Informez-vous. Préparez-vous au vaccin »

Most did not see a significant difference in terms of how they interpreted each of the options. For those few who did, their preference remained for the tagline they had been shown which encouraged them to ‘prepare’ for the vaccine (e.g., “Get vaccine ready.”).

Indigenous participants leaned towards version ‘C’ over ‘B,' as it included an image of an Indigenous person who they could relate to and found credible. Further they responded positively to the setting which they took to be an Indigenous person working in a scientific field.

Relatively few suggestions were offered when participants were asked what might make the ads more effective, including the following:

Incorporate images of people who aren’t necessarily as healthy and fit as those shown – participants felt that the people shown in the images are likely less concerned about contracting COVID-19 relative to others with underlying health conditions;
Include some data and facts – a few participants continued to underscore their interest in having some facts included in the ad itself, which they felt would prompt more viewers to then go to the website for more information. They felt that this approach would make the ad’s claims about the vaccine more credible and the ad itself less generic; and
A less direct prompt to get vaccinated – a small number of participants in the group among seniors (Vancouver Island) were concerned that the ad may not encourage those who are hesitant to get the vaccine or who feel strongly that it is a personal decision. While they did not suggest any specific change to the phrasing used, they wondered if the current wording was too strong.

Vaccine and You

Participants responded positively to this concept. Its main strength was in subtly acknowledging public concerns about vaccine safety and being transparent about the possibility of side effects from the vaccine.

The Vaccine and You A (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a yellow background was six animated figures shown (in order from left to right, there is a woman with light skin and white hair, a woman with darker skin and black hair in a bun, a light skin male with short, blond hair, a male with darker skin and short, brown hair, a male with light skin, short brown hair and a blue face mask, and a woman with darker skin and dark brown curly hair), all wearing dark green shirts. There is also text in the middle of the frame. Smaller white font reads ‘the COVID-19 vaccine’ with a maple leaf to the right. Underneath, in larger white font reads ‘vaccines & you’ with the word ‘you’ in yellow font. The second frame has the same yellow background with white font on the left-hand side reading ‘Do COVID-19 vaccines have side effects?’ to the right-hand side, the light skin and short blond hair male animated figure is looking in the direction of the text. The next slide has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Feeling some mild side effects is a normal sign that your body is building protection, and they should resolve within a few days.’ The next slide has a similar dark grey background, at the top, there is small yellow font reading ‘Find out more about’ with ‘The COVID-19 vaccines & you’ below. To the right of the word ‘COVID-19’ there is a maple leaf and the word ‘you’ is in yellow. At the bottom of the frame, there is white font reading ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Government of Canada Wordmark in the middle.

The Vaccine and You B (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has an orange background was six animated figures shown (in order from left to right, there is a woman with light skin and white hair, a woman with darker skin and black hair in a bun, a light skin male with short, blond hair, a male with darker skin and short, brown hair, a male with light skin, short brown hair and a blue face mask, and a woman with darker skin and dark brown curly hair), all wearing dark green shirts. There is also text in the middle of the frame. Smaller white font reads ‘the COVID-19 vaccine’ with a maple leaf to the right. Underneath, in larger white font reads ‘vaccines & you’ with the word ‘you’ in yellow font. The second frame has the same orange background with white font on the left-hand side reading ‘What kind of information is used to approve COVID-19 vaccines in Canada?’ to the right-hand side, the darker skinned female with brown curly hair animated figure is smiling and looking straight out. The next slide has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘The decision is based on scientific evidence show that it’s safe, effective and well made.’ The next slide has a similar dark grey background, at the top, there is small yellow font reading ‘Find out more about’ with ‘The COVID-19 vaccines & you’ below. To the right of the word ‘COVID-19’ there is a maple leaf and the word ‘you’ is in yellow. At the bottom of the frame, there is white font reading ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Government of Canada Wordmark in the middle.

The Vaccine and You C (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a yellow background was six animated figures shown (in order from left to right, there is a woman with light skin and white hair, a woman with darker skin and black hair in a bun, a light skin male with short, blond hair, a male with darker skin and short, brown hair, a male with light skin, short brown hair and a blue face mask, and a woman with darker skin and dark brown curly hair), all wearing dark green shirts. There is also text in the middle of the frame. Smaller white font reads ‘the COVID-19 vaccine’ with a maple leaf to the right. Underneath, in larger white font reads ‘vaccines & you’ with the word ‘you’ in yellow font. The second frame has the same yellow background with white font on the left-hand side reading ‘Why should I get vaccinated against COVID-19?’ to the right-hand side, the darker skin female with black hair in a bun animated figure is looking straight out. The next slide has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘There is no way to know how COVID-19 will affect you but it can cause severe complications. A COVID-19 vaccine can help protect you.’ The next slide has a similar dark grey background, at the top, there is small yellow font reading ‘Find out more about’ with ‘The COVID-19 vaccines & you’ below. To the right of the word ‘COVID-19’ there is a maple leaf and the word ‘you’ is in yellow. At the bottom of the frame, there is white font reading ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Government of Canada Wordmark in the middle.

The Vaccine and You D (Vancouver Island Seniors)

The above figure consists of three frames. The first frame has a yellow background with a female with light skin and white hair animated figure who is wearing a green shirt. Overlaid on the shirt there is smaller white font reads ‘the COVID-19 vaccine’ with a maple leaf to the right. Underneath, in larger white font reads ‘vaccines & you’ with the word ‘you’ in yellow font. The second frame has the same yellow background with white text in the middle of the frame reading ‘Do COVID-19 vaccines have side effects?’ In the top right of the frame, there is a white circle with yellow font, where smaller font reads ‘the COVID-19 vaccine’ with a maple leaf to the right. Underneath, in a larger font reads ‘vaccines & you.’ The third frame has the same yellow background with white text reading ’Feeling some mild side effects is a normal sign that your body is building protection, and they should resolve within a few days.’ Below, there is a white callout box with green font inside reading ‘learn more’ with an arrow. In the top right of the frame, there is a white circle with yellow font, where smaller font reads ‘the COVID-19 vaccine’ with a maple leaf to the right. Underneath, in a larger font reads ‘vaccines & you.’ At the bottom of the slide, there is a white bar across the bottom that features the Government of Canada wordmark on the right and a governmental department logo on the left.

Comments on this concept were generally aligned across all groups, although seniors (Vancouver Island) and Indigenous participants (Manitoba and Saskatchewan) offered more recommendations aimed at improving the ad and, specifically, targeting it to particular groups who may be more hesitant and/or may not be as trusting in the health care system.

However, on balance, many participants were drawn to this concept due to the following aspects:

Generally upbeat, positive tone – Participants described the concept as warm and light. They felt the brighter colour palette, particularly with respect to version A of this concept, had the effect of drawing viewer attention in a more positive way. Some also felt that the cartoon-style images of people contributed to a more cheerful and optimistic tone, to which most responded well.
Inclusiveness – Those who were shown versions A, B and C remarked in a positive way on the inclusiveness and diversity expressed through the images. Moreover, some remarked on the inclusion of an individual wearing a mask. Although a few participants were confused by this, as it left them wondering whether the vaccine was indeed safe if people were still required to wear masks. Others remarked that the mask was a good reminder in terms of continued compliance with public health measures as the vaccine is rolled out in stages.
Framing of the key message – Participants appreciated that the ad addressed them in a respectful way. First, they noted that the ad was speaking directly to them (e.g., “Vaccines and you”). They preferred this more personal approach. Secondly, it posed a question about an important concern for many, especially those who exhibit some vaccine hesitancy, in regards to possible side effects from the vaccine. They thought that many people would be reassured to know that side-effects are both common and normal. Relative to the Dose of Facts concept, participants found this concept to be far less dismissive and condescending. By contrast, it was viewed as being framed in a way that was both forthcoming and fully transparent about one of the issues with vaccinations (e.g., side effects). Participants found this approach to be credible and reassuring. The very fact that the concept flagged a potential downside of vaccines in such an open manner tended to promote a stronger sense of trust in the source (e.g., the Government of Canada) and a number of participants indicated they would likely visit the website to learn more about the potential side effects.

Whereas participants found ‘A dose of facts’ to be more directive in its tone, most felt that ‘Vaccine and you’ was more engaging and truthful, specifically addressing a key fear that some have with vaccines. In this respect, this concept was thought to have provided at least one key fact about vaccines which they felt was lacking from the other concept despite the way in which the opening statement was framed. Moreover, this concept addressed how people ‘feel’ about the vaccine rather than what they generally ‘know’ about vaccines, the latter being felt to be the approach which was taken in ‘A dose of facts.’

While most participants reacted positively to this concept, some suggestions for improvement were offered:

Some Indigenous participants in particular did not respond well to the cartoon or animated format used in this concept. Moreover, they felt that the images shown did not reflect the full spectrum of age groups affected by COVID-19. They thought a more realistic set of images should include children, adults and seniors or elderly persons.
A few participants found the positive cartoon-style images of smiling people juxtaposed with what they described as a more negative message about side effects somewhat incongruous. While this was not the majority perspective, some participants were left feeling confused.
A few others wanted to know more about side-effects for those with specific auto-immune conditions, for example. These participants felt there may be opportunities to modify the ads such that they could contain more focused messaging for particular sub-groups with unique concerns or issues with respect to vaccinations.
While racialized Canadians in the group held in Alberta reacted mostly positively to this concept, they still had questions about the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine relative to other vaccines. At the same time, they commented that the ad effectively invited them to learn more by going to the website.
Some participants among the group of Vancouver Island seniors, who were only shown the Banner ad version of this concept, found it was not particularly visually compelling. They would have preferred to see a more diverse group of people shown in the first panel. Unlike other participants in other groups, seniors were also more likely to question the target for this ad. They did not see it as being directed at them, most of whom were generally enthusiastically awaiting the vaccine, and felt that it may not go far enough to convince anyone who was somewhat reluctant to get vaccinated. In this respect, they felt the ad could be more direct and remind the public that widespread vaccination uptake is required in order to significantly reduce transmission of the virus.

On balance, version A was preferred over version B. The content or information provided in version B was viewed as less compelling. Specifically, some participants took exception to the framing of the message in version B which they felt was asking Canadians to take safety claims at face value. By contrast, version A resonated more strongly as it addressed a specific question or issue that many had regarding vaccines, reflecting an appreciation for Canadians’ concerns about vaccine safety. The gentler and more empathetic tone of version A was also preferred over version B which was seen as more directive.

Indigenous participants were more mixed in their assessments of versions B and C. Some felt neither of the versions were particularly effective, while others found both to be so. The conversation among Indigenous raised general concerns about the treatment of Indigenous peoples within the health care system in Canada. A number of participants raised concerns about a lack of trust based on longstanding issues, specifically health inequities between Indigenous communities and other Canadians, which plays into a certain degree of skepticism about health-related information from the Government of Canada. Some participants felt a more Indigenous-specific approach was called for to ensure that Indigenous issues were more directly addressed and to reflect Indigenous approaches to medicine.

Ask an Expert

The response to the third concept, ‘Ask an expert,’ was similar to the first in that many reacted negatively to the tone. Like the first, ‘A dose of facts,’ they felt this concept was somewhat generic and didn’t really add much to their existing understanding of how vaccines work.

Ask an Expert A (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Ask a COVID-19 vaccine expert’ with the words ‘vaccine expert’ in yellow font. The second frame depicts a young, smiling man against a light background, with the words ‘How do the COVID-19 vaccines work?’ to the right in dark green font. The third frame depicts Dr. Howard Njoo, Deputy Chief Public Health Officer (with his name and title overlaid in text on the bottom right of the frame) sitting at his desk. Below, the text reads ‘Dr. Howard Njoo (to camera) They word with your immune system so your body will be ready to fight the virus if you are exposed.’ The fourth frame depicts the same young man previously shown, although he is against a darker grey background now, and the text to the right reads ‘Make an informed decision about vaccination’ in white font. Below this text, smaller yellow test reads ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Canada Workmark in the middle.

Ask an Expert B (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Ask a COVID-19 vaccine expert’ with the words ‘vaccine expert’ in yellow font. The second frame depicts a young, smiling woman against a light background, with the words ‘How were the COVID-19 vaccines developed so quickly?’ to the right in dark green font. The third frame depicts Dr. Caroline Quach, Medical Lead, Infection Prevention and Control, CHU Ste-Justine (with her name and title overlaid in text on the bottom right of the frame) smiling towards the camera. Below, the text reads ‘Dr. Caroline Quach (to camera) The COVID-19 vaccines were developed quickly thanks to advances in science, international collaboration and increased funding.’ The fourth frame depicts the same young woman previously shown, although she is closer up and is against a darker grey background now, and the text to the right reads ‘Make an informed decision about vaccination’ in white font. Below this text, smaller yellow test reads ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Canada Workmark in the middle.

Ask an Expert C (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Ask a COVID-19 vaccine expert’ with the words ‘vaccine expert’ in yellow font. The second frame depicts an older woman against a light background, with the words ‘Why should I get vaccinated against COVID-19?’ to the right in dark green font. The third frame depicts Dr. Evan Adams, Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Indigenous Services Canada (with his name and title overlaid in text on the bottom right of the frame). Below, the text reads ‘Dr. Evan Adams (to camera) The COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you and your community against serious illness, long-term health effects and even death.’ The fourth frame depicts the same older woman previously shown, although she is against a darker grey background now, and the text to the right reads ‘Make an informed decision about vaccination’ in white font. Below this text, smaller yellow test reads ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Canada Workmark in the middle.

Ask an Expert D (Vancouver Island Seniors)

The above figure consists of three frames. The first frame has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Ask a COVID-19 vaccine expert’ with the words ‘vaccine expert’ in yellow font. Directly below the text, there is an image of Dr. Caroline Quach, Medical Lead, Infection Prevention and Control, CHU Ste-Justine (with his name and title overlaid in text on the bottom right of the frame). The second frame had a white background with green text reading ‘How were the COVID-19 vaccines developed so quickly?’ The third frame had a dark grey background with yellow text reading ‘The COVID-19 vaccines were developed quickly thanks to advances in science, international collaboration and increased funding.’ Below, there is a white callout box with green text reading ‘learn more’ and an arrow. Below this box, there is the same image of Dr. Caroline Quach and her title of Medical Lead, Infection Prevention and Control, CHU Ste-Justine in white text. At the bottom of the frame, there is a white bar across the bottom that features the Government of Canada wordmark on the right.

While some felt that this concept implied taking the vaccine was a personal choice, most found it vague and somewhat confusing. A few participants commented that they would have expected more substantive information from the ‘expert’ being profiled, specifically something they didn’t already know. By contrast, they found the statements were generic in nature and not particularly reassuring. Moreover, a number of participants had not previously heard of or seen the experts and, as such, they were more inclined to focus on who the expert was, and their credentials, rather than on the information being provided.

Several participants expressed disappointment as they had expectations based on the title frame that were subsequently not met by the information shown in subsequent frames. In this respect, they found the ad to be incomplete, having anticipated that it would provide more data or statistics of interest.

They also found the tone of this concept somewhat lecturing and condescending in its style. Few participants felt this concept would encourage higher vaccine uptake. Overall, this concept did not resonate at either an emotional or rational level for most participants.

At the same time, many participants did say that this concept would entice them to go to the website primarily because they were intrigued by any additional advice the experts may have to offer. Some had the impression that a range of experts or specialists may be available to answer their questions.

When asked which of the versions they preferred, results were mixed. Many simply didn’t like the format of the concept, regardless of the version, feeling that it was not as substantive as they would have expected. Some participants preferred version B over version A – they were more drawn to the question about how vaccines were developed, as opposed to how they work. This was especially true among vaccine hesitant participants who found the question about vaccine development of much higher interest, although they nevertheless expressed some disappointment in the answer provided in this ad. The answer did not make them feel any more secure.

Indigenous participants also had mixed responses when asked which version of the concept they preferred. Several stated a preference for version C which included an Indigenous expert. At the same time, they found both versions (B and C) very similar and reiterated earlier comments that neither version was viewed as offering substantive responses to key questions. Some participants emphasized that they remained skeptical about the facts provided, regardless of whether the expert was Indigenous or not although several did indicate that they had a higher comfort level, overall, having the information provided by an Indigenous expert.

Participants were asked what questions they had about COVID-19 vaccines which they would ask of an expert if they had the opportunity. Several were raised, including:

What are the negative side effects? Are there long-term implications?
Would the experts themselves take the vaccination?
Are the vaccines safe for children?
Should you get the vaccine if you are pregnant?
What is the relative risk of contracting COVID-19 as opposed to possible effects from the vaccine?
Within what general timeframe will we know how safe the vaccines are (i.e., will issues appear in the first 3, 6 or 12 months following mass vaccine distribution)?
Why are mRNA vaccines being developed in response to COVID-19 rather than the traditional vaccines (i.e., those which put a weakened or inactivated germ into the human body)?
Will booster shots need to be administered? And, if so, how often?
What is the efficacy of the vaccine? And will the vaccine be effective against the new variants?
How is the dosage determined?
Will vaccines be mandatory?

Preferred Concept

After reviewing the three concepts, participants were asked which one they most preferred. With few exceptions, most favoured ‘Vaccine and you.’ This concept was deemed to be more authentic, reassuring and personal, and spoke to participants about their specific concerns about vaccines. In particular, the version which directly responded to the question about side effects was seen as addressing a major concern for those who expressed some reluctance about vaccinations in general. This version of the concept was strongly preferred by the group of racialized Canadians who found that it resonated directly with them and appreciated the active tone incorporated in this concept – they heard themselves asking the same question.

The other two concepts were generally of less interest and the tone of ‘A dose of facts’ was viewed as condescending. Those few who did prefer ‘Ask an expert’ favoured it because it offered advice from credible public health professionals.

Indigenous participants were split in terms of their preferred concept, with a slight lean towards ‘Ask an expert.’ They favoured hearing from a credible Indigenous expert and found that this approach helped to boost their sense of safety with respect to vaccinations. A few others were more drawn to ‘Vaccine and you’ because it addressed a key concern about potential side effects.

Seniors (Vancouver Island) were the only group which favoured ‘A dose of facts.’ They liked the reminder contained in the initial phrase which emphasized that vaccines provide protection and felt that this concept offered specific, immediate information which tended to raise their comfort level. On balance, they felt it was important to reiterate to Canadians the importance of being vaccinated, in terms of allowing Canadians to resume visits with family or travel, rather than to focus on how the vaccine works, how it was developed or potential side effects.

COVID-19 Vaccines (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

In various groups held during January, participants were asked about their views related to the COVID-19 vaccine, including what they had heard, impressions regarding the Government of Canada’s performance in procuring and distributing a vaccine, expectations with respect to the timing of the vaccine roll-out, and their personal stance on getting vaccinated.

Two groups were recruited on the basis of their views regarding vaccination, specifically expressing some degree of hesitation. The views of participants within these groups, as well as participants in other groups who indicated some reticence to be vaccinated, are described in detail in the last section (below).

Awareness of COVID-19 Vaccine (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick)

Participants in the above-noted groups had heard about varying announcements and reports regarding a COVID-19 vaccine, pertaining to the following aspects:

Pacing of the Vaccine Distribution – While a few participants felt the distribution was occurring fairly quickly, particularly to front-line health care workers, those in long-term care facilities and/or retirement homes, others mentioned that the vaccine roll-out was taking place slower than had been originally anticipated. Specifically, some participants commented on delays in expected shipments from vaccine manufacturers, as well as in administering the second dose to those who had already received their initial vaccination. Several participants attributed delays to a lack of domestic capability to produce the vaccine, while others simply suggested that this would hold up mass vaccinations until sometime in the late spring or late summer. Some disappointment was expressed and this discussion prompted a few questions about a more concrete timeline for vaccine distribution, including a call for greater transparency from the Government of Canada on this issue. Others had heard about announcements by the federal government that vaccinations for all those who wished to be vaccinated would be completed by the end of September.
Side Effects, Effectiveness and Safety – Several participants mentioned having heard about various reactions to the vaccine (e.g., allergic reactions) and that anyone with a food allergy should check with their physician prior to getting vaccinated. Others were aware of information circulating in various media which questioned the overall reliability, effectiveness and general safety of the vaccines, although no further specifics on these issues were forthcoming. Those who had raised concerns about delays in the distribution of the second dose also questioned whether this might impact the overall efficacy and/or safety of the vaccine. While a few participants commented that much of this information could be classified as ‘conspiracy theories,’ it was nevertheless top-of-mind for several participants in each of the groups.

Assessment of the Government of Canada’s Performance (GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-Size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

Procuring and Distributing the Vaccine

For the most part, participants believed the Government of Canada was doing reasonably well or, at a minimum, the best they could under the circumstances, at procuring and distributing the vaccine to the provinces. Very few participants were outright negative in their evaluation of the federal government’s response, although there was mention of a higher rate of vaccinations in other countries (e.g., India) which left some questioning why an advanced country like Canada could not move faster. Several others felt they were not sufficiently informed or that it was too early in the process of distribution to come to any conclusive judgement regarding how well the Government of Canada is performing on this issue.

Most credited the Government of Canada with procuring vaccines from multiple manufacturers and for efforts to ensure that health care workers were among the earliest groups to be fully vaccinated. A few participants commented positively on their sense that the federal government was communicating openly with the public about its plans, including what vaccines have been purchased, expected arrival dates and how doses are to be distributed across the country.

Some participants also acknowledged the challenges in working with the provinces and territories to coordinate a nationwide undertaking of this scope and scale, remarking positively on the substantial investment made by the federal government to purchase the vaccine. They noted that many facets related to procurement and distribution were not entirely within the control of the Government of Canada (e.g., production and logistics). For example, some felt that the major challenge lay not with the federal government but rather with the provinces and territories to both oversee the health care response and ensure rapid distribution of the vaccine to their respective populations. Additionally, participants mentioned that the decision by Pfizer to retool its plant in Belgium, which temporarily resulted in reduced shipments, was a corporate business decision and not something about which Canada could do much.

At the same time, a number of questions or comments focused on what participants described as an inadequate domestic production capability. Several participants remarked on Canada’s inability to produce the vaccine domestically resulting in a heavy reliance on offshore manufacturers. The point was made that this situation left Canada and Canadians vulnerable to supply issues and to decisions about production levels and available doses that were being made overseas.

Compared to Other Countries

When explicitly asked about how Canada was doing, as a whole, compared to other countries in getting Canadians vaccinated, most felt the roll-out was occurring at a slower pace and that Canada compared poorly in this regard. Participants pointed to other countries and regions, including the United States, Israel, and several countries within the European Union, which they felt were outperforming Canada in terms of the percentage of the population already vaccinated. Several participants commented on delays in receipt of vaccine doses which Canada had ordered and perceived that those countries with domestic manufacturing capability were experiencing a quicker roll-out. Some expressed disappointment given the level of investment in procurement of the vaccine by the Government of Canada. Others were specifically monitoring the daily vaccination rate in various countries, along with the overall percentage of the population vaccinated, Canada’s ranking on this basis against other countries, and the number of mass vaccination sites which had been set-up. Based on these metrics, many felt that Canada was well behind other countries and a few questioned the Government of Canada’s preparation and planning in advance of receiving the vaccine. In particular, some wondered why more wasn’t being done to organize schools, arenas and other venues which could accommodate large numbers of people as sites for mass vaccinations. As a result, they anticipated a slow roll-out.

A small number of participants did feel that Canada was doing about the same as or better relative to other countries and attributed this primarily to successful initiatives to vaccinate essential workers.

Government of Canada’s Vaccine Plan (Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

Participants were shown the following three statements about the Government of Canada’s vaccine plan and asked how they felt about each.

Canada is on track to have everyone who wants a vaccine vaccinated by the end of September
Canada is vaccinating its citizens at over double the global rate
Canada has vaccinated its citizens at around the same rate as the European Union so far

While the statements were generally reassuring, underscoring that vaccinations were occurring, and participants responded to them positively, some questioned their credibility or felt the Government of Canada was perhaps being overly-optimistic about the timing and its progress in vaccinating Canadians. A few participants asked whether the statements were indeed true and about the relevant timeframe for which these claims were being made. Others felt the statements contradicted information they had heard from other sources and a few felt it was too early to be making bold claims – they preferred to withhold judgement at this time.

When asked which, if any, of the statements made them feel better about Canada’s vaccine plan, participants’ views varied. A few participants preferred the first statement. It was deemed more relevant and useful because it included reference to a precise timeline and a September end date. Others felt this was the least reassuring of the three statements as they were not optimistic this timeline could be met, with some believing the roll-out would carry over into 2022.

Some felt more reassured by the second statement which noted vaccinations were taking place in Canada at double the global rate. This claim aligned with their own understanding of the situation based on what they had heard, read or seen in the news, and several participants found that situating Canada’s progress within a global context was helpful. By contrast, others felt this statement was somewhat vague, specifically remarking that as a world leader and a member of the G7, measuring Canada’s progress against the global rate of vaccinations was meaningless.

Relatively few commented on the third statement, although a few participants found the comparison to the EU relevant.

Participants were asked to review the statements again and specifically consider which one of the three was the worst or least helpful. Most focused on the second statement which tended to prompt some skepticism for a number of reasons:

It simply didn’t ‘feel’ true;
It was described as an unfair comparison; and
In general, the global rate of vaccinations was not viewed as a useful metric, given it would include the rate of vaccinations in both developed and less developed countries.

Timing of Vaccinations (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick)

Completing the Vaccination Roll-out Across Canada (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick)

A number of participants were aware of announcements by the Government of Canada targeting September 2021 as the date by which all those who were eligible to be vaccinated would be and felt this proposed timeline was reasonable. Otherwise, when asked what they felt was a reasonable target date to complete vaccinations across Canada, the timing varied: some were firm that there should be no delays and anticipated a timeline of early to mid-spring, while others anticipated completing vaccinations by the end of the summer. A few participants were of the view that vaccinations would not likely be completed until sometime toward the end of 2021 or into the early part of 2022, and accepted that distributing the vaccine across a vast geography to over 35 million people was both a sensitive operation and a logistical challenge, requiring time and considerable effort to execute properly.

Personal Expectations on the Timing of Receiving a Vaccine (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

Participants were subsequently asked when they thought they would be in a position to receive a vaccine. There was no strong consensus and participants’ expectations mostly aligned with earlier projections they had offered regarding the anticipated date at which all eligible Canadians would be vaccinated – ranging from spring through summer, to sometime in September as per the information from the Government of Canada, during the fall or winter months, by the end of 2021 or into the following year.

While participants’ were hopeful that they would receive the vaccine as quickly as possible, their comments suggested they were not overly-anxious about the timelines. A few participants described themselves as ‘low risk’ given their situation at work and in terms of their health status. As such, they preferred that higher risk individuals, including the elderly, frontline workers, and health care professionals, be the priority for early vaccination. Some also noted that they were checking a COVID-19 calculator, an online tool that provides information as to approximately when an individual may be in the queue to receive a vaccine, based on the national guidelines (note that while the calculator is based on the federal government’s guidelines, it was developed by a private individual who is not associated with the Government of Canada).

Vaccine Intentions and Hesitancy

Plans to be Vaccinated (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick; GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-Size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C., )

In several of the groups participants were asked outright if they planned to be vaccinated. Most responded affirmatively, while a few were unsure or indicated they would not.

Those who stated their intention to be vaccinated spoke about their motivations, emphasizing the following:

Confidence in the safety of the vaccine and the science behind it, particularly given the level of global cooperation in vaccine development;
General level of comfort with vaccines and history of yearly vaccinations for the flu;
Preventing further spread of the virus and a desire to protect other people;
Interest in being more protected given personal circumstances (e.g., children in school);
Their age or circumstance – a few participants commented on their age being a risk factor and wanting to ensure they were vaccinated in order to feel safer. Others who worked with the public spoke about getting vaccinated as a precaution given the challenges they faced in maintaining 2 metres or 6 feet of physical distance;
Wanting to be able to visit with friends and relatives; and
Getting back to some kind of normalcy.

Within this group, several declared that a member of their immediate or extended household worked in a frontline capacity, including in the health care sector, and that they had either been vaccinated or were scheduled for a vaccination. Others worked as volunteers in a health care setting and indicated that vaccination was mandatory to continue doing so. Participants in this situation expressed a high degree of comfort in vaccinations based on the information being shared by their colleagues and family members. Effectively, they felt it was the right thing to do.

Those few who expressed some reluctance or indicated they did not intend to be vaccinated raised the following issues:

Possible side effects;
Implications for those with specific medical conditions (e.g., Type 2 Diabetes) and the absence of test data among people with these conditions;
Questions about the reliability of the vaccine, particularly when compared to flu vaccines;
A sense that the vaccines were still ‘experimental’ in nature;
A preference to address the virus through natural remedies and/or holistic practices, and a desire to build a ‘natural’ immunity to the virus; and
A general predisposition to be cautious – Some commented that the vaccine had been developed in less than a year and that they had not undergone the standard, rigorous process of human or clinical trials. Their understanding of the shortened process for development gave rise to a sense of anxiety and nervousness about the vaccine.

When asked what factors would influence their decision on whether to get vaccinated, the group who were opposed to or unsure about being vaccinated pointed to the following: success rates, waiting times to get the vaccine, increasing numbers being vaccinated and hearing more positive stories from those who have been vaccinated. Some also noted that their desire to see family members and to travel may ultimately push them in the direction of being vaccinated.

Exploring Vaccine Hesitancy (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

In a select number of groups, the issue of vaccine hesitancy was explored in more depth. Many of these participants were undecided or unsure and simply preferred to wait and observe as the vaccine rolled out prior to making a decision. Some felt they were not at a particularly high risk and, as a result, felt comfortable holding off and/or being part of the last group to be vaccinated. They did not feel a particular sense of urgency at this time.

Many expressed similar concerns as were noted above which tended to reinforce their position on the vaccine (e.g., questions about the safety of the vaccine given the rapid development) and a general tendency to seek alternative solutions outside of traditional medicine. Additionally, some expressed a lack of confidence and trust in how decisions regarding vaccine development had been made. They did not want to take the risk of being among the first cohort to receive a vaccination. A few others questioned the efficacy of the vaccine, specifically whether it would actually protect the recipient from becoming ill or prevent further spread. These participants were less concerned about their own health and more concerned about the impact on the broader community and society. A number of participants also wondered how effective the vaccine was with respect to protection from new variants of COVID-19. Among racialized Canadians, the point was made that information from their home country was factoring into their views. In particular, those of South Asian origin were monitoring the roll-out in India and expressed concerns that the results had not been overly-positive. There were also questions from this group about the effects of the vaccine on fertility, with some indicating that information they had seen had suggested there could be adverse effects.

When asked whether the ad concepts they had just seen (see Section Vaccine Ads for detailed findings on this topic) would cause them to re-consider and/or make them feel more inclined to get vaccinated, most said they would not. Many indicated they needed more information before making a decision and that they were comfortable taking a ‘wait and see’ approach to ascertain vaccine effectiveness, side effects and longer-term repercussions. Additional information and hard data would help to increase levels of trust and ultimately sway them towards being vaccinated. A few did comment that other factors, including their ability to earn a living, would also impact their decision.

Vaccine Messages (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

Those identifying as Indigenous people residing in Manitoba and Saskatchewan were shown multiple statements related to COVID-19 vaccines:

COVID-19 can be devastating to those with underlying medical conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes. The new vaccines will protect them.

The COVID-19 vaccine is now available for Indigenous seniors over the age of 70. It will protect them and is safe even for those with underlying medical conditions.

Both the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines are effective. Remote communities will receive Moderna as this is the one they are best equipped to store. Learn more.

Remote communities will receive Moderna as this is the one they are best equipped to store. Indigenous leaders made this decision with health officials for the safety of their community.

COVID-19 vaccine trials included Indigenous Peoples and have proven to be safe and effective for them. Other groups, such as children and expecting moms were not tested which is why they are not recommended for the initial roll out of the vaccination.

Indigenous leaders helped determine who will be vaccinated first. COVID-19 vaccines are now available for First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities.

First Nations and Inuit communities successfully stopped the spread of the H1N1 virus by getting vaccinated. The COVID-19 vaccines will help you do the same.

Participants were subsequently asked to identify which two or three messages they deemed to be most important.

The most important message for many focused on the availability of the COVID-19 vaccine for Indigenous seniors over the age of 70. Participants noted this was a reassuring message given their worries about those over the age of 70 and their vulnerability to adverse reactions from the virus. Several shared personal stories about their concerns for the health of older family members to further emphasize their concerns in this regard. Additionally, they indicated they found this statement reassuring and appreciated the focus on the important role of the COVID-19 vaccine in keeping their loved ones safe.

Another popular message was COVID-19 can be devastating to those with underlying medical conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes. The new vaccines will protect them. The death rate from the virus was top-of-mind for many participants, and it was understood how underlying medical conditions posed significant risks should the person contract COVID-19. Given this reality, it was appreciated that this message addressed those most at risk.

The following statements were also well-received: COVID-19 vaccine trials included Indigenous Peoples and have proven to be safe and effective for them. Other groups, such as children and expecting moms were not tested which is why they are not recommended for the initial roll out of the vaccination. Many found that these statements were honest and genuine, in particular highlighting those groups who had not been included in the testing and for which claims about the safety of the vaccine could not be made with any degree of confidence.

The statements which were identified as the least important were the following:

Remote communities will receive Moderna as this is the one they are best equipped to store. Indigenous leaders made this decision with health officials for the safety of their community, and

First Nations and Inuit communities successfully stopped the spread of the H1N1 virus by getting vaccinated. The COVID-19 vaccines will help you do the same.

COVID Alert App (Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan)

A discussion was held among a group comprising participants residing in mid-size and major centres in Saskatchewan on the topic of the COVID Alert app and its ongoing development. The conversation centered on participants’ awareness of and reactions to the app as well as to recent updates to it.

Participants were first asked whether they were aware of the Government of Canada’s COVID Alert app. All participants commented that they had heard of the app, however, only a few participants stated they had downloaded it. When asked to explain briefly how the app functions, participants were fairly well informed, noting the app’s use of Bluetooth, the anonymity of data, and its purpose in terms of alerting a user when they have been in close contact with an individual who has tested positive for COVID-19.

Before continuing, and to ensure that all participants had some basic information about the app, participants were provided with a brief overview which included, but was not limited to, the following:

Smartphone app that notifies users if they have been physically close to someone who has been diagnosed with COVID-19;
Runs in the background using Bluetooth, and whenever a user is closer than 2 metres from someone who also has the COVID Alert app, the phones will exchange random codes;
Random codes cannot be used to identify users;
If someone with the app is diagnosed with COVID-19, they can choose to report their diagnosis on the app;
Users who have been in close contact with a self-reported diagnosed individual will be notified of their exposure and given guidance.

Prior to updating the COVID Alert app, the Government of Canada created messages to be shared with the public via social media, which detailed the various modifications to the app. To gauge participants’ thoughts and concerns related to the ongoing development and the pending update, the following messages were shared with participants:

As of Feb XX, new performance data will be collected from #COVIDAlert app to better measure the app’s effectiveness on reducing the spread of #COVID19. Learn more: canada.ca/COVIDAlert

To support the ongoing development and assessment of the #COVIDAlert app, the Government of Canada will start collecting limited in-app data while preserving the app’s privacy-protecting approach. The following data will be included on a go-forward basis:

The number of users per province or territory

The number of exposure notifications sent

The number of app users who enter a one-time key after receiving a notification

Technical performance data

This data will help to better assess the effectiveness of the app, and catch and fix any issues faster to provide a better service to Canadians. Learn more by visiting: canada.ca/COVIDAlert

To support the ongoing development of #COVIDAlert, the #GoC will start collecting limited in-app performance data related to the use and functioning of the app. Learn more: canada.ca/COVIDAlert

Overwhelmingly, participants were supportive of the proposed changes and felt that more awareness is needed about the app with a particular focus on how a users’ privacy is protected. Some skepticism was expressed and a few participants were fearful that the collection of additional personal data was only a first step towards further and more invasive infringement upon personal freedoms and sharing of personal data to third parties.

Some participants commented that the messages provided greater clarity and a deeper understanding of how the app collects data, whereas prior to this discussion they felt they did not know enough about it. They also thought the messaging offered a sense of reassurance with respect to privacy. Others noted that as long as the app was not collecting personal data, improving the app and its general effectiveness was viewed positively.

Among those who had already downloaded the COVID Alert app, all stated that the messaging did not make them any more or less likely to keep the app on their phone. Some felt that the app and the gathering of more information would help limit the spread of COVID-19 and hasten the end of the pandemic. Others commented that the improvements were generally beneficial and would serve to enhance the value and functionality of the app, given its intended purpose.

Participants who had not downloaded the COVID Alert app were asked if they were any more or less likely to do so given the messaging and changes. Overall, they were generally indifferent, indicating no change in their plans one way or another.

When participants were asked whether they had any concerns about privacy issues, a few comments in response focused on the potential loss of personal freedom when downloading and registering for any app and were not specific to the COVID Alert app. Overall, most participants were not overly-concerned about any incursion on their privacy.

CERB Repayment (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians)

Government of Canada’s Performance in Providing COVID-19 Financial Support

Overall, participants thought that the Government of Canada had done an adequate to good job in providing financial support during the pandemic to people affected by COVID-19.

On the more positive side, the CERB and its rapid roll-out were seen as being a vital support for many people that would otherwise have faced challenging personal circumstances, especially those working in hard hit industries. Given the background of some of the participants being former CERB recipients, there were some strong positive personal feelings expressed. It was stated several times both that the intentions behind the CERB were good and that Canada had done a better job of providing financial assistance compared to other countries (especially the U.S.). It was felt that some Canadians had taken advantage of the CERB payments, as the financial support program might have been opened up to too many, too fast. At the same time, it was felt that much of this will be able to be taken back and that the best part of the program was its rapid roll-out. The CERB was also strongly supported by some participants who were already advocates for the introduction of a universal basic income.

The most significant area of concern was the issue of financing the CERB and other financial supports. One worry was that other social services may be cut to help pay for this expenditure, while another view expressed was that the debt incurred will be a major burden for the next generation of taxpayers. Some additional nuanced critiques of the CERB were also shared. It was thought that both the benefit could have been better targeted and that the supports provided to private sector companies could have been reduced, thereby possibly allowing the original CERB program to have been extended. There were also comments about challenges in implementation. Dealing with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), and other relevant departments/agencies, was seen as being unnecessarily difficult and some strong criticisms were made in this regard.

The question was then posed as to whether the Government of Canada’s performance in the area of financial supports had gotten better or worse. On balance, most participants thought that the federal government’s response was about the same. It was felt that those who needed help as a result of COVID-19 were able to get this support, that the Government of Canada still had good intentions with the current supports offered but some implementation questions remained (again, issues with interaction with the CRA were specifically referred to). However, some of those who felt that the federal government’s performance was about the same also stated that they were not necessarily up-to-speed with current developments.

Some participants did say that they thought that the Government of Canada’s performance had improved. The reasons discussed were that they felt that the federal government had access to more information and as a result were tailoring the programs more accurately, because they had become more effective at screening applicants and because there was much more explanation available to potential recipients. Another subset of participants said they thought that performance had become worse. This was because of a perception that the criteria had become too strict and because although individual financial support was helpful, the real issues that need to be addressed regarding the pandemic were elsewhere (such as better targeting of lockdowns, better plans for schools, etc.).

CERB Repayment

Most of the participants had heard, through conventional media sources and word-of-mouth, that those who had received CERB payments for which they were not eligible would have to repay them. They had heard that not only was there an obligation to repay, but that in many cases formal letters requesting repayment had already been sent. A range of examples were shared as to why participants thought that some individuals would have to make repayments. It was said that some recipients may have been unsure about the parameters and that others had initially been confused about terminology, but also cases of fraud (e.g., deliberate double applying through both the CRA and through EI) were discussed. There were also several areas of confusion including whether or not all of these issues would be sorted out through the annual taxation process or if individuals should make proactive repayments, whether or not CERB payments were taxable income and as to what repayment plans would look like.

The following clarification was then provided:

The Government of Canada recently announced that payments made to anyone who is later found to be ineligible will need to be returned. Any individuals who mistakenly received multiple payments or payments they did not qualify for should begin the repayment process, if they have not already done so.

Asked for their reaction, there was a consensus view that this was a reasonable position for the federal government to take and that if it was clear that someone had received CERB payments to for which they were not entitled to that these should be repaid. However, the above statement did also engender a significant amount of discussion. It was felt that there were realistic circumstances that could make repayment very difficult. These circumstances, outlined below, were referred to in all the groups but with different details:

It is often difficult to get repayments from some people under any circumstances;
The money has likely already been spent on necessities (such as food and rent); and
Lower income Canadians may not be in a position to make any sort of repayment. Some people are probably still in a financially constrained position (from loss of job or other circumstances) that led them to apply for the CERB in the first place.

There were also comments about whether or not the Government of Canada would actually profit from the repayments or not, and it was felt that they should not. This was driven by a perception that interest would be charged on overpayments and that the CERB payments would be classified as taxable income. There were also questions that the costs incurred in a collections process could outweigh the amount of money recovered from CERB overpayments, and if so, some questioned why the Government of Canada should proceed with such an initiative.

Participants were then asked for those Canadians who received the CERB by mistake, which of the following three options makes the most sense:

They should all have to pay it back

Determining whether individuals should have to pay it back should be done on a case-by-case basis

There should be exceptions for people who are living in poverty

On balance, participants were slightly in favour of the second statement, determining whether individuals should have to pay it back should be done on a case-by-case basis, but there was also support for the other two statements as well.

It was recognized that people in poverty would have trouble repaying any overpayments, but that this issue was captured in the second statement as well as other concerns. Others were still facing difficult circumstances as a result of the pandemic and also may have specific issues at the current time which could be determined on a case-by-case basis. An interesting point was made that some of the challenges with the CERB were as a result of its blanket application, and that a blanket application of a repayment program may exacerbate some of the issues for specific individuals and families. One caveat about the second statement was that any policy based on a case-by-case basis would likely be more expensive to implement and that a cost-benefit analysis of some sort would be required when it came to deciding how to pursue repayments of the CERB.

Although there was not consensus support of the first statement - they should all have to pay it back - all participants supported repayment and elements of flexibility as well.

Focused Discussion (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients)

Further discussion with participants from these two groups, consisting of former CERB recipients, drilled down on several detailed issues surrounding CERB repayments. The first was whether or not they thought that Canadians should have to pay what they owe by the end of the tax filing deadline (at the end of April) or be allowed to repay over a number of months or years. Most thought that extra time should be allowed, however probably in terms of months rather than years. It was acknowledged that this would negatively affect people in poverty, and as a result it was important that some kind of payment arrangement be worked out. There was also a point made that if someone was found to have deliberately defrauded the system they should have to repay immediately.

Participants were then asked if those who are self-employed and mistakenly received the CERB because of confusion over eligibility should be treated the same as or differently from Canadians who work for an employer. Most participants thought that they should be treated the same way. In essence, it was felt that there was no real difference as both needed the financial support for the same reasons and both were working Canadians. Many participants had been both employees and self-employed at different times and felt that the distinction was driven more by program design. There were also strong statements in support of the self-employed and entrepreneurs, and of their vital importance to building the economy. Participants also felt though that being treated the same way also applied to making any required repayments.

The discussion then moved on to tax issues. Participants both groups were asked if they knew that CERB payments were taxable. Awareness was high, with almost all former CERB recipients stating they were aware the CERB was taxable and they knew that they would have to address this on their upcoming tax returns. However, participants shared a wide range of concerns about this situation. While some had put money aside to cover taxes, others either had not or had been unable to for a range of reasons (such as family responsibilities or job insecurity). Most felt that they should be given an extended period of time in which to pay their taxes. This was either because some were initially misinformed, they felt everyone was facing a more difficult financial situation as a result of the pandemic or because these were simply trying times that required leniency. For many, their only sources of income were the CERB or EI.

Detailed Findings – Part II: Other Issues

Canada Wordmark (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, New Brunswick)

In several groups, participants were asked about Government of Canada information and communications that is distributed to the public across various mediums (e.g., online, print, billboards, TV, radio) and specifically how they identify the source as the federal government, as well as their awareness of and associations with the Canada wordmark.

Participants discussed the basis on which they attribute information that they see, read or hear to the Government of Canada. Comments suggested that participants look for specific icons, symbols or other features depending on the medium by which the information is shared. In visual media, participants indicated they identify Government of Canada information via the logo (Canada flag), and by the application of a standard colour palette, template or style which they typically associate with federal government communications. As a practice, participants noted that they look for references to Government of Canada websites which utilize a recognizable domain name (e.g., xxx.gc.ca). For communications with an audio track, a number of participants mentioned the music or ‘jingle’ that accompanies all Government of Canada advertising or messaging and appears at the end of every ad, whether on TV, radio or online. There was also mention of a standard phrase or voiceover preceding the ‘jingle’ which indicates that the message is from the Government of Canada.

With the above-noted identifiers, participants were generally confident in the reliability and credibility of the information received, knowing that it was coming from the Government of Canada. Several participants noted their increased attention to security provisions, especially when accessing websites or responding to e-mails which appear to be official. They look for the symbol of the lock which indicates the URL or website link is SSL encrypted and, in their view, is a legitimate website. Some participants also said they take additional steps to cross-reference information found online. Doing so provided them with an additional level of assurance as to its authenticity. When receiving what appear to be Government of Canada issued e-mails, some participants commented that they ascertain legitimacy by clicking on ‘reply’ to verify the source and determine whether the e-mail address appears credible. Alternatively, some indicated that by hovering over a link included in an e-mail, one can quickly verify the legitimacy of a URL.

A few participants remarked on phishing scams and, in particular, individuals who are impersonating Canada Revenue Agency officials. They noted a heightened level of activity of this nature at tax time and simply underscored the need for the public to be vigilant.

Several participants commented on third party information and/or individuals interviewed or referenced in reports aired on the radio or in print. While they noted the need to check the authenticity of some sources, the point was made that Canada’s public broadcaster – the CBC – and national newspapers such as the Globe and Mail are generally considered to be trustworthy. As such, comments or information from the Government of Canada which are intermediated by these news outlets are also generally considered to be credible.

The Government of Canada Wordmark

Participants were shown the Canada wordmark, an illustration of which is included below.

In the above image, the word ‘Canada’ is written in black font over a white background. Over the final ‘a’ there is a coloured, red and white, Canadian flag.

Unanimously, all participants indicated being familiar with this symbol, having seen it on Government of Canada websites, letterhead and application forms, as well as in advertising, on signage and an array of physical infrastructure (e.g., bridges and roads).

When asked what the symbol meant to them personally, participants’ comments could be grouped into several categories, as follows:

Source verification – participants noted that the symbol represented a product which had been made, sponsored or funded by the Government of Canada.
National pride – some participants commented that the symbol represented a source of national pride in Canada, as a country. Moreover, as an official representation from the Government of Canada, it conferred a certain degree of authority. In this respect it also reflected the rules and regulations governing Canada.
Legitimacy – related to the above points, many participants mentioned that the wordmark is associated with legitimate, authentic and credible information.

While most associations with the Canada wordmark were positive, as noted above, a few participants indicated they were, at times, apprehensive when receiving correspondence which included this symbol. Participants commented on their feelings of pride when seeing the wordmark on applications for passport renewals, for example, but then also feeling more anxious when receiving letter mail with the symbol affixed to the envelope or on the letterhead. On the one hand, while official letter mail clearly marked as being from the Government of Canada prompts their attention, it also can be anxiety-inducing as participants questioned why they are receiving it. According to participants, an aspect of this somewhat more negative or apprehensive reaction is a factor of differing views related to government policy. On balance, however, most participants saw the wordmark as a symbol which represented Canada and the federal government with associations that ranged from neutral to positive.

When participants were asked why they thought the Government of Canada employed this symbol in its communications and information, most indicated that its use was intended to enhance recognition and reinforce federal government branding efforts. Participants commented that the wordmark, in their view, is highly familiar to the Canadian public and represents the ‘Canadian identity’ and brand in the same way that other corporate logos do. They also felt that using the wordmark automatically conferred a high degree of legitimacy and trust in the information being delivered. They expected the symbol to be shown on all Government of Canada property, advertising, marketing and mail correspondence.

To conclude, most participants trusted information which was accompanied by the Canada wordmark and noted that the wordmark itself inferred that they could have confidence in the legitimacy of this information. At the same time, a few participants underscored their increasing concerns about fraudulent e-mails in particular, pointing out that it would not be difficult to replicate or to produce a digitally altered version of the Canada wordmark. As such, these participants suggested it was a good practice to authenticate any information received from presumably legitimate sources, especially in the online environment. In a related point, participants commented that while the symbol or wordmark itself has credibility, it is important to examine the content accompanying any communications to assess its authenticity.

French Language (Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare)

Francophone Groups (Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres)

The discussions on the subject of the French language in Canada varied regionally. Furthermore, the comments were centred on regional experiences there was not much willingness to discuss the issue from the point of view of another region or nationally. This was primarily because, as expressed by participants in multiple groups, many did not feel they knew enough about the subject or about other regions to do so. A related conclusion was that there were few strong feelings about this as a national issue.

Among groups conducted with Francophones, most were not positive about the state of the French language. It was thought that despite measures that had been put in place to protect it that the French language remained threatened. Perceived examples that were given included:

in major cities and amongst university graduates the use of French was declining;
most media and specifically television content was in English; and
some people who live in Quebec cannot speak any French.

There was an outlying view however that French was in good shape in Ottawa universities and as a help in finding employment.

Many of these same participants also thought that the state of French in the rest of Canada was also threatened due to a lack of resources for, and a low standard of, French immersion schooling. As mentioned above, some also said that they did not know enough about the situation in other regions to comment.

Participants in the Francophone groups were asked if they felt that the Government of Canada was doing enough to protect the French language. Most did not think that they were. They thought that the Government of Canada should be providing more programs across the country to help people learn French, including starting at a young age in the school system, and especially for new Canadians. A feeling was also expressed that it must be possible for more jurisdictions (specifically municipalities) to become officially bilingual.

It was thought that the main reason to take action to protect the French language was that French is one of Canada’s two official languages and that this was a sufficient reason to convince more Canadians to participate in French language education. It was also thought that an argument could be made that French is part of our culture and therefore should be protected and that Francophones should be able to move around the country and still be able to receive services in French. Many participants were of the view that knowing French would help many people professionally given how global many enterprises have become.

Anglophone Groups (Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare)

Participants in the four groups referred to above that were not held among Francophones were also asked for their opinions on the state of the French language in Canada. There was widespread support for use of the French language, for it being part of the Canadian identity, and for French immersion schooling, but there was an acknowledgement that very little was spoken west of Ottawa. Knowing French was seen as a beneficial part of schooling and useful for applications for some specific jobs but, it was not seen as being deeply embedded in the overall national culture. Many said that they did not think that sufficient resources had been put into French immersion education for children, let alone for adult French language education outside of Quebec. A realistic sentiment was expressed though that there were few opportunities to speak French in many provinces, and that even if one graduated from a bilingual or French immersion school, it would be hard to maintain the skill over time. It was felt by many that the lack of French outside of Quebec and New Brunswick was a lost opportunity educationally, culturally and economically.

The French language was seen as being a regional issue, with less importance on the West Coast, for example. This was attributed mostly to the jurisdictional divisions of power between provinces in areas of education and language, rather than a lapse on behalf of the federal government. It was also shared, and not just by those in the New Brunswick group, that New Brunswick was the only bilingual province in the country.

A range of views were expressed as to whether or not the Government of Canada was doing enough to protect the French language. Some, especially on the West Coast, felt that enough was being done especially as there is very little discussion of the issue locally or in Quebec. French immersion programs were available to them, and French schools were thought to be good. Others who thought that the Government of Canada was doing enough thought so for a very different reason. They reiterated the point made above that language and education issues are provincial in nature and should be left to that level of government.

Some participants thought that since there was little opportunity to speak French in their communities, not enough was being done to protect the language. Many participants in these groups did not think that the Government of Canada was doing enough to protect the French language, especially if there was going to be a serious effort to promote bilingualism across the country. Some participants went beyond this and thought that efforts should be made to protect the French culture overall, and not just the language. Others thought that the current situation of regionalism was a more realistic approach. Similar to the groups above, when participants were asked what they thought the Government of Canada could do to protect the French language in Canada, most thought that the answer would be to provide more French language education in schools.

Possible Actions to Protect the French Language

Several specific possible actions were shared with participants. The first was: Ensuring that federally regulated workplaces (e.g., banks, telecoms, airlines) that operate in francophone or bilingual communities must have French as one of the languages of work. This means that employees are able to do their jobs in French and that their employers communicate to them in French.

This idea was uniformly supported in the Francophone groups. One caveat was that perhaps it should be mandatory to provide services in French in Quebec, but optional in other provinces. It was thought that this measure would be central to protecting the French language and would provide opportunities and incentives for people to both learn and practice French.

Opinions differed somewhat in the Anglophone groups. There was no strong opposition to the idea, but there was a consensus behind the fact that any decision on the availability of French should be driven more by demand than by fiat. It was thought that there should not be barriers to learning French – that if a reasonable number of people needed the service in French that they should be able to get it but also that people should not be unnecessarily barred from employment by any such requirement either. It was also felt that this policy was already in effect in Canada, as where a number of people needed services in French (driven by market demand) the service was already being offered.

The next possible action that was presented was: Increasing immigration from francophone countries.

There was strong support for this measure from two of the Francophone groups, but not from participants in the Francophone Major Centres group. Participants in the latter group shared a feeling that there were already numerous Francophone immigrants, and the question should be more about finding sufficient resources to meet the current demand. Participants in all three Francophone groups however reached a strong consensus that such a measure would help protect the French language.

There was little support for this measure amongst the Anglophone groups. It was seen as prioritizing some people over others for a specific cultural reason and this was seen as possibly giving unfair priority over those who had or were currently working through the immigration system. It was also seen as a first step down a path of favouritism for those with various specific religious or cultural roots, as opposed to immigration based on meritocracy and domestic economic requirements which helps build the country.

Although it was seen as an effective way to strictly help protect the French language, it was thought that this would best be achieved by providing French language training for new Canadians.

Prioritizing French teachers in the immigration stream, so that French immersion programs could be expanded outside Quebec.

The response to this proposed action was very similar to the response to the idea above of increasing immigration from Francophone countries, amongst all seven groups. There was support amongst Francophone participants, outside the Major Centres, and a range of misgivings amongst participants in the four Anglophone groups. It was even expressly compared to increasing Francophone immigration. It was even more clearly said that immigration preference should not be given to any one race, religion or language. Instead, a few participants recommended that more Canadians be trained to become French teachers.

The final proposal that was presented for discussion was: Mandating that all Supreme Court justices be bilingual.

This idea was also strongly supported across all three Francophone groups. It was seen as having no downside as laws are written in both official languages, but it was expressed that this requirement should not override other necessary credentials. It was also seen to be an action that would demonstrate national leadership on the subject of bilingualism.

There was much more discussion of this idea in the Anglophone groups. There was a consensus that this was not a good idea, nor a necessary one. There was support for French language capability at the Supreme Court given the size of Canada’s Francophone population and of the fact that Canada has two official languages. It was thought however such a rule would not be necessary given the multilingual nature of the country, the advent of some excellent relevant legal technologies, translating services and the strong staff at the Supreme Court. It was thought that such a mandate could unnecessarily narrow the pool of potential Justices, and a strong priority should be placed instead on their legal skills and judgement.

Local Issues (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan)

Local issues of concern were discussed in four groups to gauge participants’ perspectives on their local economy, key sectors, the issues facing these sectors, as well as awareness of and the need for support from the federal government. Depending on the location, participants were also asked about projects specific to their region and/or federal investments in key sectors.

Newfoundland and Labrador Local Issues (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients)

Participants residing in Newfoundland and Labrador identified oil and gas, fishing, farming, tourism, and mining, more specifically gold mining, as the most important economic sectors in the region. They spoke about the toll the pandemic has taken on the tourism and hospitality sector in particular as well as in creative arts, festivals, and the retail sector, and the need for federal government support to assist businesses and people working in these sectors. Some mentioned the cancellation of events and the lack of tourism-generated dollars and the direct impact on the sustainability of local hotels and restaurants. Others spoke of the impact of lost jobs and income on friends and families who worked in these areas.

The discussion explored participants’ awareness of federal government initiatives to support key economic sectors and projects, including:

Fisheries – Fisheries were identified as a particularly hard-hit sector. Most were unaware of any Government of Canada support for this sector although many participants advocated for a re-evaluation of assigned quotas. Participants pointed to the Government of Canada as being partially responsible for the decline of the cod fisheries and emphasized that policy decisions in this respect should be based on science and data.
Oil and gas – Other than negative interest loans to corporations which a few participants expressed concerns about, most participants were unaware of Government of Canada supports aimed at the oil and gas sector. When asked what else the Government of Canada could do to support this sector, some argued for further safety precautions for those working on oil rigs, particularly in regards to COVID-19. There were concerns expressed about the impact of an outbreak on a rig where workers are housed in such close quarters. Not all participants, however, supported this proposal as some felt that federal government should have less of a hand in supporting private sector industry.
Tourism – Participants acknowledged the significant contribution of tourism to the provincial economy but were not aware of any specific initiatives from the federal government to support the sector other than the promotion of staycations. They felt the staycation campaign was a great idea and complimented the Government of Canada for advertising to showcase Newfoundland and Labrador.

At the conclusion of this discussion, participants were prompted to recall any information they had heard lately on the Muskrat Falls hydroelectric project and relevant Government of Canada supports for the project. While awareness of the project was high, comments on the project itself were mostly negative with some expressing concerns at the mounting debt load taken on by the provincial government. No one was aware of a recent announcement by the federal government to defer millions of dollars in payments from Newfoundland and Labrador as the project fell behind schedule and over-budget. On balance, the project was described as a fiasco by some participants who felt that the federal government had not offered adequate support for the project at the start.

Vancouver Island Local Issues (Vancouver Island Seniors)

Participants were asked to think about the most important sectors on the Island and, specifically to consider whether the Government of Canada paid sufficient attention to these sectors. Tourism was cited as the largest industry along with resource extraction, particularly the logging industry. Several participants also identified green technologies and renewable energy as growth areas, noting that federal government support should not be directed to those areas within the resource sector that are not environmentally conscious or sustainable.

Participants were asked about their awareness of federal government efforts to support two particular sectors:

Fisheries and aquaculture – Few were aware of anything specific the federal government had undertaken to support this sector. At the same time, questions were raised about whether fisheries are under federal or provincial jurisdiction. Others raised issues about diminished salmon streams and the environmental consequences of raising farmed salmon in the oceans. Some felt there was little the federal government could do to support this industry.
Tourism – Participants acknowledged that tourism had been especially hard hit as a result of COVID-19. Although they were not averse to federal government funding, they were generally unaware of any federal government initiatives to support the sector other than support to maintain heritage sites and national parks.

New Brunswick Local Issues (New Brunswick)

When asked whether the Government of Canada pays enough attention to the key sectors which are thought to drive the economy of New Brunswick, participants identified natural resources (e.g., oil, wood, forestry, mining and fishing). Farming was mentioned after some prompting as an important economic sector, while tourism was not viewed as an economic generator. On balance, most felt the federal government could do more to support these sectors, specifically pointing to stronger environmental oversight and environmental policies. In addition to the sectors noted, participants indicated that more attention should also be paid to the influx of call centers into the province. Participants commented that these businesses and the resulting jobs quickly tend to be outsourced to companies based offshore where wages are lower. As such, they felt more efforts should be made to retain these businesses in the province.

As in other groups, participants were asked about federal government support to specific industries:

Tourism – There was little awareness of anything the Government of Canada had done to support this sector, although many agreed that greater protection of the province’s natural resources and environment would help to sustain and boost the industry. Some felt that conflicting priorities and decisions across levels of government were detrimental to the tourism sector, citing the destruction of tourist attractions such as many of New Brunswick’s historic covered bridges.
Farming and agriculture – Again, participants were unaware of any specific initiatives, although they acknowledged that the agricultural sector was generally heavily subsidized by the Government of Canada. Some participants advocated for more support for small scale, sustainable farming operations to address food insecurity issues which they felt had become a priority as a result of the pandemic.
Manufacturing and processing – There was little discussion of this sector although some participants continued to stress the importance of supporting smaller scale businesses over large manufacturers and processors in order to produce higher quality and more environmentally conscious products.

Saskatchewan Local Issues (Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan)

The most important sectors and industries in Saskatchewan included: agriculture, oil and gas, energy, mining, government, healthcare and education. Participants felt that virtually all of these sectors were in need of further support.

Specific sectors were discussed in more detail:

Oil and gas – Participants were aware of the federal government’s purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline. To further support the industry, participants recommended building refineries in Alberta and Saskatchewan, noting that this would generate additional jobs, especially at a time when there had been many layoffs in the oil sector. They also felt that additional refinery capacity in Western Canada would make good economic sense by adding value to the raw resource. Others, however, made the point that federal funding should be used to diversify Saskatchewan’s economic portfolio or support other sectors, including agriculture (wheat in particular).
Agriculture – Participants were aware of Government of Canada subsidies to support the province’s agricultural sector as well as international marketing initiatives to sell canola, lentils and beef, among other agricultural goods, globally. Participants expressed support for further development in this industry and specifically an effort to increase global agricultural sales. In addition, participants felt that it was important to promote Canadian agricultural products to Canadians.
Mining and power generation – Most were not aware of any federal government initiatives in this area or weren’t sure if infrastructure projects of which they were aware had received any federal government funding. Nevertheless, they felt the Government of Canada could do more to encourage the development of wind and solar power.

As a final question, participants in this group were asked what other issues in the province required federal government support, prompting a wide-ranging discussion about more support for steel-mills, potash mines, and for mental health and suicide prevention. Several also mentioned the need to rebalance the existing equalization formula.

Indigenous Issues (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

A range of issues specific to Indigenous Peoples were discussed among a group of Indigenous participants recruited from the provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The discussion encompassed their views on Indigenous priorities, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and drinking water on reserves.

Indigenous Priorities

When asked what important Indigenous issues warranted more federal government attention, participants generated a number of issues, including:

Education – While it was appreciated that the Government of Canada had lifted the 2% cap on education support funding, participants agreed that more could and needed to be done. Given the considerable length of time that the cap had been in place, it was mentioned that more federal government funding was now needed to repair school buildings and to run schools effectively;
Healthcare and the need for clean drinking water on reserves;
More access to housing – Stories were shared about overcrowding (e.g., dozens of people residing under one roof) due to inadequate housing stock; and
A renewed emphasis on the issue of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.

Participants also identified a number of areas in the purview of the Government of Canada:

Unresolved land issues – Some participants mentioned their understanding that crown land had been sold during the pandemic. They felt that the Government of Canada needed to take more responsibility in addressing Indigenous land disputes especially given that Indigenous Peoples do not have the same standing as provincial or territorial governments; and
Canada’s penal system – It was perceived that the penal system was an extension of the residential school system and was perpetuating similar issues and traumas on Indigenous peoples and communities.

When asked if the Government of Canada had made any positive progress on Indigenous issues, some noted that the federal government had been addressing certain treaty issues that had arisen in the far north and providing related financial compensation. This was seen as a benefit for the Indigenous community in terms of creating more economic opportunities. Participants were vague on the details, but did agree that this was a sign of progress.

UNDRIP (The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples)

Unprompted, awareness of the UNDRIP was low. To further the conversation, participants were provided with additional information:

UNDRIP is an international document adopted by the United Nations in 2007 that lays out the basic rights that Indigenous peoples should have around the world. It outlines how governments should respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples.

UNDRIP consists of 46 articles that describe specific rights and actions that governments must take to protect these rights. The main themes in the declaration are:

The right to self-determination

The right to cultural identity

The right to free, prior and informed consent (i.e. the right to be consulted and make decisions on any matter that may affect the rights of Indigenous peoples)

Protection from discrimination

This clarification led some to assume that Canada and the United States were the only remaining parties which were not signatories to the UNDRIP convention. To this point, further clarification was then provided indicating that the Government of Canada had recently introduced legislation to implement UNDRIP. Despite knowing this, many nevertheless felt the Indian Act would impede any significant or meaningful change from happening. Some participants commented on Indigenous Peoples’ status under the Indian Act and felt that the Act needed to be repealed on their terms. Participants went on to say that, until Indigenous people played more of a role in the federal government and the Indian Act was repealed, the UNDRIP would have little meaning and little impact on the issues that continue to adversely impact their communities.

Further, the point was made that without the prospect of self-determination and equitable treatment for Indigenous Peoples the UNDRIP, while helpful in terms of shedding light on these issues, would do little to impact the employment and health concerns of Indigenous communities on a day-to-day basis or longer term economic development for Indigenous Peoples.

Drinking Water Advisories on Reserves

To begin the conversation regarding drinking water on Indigenous reserves, participants were asked if they were aware of or had heard anything about the Government of Canada’s efforts to lift long-term drinking water advisories. Overall, awareness of these efforts was relatively high. Participants were then shown an infographic that provided more information on the latest Government of Canada efforts related to drinking water on reserves.

This infographic features a white background with a graphic of blue waves across the bottom third of the page. On the top left, the version date “Updated December 23, 2020” in written grey font underlined by a dark blue waved line. In the middle of the infographic to the left, text reads, “98 long-term drinking water advisories lifted since November 2015” in grey font, with the number “98” in much larger font than the other font, and the word “lifted’” in blue font. In the middle of the infographic to the right, text reads “58 long-term drinking water advisories in effect in 40 communities” where the numbers are in larger font, and the words “in effect in” is written in blue text. At the bottom of the infographic, there is a large chart, along the vertical axis there is water advisories (ranging from 0 to 110), and the horizontal axis is years (ranging from 2016 to 2021). In the graph, a red line tracks downwards, from left to right. The top left of the graph line is in the number 105 in a circle. The bottom right of the graph had the number 58 in a pinpoint icon. In the bottom left hand side of the graph, a legend depicts that the red pinpoint icon is “current number of long-term drinking water advisories in effect on public systems on reserves. Below, the legend depicts that each point on the graph line is “past long-term drinking water advisories.”

The infographic did little to give participants confidence in the federal government’s efforts. While some participants mentioned there had been a significant change in the number of communities that have boil advisories in effect, they nevertheless underscored that the water in their communities still contained chemicals. Some mentioned that they could smell and taste chlorine in their tap water. Others emphasized that too many communities still remained without access to safe, clean water. Several questioned why this issue had been ongoing over such a long period of time (e.g., decades) and saw viewed it as a broken promise by the federal government.

Despite less than favourable reactions to the infographic as a whole, many participants did say the Government of Canada had made some progress on the issue. Others commented on the situation in nearby reserves where it continued to be unsafe to drink the tap water, noting that they did not see any significant progress while these issues remained unresolved.

When asked whether participants had heard anything about the timeline for lifting long-term drinking water advisories, many assumed this would be done within the four-year term of the current federal government.

To provide more context on the timeline, participants were given the following information:

The Government of Canada recently announced that it would not meet its target of March 2021 as originally planned. in addition to the $2.19 billion already budgeted for ending long-term drinking water advisories, the government announced another $1.5 billion to finish the work. This new money is for ongoing support for daily operations and maintenance of water infrastructure on reserves, continued funding for water and wastewater infrastructure on reserves, and to pay for work halted due to the COVID-19 pandemic and other project delays.

Reactions to this information were, again, generally critical. Many cited other projects, such as pandemic relief funds and infrastructure projects in Regina, which had received urgent funding. This left participants frustrated and of the view that water on Indigenous reserves was not a priority. Many noted that if these issues were occurring in a major Canadian city, they would have been a high priority and resolved within a much shorter timeframe.

Some participants also mentioned that their community aquifers were pristine but expressed concerns about the potential for environmental damage as a result of slant of directional drilling and fracking taking place near Indigenous reserves. They advocated for greater attention to issues relating to water, including protection of the resource and broad education about the importance of the resource for all Canadians.

Small Nuclear Reactors (New Brunswick)

A brief discussion on the topic of nuclear energy was held among a group residing in New Brunswick which delved into their views on nuclear power relative to other energy sources, small nuclear reactors or small modular reactors (SMRs), and the economic and environmental benefits associated with building more SMRs in Canada.

Nuclear Power Compared to Other Energy Sources

A number of participants were proponents of nuclear power as an efficient and clean source of energy relative to most of the current alternatives, with the exception of wind and solar power. At the same time, many participants raised concerns on two related issues: safety and disposal of nuclear waste. While some felt that Canada should be doing more with nuclear power, especially as a means of reducing reliance on oil and gas, there was considerable apprehension expressed about the perceived dangers to human health and the environment associated with both nuclear power accidents and radioactive waste. The latter issue regarding disposal of radioactive waste was raised numerous times by participants. Although it was acknowledged that many other energy sources also have accompanying environmental challenges, participants commented specifically about the potential for radioactive leaks from nuclear waste sites to cause damage to the water supply and the broader environment. They preferred to have these issues addressed before Canada made a stronger commitment to nuclear energy. Questions were raised, in this context, as to why solutions have not yet been developed to address nuclear waste, specifically to neutralize radioactive material.

Several participants agreed that if the choice was between fossil fuels and nuclear power, they would chose the latter. However, they also indicated that if given a choice between pursuing renewable energy options and nuclear power, they would prefer the former.

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

A few participants had heard about SMRs. Before continuing, participants were provided with clarifying information to indicate that SMRs are an emerging area of nuclear energy innovation in Canada and around the world and that they have enhanced safety features, a smaller footprint and produce less waste than traditional nuclear reactors. Knowing this, most participants remained skeptical albeit intrigued by the concept. They reiterated their concerns about dealing with nuclear waste. Others commented that, while they appreciated that smaller nuclear reactors which produced less waste were a positive development, they would still prefer to focus on developing cleaner, sustainable, renewable forms of energy over nuclear power.

A few participants felt they were not sufficiently informed on the topic. Although they were interested in the idea of SMRs and generally favoured a move in this direction, they wanted to know more before firmly committing to the technology. As other participants had suggested, they also felt investing in more renewable sources of energy with a proven track record of being less harmful to the environment was a safer and less costly approach to take at this time.

Several participants were quite knowledgeable about SMRs and the fact that this technology was under consideration for the province of New Brunswick. Of all participants, they were the most vocally supportive of having more SMRs in Canada, citing the following reasons:

The smaller footprint;
The modular nature of the technology, which means the reactors can be quickly and easily moved into location and erected on-site; and
The advantages of SMRs for more remote locations which may not be connected to the grid.

Given that some people say SMRs are a good way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, participants were asked if this was a good reason to build more in Canada or not. Most responded negatively, while a number of participants were uncertain. The issue of waste surfaced again in this context, with some participants expressing concerns about what this would mean for future generations who may be left to deal with what they perceived to be a highly toxic industrial waste. Others commented that they would want to be more certain a shift to SMRs would not lead to more problems in the future.

Finally, participants discussed the economic benefits associated with SMRs, specifically the fact that several Canadian companies are able to make and sell these abroad and would create jobs for Canadians in doing so. Most participants were not convinced that job creation was a good enough reason to move ahead with developing and supporting SMRs. In particular, they felt it should not be the driving force behind building more SMRs in Canada. Some participants emphasized their view that job creation alone is not a sufficient rationale especially for this type of decision in which the potential for environmental risk should be factored into the decision-making process. Others noted that job creation is of secondary importance relative to the environmental benefits and that, if the arguments regarding the latter could be bolstered, this would make for a better rationale in favour of Canadian companies building more SMRs.

Homelessness (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick)

There was a strong consensus across all groups that homelessness is a problem in Canada. Even the few who were not convinced of this did recognise there was an issue but viewed it as more of a symptom of other underlying challenges rather than as a problem in its own right.

One common concern in all groups was the issue of winter weather which prompted comments that Canadians need to exhibit more compassion towards the homeless especially when weather conditions are extreme.

Participants were asked if they thought that the issue of homelessness was getting better or worse. Again, there was a strong consensus that the problem was not only severe but getting worse. There were multiple anecdotes shared of increasing visible homelessness, especially in Ontario and British Columbia. A linkage to the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic was made specifically by several participants; in every group the worsening economic situation for some who had lost their livelihoods was referred to with some expressing more compassion for those who found themselves homeless. The reduction in major centres of affordable housing and their replacement with more expensive condominiums was perceived to have exacerbated the issue of homelessness.

There were however a few dissenting views. It was mentioned that the issue may be one of personal responsibility and accountability. Some felt that existing support programs would be sufficient to assist affected individuals, assuming they were responsible with what they were being given. There was also a mention that the situation in Toronto was seen to be improving.

Role of the Government of Canada

The question was asked as to what the Government of Canada should do about homelessness, although their suggestions reflected a more holistic view of government rather than a specific perspective on the federal level of government per se. These responses could be broken down roughly into three categories: mental health, substance use and economic determinants.

Many participants across the groups called for an increase in the availability of mental health supports, including for prevention and treatment. While this suggestion was put forward in many groups, few participants offered detailed advice other than a call for early access to social workers, in situ support (e.g., in-location assistance as opposed to moving homeless people to areas of low-cost housing where fewer supports may be available, and they may lose existing networks). Education was also flagged as a key determinant to reduce or prevent homelessness. There was strong support for a focus on mental health especially in order to help people who do not currently want to or cannot get off the streets and face the prospect of freezing to death.

Participants agitated for more action on economic issues. Some focussed on addressing individual and/or household income issues. There were calls for the introduction of a universal basic income as well as for an income supplement tied to housing, and for efforts to increase employment to empower people to take care of themselves.

Other ideas focused more specifically on the housing market including a call for more controls on:

Companies like Airbnb (in terms of the impact it has on the market and affordable rentals);
Foreign and speculative real estate investment specifically viewed as distorting property values; and
Landlords.

Discussion then centred on the possibility of the eradication of homelessness in Canada within the next ten years. While many felt this was a laudable goal, few thought it was realistic that it could be achieved within the next decade. Those who said that it would be possible cited the speed of the development of COVID-19 vaccines as an example of an agile response in a crisis situation and felt this practice could be translated to the issue of homelessness. Others stated that if there was a strong enough push and cohesion across society to make this a priority it might be possible. It was understood though that a sea change in attitudes would be required if rapid eradication of homelessness was to happen in ten years’ time.

Most participants were more measured in their comments. Some thought that further experimentation was required to see what measures may help with mental health and addiction issues. These ranged from safe injection sites and legalization to increased access to mental health centres, and it was thought that such experimental programs would require longitudinal study to ascertain how and to what extent they affected the homelessness issue. Another perspective offered by several participants was that Canada would be starting from a weak position, as the country is already in a pandemic-driven recession and needed to recover from this first in order to get the economy back on track. Linked views were expressed that it would hard to dedicate funding to this issue and to rouse significant public interest at this time in order to tackle it in a short period, especially as the issue has been in the public eye for decades.

There was more of a consensus that a target of a 50% elimination of homelessness in ten years was realistic and achievable.

General Messaging by the Government of Canada about Homelessness

Participants were then shown three statements that could be used by the Government of Canada for general messaging on this subject. These were:

Every Canadian deserves a safe and affordable place to call home

One homeless person in Canada is one too many

In a country such as Canada, no one should live on the street

The first phrase – Every Canadian deserves a safe and affordable place to call home – was favoured across all of the groups, well ahead of the other two. This was seen to focus on the basic necessities of life and captured the health, safety and financial aspects of life. Participants commented that this statement as drafted sounded like a good policy goal and the two-pronged nature of the statement resonated more strongly. It was seen as positive, accurate, and applicable to a wide range of circumstances that trigger homelessness. It clearly captured the important issue of a livable wage, and many participants responded favourably to the words ‘safe’ and ‘affordable.’

The phrase – In a country such as Canada, no one should live on the street – had some resonance. It was viewed as having a positive, but also very realistic, emotional appeal, in that it recognized the following:

The strong foundation of Canada;
That Canadians should look after each other; and
The intractable nature of homelessness and that while it should not be accepted, there is likely always going to be somewhat of an issue.

It was also seen as a strong statement that recognized the good position that Canada is in and the fact that the country could be a world leader in solving this issue.

The second statement – One homeless person in Canada is one too many – was seen as short, punchy and to the point but, nevertheless, did not gain much traction from participants. Participants commented that, while it was factual, it was somewhat vague and did not touch on the important context as the first statement had. It was suggested that this statement was probably too aspirational and not really grounded in the current reality.

Online Hate (Major Francophone Centres, Interior B.C.)

An extensive conversation on the topic of online hate was held among two groups in January covering views on the need for limits as to what people can say online, priority areas for action and the role of the federal government versus social media companies.

To open the discussion, participants were asked whether people should be allowed to say whatever they want in online conversations (e.g., social media posts on Facebook or Twitter), or if there should be some limits. Views on this question varied between the two groups. The consensus among those attending the group comprising Francophones residing outside of Quebec was that limits should be put in place, although a few participants in this group did not venture an opinion.

By contrast, varying perspectives were put forward among participants from Interior British Columbia and the discussion was quite nuanced. While many acknowledged the dangers of unrestricted conversations on social media, there was a split between those who were comfortable with a requirement for limits and those who supported freedom of speech. Among those who favoured setting limits, participants commented on the ‘nasty’ and ‘horrible’ nature of some online posts and, in particular, the dangers for young people as well as the challenges for parents in attempting to monitor exposure of their children to online bullying or inappropriate content. Others suggested that, at a minimum, there should be some accountability which could include a requirement that posts are associated with a valid account and cannot be issued anonymously. Several participants expressed more caution in terms of setting any limits which could potentially infringe on freedom of speech. This subset of participants fully admitted the delicate balance between maintaining freedom of speech while also containing misinformation which is easily spread online and, specifically, the potential for incitement to violence. And, many indicated a high level of discomfort with current social media content and what they perceived to be a lack of discretion among those posting on social media. At the same time, they questioned who would ultimately be the arbiter of what is/is not permitted or acceptable online and how restrictions would be implemented. The point was made that there should be freedom to make remarks that may be deemed ignorant or uninformed, but there should be less tolerance for remarks that are clearly wrong and especially those that contribute to racism and/or violence. They also felt that there should be some degree of accountability and clear consequences for those whose online opinions and actions cause harm.

Participants were shown a list of several issues in terms of online activity and asked which, if any, they felt were major problems in Canada. These included: child sexual exploitation, hate speech, incitement to violence, private images being shared without permission, radicalization and terrorist propaganda. Participants tended to focus more on the first four of these and less so on radicalization and terrorist propaganda.

Child exploitation was described as a ‘big problem.’ Participants commented that young girls were particularly vulnerable. Some parents in the groups shared accounts of their pre-pubescent children being approached in online gaming forums as well as games which included ‘secret rooms.’ Many participants agreed that hate speech was a significant issue as well, citing concerns about racist behaviours but also viewing online bullying within this context. Indeed some participants commented that they would have expected to see online bullying flagged as a specific issue on the list that was presented. The point was made that discussions online are no longer on the basis of the merits of issues and ideas, but have degraded to a disrespectful tone employing inappropriate language. A number of participants also indicated that the concept of hate speech is wide-ranging and encompasses a broad range of issues including showing private images without permission, child exploitation, incitement to violence and, as noted earlier, online bullying. Concerns about incitement to violence as an issue centered on the transition of conversations in cyberspace, some of which may seem more theoretical in an online environment, to the perpetration of violent actions in reality. For this reason, this issue was viewed as a major one by a number of participants.

Relatively fewer participants were as concerned about radicalization or terrorist propaganda online, mostly because these issues were not reported on as frequently and, as a result, did not seem as prevalent compared to the other issues discussed. Additionally, some participants felt that issues such as hate speech and incitement to violence were similar and they tended to focus more on those as bigger and more urgent issues. Those who flagged radicalization as a problem did so because they felt that social media companies were contributing to a one-sided understanding of world events and issues, and generally more polarized views. There was also a perception that the algorithms used by companies such as Facebook and Google were self-reinforcing. As some participants noted those who frequently access Facebook or use the Google search engine tend to lose perspective and the ability to see the larger picture as the information and sources pushed to them tend to reinforce a particular point of view and much of this occurs covertly.

When asked if there were any other issues that should be added to this list, some participants mentioned addiction to and dependency on social media, in general, as a problem. Comments were made that an over-reliance on social media tends to impinge on more valuable face-to-face human interaction, removing people from ‘real’ conversations to the detriment of building more trusting and trusted relationships.

Priorities for the Government of Canada and Social Media Companies

Participants’ responses to a question as to whether more online regulation was needed reflected earlier comments as to whether limits should be placed on what people can say in online conversations. While the initial reaction for many participants was affirmative, suggesting that more regulation was required, additional commentary pointed to specific concerns regarding:

The potential for infringements on freedom of speech and on personal privacy (e.g., tapping individuals’ cellphones and monitoring people’s online search patterns);
The nature and scope of regulation; and
The ability to regulate rapidly-evolving and widespread online platforms and technologies. Some felt it would be difficult at this point to rein in both the online platforms and users.

A subsequent question as to whether the Government of Canada had a role to play to address these issues, or if it should be left to the social media companies themselves, again generated mixed responses. Some felt that the federal government should step in. They were of the opinion that social media companies would be unlikely to self-regulate or that they should not be left to come up with the solution themselves. Others, however, were concerned that federal government would find it challenging to impose regulations on privately held American corporations. There was also some concern expressed about the federal government taking on a ‘Big Brother’ role and how far this role might extend in terms of intrusion on Canadians’ privacy.

Participants were shown a number of actions which the Government of Canada could consider taking and asked which one should be its top priority. The option of asking social media companies to increase their own monitoring was roundly discounted. Most thought that social media companies were not well equipped professionally to take on this role and it was the view of a few participants that some may even be complicit in unlawful or unethical activities. Some participants were also of the opinion that the profit motive would constrain these companies from addressing this issue and that they would simply do what is in their best interests, from a profitability perspective. There was more support for law enforcement monitoring online of things that that are illegal under current laws and for regulating social media companies so that there are rules on what needs to be taken down. Support for these options was grounded in the view that law enforcement officials have the appropriate training and resources to tackle these issues and that specific rules and boundaries for unacceptable practices needed to be put in place.

In the latter part of the discussion participants evaluated potential actions which could be taken by social media companies and were again asked to identify their top priority. Of the four potential actions shown to participants, most rallied around creating stricter penalties for repeat abusers, including denying access to the platform. The sense was that this approach would apply strict consequences to abusers, particularly denying future access to the platform. The point, however, was made that a warning system should be implemented to alert identified abusers early that their permissions may be removed. There was also some support for getting rid of trolls and bots. These were seen to be a huge problem on platforms such as Reddit and Twitter, for example. The idea of having others controlling a conversation or inserting ‘fake’ opinions was viewed as on the rise and a significant problem. The options of adding more filters to help users identify illegal or otherwise harmful content or providing more transparency on who the repeat abusers are received minimal attention from participants. The few comments that were made about these two options centered on concerns that they were not as strict or consequential as the other options discussed.

As a final question, participants were asked which one of two options more closely reflected their point of view:

Most participants felt there should be increased regulation of social media companies, even if it meant that legitimate material may occasionally be flagged or removed. This approach aligned with most participants’ perspective that there needed to be consequences for companies that participate in the proliferation of illegal online activities.
Fewer participants said that there should not be increased regulation of social media platforms, even if it means that things like hate speech or incitement to violence may harm people.

Childcare (GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

A discussion on the topic of childcare was held at the end of the month among a group comprising of parents in the GTA with children in daycare or considering daycare, as well as with two groups with the general population in the above noted locations. The discussion centered on participants’ perceptions of childcare services in their area, as well as awareness and opinions of the federal government plans regarding childcare.

Perceptions of Childcare Services

Participants were asked to think about childcare, prior to the pandemic, and to comment on how they felt generally about the services in their area. Overall, perceptions were quite balanced, with the exception of those living in Interior B.C. whose views tended to skew more negative.

Positive comments from participants centered on two aspects - the view that there was both a significant amount of daycares conveniently located in their own neighbourhoods and a good variety to choose from, including childcare centres, licensed and unlicensed home daycares.

There were however, a few aspects of childcare services that participants felt could be improved. These included:

Affordability: By far, the cost of childcare was the most cited area for improvement across all three groups. Participants discussed paying exorbitant rates and it simply being unaffordable, especially for those with multiple children of daycare age. Some discussed how their family struggled to decide if, after maternity leave, a parent would go back to work (sometimes only to make enough to pay for daycare) or if they would instead stay home with their child/children. A few participants also commented on the cost disparity between certain communities.
Availability: Due to a high demand for childcare services, many suggested that spaces were limited and that waitlists made it fairly difficult to get a spot for their children unless they planned early. A few participants felt that some waitlists were over a year, which required families to plan for childcare during pregnancy. Others suggested that there were also gaps in the availability of daycare services for individuals like healthcare workers and first responders, who are often obligated to work shifts and require daycare outside of typical working hours.
Better Pay for Childcare Workers: While less mentioned overall, a few participants commented that there was a high turnover rate for those working in childcare and suggested that if they were compensated more, the quality of care their children received would also likely improve.

Awareness and Perceptions of Federal Government’s Plans Regarding Childcare

Relatively few participants were aware of any of the Government of Canada’s plans related to childcare. Unprompted, a few participants vaguely mentioned a national childcare program or the introduction of additional childcare benefits, but were not aware of any the specific details regarding such initiatives.

Before continuing further, participants were provided with additional information on the Government of Canada’s childcare plans, as follows:

The Government of Canada has said that it wants to make significant, long-term, sustained investment to create a Canada-wide early learning and childcare system, including further support for Indigenous Early Learning and Child Care.

Reactions to the statement were generally positive. Many participants were quite supportive of the plan, particularly in the GTA parents group, where they stated that this type of support was filling an important need and would be very welcomed and highly appreciated. A few participants in the other groups spoke about the importance of investing in children’s early education in order to create better opportunities for them in the future. However, several participants perceived the statement to be vague and left them asking more questions about the specific details.

Importance of Investing in Childcare/Most Compelling Reasons

Across all three groups, participants unanimously believed that investing in childcare was important and that it should be a high priority for the Government of Canada.

In order to probe further on why they believed this, participants were told that some Canadians may feel that the Government of Canada should not be investing more in childcare when it is currently running a large deficit. When asked if this argument resonated with them or what their response would be to Canadians with this perspective, participants cited a number of meaningful reasons, including that:

Childcare stimulates the economy by allowing more people to participate in the workforce through earning an income (versus staying home with their children).
Allowing more parents to go back to work, may prove to be self-fulfilling for them and lead to more positive parenting and less strain overall on the healthcare system.
Childcare is viewed as a ‘net-positive’, in that early investment in a child’s care and education will result in positive returns in the long term.
Some participants simply felt that childcare would be a more successful investment for the Government of Canada, compared to some of its other ongoing priorities/initiatives.

Following this discussion, participants were then shown three potential reasons (outlined below) why the federal government should invest more in childcare and asked which one was the most compelling to them.

Childcare is important since it allows more women to enter the workforce

Childcare grows the economy because it allows more people to work

More childcare spaces mean less financial pressures on hard working middle class families

Consistent with their previous commentary, most participants believed the second statement ‘Childcare grows the economy because it allows more people to work’ to be the most compelling for similar reasons to those mentioned above. Participants felt this statement resonated more with them as it clearly explained that getting people back into the workforce would help to grow the economy (as more people would be earning income and paying taxes). They felt that this statement would do a good job counteracting opinions that the federal government should not be spending money on childcare while it is running a large deficit.

Participants found the first statement - Childcare is important since it allows more women to enter the workforce - quite similar to the second. While a few participants appreciated that this version specifically spoke to women entering the workforce (as they believed the responsibility for childcare disproportionately falls on women), most preferred the second statement as it was more inclusive. There was limited commentary provided on the last statement, which participants ranked the least compelling overall.

When asked if they could think of any other reasons to support childcare investment, responses were limited.

Message Testing

To conclude the discussion on this topic, participants across all three groups were shown the following two messages regarding childcare and asked about their preference:

Investing in accessible, high-quality, affordable and inclusive child care is not only good for families, it makes good economic sense.
High quality, affordable child care is not a luxury, it is a necessity. That is why we are creating a national system that will cut costs and create more spaces.

Overall, there was no clear consensus from participants as to which of the two messages they preferred, as they liked each for different reasons.

The first option - Investing in accessible, high-quality, affordable and inclusive child care is not only good for families, it makes good economic sense – was liked because it provided a rationale as to why childcare would be a good investment for all Canadians, not just families. Participants said that it would be a good message to share specifically with those who were skeptical about making such an investment at this time.

The second option was also well liked. Participants commented that it did a good job of being specific about what would be done as part of the plan - ‘cutting costs and creating more spaces.’ Regarding the terminology used, participants resonated with the reference to childcare being a ‘necessity,’ but some commented that they did not like the use of the term ‘luxury,’ although little detail was provided as to their reasoning.

Phrasing on Cutting Costs (GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare)

In the group comprised of parents in the GTA with children in daycare/considering daycare, a final line of questioning was asked regarding possible things the federal government could do as part of its plan for a Canada-wide early learning and childcare system. Given the following three options, participants were asked to select which one they thought should be the Government of Canada’s target.

Cutting the cost of childcare by $5,000 a year by next year, and eventually cutting it by $7,500.

Cutting the cost of childcare in half to start, and eventually reducing it by 75%.

Putting a cap of $20 a day on childcare costs next year, and eventually lowering it to $10 a day.

Of the options presented, most selected the last – ‘Putting a cap of $20 a day on childcare costs next year, and eventually lowering it to $10 a day.’ Comments from participants suggested that they found this statement the most relatable and easiest to understand. Many said that they were most familiar with daycare costs being expressed in dollars per day, so this made it easy for them to compare the reduced cost against what they are currently paying. Some mentioned that this method may be easier to interpret for those earning an hourly wage, versus a salary. In addition, many perceived this option to be the cheapest overall and liked that it appeared to provide a more fair approach across the board, particularly in areas or regions of the country where childcare was known to be more expensive (upwards of $60-$70 per day).

A couple of participants selected the second option - Cutting the cost of childcare in half to start, and eventually reducing it by 75% - because they believed it would provide those less familiar with the costs of childcare a better understanding of how much the cost would actually be reduced. Participants were least enthusiastic about the first option, and when prompted as to why, they mentioned that it appeared to provide a smaller deduction compared to the others.

Lastly, participants were asked that if the Government of Canada were to cut costs by $5,000 (as per the first option presented) if it would matter to them if it was sent as a rebate or if it were important to ensure that the actual fees charged by daycares went down. Across the group, the latter – the reduction being directly applied to childcare costs - was preferred by more participants, but a few indicated they had no preference one way or the other.

Appendix A – Recruiting Scripts

English Recruiting Script

Privy Council Office

Recruiting Script – January 2021

English Groups

Recruitment Specifications Summary

Groups conducted online
Each group is expected to last for two hours
Recruit 8 participants for 6-8 to show
Incentives will be $90 per person 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	MODER-ATOR
1	Wed., Jan. 6	4:30-6:30	6:00-8:00 (NST) 5:30-7:30 (AST)	Newfoundland and Labrador	Former CERB Recipients	DN
3	Mon., Jan. 11	6:00-8:00	6:00-8:00 (EST)	Major Centres - Ontario	Vaccine hesitant	DN
4	Tues., Jan. 12	8:00-10:00	7:00-9:00 (CST)	Manitoba/Saskatchewan	Indigenous people	DN
5	Wed., Jan. 13	8:00-10:00	6:00-8:00 (MST)	Mid-size and Major Centres – Alberta	Racialized Canadians	TBW
8	Wed., Jan 20	9:00-11:00	6:00-8:00 (PST)	Vancouver Island	Seniors	TBW
9	Thurs., Jan. 21	6:00-8:00	7:00-9:00 (AST)	New Brunswick	General population	DN
10	Mon., Jan. 25	6:00-8:00	6:00-8:00 (EST)	GTA	Parents with children in daycare and/or considering daycare within next 12 months	DN
11	Tues., Jan. 26	8:00-10:00	7:00-9:00 (CST)	Mid-size and Larger Centres – Saskatchewan	General population	DN
12	Thurs., Jan. 28	9:00-11:00	6:00-8:00 (PST)	Interior B.C.	General population	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
Newfoundland/ Labrador	Cities could include (but are not limited to): St. John’s, Conception Bay South, Mount Pearl, Paradise, Corner Brook, Grand Falls-Windsor, Gander, Portugal Cove-St. Phillip`s, Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Torbay, Labrador City, Stephenville, Clarenville, Bay Roberts, and Marystown. MAX OF 3 PARTICIPANTS FROM ST. JOHN’S. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION INCLUDING THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.	CONTINUE - GROUP 1
Major Centres - Ontario	Cities include: Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton. PARTICIPANTS SHOULD RESIDE IN THE ABOVE-NOTED CENTERS PROPER.	CONTINUE - GROUP 3
Manitoba/Saskatchewan	Cities could include (but are not limited to): Manitoba: Winnipeg, Brandon, Steinbach, Thompson, Portage la Prairie, Winkler, Selkirk, Morden, Dauphin, The Pas, Flin Flon. Saskatchewan: Saskatoon, Regina, Prince Alberta, Moose Jaw, Swift Current, Yorkton, North Battleford, Lloydminster, Estevan, Warman, Weyburn, Martensville, Melfort, Humboldt, Meadow Lake. ENSURE 4 PARTICIPANTS FROM EACH PROVINCE. MAX 2 PARTICIPANTS FROM MAJOR CITIES IN EACH PROVINCE. MAX 2 FROM WINNIPEG AND BRANDON. MAX 2 FROM OR SASKATOON AND REGINA. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.	CONTINUE - GROUP 4
Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta	Cities include: Calgary, Edmonton, Red Deer, Lethbridge, Fort McMurray, St. Albert, Medicine Hat, Grand Prairie, Airdrie. MAX 2 PARTICIPANTS FROM EACH MAJOR CITY – CALGARY AND EDMONTON. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION.	CONTINUE GROUP 5
Vancouver Island	Cities could include (but are not limited to): Victoria, Nanaimo, Courtney/Comox, Duncan/Cowichan, Campbell River, Parksville/Qualicum Beach, Port Alberni, Sidney, Lady Smith, Sooke. MAX 3 PARTICIPANTS FROM VICTORIA. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.	CONTINUE - GROUP 8
New Brunswick	Cities could include (but are not limited to): Moncton, Saint John, Fredericton, Dieppe, Miramichi, Edmundston, Bathurst, Campbellton. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.	CONTINUE - GROUP 9
GTA	Cities could include (but are not limited to): City of Toronto, Durham (Ajax, Clarington, Brock, Oshawa, Pickering, Whitby), Halton (Burlington, Halton Hills, Oakville, Milton), Peel (Brampton, Caledon, Mississauga), York (Markham, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Newmarket, Aurora), Dufferin County (Mono, Orangeville) and Simcoe County. ENSURE A GOOD MIX ACROSS THE GTA. NO MORE THAN TWO IN CITY OF TORONTO, OR PER REGION/COUNTY. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.	CONTINUE - GROUP 10
Mid-size and Larger Centres Saskatchewan	Cities include: Saskatoon, Regina, Prince Albert, Moose Jaw, Swift Current, Yorkton. MAX 2 PARTICIPANTS FROM EACH MAJOR CITY – SASKATOON AND REGINA. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION.	CONTINUE - GROUP 11
Interior B.C	Cities could include (but are not limited to): Kamloops, Vernon, Kelowna, Penticton, Peachland Nelson, Cranbrook, Golden, Revelstoke, Prince George, Williams Lake, Fort St. John. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF CITIES ACROSS THE REGION. INCLUDE THOSE RESIDING IN LARGER AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES.	CONTINUE - GROUP 12
Other		THANK AND END
VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer	-	THANK AND END

2a. How long have you lived in [INSERT CITY]?

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 In the past 10 months, have you received the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) from the Government of Canada?

YesCONTINUE

NoTHANK AND END

Don’t know/Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

3a. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 1 The last eligibility period for which Canadians could receive CERB ($2,000/month) ended on Sept. 26. The Government of Canada announced that that it would be transitioning those who still needed income support to a simplified Employment Insurance (EI) program or to a suite of three new recovery benefits. Are you currently receiving any of these benefits from the Government of Canada?

Employment Insurance (EI) CONTINUE

Canada Recovery Benefit CONTINUE

Canada Recovery Caregiver Benefit CONTINUE

Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit CONTINUE

No, I am not receiving any of these benefits CONTINUE

Don’t know/Prefer not to answerCONTINUE

ENSURE 4 ARE RECEIVING EI/RECOVERY BENEFITS AND 4 ONLY RECEIVED CERB. FOR THOSE WHO ARE RECEIVING BENEFITS, ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF BENEFIT TYPE.

4. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 3 Which of the following best describes what you would do if a COVID-19 vaccine became available?

I would get the vaccine as soon as I became eligible for it THANK AND END

I will probably get the vaccine, but would want to wait a whileCONTINUE – HESITATOR

I’m not sure if I would get the vaccine CONTINUE – HESITATOR

I would not get the vaccine THANK AND END

Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

5. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 4 Do you identify as Indigenous (First Nations, Métis or Inuit (Inuk))?

Don’t know/Prefer not to answer	THANK AND END
Yes	CONTINUE ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF DIFFERENT INDIGENOUS GROUPS.
No	THANK AND END

6. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 5 Which of the following racial or cultural groups best describes you? (multi-select)

RECRUIT ANY THAT IDENTIFY AS NON-WHITE/CAUCASIAN. ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF DIFFERENT RACIAL/CULTURAL GROUPS.

White/Caucasian THANK AND END

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

Other (specify)

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

7. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 10 Do you have any children under the age of 18?

YesCONTINUE

NoTHANK AND END

VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer THANK AND END

8. ASK ONLY IF GROUP 10 Are any of these children currently in daycare or will likely be in daycare within the next 12 months?

Yes, they currently are in daycare CONTINUE

Yes, they will likely be in daycare within the next 12 monthsCONTINUE

No, they are not and will not be in daycare within the next 12 months THANK AND END

Not sure THANK AND END

ENSURE A GOOD MIX OF THOSE CURRENLTY IN DAYCARE (MAX 6) AND THOSE WHO ARE CONSIDERING PUTTING THEIR CHILD IN DAYCARE WITHIN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS.

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

25-34
Under 18 years of age	IF POSSIBLE, ASK FOR SOMEONE OVER 18 AND REINTRODUCE. OTHERWISE THANK AND END.
18-24	IF VANCOUVER ISLAND = THANK AND END ALL OTHER LOCATIONS, CONTINUE
35-44
45-54
55+	IF VANCOUVER ISLAND = GROUP 8 ALL OTHER LOCATIONS, CONTINUE
VOLUNTEERED Prefer not to answer	THANK AND END

PARENTS IN GROUP 10 MAY SKEW YOUNGER-MIDDLE AGED (30S/40S).

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

Male	CONTINUE
Female	CONTINUE

ENSURE A GOOD MIX BY GENDER IN EACH GROUP.

11. Which of the following best describes the industry sector that you are currently employed in?

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.

12. 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.”

13. 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

14. 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

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

YesCONTINUE

NoCONTINUE

16. How would skilled are you 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

17. 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.

18. 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.22

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

Less than 6 months ago THANK AND END

More than 6 months ago CONTINUE

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

0-4 groups CONTINUE

5 or more groups THANK AND END

21. And on what topics were they?
TERMINATE IF ANY ON SIMILAR/SAME TOPIC

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.

22. 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.

23. Which of the following categories best describes your total household income in 2019? 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

ENSURE A GOOD MIX.

24. 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 $90 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 — janvier 2021

Groupes en français

Résumé des consignes de recrutement

Groupes tenus en ligne.
Durée prévue de chaque rencontre : deux heures.
Recrutement de huit participants pour assurer la présence d’au moins six à huit personnes.
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)	LIEU	COMPOSITION DU GROUPE	MODÉRATEUR
2	7 janvier	18 h-20 h	Ville de Québec	Anciens bénéficiaires de la PCU	M. Proulx
6	14 janvier	18 h-20 h	Grande région de Montréal – y compris Montréal même	Personnes qui hésiteraient à se faire vacciner	M. Proulx
7	18 janvier	18 h-20 h	Francophones du Manitoba, de l’Ontario et du Nouveau-Brunswick	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
Ville de Québec	Ville de Québec LES PARTICIPANTS DOIVENT RÉSIDER DANS LESDITS CENTRES.	CONTINUER - GROUPE 2
Grande région de Montréal (GRM) – y compris Montréal même	Les villes de la GRM peuvent notamment comprendre : Montréal, Laval, Longueuil, Terrebonne, Brossard, Saint-Jérôme, Blainville, Mirabel, Dollard-des-Ormeaux PAS PLUS DE DEUX PARTICIPANTS DE LA VILLE DE MONTRÉAL. ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES VILLES DANS CHAQUE LIEU.	CONTINUER - GROUPE 6
Francophones du Manitoba, de l’Ontario et du Nouveau-Brunswick	Winnipeg/Saint-Boniface, Nouveau-Brunswick, Ontario ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES VILLES DANS CHAQUE LIEU. MINIMUM DE DEUX PARTICIPANTS PAR PROVINCE.	CONTINUER - GROUPE 7
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]?

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. DEMANDER UNIQUEMENT AU GROUPE 2 Dans les dix derniers mois, avez-vous reçu la Prestation canadienne d’urgence (PCU) du gouvernement du Canada ?

OuiCONTINUER

Non REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Ne sais pas/Préfère ne pas répondre REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

4a. DEMANDER UNIQUEMENT AU GROUPE 2 La dernière période d’admissibilité des Canadiens à la PCU (2 000 $/mois) a pris fin le 26 septembre. Le gouvernement du Canada a annoncé que les personnes ayant encore besoin d’un soutien du revenu pourraient faire la transition vers un régime d’assurance-emploi (AE) simplifié ou une série de trois nouvelles prestations de relance. Est-ce que vous recevez actuellement certaines de ces prestations du gouvernement du Canada?

Assurance-emploi (AE)CONTINUER

Prestation canadienne de la relance économique CONTINUER

Prestation canadienne de la relance économique pour proches aidants CONTINUER

Prestation canadienne de maladie pour la relance économique CONTINUER

Non, je ne reçois aucune de ces prestations CONTINUER

Ne sais pas/Préfère ne pas répondre CONTINUER

VEILLER À CE QUE QUATRE PARTICIPANTS TOUCHENT L’AE OU DES PRESTATIONS DE RELANCE ET À CE QUE QUATRE PARTICIPANTS AIENT SEULEMENT TOUCHÉ LA PCU. PARMI CEUX QUI TOUCHENT DES PRESTATIONS, ASSURER UN BON MÉLANGE DES TYPES DE PRESTATIONS.

5. DEMANDER UNIQUEMENT AU GROUPE 6 Lequel des énoncés suivants décrit le mieux ce que vous feriez si un vaccin contre la COVID-19 devenait disponible?

Je me ferais vacciner dès que je serais admissible REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Je me ferais probablement vacciner, mais je préférerais attendre un certain temps CONTINUER

Je ne suis pas sûr que je me ferais vacciner CONTINUER

Je ne me ferais pas vacciner REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

Préfère ne pas répondre REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

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

25 à 34
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.
35 à 44
45 à 54
55 ans ou plus
RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE Préfère ne pas répondre	REMERCIER ET CONCLURE

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

Homme

Femme

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

8. 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

À la retraite

Autre situation ou autre secteur ; veuillez préciser : ______________

CONTINUER POUR TOUS LES RÉPONDANTS. ASSURER UNE BONNE REPRÉSENTATION DES TYPES D’EMPLOI DANS CHAQUE GROUPE, HORMIS LE GROUPE 7. PAS PLUS DE DEUX RÉPONDANTS PAR SECTEUR D’ACTIVITÉ.

9. 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 ».

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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.

15. 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.19

16. 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

17. 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

18. Et sur quels sujets portaient-ils?
METTRE FIN À L’ENTRETIEN SI LES SUJETS ÉTAIENT LES MÊMES OU SEMBLABLES

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.

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 2019— 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 Moderators Guide

MODERATOR’S GUIDE – January 2021

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 (10-15 minutes) All Locations

What have you seen, read or heard about the Government of Canada in the last few days?
- GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. FOR MENTIONS RELATED TO THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA: Have others heard about this? What have you heard?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Have you heard anything about the Government of Canada’s recent announcement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2030?
- IF YES: What did you hear?

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
Recently the Government of Canada announced proposed measures aimed to help Canada cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and get the country to net-zero emissions by 2050. One of these measures includes increasing the carbon price through to 2030. The carbon pricing system returns all proceeds to individuals, families and businesses.

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant What do you think about increasing the price on pollution?
Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Are you aware of the Climate Action Incentive Payment? If so, what is it? Do you know how much it is, approximately?

Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant CLARIFY AS NECESSARY

The carbon pricing system returns all proceeds to individuals, families and businesses. For individuals and families, this is in the form of a Climate Action Incentive Payment.

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Do you think the carbon pricing payment you will receive will be more, less or roughly the same as what you will pay in costs associated with the price on pollution

CANADA WORDMARK (15 minutes) Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, New Brunswick

When you are looking at information from the Government of Canada (either online, on paper, on billboards, on TV, etc.), how do you know it is from the Government of Canada?
- Probe: Is it clear to you that you are looking at Government of Canada information? Why? Why not?
- If not, probe: Can you give me an example of an instance when you weren’t sure?
What about when you hear information from the Government of Canada, like on the radio for instance, how do you know it’s from the Government of Canada?
- Probe: where do you hear this? Radio? TV?

Show the “Canada” wordmark ON SCREEN

Have you seen this symbol before?
Where have you seen this symbol?
I want to ask you what this symbol means in general and also what it means to you personally:
- So, first: what does this symbol mean in general? Anything else?
  - If not mentioned, probe: do you think that the wordmark represents the Government of Canada? Why? Why not?
- Ok, now what does this symbol mean to you personally?
  - Probe if necessary:
    - What are you most likely to associate this symbol with? How does it make you feel? Why?
    - Does the symbol represent positive or negative feelings/ideas? Why?
Why do you think the Government of Canada uses this symbol in its
communications/information?
Where do you expect to see or hear this symbol? Where should this wordmark be shown?
If TRUST/CREDIBILITY/CONFIDENCE not mentioned yet, ask: When you see this symbol, do you trust the information that comes along with it? Do you have confidence that the information is credible? Why? Why not?

COVID-19 OUTLOOK (15 - 30 minutes) Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.
Now I’d like to talk about COVID-19 …

Have you changed your behaviour in the last few weeks? What are you doing differently now compared to a couple of months ago?
- What have you done?
- IF YES: why are you doing these things more?
- IF NO: why haven’t you changed your behaviour?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick What have you heard lately about a COVID-19 vaccine?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick When do you think you personally will be in a position to receive a vaccine?
- Do you plan to get vaccinated?
  - (IF NO) Why not?
  - (IF UNSURE) What are the factors that will influence your decision on whether or not to get vaccinated?
  - Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick (IF UNSURE) When you hear about people who have been vaccinated in Canada, are you more likely or less likely to be influenced by their experiences? Does it affect your stance on getting vaccinated? Why?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick What do you think is a reasonable target date to have everyone in Canada (who wants to be vaccinated) to be vaccinated by?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients Have you heard anything recently about new guidelines around international travel?

Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients CLARIFY AS NEEDED
The Government of Canada announced that all air passengers five years of age or older will be required to test negative for COVID-19 before travelling from another country to Canada. Documentation of a negative test result must be presented to the airline prior to boarding a flight to Canada. The test must be taken within 72 hours prior to the traveller’s scheduled departure to Canada. Anyone who receives a negative test result and is authorized to enter Canada must still complete the full, mandatory 14-day quarantine.

Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients Overall, do you think current rules around travel and borders are about right, or does the Government of Canada need to make it easier for people to travel, or does the Government of Canada need to do more to limit travel?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients (If the Government of Canada needs to do more to limit travel): What specifically should the Government of Canada do?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. How have COVID-19 and COVID-related restrictions impacted you?
- GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare How has this impacted you and your family?
- GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare Has it been hard on your kids?
- GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare Has it been hard on you as a parent?
- How does it compare to restrictions last spring – is it harder, easier, or about the same now? What makes you say that
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare Are any of your kids still going to daycare or have these been closed?
- KIDS IN DAYCARE: Are you worried about sending your kids to daycare? What worries you the most about it?
  - PROMPT AS NECESSARY: Your kids’ health? Your kids passing COVID on to you or other family members? Something else?
- KIDS STAYING HOME: How has that impacted your day to day behaviours? Has it had an impact on your job?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare What do you think is most needed in order to make things safer in daycares?
- PROBE: Do daycares need more space so kids can be spaced out more? Do they need to hire more daycare workers? Hire more cleaning staff? Something else?
Major Francophone Centres, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. When it comes to how the Government of Canada has performed during the pandemic, what are some things you think they have been doing well lately?
Vancouver Island Seniors When it comes to how the Government of Canada has performed during the pandemic, how would you rate the kind of supports available for seniors?
- What makes you say that?
- What could they be doing better?

CERB REPAYMENT (20 - 40 minutes)Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians

How do you think the Government of Canada has performed during the pandemic, specifically in terms of providing financial support to people affected by COVID-19?
- What makes you say that?
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.
Have you heard any discussion about the repayment of the CERB for those who received it by mistake?
- What have you heard?

CLARIFY AS NEEDED
The Government of Canada recently announced that payments made to anyone who is later found to be ineligible will need to be returned. Any individuals who mistakenly received multiple payments or payments they did not qualify for should begin the repayment process, if they have not already done so.

What do you think about this?
For all those who received it by mistake, what do you think makes the most sense:
- They should all have to pay it back
- Determining whether individuals should have to pay it back should be done on a case-by-case basis
- There should be exceptions for people who are living in poverty
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients When it comes to paying it back, do you think Canadians should have to pay whatever they owe by the end of the tax filing deadline at the end of April, or do you think the Government of Canada should allow Canadians to repay the total amount over a number of months or years?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients And thinking about those who are self-employed who mistakenly received the CERB because of confusion over qualification rules – do you think they should be treated the same as or differently from Canadians who work for an employer? What makes you say that?
Do you know if the CERB amounts are taxable?

Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients CLARIFY AS NEEDED
CERB amounts are taxable, just like EI. You will need to report the amounts from your T4A tax information slip on your 2020 tax return.

Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients Thinking about your personal tax return, do you think you will have to pay taxes on the CERB?

Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients FOR THOSE WHO ANTICIPATE HAVING TO PAY TAXES ON IT:

Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB RecipientsWhat kind of impact will this have on you?
- Are any of you concerned that it will leave you in a difficult financial situation?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients Do you think that anyone who has to pay taxes on the CERB should be given a longer repayment window, or do you think it should be treated the same as any tax amounts owed? What makes you say that?

LOCAL ISSUES / INDUSTRIES (20 minutes) Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan

Let’s shift our focus a little bit.

Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients What are the most important sectors and industries in Newfoundland and Labrador?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients Which sectors and industries in Newfoundland and Labrador do you feel need the most help?
Vancouver Island Seniors Thinking about the most important sectors and industries on Vancouver Island, do you think the Government of Canada pays enough attention to these, or not?
- What makes you say that?
Vancouver Island Seniors PROMPT AS NEEDED: Which sectors and industries on Vancouver Island do you think the Government of Canada needs to pay more attention to?
New Brunswick Thinking about the most important sectors and industries in New Brunswick, do you think the Government of Canada pays enough attention to these, or not?
- What makes you say that?
New Brunswick PROMPT AS NEEDED: Which sectors and industries in New Brunswick do you think the Government of Canada needs to pay more attention to?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan What are the most important sectors and industries in Saskatchewan?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan Which sectors and industries in Saskatchewan do you feel need the most help?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients Now thinking about local fisheries, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
Vancouver Island Seniors And thinking about local fisheries and aquaculture, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
- What else should the Government of Canada do to support local fisheries?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients Now thinking about oil and gas in Newfoundland, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
- What else should the Government of Canada do to support oil and gas here?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan Now thinking about the oil and gas industry, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
- What else should the Government of Canada do to support the oil and gas industry?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients Now thinking about tourism in Newfoundland, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
Vancouver Island Seniors Now thinking about tourism on Vancouver Island, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
New Brunswick Now thinking about tourism in New Brunswick, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
- Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients What else should the Government of Canada do to support the Newfoundland tourism sector?
- Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick What else should the Government of Canada do to support tourism here?
New Brunswick And thinking about farming and agriculture in New Brunswick, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan Now thinking about agriculture, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
- New Brunswick What else should the Government of Canada do to support farming and agriculture?
- New Brunswick What about the manufacturing and processing sector?
- Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan What else should the Government of Canada do to support agriculture here?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan Now thinking about mining and power generation in Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, are you aware of anything the Government of Canada has done to support this sector?
- What else should the Government of Canada do to support the mining and power generation sector?
Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients Have you seen, read or heard anything the Government of Canada has done to support the Muskrat Falls hydroelectric project?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan Are there any issues specific to Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan that you feel the Government of Canada should be paying more attention to? Why do they need federal support?

FRENCH LANGUAGE (15 - 20 minutes) Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare

Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres Let’s shift our focus a little bit.

Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Thinking about the French language in Quebec, how do you feel about the state of the French language?
Major Francophone Centres Thinking about the French language in your specific regions (as some of you are in Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick), 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?
Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare How do you feel about the state of the French language in Canada?
Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres 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?
- How would you convince someone who did not think that the Government of Canada needs to do more to protect the French language? What would you say to them?
Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare When it comes to the Government of Canada, are they doing the right amount, not enough, or too much to protect the state of the French language in Canada?
- (IF NOT ENOUGH) What should they be doing?

Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres I’m going to discuss a few things that could be done to support the French language. For each, I’d like to get your opinion as to whether you feel this is a good idea or not, and whether/how it would help to protect the French language. The first is …

Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres Ensuring that federally regulated workplaces (e.g. banks, telecoms, airlines) that operate in francophone or bilingual communities must have French as one of the languages of work. This means that employees are able to do their jobs in French and that their employers communicate to them in French.
- Is this a good idea?
- Would it help protect the French language?
Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres Increasing immigration from francophone countries.
- Is this a good idea?
- Would it help protect the French language?
Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres Prioritizing French teachers in the immigration stream, so that French immersion programs could be expanded outside Quebec.
- Is this a good idea?
- Would it help protect the French language?
Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres Mandating that all Supreme Court justices be bilingual.
- Is this a good idea?
- Would it help protect the French language?

Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare
I’m going to read you a few things the Government of Canada could do to protect the French language more in Canada. ( NOTE TO MODERATOR: read them one at a time, ask after each if they think it’s a good idea or not and why)

- Ensure that federally-regulated workplaces (e.g., banks, telecommunications, and airlines) that operate in francophone or bilingual communities must have French as one of the languages of work. This means that employees are able to do their jobs in French and that their employers communicate to them in French.
- Increase immigration from francophone countries.
- Prioritize French teachers in the immigration stream, so that French immersion programs could be expanded outside Quebec.
- Mandate that all Supreme Court justices be bilingual.

Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres I’m going to show you this list again and I’d like you to select the one that you think would help protect the French language the most.

Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres POLL #1 – Participants select one option only.

Ensuring that federally-regulated workplaces (e.g., banks, telecommunications, and airlines) that operate in francophone or bilingual communities must have French as one of the languages of work. This means that employees are able to do their jobs in French and that their employers communicate to them in French.
Increasing immigration from French-speaking countries.
Prioritizing French teachers in the immigration stream in order to expand French immersion programs outside Quebec.
Mandating that all Supreme Court justices be bilingual.

Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres Moderator to discuss participants’ selections.
Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Major Francophone Centres Do you have other recommendations that are not part of the list or that have not been mentioned in this discussion?

VACCINE ADS (15 - 40 minutes) Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Vancouver Island Seniors

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

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples There are a total of 3 concepts each of which includes a storyboard. You will notice that these are 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 give a sense of what the ad might look like in its finished format. The final product will be a 15-second video produced professionally to be advertised through social media and digital platforms. Please keep this in mind as you are viewing the ad.

Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant There are a total of 3 concepts each of which includes a storyboard. Each concept has two versions. So each version is to provide examples of the kinds of things that would be included with each approach (i.e. in the final version, there will be multiple versions of that concept). You will notice that these are 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 give 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 “stock images”) 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 15-second video produced professionally to be advertised through social media and digital platforms. Please keep this in mind as you are viewing the ad.

Vancouver Island Seniors There are a total of 3 concepts each of which includes banner images. You will notice that these are not in finished form.

ALTERNATE SEQUENCE OF CONCEPTS BY REGION

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant order: 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b

Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples order: 2a, 2c, 3b, 3c, 1b, 1c

Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians order: 3a, 3b, 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b

GMA Vaccine Hesitant order: 1a, 1b, 3a, 3b, 2a, 2b

Vancouver Island Seniors order: 2, 1, 3

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant SHOW CONCEPT 1a ON SCREEN: A Dose of Facts
Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples SHOW CONCEPT 1b ON SCREEN : A Dose of Facts
Vancouver Island Seniors SHOW CONCEPT 1 ON SCREEN: A Dose of Facts

What are your initial thoughts about this ad? What makes you say that?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant What is the main message of this ad?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Does this ad help address any concerns you may have about COVID-19 vaccines?
Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant And let’s say it said something like “learn more about how COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you”. Bearing this in mind, would the concept as a whole entice you to go to the website to get more information?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples Do you have any other thoughts about what could make this ad more effective?
Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Vancouver Island Seniors 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?
Vancouver Island Seniors Does it entice you to go to the website to get more information?

Now, I’m going to show you an alternate version of this ad.

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant SHOW CONCEPT 1b ON SCREEN: A Dose of Facts
Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples SHOW CONCEPT 1c (INDIGENOUS VERSION) ON SCREEN: A Dose of Facts

What do you think of this version of the ad?
Do you think this one is more or less effective than the first version you saw? What makes you say that?
GMA Vaccine Hesitant In both versions of this concept, you may have noticed the tagline at the end which reads « Informez-vous. Préparez-vous pour le vaccin. » I would like to show you two other options and get your thoughts on these. SHOW DOSE OF FACTS TAGLINES ON SCREEN. The other two options are « Informez-vous. Soyez prêt pour le vaccine » and « Informez-vous. Préparez-vous au vaccine. »
- Is there a difference between these three? If so, how do you interpret/react to each?
- Which one of these do you prefer and why? SHOW OF HANDS.

Let’s move on to the next concept.

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant SHOW CONCEPT 2a ON SCREEN: The Vaccine and You
Vancouver Island Seniors SHOW CONCEPT 2 ON SCREEN: The Vaccine and You

What are your initial thoughts about this ad? What makes you say that?
What is the main message of this ad?
Does this ad help address any concerns you may have about COVID-19 vaccines?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Do you have any other thoughts about what could make this ad more effective?
Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant And again: let’s say it said something like “learn more about how COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you”.
Bearing this in mind, would the concept as a whole entice you to go to the website to get more information?
Vancouver Island Seniors 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 an alternate version of this ad.

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant SHOW CONCEPT 2b ON SCREEN: The Vaccine and You
Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples SHOW CONCEPT 2c (INDIGENOUS VERSION) ON SCREEN: The Vaccine and You

What do you think of this version of the ad?
Do you think this one is more or less effective than the first version you saw? What makes you say that?

Now I’m going to show you the third concept

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant SHOW CONCEPT 3a ON SCREEN: Ask an Expert
Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples SHOW CONCEPT 3b ON SCREEN: Ask an Expert
Vancouver Island Seniors SHOW CONCEPT 3 ON SCREEN: Ask an Expert

What are your initial thoughts about this ad? What makes you say that?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant What is the main message of this ad?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Does this ad help address any concerns you may have about COVID-19 vaccines?
Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Does it entice you to go to the website to get more information?
- IF NO: what if it said something like “learn more about how vaccines work”?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples Do you have any other thoughts about what could make this ad more effective?
Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Vancouver Island Seniors 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 an alternate version of this ad.

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant SHOW CONCEPT 3b ON SCREEN: Ask an Expert
Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples SHOW CONCEPT 3c (INDIGENOUS VERSION) ON SCREEN: Ask an Expert

What do you think of this version of the ad?
Do you think this one is more or less effective than the first version you saw? What makes you say that?
If you could ask a question to an expert about COVID-19 vaccines, what would you ask?

AD WRAP-UP

- Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples POLL: Which of the 3 concepts do you feel is most effective in terms of addressing any concerns you may have about COVID-19 vaccines? (NOTE TO MODERATOR: IF ASKED, CLARIFY THAT PARTICIPANTS SHOULD THINK ABOUT COMPARING OVERALL CONCEPTS 1, 2 and 3 (WITH ALTERNATE VERSION).
- Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Vancouver Island Seniors POLL Regardless of the specific images or messages in each concept, Which of the 3 approaches do you feel is most effective in terms of addressing any concerns you may have about COVID-19 vaccines: is it an approach which provides facts about vaccines (a dose of facts); a question and answer approach (vaccines and you), or an “ask an expert” approach? (NOTE TO MODERATOR: IF ASKED, CLARIFY THAT PARTICIPANTS SHOULD THINK ABOUT COMPARING OVERALL CONCEPTS 1, 2 and 3 (WITH ALTERNATE VERSION).
- What is it about XX concept that you prefer over the other ones?

COVID-19 VACCINE (15 minutes) Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant Now I’d like to focus more broadly on COVID-19 vaccines, not just the ad concepts we just reviewed…

GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Now I’d like to focus on COVID-19 vaccines …

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant When we asked you to participate in this focus group, we asked you whether you thought you would get vaccinated it or not. Some of you said you would but you preferred to wait, and others of you said you were unsure. Is this still the case? Why/why not?

- Did any of the ad concepts we just saw, cause you to re-consider/make you feel more inclined to get vaccinated? How so?
- (IF STILL HESITANT) What are the factors that will influence your decision on whether or not to get vaccinated?

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant As you hear news of people getting vaccinated in Canada, does this make you more or less likely to want to get the vaccine, or does it not influence you? Why/why not?
Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant What other information do you need to help you decide about getting a COVID-19 vaccine?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Do you plan on getting a COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available to you, or not? What makes you say that?
- (FOR THOSE WHO ARE HESITANT) What are the factors that will influence your decision on whether or not to get vaccinated?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Do you think that the Government of Canada is doing a good job in procuring and distributing the vaccine to provinces and territories, or not?
- Why do you think that?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Compared to other countries, how is Canada as a whole doing in terms of getting people vaccinated?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. When do you think you personally will be in a position to receive a vaccine?

Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Now, I’m going to show you three different statements about the Government of Canada’s vaccine plan and then I will ask you a few questions.

Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. SHOW ON SCREEN

- Canada is on track to have everyone who wants a vaccine vaccinated by the end of September
- Canada is vaccinating its citizens at over double the global rate
- Canada has vaccinated its citizens at around the same rate as the European Union so far

Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. How do you feel about the Government of Canada’s vaccination plan after reading these statements?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Do any of these statement make you feel better about Canada’s vaccine plan? Which ones?
- Does anyone feel worse about it? Or are you indifferent?

HOMELESSNESS (15 - 20 minutes) Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick

Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians Now, I would like to change the topic and focus our attention on homelessness.

Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors Again, I would like to change the topic and focus our attention on homelessness.

Do you think that there is a problem with homelessness in Canada? What makes you say that?
Has homelessness become worse recently? Or better? The same?
What can the Government of Canada do to help tackle the issue of homelessness in Canada?
Do you think it’s realistic to try to end homelessness in the next 10 years?
- Or, would it be more feasible if the Government of Canada aimed at reducing it by 50%?

POLL:

I’m going to show you a couple of statements that could be used by the Government of Canada as general messaging regarding the issue of homelessness in Canada. We’re going to read them over, and then proceed to a poll. SHOW STATEMENTS ON SCREEN FIRST. RUN POLL. Now, please select which one would be the more appropriate type of messaging for the federal government on the issue of homelessness.
- Every Canadian deserves a safe and affordable place to call home
- One homeless person in Canada is one too many
- In a country such as Canada, no one should live on the street

NOTE TO MODERATOR: After the vote, please discuss why they made that decision.

VACCINE MESSAGES (20 minutes) Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples

I’m now going to show you a series of messages the Government of Canada could provide related to COVID-19 vaccines. I’d like you to read it individually and then we’ll discuss.

SHOW ON SCREEN

- COVID-19 can be devastating to those with underlying medical conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes. The new vaccines will protect them.
- The COVID-19 vaccine is now available for Indigenous seniors over the age of 70. It will protect them and is safe even for those with underlying medical conditions.
- Both the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines are effective. Remote communities will receive Moderna as this is the one they are best equipped to store. Learn more.
- Remote communities will receive Moderna as this is the one they are best equipped to store. Indigenous leaders made this decision with health officials for the safety of their community.
- COVID-19 vaccine trials included Indigenous Peoples and have proven to be safe and effective for them. Other groups, such as children and expecting moms were not tested which is why they are not recommended for the initial roll out of the vaccination.
- Indigenous leaders helped determine who will be vaccinated first. COVID-19 vaccines are now available for First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities.
- First Nations and Inuit communities successfully stopped the spread of the H1N1 virus by getting vaccinated. The COVID-19 vaccines will help you do the same.

I’m going to show you a poll. I’d like you to select which of these messages, if any, is the most important (participants to select 2-3 max).

MODERATOR TO REVIEW SELECTIONS

INDIGENOUS ISSUES (30 minutes) Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples

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

What important Indigenous issues do you think the Government of Canada should focus on?
Has the Government of Canada done anything well?
What can they improve on?
Have you heard of UNDRIP (the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples)?

SHOW ON SCREEN
UNDRIP is an international document adopted by the United Nations in 2007 that lays out the basic rights that Indigenous peoples should have around the world. It outlines how governments should respect the human rights of Indigenous peoples.

UNDRIP consists of 46 articles that describe specific rights and actions that governments must take to protect these rights. The main themes in the declaration are:

- The right to self-determination
- The right to cultural identity
- The right to free, prior and informed consent (i.e. the right to be consulted and make decisions on any matter that may affect the rights of Indigenous peoples)
- Protection from discrimination

Have you heard anything recently about how the Government of Canada has responded to UNDRIP? What have you heard?

CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
The Government of Canada recently introduced legislation to implement UNDRIP.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you think this will change anything? What makes you say that?

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

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?
Have you heard anything about what the Government of Canada’s timeline is for lifting all long-term drinking water advisories?

SHOW ON SCREEN
The Government of Canada recently announced that it would not meet its target of March 2021 as originally planned. in addition to the $2.19 billion already budgeted for ending long-term drinking water advisories, the government announced another $1.5 billion to finish the work. This new money is for ongoing support for daily operations and maintenance of water infrastructure on reserves, continued funding for water and wastewater infrastructure on reserves, and to pay for work halted due to the COVID-19 pandemic and other project delays

What are your thoughts on this?
What do you think is a reasonable timeline?

ONLINE HATE (30 minutes) Major Francophone Centres, Interior B.C.

We’re going to shift our focus again, to online conversations.

When you think about online conversations, such as social media posts on Facebook or Twitter, do you think that people should be allowed to say whatever they want online, or should there be limits to what they can say?

POLL:

Now, I’m going to show you a list of issues and we’ll then proceed to a poll to see which ones, if any, you think are major problems in Canada. SHOW STATEMENTS ON SCREEN. RUN POLL. Please select up to three choices maximum. If you don’t think any are a major problem, then do not select any. We will then discuss your selections.
- Child sexual exploitation
- Hate speech
- Incitement to violence
- Private images being shared without permission
- Radicalization
- Terrorist propaganda
How concerned are you, if at all, about these issues happening online?
Do these issues affect you personally (or your children)?
- Are they more issues you see in society as a whole? (or both)
Do you think more online regulation is needed?
- IF YES: Does the Government of Canada have a role to play to address these issues? Or, is it the responsibility of social media companies themselves?

TALLY BY SHOW OF HANDS:

I’m going to show you a list of possible things the Government of Canada could potentially do. Then, I will ask you to tell me which one you think should be the Government of Canada’s top priority. If you don’t think the federal government should do any of these things, please let me know.

- Ask social media companies to increase their own monitoring
- Increase law enforcement monitoring online of things that are illegal under current laws
- Regulate social media companies so that there are rules on what needs to be taken down

Moderator to discuss participants’ selections.
- How many chose (Moderator to work through each option)? Why did you choose this over the others as the top priority?
- How many did not select any of the options? Why? Is there something else they should do instead?
- I did ask you to select your top priority. But, do you feel they should do all of these things? Alternatively, are there any that you think they should not do? Why?

TALLY BY SHOW OF HANDS:

Now, I’m going to show you a list of possible things social media companies could potentially do. Then, I will ask you to tell me which one you think should be their top priority. Again, if you don’t think they should do any of these things, please let me know.
- Add more filters to help users identify illegal or otherwise harmful content
- Create stricter penalties for repeat abusers, including denying access to the platform
- Get rid of trolls and bots
- Provide more transparency of who the repeat abusers are
Moderator to discuss participants’ selections.
- How many chose (Moderator to work through each option)? Why did you choose this over the others as the top priority?
- How many did not select any of the options? Why? Is there something else they should do instead?
- I did ask you to select your top priority. But, do you feel they should do all of these things? Alternatively, are there any that you think they should not do? Why?
Which of these two options comes closer to your view (SHOW OPTIONS ON SCREEN. TALLY BY SHOW OF HANDS):
- There should not be increased regulation of social media platforms, even if it means things like hate speech or incitement to violence may harm people
- There should be increased regulation of social media platforms, even if it means legitimate material may occasionally be flagged and/or removed

SMALL NUCLEAR REACTORS (15 minutes) New Brunswick

Changing topics again…

How do you feel about nuclear power compared to other energy sources? Should Canada be doing more or less with nuclear power?
Have you heard about small nuclear reactors, or Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)?

CLARIFY AS NECESSARY
Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are an emerging area of nuclear energy innovation in Canada and around the world. SMRs will have enhanced safety features, a smaller footprint and produce less waste than traditional nuclear energy reactors.

How do you feel about having more SMRs in Canada?
- IF CONCERNED: What are you biggest concerns?
Some people say this is a good way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and get Canada to net zero emissions. What do you think of that – do you think that’s a good reason to build more SMRs in Canada, or not?
Some people say there’s a good economic opportunity since several Canadian companies are able to make these and could sell them to other countries. This would, therefore, create jobs in Canada. What do you think of that – do you think that’s a good reason to build more SMRs in Canada, or not?

CHILDCARE (35 minutes) GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.

GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare Now, I’d like to shift over to discussing childcare, and I would like you to think back to your situation prior to the pandemic, not how things are at the moment. So with this in mind…

Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Now I’d like to shift over to discussing childcare. Whether or not you currently have or have previously had a child in daycare we want to ask you the following questions based on your understanding of childcare prior to the pandemic, not how things are at the moment.

GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare How do you feel about childcare services in your area?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. What are your thoughts about childcare services in your area?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare What could be improved?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. Do you think it could be improved
- PROMPT AS NECESSARY: shorter waiting lists, quality of childcare, lower cost, more convenient locations? Something else?
Are you aware of any Government of Canada plans regarding childcare?

CLARIFY:
The Government of Canada has said that it wants to make significant, long-term, sustained investment to create a Canada-wide early learning and childcare system, including further support for Indigenous Early Learning and Child Care.

What do you think about this?
Do you think it’s important that the Government of Canada invests in childcare, or not? What makes you say that?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare FOR THOSE WHO THINK IT’S
IMPORTANT: Some people, such as those who don’t have kids, may feel that the Government of Canada should not be investing more in childcare, when it is currently running a large deficit. What would you say to them in response?
- That is, what kinds of points would you raise to explain the benefits of investing more in childcare?
Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C. FOR THOSE WHO THINK IT’S
IMPORTANT: Some people may feel that the Government of Canada should not be investing more in childcare when it is currently running a large deficit. What do you think about these concerns? Do they resonate with you?

Now I’m going to show you some potential reasons to invest more in childcare (SHOW ITEMS ON SCREEN THEN DISCUSS):

a) Childcare is important since it allows more women to enter the workforce

b) Childcare grows the economy because it allows more people to work

c) More childcare spaces mean less financial pressures on hard working middle class families

What do you think of these? Are any of these compelling reasons? What makes you say that?
Which of these reasons do you find the MOST compelling? What makes you say that?
Now that I’ve shown you some reasons, can you think of any others that support investing more in childcare in Canada?

Now, I’m going to show you two different messages regarding childcare to see what you think about them and which you prefer. SHOW ITEMS ON SCREEN THEN DISCUSS.

1. Investing in accessible, high-quality, affordable and inclusive child care is not only good for families, it makes good economic sense.
2. High quality, affordable child care is not a luxury, it is a necessity. That is why we are creating a national system that will cut costs and create more spaces.

Which one of these messages resonates more with you? Why?

GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare I’m going to show you some possible things the Government of Canada could do as part of its plan for a Canada-wide early learning and childcare system. We’re going to read them over, and then proceed to a poll. SHOW ITEMS ON SCREEN FIRST. RUN POLL. Now, please select which one you think should be the Government of Canada’s target.

- Cutting the cost of childcare by $5,000 a year by next year, and eventually cutting it by $7,500.
- Cutting the cost of childcare in half to start, and eventually reducing it by 75%.
- Putting a cap of $20 a day on childcare costs next year, and eventually lowering it to $10 a day.

GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare NOTE TO MODERATOR: After the vote, please discuss why they made that decision.
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare Which of these would help you the most? Why is that?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare Are these realistic targets?
GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare If the Government of Canada were to cut the costs by $5,000, would it be better if a rebate was sent to parents for this OR should they find a way to make sure that the actual costs that are charged by the daycare provider go down? Or does it not matter to you, as long as actual costs go down?

COVID ALERT APP (20 minutes) Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan

Has anyone heard of the Government of Canada’s COVID Alert App?
Have any of you downloaded this app?
Do you know how it works? Can you explain it briefly?

MODERATOR TO CLARIFY/READ FOR ALL PARTICIPANTS AND SHOW ON SCREEN
Back in the summer, the Government of Canada developed a smartphone app that would notify its users if they have been physically close to someone who has been diagnosed with COVID-19.

The way it works is that it runs in the background using Bluetooth, and whenever you’re closer than 2 metres from someone who also has the COVID Alert app, both phones exchange random codes. These codes change often and cannot be used to identify you.

If someone with the app is diagnosed with COVID-19, they can choose to upload the random codes their phone has sent, which goes into a central server. The server only gets the codes, not information about the person.

Every day, whenever your phone is connected to the Internet, your phone will get a list of the random codes from people who reported a diagnosis. If it finds a match, the app notifies you that you’ve been exposed and gives you guidance.

MODERATOR TO READ THE FOLLOWING: In February, the app will be updated in order to collect additional information. I am going to show you some messages that the Government of Canada is planning to share with people over social media about these changes. I’m going to go through them with you and then we will discuss.

SHOW ON SCREEN

Messages:

As of Feb XX, new performance data will be collected from #COVIDAlert to better measure the app’s effectiveness on reducing the spread of #COVID19. Learn more: canada.ca/COVIDAlert
To support the ongoing development and assessment of the #COVIDAlert app, the Government of Canada will start collecting limited in-app data while preserving the app’s privacy-protecting approach. The following data will be included on a go-forward basis:
- The number of users per province or territory
- The number of exposure notifications sent
- The number of app users who enter a one-time key after receiving a notification
- Technical performance data
This data will help to better assess the effectiveness of the app, and catch and fix any issues faster to provide a better service to Canadians. Learn more by visiting: canada.ca/COVIDAlert
To support the ongoing development of #COVIDAlert, the #GoC will start collecting limited in-app performance data related to the use and functioning of the app. Learn more: canada.ca/COVIDAlert

Questions:

What are your initial thoughts about these changes?
For those of you who have downloaded the app, does it make you more or less likely to keep the app on your phone, or does it make no difference? What makes you say that?
For those of you who haven’t downloaded the app, does it make you more or less likely to download it, or does it make no difference? What makes you say that?
IF NOT MENTIONED: Do any of you have concerns about privacy?
- IF YES: is there anything specific in these messages that creates concern for you?

CONCLUSION (5 minutes)

French Moderators Guide

GUIDE DU MODÉRATEUR – JANVIER 2021

DOCUMENT MAÎTRE

INTRODUCTION (10 minutes) Tous les lieux

Le modérateur ou la personne responsable du soutien technique doit faire savoir aux participantes et aux participants 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 (10-15 minutes) Tous les lieux

Ces derniers temps, qu’avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu au sujet du gouvernement du Canada ?
- Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. POUR LES MENTIONS RELATIVES AU GOUVERNEMENT DU CANADA : Y a-t-il d’autres personnes qui ont entendu parler de cela ? Qu’avez-vous entendu ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit quant à la récente annonce du gouvernement du Canada de réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre d’ici 2030 ?
- SI OUI : Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN
Récemment, le gouvernement du Canada a annoncé qu’il proposait des mesures en vue de permettre au Canada de réduire ses émissions de gaz à effet de serre d’ici 2030 et de rendre le pays carboneutre d’ici 2050. L’une de ces mesures comprend l’augmentation du prix du carbone jusqu’en 2030. Le système de tarification du carbone remet tous les produits aux particuliers, aux familles et aux entreprises.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Que pensez-vous de l’augmentation du prix sur la pollution ?
Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Connaissez-vous l’Incitatif à agir pour le climat ? Si oui, de quoi s’agit-il ? Savez-vous quel est le montant du paiement, approximativement ?

Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN
Le système de tarification du carbone remet tous les produits aux particuliers, aux familles et aux entreprises. En ce qui concerne les particuliers et les familles, il s’agit d’un paiement qui prend la forme d’Incitatif à agir pour le climat.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Pensez-vous que le montant que vous recevrez grâce à la tarification du carbone sera plus, moins, ou à peu près le même que ce que vous débourserez pour les coûts associés à la tarification de la pollution ?

MOT-SYMBOLE « CANADA » (15 minutes) Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec, Nouveau-Brunswick

Lorsque vous voyez de l’information émanant du gouvernement du Canada (en ligne, sur papier, sur des panneaux d’affichage, à la télévision, etc.), comment savez-vous qu’elle provient du gouvernement du Canada ?
- Sonder : Est-il clair pour vous que vous regardez de l’information provenant du gouvernement du Canada ? Pourquoi ?
- Si la réponse est non, sonder : Pouvez-vous me donner un exemple d’un cas où vous n’étiez pas certain ?
Et lorsque vous entendez de l’information émanant du gouvernement du Canada, à la radio par exemple, comment savez-vous qu’elle provient du gouvernement du Canada ?
- Sonder : Où avez-vous entendu ceci ? Radio ? Télévision ?

AFFICHER le mot-symbole « Canada » À L’ÉCRAN

Avez-vous déjà vu ce symbole ?
Où avez-vous vu ce symbole ?
J’aimerais savoir ce que ce symbole signifie en général et ce qu’il signifie pour vous personnellement.
- Pour commencer, que signifie ce symbole en général ? Autre chose ?
  - Si l’on n’en fait pas mention, sonder : Pensez-vous que le mot-symbole représente le Canada ? Pourquoi ?
- Bien. Maintenant, que signifie ce symbole pour vous personnellement ?
  - Sonder au besoin :
    - À quoi avez-vous le plus tendance à associer ce symbole ? Quels sentiments suscite-t-il ? Pourquoi ?
    - Ce symbole représente-t-il des impressions/idées positives ou négatives ? Pourquoi ?
Pourquoi pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada utilise ce symbole dans ses communications/échanges d’informations ?
Où vous attendez-vous à voir ou à entendre ce symbole ? Où ce mot-symbole devrait-il figurer ?
Si l’on ne mentionne pas CONFIANCE/CRÉDIBILITÉ/CERTITUDE, demander : Lorsque vous voyez ce symbole, faites-vous confiance à l’information qui l’accompagne ? Avez-vous la certitude que l’information est crédible ? Pourquoi ?

PERSPECTIVES SUR LA COVID-19 (15 - 30 minutes) Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec, grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick, parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B.

Maintenant, j’aimerais parler de COVID-19…

Avez-vous modifié votre comportement au cours de ces dernières semaines ?
- Qu’avez-vous fait ?
- Si oui : pourquoi faites-vous davantage ces choses ?
- Si non : pourquoi n’avez-vous pas changé votre comportement ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec, grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick Qu’avez-vous entendu récemment au sujet d’un vaccin COVID-19 ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec, grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick Quand pensez-vous être personnellement en mesure de recevoir un vaccin ?
- Comptez-vous vous faire vacciner ?
  - [SI NON] Pourquoi pas ?
  - [SI INCERTAIN(E)] Quels sont les facteurs qui influenceront votre décision de vous faire vacciner ou non ?
  - Grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick [SI INCERTAIN(E)] Lorsque vous entendez parler des personnes qui se sont fait vacciner au Canada, est-il plus probable ou moins probable que vous soyez influencé par leurs expériences ? Est-ce que cela a une incidence sur votre position quant à vous faire vacciner ? Pourquoi ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec, grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick Selon vous, quelle est une date cible raisonnable à laquelle toute personne au Canada (qui souhaite être vaccinée) sera vaccinée ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit récemment au sujet des nouvelles directives concernant les voyages internationaux ?

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN
Le gouvernement du Canada a annoncé que tous les passagers aériens âgés de cinq ans ou plus soient déclarés négatifs à la COVID-19 avant qu’ils n’effectuent un voyage à partir d’un pays étranger vers le Canada. La documentation d’un résultat négatif doit être présentée au transporteur aérien avant l’embarquement sur un vol à destination du Canada. Le test doit être réalisé au cours des 72 heures avant le départ prévu du voyageur à destination du Canada. Toute personne qui reçoit un résultat négatif au test de dépistage et qui est autorisée à entrer au Canada doit quand même se soumettre à la quarantaine obligatoire de 14 jours complets.

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec Dans l’ensemble, pensez-vous que les règles actuelles concernant les voyages et les frontières sont adéquates, est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada doit faire en sorte qu’il soit plus facile pour les gens de voyager, ou est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada doit en faire davantage pour limiter les voyages ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec (Si le gouvernement du Canada doit en faire davantage pour limiter les voyages) : Que devrait faire précisément le gouvernement du Canada ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. De quelle façon est-ce que la COVID-19 et les restrictions liées à la COVID vous ont affecté ?
- Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Quel effet cela a-t-il eu sur vous et votre famille ?
- Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Est-ce que cela a été difficile pour vos enfants ?
- Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Est-ce que cela a été difficile pour vous en tant que parent ?
- Comment est-ce que cela se compare aux restrictions du printemps dernier — est-ce plus difficile, plus facile, ou à peu près la même chose maintenant ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Est-ce que vous avez encore des enfants qui vont à la garderie ou est-ce qu’elles ont été fermées ?
- ENFANTS EN GARDERIE : Vous inquiétez-vous quant à envoyer vos enfants à la garderie ? Qu’est-ce qui vous inquiète le plus par rapport à cela ?
  - DEMANDER AU BESOIN : La santé de vos enfants ? Que vos enfants vous transmettent la COVID ou la transmettent à d’autres membres de votre famille ? Autre chose ?
- ENFANTS DEMEURANT À LA MAISON : Quel impact cela a-t-il eu sur vos comportements quotidiens ? Cela a-t-il eu un impact sur votre travail ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT À votre avis, qu’est-ce qui est le plus nécessaire afin de rendre les choses plus sûres dans les garderies ?
- SONDER : Est-ce que les garderies ont besoin de plus d’espace afin de placer les enfants à plus grande distance les uns des autres ? Doivent-elles embaucher plus d’éducateur(-trice)s ? Doivent-elles embaucher plus de personnel d’entretien ménager ? Y a-t-il autre chose ?
Grands centres francophones, Nouveau-Brunswick, parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. 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 ces derniers temps ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver En ce qui concerne la performance du gouvernement du Canada pendant la pandémie, comment évalueriez-vous le genre de soutiens offerts aux aîné(e)s ?
- Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
- Que pourrait-il faire de mieux ?

REMBOURSEMENT DE LA PCU (20 - 40 minutes) Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta

Que pensez-vous de la performance du gouvernement du Canada durant la pandémie, notamment en ce qui concerne le soutien financier aux personnes touchées par COVID-19 ?
- Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
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 fait mieux ou qu’il fait moins bien ?
- Veuillez expliquer.
Avez-vous entendu parler de la question du remboursement de la PCU pour les personnes qui l’ont reçue par erreur ?
- Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT, AU BESOIN
Les paiements versés à une personne qui, par la suite, est jugée non admissible doivent être remboursés. Toutes personnes qui ont reçu par erreur plusieurs paiements ou des paiements pour lesquels elles n’étaient pas admissibles devraient entreprendre le processus de remboursement si elles ne l’ont pas déjà fait.

Que pensez-vous de cela ?
Pour toutes personnes l’ayant reçu par erreur, qu’est-ce qui vous semble le plus sensé :
- Elles devraient toutes être tenues de la rembourser
- Déterminer si une personne est tenue de la rembourser ou non devrait être fait au cas par cas
- Il devrait y avoir des exceptions pour les personnes en situation de pauvreté
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec En ce qui concerne le remboursement, pensez-vous que les Canadiens devraient payer ce qu’ils doivent d’ici la date limite de production à la fin du mois d’avril, ou pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada devrait permettre aux Canadiens de rembourser la totalité du montant sur un certain nombre de mois ou d’années ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec Et en ce qui concerne les travailleurs autonomes qui ont reçu par erreur la PCU en raison d’une confusion dans les critères d’admissibilité, pensez-vous que ces personnes devraient être accordées le même traitement ou un traitement différent de celui des Canadiens qui travaillent pour un employeur ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Savez-vous si les montants de la PCU sont imposables ?

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN

Les montants de PCU sont imposables. Vous devrez déclarer les montants inscrits sur votre relevé d’impôt T4A dans votre déclaration de revenus de 2020.

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec En pensant à votre déclaration de revenus personnelle, croyez-vous que vous aurez à payer de l’impôt sur la PCU ?

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec POUR LES PERSONNES QUI S’ATTENDENT À DEVOIR PAYER DES IMPÔTS SUR CELLE-CI :

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec Quel genre de conséquence cela aura-t-il sur vous ?
- Y en a-t-il parmi vous qui craignent que cela vous place dans une situation financière difficile ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, anciens prestataires de la PCU de la ville de Québec Croyez-vous que toute personne qui doit payer l’impôt sur la PCU devrait bénéficier d’une fenêtre de remboursement plus longue, ou pensez-vous que cela devrait être considéré comme tout autre montant d’impôt dû ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

ENJEUX LOCAUX/INDUSTRIES LOCALES (20 minutes) Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan

Changeons un peu de sujet.

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador Quels sont les secteurs et les industries les plus importants de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador Quels sont, selon vous, les secteurs et les industries de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador qui ont le plus besoin d’aide ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Si vous pensez aux secteurs et aux industries les plus importants de l’île de Vancouver, croyez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada leur accorde suffisamment d’attention, ou non ?
- Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver DEMANDER AU BESOIN : À votre avis, quels sont les secteurs et les industries de l’île de Vancouver auxquels le gouvernement du Canada doit accorder plus d’attention ?
Nouveau-Brunswick Si vous pensez aux secteurs et aux industries les plus importants du Nouveau-Brunswick, croyez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada leur accorde suffisamment d’attention, ou non ?
- Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Nouveau-Brunswick DEMANDER AU BESOIN : À votre avis, quels sont les secteurs et les industries du Nouveau-Brunswick auxquels le gouvernement du Canada doit accorder plus d’attention ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan Quels sont les secteurs et les industries les plus importants de la Saskatchewan ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan Quels sont, selon vous, les secteurs et les industries de la Saskatchewan qui ont le plus besoin d’aide ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador Maintenant, en pensant aux pêches locales, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Et, en pensant aux pêches et à l’aquaculture locales, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
- Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir les pêches locales ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador Maintenant, en pensant au pétrole et au gaz à Terre-Neuve, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
- Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir le secteur pétrolier et gazier ici ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan Maintenant, en pensant au pétrole et au gaz, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
- Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir l’industrie pétrolière et gazière ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador Maintenant, en pensant au tourisme à Terre-Neuve, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Maintenant, en pensant au tourisme sur l’île de Vancouver, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
Nouveau-Brunswick Maintenant, en pensant au tourisme au Nouveau-Brunswick, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
- Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir le secteur du tourisme de Terre-Neuve ?
- Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir le secteur du tourisme ici ?
Nouveau-Brunswick Maintenant, en pensant à l’agriculture au Nouveau-Brunswick, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan Maintenant, en pensant à l’agriculture, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
- Nouveau-Brunswick Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir l’agriculture ?
- Nouveau-Brunswick Qu’en est-il du secteur de la fabrication et de la transformation ?
- Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir l’agriculture ici ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan Maintenant, en pensant à l’extraction minière et à la production d’électricité dans les centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, êtes-vous au courant de quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada a fait pour soutenir ce secteur ?
- Qu’est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada devrait faire d’autre pour soutenir le secteur minier et de production d’électricité ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador Avez-vous vu, lu ou entendu quoi que ce soit que le gouvernement du Canada ait fait pour soutenir le projet hydroélectrique de Muskrat Falls ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan Y a-t-il des enjeux spécifiques aux centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan auxquels, à votre avis, le gouvernement du Canada doit accorder plus d’attention ? Pourquoi ont-ils besoin d’un soutien de la part du fédéral ?

LA LANGUE FRANÇAISE (15 – 20 minutes) Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick, parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Changeons un peu de sujet.

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM En ce qui concerne la langue française au Québec, que pensez-vous de l’état de la langue française ?
Grands centres francophones En pensant à la langue française dans votre région particulière (puisque certains d’entre vous se trouvent au Manitoba, en Ontario et au Nouveau-Brunswick), 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 ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick, parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Que pensez-vous de l’état de la langue française au Canada ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones 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 ?
- Que feriez-vous pour convaincre quelqu’un qui ne pense pas que le gouvernement du Canada doit en faire davantage pour protéger la langue française ? Que leur diriez-vous ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick, parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Pour ce qui est du gouvernement du Canada, est-ce qu’il en fait assez, pas assez ou trop pour protéger la langue française au Canada ?
- (SI PAS ASSEZ) Que devrait-il faire ?

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Je vais vous présenter quelques mesures qui pourraient être prises pour soutenir la langue française. Pour chacune d’entre elles, j’aimerais avoir votre avis à savoir si vous estimez que c’est une bonne idée ou non, et si cela ou comment cela contribuerait à protéger la langue française. La première est…

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Veiller à ce que les lieux de travail sous réglementation fédérale (par exemple, les banques, les sociétés de télécommunications, les compagnies aériennes) qui fonctionnent dans des communautés francophones ou bilingues doivent avoir le français comme l’une des langues de travail. Cela signifie que les employés sont capables de faire leur travail en français et que leurs employeurs communiquent avec eux en français également.
- Est-ce une bonne idée ?
- Est-ce que cela contribuerait à protéger la langue française ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Augmenter l’immigration en provenance des pays francophones.
- Est-ce une bonne idée ?
- Est-ce que cela contribuerait à protéger la langue française ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Donner la priorité aux professeur(e)s de français dans les catégories d’immigration, afin que les programmes d’immersion en français puissent être étendus en dehors du Québec.
- Est-ce une bonne idée ?
- Est-ce que cela contribuerait à protéger la langue française ?
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Exiger que l’ensemble des juges de la Cour suprême soient bilingues ?
- Est-ce une bonne idée ?
- Est-ce que cela contribuerait à protéger la langue française ?

Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick, parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Je vais vous lire certaines choses que le gouvernement du Canada pourrait faire pour protéger davantage la langue française au Canada. ( NOTE AU MODÉRATEUR : lisez-les une à la fois et après chacune, demandez si l’ont pense que c’est une bonne idée ou non et pourquoi.)

- Veiller à ce que les lieux de travail sous réglementation fédérale (par exemple, les banques, les sociétés de télécommunications, les compagnies aériennes) qui fonctionnent dans des communautés francophones ou bilingues doivent avoir le français comme l’une des langues de travail. Cela signifie que les employés sont capables de faire leur travail en français et que leurs employeurs communiquent avec eux en français également.
- Augmenter l’immigration en provenance des pays francophones.
- Donner la priorité aux professeur(e)s de français dans les catégories d’immigration, afin que les programmes d’immersion en français puissent être étendus en dehors du Québec.
- Exiger que l’ensemble des juges de la Cour suprême soient bilingues.

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Je vais vous montrer à nouveau cette liste et j’aimerais que vous choisissiez la mesure qui, selon vous, contribuerait le plus à protéger la langue française.

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones SONDAGE N_O 1 – Les participant(e)s doivent choisir qu’une seule option.

Veiller à ce que les lieux de travail sous réglementation fédérale (par exemple, les banques, les sociétés de télécommunications, les compagnies aériennes) qui fonctionnent dans des communautés francophones ou bilingues doivent avoir le français comme l’une des langues de travail. Cela signifie que les employés sont capables de faire leur travail en français et que leurs employeurs communiquent avec eux en français également.
Augmenter l’immigration en provenance des pays francophones.
Donner la priorité aux professeur(e)s de français dans les catégories d’immigration, afin que les programmes d’immersion en français puissent être étendus en dehors du Québec.
Exiger que l’ensemble des juges de la Cour suprême soient bilingues.

Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Le modérateur discutera les choix des participant(e)s.
Anciens prestataires de la PCU de Québec, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, grands centres francophones Avez-vous d’autres recommandations qui ne font pas partie de la liste ou qui n’ont pas été mentionnées au cours de cette discussion ?

PUBLICITÉ SUR LES VACCINS (15 - 40 minutes) Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver

Je vais maintenant vous montrer des concepts en cours de développement par le gouvernement du Canada pour une éventuelle publicité portant sur le vaccin COVID-19.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan Il y a un total de trois concepts qui comprennent chacun un scénarimage. 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. Le produit final sera une vidéo de 15 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.

Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Il y a un total de trois concepts qui comprennent chacun un scénarimage. Chaque concept a deux versions. Chaque version doit donc fournir des exemples du genre de choses qui figureraient dans chaque approche (c’est-à-dire que dans la version définitive, il y aura de multiples versions de ce concept). Vous remarquerez que la publicité n’est pas dans sa forme définitive. 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 (elles ont été tirées d’une banque d’images) 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 15 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.

Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Il y a un total de trois concepts dont chacun comprend des images de bannière. Vous remarquerez qu’elles ne sont pas dans une forme achevée.

ALTERNER LA SÉQUENCE DES CONCEPTS PAR RÉGION

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario ordre de présentation : 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b

Peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan ordre de présentation : 2a, 2 c, 3b, 3 c, 1b, 1 c

Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta ordre de présentation : 3a, 3b, 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM ordre de présentation : 1a, 1b, 3a, 3b, 2a, 2b

Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver ordre de présentation : 2, 1, 3

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM AFFICHER CONCEPT 1a À L’ÉCRAN : Une dose de faits
Peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan AFFICHER CONCEPT 1b À L’ÉCRAN : Une dose de faits
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver AFFICHER CONCEPT 1 À L’ÉCRAN : Une dose de faits

Quelles sont vos premières impressions de cette publicité ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Quel est le message principal de cette publicité ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Est-ce que cette publicité répond à quelconque préoccupation que vous pourriez avoir au sujet des vaccins COVID-19 ?
Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Et supposons que ça disait quelque chose comme « apprenez-en davantage sur la façon dont les vaccins COVID-19 peuvent vous aider à vous protéger. » Tenant compte de cela, est-ce que le concept dans son ensemble vous inciterait à consulter le site Web pour obtenir plus d’informations ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan Avez-vous d’autres idées sur ce qui pourrait rendre cette publicité plus efficace ?
Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Avez-vous d’autres idées sur ce qui pourrait rendre cette publicité plus efficace ou sur ce qui pourrait vous inciter à consulter le site Web ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Vous incite-t-elle à vous rendre sur le site Web pour obtenir plus d’informations ?

Maintenant, je vais vous montrer une autre version de cette publicité.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM AFFICHER CONCEPT 1b À L’ÉCRAN : Une dose de faits
Peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan AFFICHER CONCEPT 1b (VERSION AUTOCHTONE) À L’ÉCRAN : Une dose de faits

Que pensez-vous de cette version de l’annonce ?
Pensez-vous que celle-ci est plus efficace ou moins efficace que la première version que vous avez vue ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Dans les deux versions de ce concept, vous avez peut-être remarqué la signature à la fin qui dit « Informez-vous. Préparez-vous pour le vaccin. » J’aimerais vous montrer deux autres signatures possibles et connaître votre avis sur celles-ci. AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN LES SIGNATURES UNE DOSE DE FAITS. Les deux autres versions sont « Informez-vous. Soyez prêt pour le vaccin » and « Informez-vous. Préparez-vous au vaccin. »
- Y a-t-il une différence entre les trois ? Le cas échéant, comment les interprétez-vous ou réagissez-vous à chacune d’entre elles ?
- Laquelle parmi celles-ci préférez-vous et pourquoi ? SONDAGE À MAIN LEVÉE.

Passons au concept suivant.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM AFFICHER CONCEPT 2a À L’ÉCRAN : Les vaccins et vous
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver AFFICHER CONCEPT 2 À L’ÉCRAN : Les vaccins et vous

Quelles sont vos premières impressions de cette publicité ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Quel est le message principal de cette publicité ?
Est-ce que cette publicité répond à quelconque préoccupation que vous pourriez avoir au sujet des vaccins COVID-19 ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Avez-vous d’autres idées sur ce qui pourrait rendre cette publicité plus efficace ?
Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Encore une fois : supposons que ça disait quelque chose comme « apprenez-en davantage sur la façon dont les vaccins COVID-19 peuvent vous aider à vous protéger. » Tenant compte de cela, est-ce que le concept dans son ensemble vous inciterait à consulter le site Web pour obtenir plus d’informations ?
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Avez-vous d’autres idées sur ce qui pourrait rendre cette publicité plus efficace sur ce qui pourrait vous inciter à consulter le site Web ?

Maintenant, je vais vous montrer une autre version de cette publicité.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM AFFICHER CONCEPT 2b À L’ÉCRAN : Les vaccins et vous
Peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan AFFICHER CONCEPT 2c (VERSION AUTOCHTONE) À L’ÉCRAN : Les vaccins et vous

Que pensez-vous de cette version de l’annonce ?
Pensez-vous que celle-ci est plus efficace ou moins efficace que la première version que vous avez vue ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

Maintenant, je vais vous montrer un troisième concept.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM AFFICHER CONCEPT 3a À L’ÉCRAN : Demandez à un expert
Peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan AFFICHER CONCEPT 3b À L’ÉCRAN : Demandez à un expert
Aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver AFFICHER CONCEPT 3 À L’ÉCRAN : Demandez à un expert

Quelles sont vos premières impressions de cette publicité ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Quel est le message principal de cette publicité ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Est-ce que cette publicité répond à quelconque préoccupation que vous pourriez avoir au sujet des vaccins COVID-19 ?
Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Est-ce qu’elle vous incite à consulter le site Web pour obtenir plus d’informations ?
- SI NON : Supposons que ça disait quelque chose comme « Apprenez-en davantage sur comment fonctionnent les vaccins. »
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan Avez-vous d’autres idées sur ce qui pourrait rendre cette publicité plus efficace ?
Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Avez-vous d’autres idées sur ce qui pourrait rendre cette publicité plus efficace sur ce qui pourrait vous inciter à consulter le site Web ?

Maintenant, je vais vous montrer une autre version de cette publicité.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM AFFICHER CONCEPT 3b À L’ÉCRAN : Demandez à un expert

Peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan AFFICHER CONCEPT 3c (VERSION AUTOCHTONE) À L’ÉCRAN : Demandez à un expert

Que pensez-vous de cette version de l’annonce ?
Pensez-vous que celle-ci est plus efficace ou moins efficace que la première version que vous avez vue ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Si vous pouviez poser une question à un expert sur les vaccins COVID-19, que lui demanderiez-vous ?

RÉCAPITULATIF DE LA PUBLICITÉ

- Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan SONDAGE : Lequel des trois concepts vous semble le plus efficace pour ce qui est de répondre à quelconque préoccupation que vous pourriez avoir au sujet des vaccins COVID-19 ? (NOTE AU MODÉRATEUR : SI ON LE DEMANDE, PRÉCISER QUE L’ON DOIT TENIR COMPTE DE L’ENSEMBLE DES CONCEPTS 1, 2 et 3 [AVEC L’AUTRE VERSION] POUR FINS DE COMPARAISON.)
- Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver SONDAGE Indépendamment des images ou des messages uniques à chaque concept, laquelle des trois approches vous semble la plus efficace pour ce qui est de répondre à quelconque préoccupation que vous pourriez avoir au sujet des vaccins COVID-19 : est-ce une approche qui présente des faits sur les vaccins (Une dose de faits), une approche question-réponse (Les vaccins et vous), ou une approche du genre « Demandez à un(e) expert(e) » ? ) » ? (NOTE AU MODÉRATEUR : SI ON LE DEMANDE, PRÉCISER QUE QUE L’ON DOIT TENIR COMPTE DE L’ENSEMBLE DES CONCEPTS 1, 2 et 3 [AVEC L’AUTRE VERSION] POUR FINS DE COMPARAISON.)
- Qu’est-ce qui fait que vous préférez le concept XX plutôt que les autres ?
VACCIN COVID-19 (15 minutes) Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM, parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B.

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM J’aimerais maintenant me concentrer de manière plus générale sur les vaccins COVID-19, et pas seulement sur les concepts publicitaires que nous venons de passer en revue…
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Maintenant, j’aimerais me tourner vers les vaccins COVID-19…

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Lorsque nous vous avons invité à participer à ce groupe de discussion, nous vous avons demandé si vous pensiez vous faire vacciner ou non. Certain(e)s d’entre vous ont répondu oui, mais que vous préfériez attendre, et d’autres ont répondu être incertain(e)s. Est-ce toujours le cas ? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas ?
- Parmi les concepts publicitaires que nous venons de voir, est-ce qu’il y en a qui vous ont fait reconsidérer votre choix ou qui vous ont amenés à vous sentir plus enclin à vous faire vacciner ? De quelle façon ?
- [SI TOUJOURS RÉTICENT(E)] Quels sont les facteurs qui influenceront votre décision de vous faire vacciner ou non ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM Lorsque vous entendez parler de gens qui se font vacciner au Canada, est-il plus probable ou moins probable que vous allez vouloir vous faire vacciner, ou est-ce que cela ne vous influence pas ? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas ?
Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, personnes hésitantes à la vaccination de la RGM De quelles autres informations avez-vous besoin pour vous aider à prendre une décision quant à recevoir le vaccin COVID-19 ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres taille de moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Avez-vous l’intention de recevoir le vaccin COVID-19 lorsqu’il vous sera proposé, ou non ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
- (POUR LES PERSONNES QUI SONT HÉSITANTES) Quels sont les facteurs qui influenceront votre décision de vous faire vacciner ou non ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres taille de moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Pensez-vous que le gouvernement du Canada fait un bon travail pour ce qui est de l’achat et de la distribution du vaccin aux provinces et territoires, ou non ?
- Pourquoi pensez-vous cela ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Par rapport à d’autres pays, comment évaluez-vous le Canada dans son ensemble pour ce qui est de vacciner les gens ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Quand pensez-vous être personnellement en mesure de recevoir un vaccin ?

Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Maintenant, je vais vous montrer trois affirmations différentes qui portent sur le plan de vaccination du gouvernement du Canada, puis je vous poserai quelques questions.

Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN

- Le Canada est en bonne voie de vacciner toutes les personnes qui le souhaitent d’ici la fin du mois de septembre.
- Le Canada vaccine ses citoyen(ne)s à un rythme deux fois supérieur au taux mondial
- Jusqu’à présent, le Canada a vacciné ses citoyen(ne)s à peu près au même rythme que l’Union européenne

Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Que pensez-vous du plan de vaccination du gouvernement du Canada après avoir lu ces affirmations ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Y a-t-il certaines de ces affirmations qui vous rassurent sur le plan de vaccination du Canada ? Lesquelles ?
- Est-ce que quelqu’un se sent moins bien par rapport à ce plan ? Ou alors, celui-ci vous laisse-t-il indifférent ?

L’ITINÉRANCE (15 - 20 minutes) Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta, grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver, Nouveau-Brunswick

Personnes hésitantes à la vaccination des grands centres de l’Ontario, Canadiens racisés des centres de taille moyenne et grande de l’Alberta Maintenant, je souhaiterais changer de sujet afin qu’on se penche sur la question de l’itinérance.
Grands centres francophones, aîné(e)s de l’île de Vancouver Encore une fois, je souhaiterais changer de sujet afin qu’on se penche sur la question de l’itinérance.

Pensez-vous qu’il y a un problème d’itinérance au Canada ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Est-ce que l’itinérance s’est aggravée récemment ? S’est améliorée ? Est demeurée inchangée ?
Que peut faire le gouvernement du Canada pour contribuer à la lutte contre l’itinérance au pays ?
Pensez-vous qu’il soit réaliste d’essayer de mettre fin à l’itinérance d’ici les dix prochaines années ?
- Ou serait-il plus réalisable si le gouvernement du Canada visait une réduction de 50 % ?

SONDAGE :

Je vais vous montrer quelques énoncés qui pourraient être utilisés par le gouvernement du Canada en tant que message général sur la question de l’itinérance au pays. Nous allons les lire, puis nous procéderons à un sondage. AFFICHER LES ÉNONCÉS À L’ÉCRAN. LANCEZ LE SONDAGE. Maintenant, veuillez en choisir un qui représente le genre de message le plus approprié pour le gouvernement fédéral sur la question de l’itinérance.
- Chaque Canadienne et Canadien mérite d’avoir un chez-soi sécuritaire et abordable.
- Une personne itinérante au Canada en est une de trop.
- Dans un pays comme le Canada, personne ne devrait vivre dans la rue.

NOTE À L’INTENTION DU MODÉRATEUR : Après le vote, veuillez discuter des raisons qui ont motivé cette décision.

MESSAGES VACCINAUX (20 minutes) Peuples autochtones du Manitoba et de la Saskatchewan

Je vais maintenant vous montrer une série de messages que le gouvernement du Canada pourrait émettre en lien avec les vaccins COVID-19. J’aimerais que vous les lisiez individuellement et nous en discuterons par la suite.

AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN

- La COVID-19 peut être dévastatrice pour les personnes qui ont des conditions médicales sous-jacentes, comme les maladies cardiaques et le diabète. Les nouveaux vaccins les protégeront.
- Le vaccin COVID-19 est maintenant disponible pour les aîné(e)s autochtones de plus de 70 ans. Celui-ci les protégera et il est sécuritaire même pour ceux qui ont des conditions médicales sous-jacentes.
- Les vaccins COVID-19 de Moderna et de Pfizer sont tous deux efficaces. Les communautés éloignées recevront le Moderna, car c’est celui qu’elles sont le plus en mesure d’entreposer. Apprenez-en davantage.
- Les communautés éloignées recevront le vaccin Moderna, car c’est celui qu’elles sont les plus en mesure d’entreposer. Les leaders autochtones ont pris cette décision avec les responsables de la santé pour la sécurité de leur communauté.
- Les peuples autochtones ont participé aux essais du vaccin COVID-19, qui se sont révélés sûrs et efficaces pour eux. D’autres groupes, tels que les enfants et les femmes enceintes, n’ont pas été testés, c’est pourquoi ils ne sont pas recommandés pour le déploiement initial de la vaccination.
- Les leaders autochtones ont contribué à déterminer qui sera vacciné en premier. Les vaccins COVID-19 sont maintenant disponibles pour les communautés des Premières Nations, des Inuits et des Métis.
- Les communautés des Premières Nations et des Inuits ont réussi à stopper la propagation du virus H1N1 en se faisant vacciner. Les vaccins COVID-19 vous aideront à faire de même.

Je vais vous soumettre un sondage. J’aimerais que vous choisissiez parmi ces messages ceux qui, le cas échéant, sont les plus importants (les participants doivent sélectionner au maximum 2 ou 3 messages).

LE MODÉRATEUR PASSERA EN REVUE LES CHOIX

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

J’aimerais maintenant qu’on porte notre attention sur les questions autochtones.

Quels sont les enjeux autochtones importants sur lesquels le gouvernement du Canada devrait, selon vous, se concentrer ?
Est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada a fait quoi que ce soit de bien ?
Que peut-il améliorer ?
Avez-vous entendu parler de la Déclaration des Nations unies sur les droits des peuples autochtones ?

AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN
La Déclaration des Nations unies sur les droits des peuples autochtones est un document international adopté par les Nations unies en 2007 qui énonce les droits fondamentaux que les peuples autochtones devraient avoir dans le monde entier. Elle explique comment les gouvernements devraient respecter les droits de l’homme des peuples autochtones.

La Déclaration universelle des droits de l’homme comprend 46 articles qui décrivent les droits spécifiques et les mesures que les gouvernements doivent prendre pour protéger ces droits. Les principaux thèmes de la déclaration sont les suivants :

- Le droit à l’autodétermination
- Le droit à l’identité culturelle
- Le droit au consentement libre, préalable et éclairé (c’est-à-dire le droit d’être consulté et de prendre des décisions sur toute question susceptible d’affecter les droits des peuples autochtones)
- La protection contre la discrimination

Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit récemment quant à ce que le gouvernement du Canada a fait en réponse à la Déclaration des Nations Unies sur les droits des peuples autochtones (UNDRIP) ? Qu’avez-vous entendu ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN
Le gouvernement du Canada a récemment déposé un projet de loi visant à mettre en œuvre la Déclaration des Nations Unies sur les droits des peuples autochtones.

Qu’en pensez-vous ? Pensez-vous que cela changera quelque chose ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?

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

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 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 ?
Avez-vous entendu quoi que ce soit quant à l’échéancier du gouvernement du Canada pour lever tous les avis à long terme sur la qualité de l’eau potable ?

AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN
Le gouvernement du Canada a récemment annoncé qu’il n’atteindrait pas l’objectif qu’il s’était fixé, celui de mars 2021, comme prévu initialement. En plus des 2,19 milliards de dollars déjà prévus au budget pour mettre fin aux avis concernant la qualité de l’eau potable à long terme, le gouvernement a annoncé une somme additionnelle de 1,5 milliard de dollars pour terminer les travaux. Ces nouveaux fonds visent à assurer un soutien continu pour le fonctionnement et l’entretien quotidien des infrastructures liées à l’eau dans les réserves, à maintenir le financement des infrastructures en approvisionnement d’eau et de traitements d’eaux usées dans les réserves, et à payer les travaux interrompus en raison de la pandémie de COVID-19 et d’autres retards dans les projets.

Qu’en pensez-vous ?
Quel est, à votre avis, un délai raisonnable ?

LA HAINE SUR INTERNET (30 minutes) Grands centres francophones, intérieur de la C.-B.
Nous allons à nouveau nous tourner vers les conversations en ligne.

Lorsque vous pensez aux conversations en ligne, comme les publications dans les médias sociaux tels que Facebook ou Twitter, pensez-vous que les gens devraient être autorisés à dire ce qu’ils ou elles veulent en ligne, ou devrait-il y avoir des limites à ce que les gens peuvent dire ?

SONDAGE :

Je vais maintenant vous montrer une liste d’enjeux et nous allons ensuite procéder à un sondage pour voir lesquels, le cas échéant, constituent selon vous des problèmes majeurs au Canada. AFFICHER LES ÉNONCÉS À L’ÉCRAN. LANCEZ LE SONDAGE. Veuillez en choisir un maximum de trois. Si vous ne croyez pas que l’un d’entre eux constitue un problème majeur, alors n’en choisissez aucun. Nous discuterons ensuite de vos choix.
- L’exploitatio sexuelle des enfants
- Les discours haineux
- L’incitation à la violence
- La diffusion non consensuelle d’images intimes
- La radicalisation
- La propagande terroriste
Dans quelle mesure êtes-vous préoccupé, si vous l’êtes du tout, par ces phénomènes que l’on observe en ligne ?
Est-ce que ces enjeux vous touchent personnellement (ou touchent vos enfants) ?
- S’agit-il plutôt de problèmes que l’on observe dans I' ensemble de la société ? (Ou les deux)
Pensez-vous qu’une plus grande réglementation en ligne soit nécessaire ?
- SI OUI : Est-ce que le gouvernement du Canada a un rôle à jouer en réponse à ces enjeux ? Ou est-ce la responsabilité des entreprises de médias sociaux elles-mêmes ?

DÉCOMPTE À MAIN LEVÉE :

Je vais vous montrer une liste de possibles choses que le gouvernement du Canada pourrait potentiellement faire. Ensuite, je vous demanderai de me dire laquelle vous estimez devrait-être la priorité absolue du gouvernement du Canada. Si vous estimez que le gouvernement fédéral ne devrait faire aucune de ces choses, veuillez me le dire.
- Demander aux entreprises de médias sociaux d’accroître leur propre surveillance.
- Renforcer la surveillance en ligne par les forces policières des choses qui sont illégales selon les lois actuelles.
- Réglementer les entreprises de médias sociaux afin que des règles soient établies sur ce qui doit être retiré.
Le modérateur discutera des choix des participant(e)s.
- Combien d’entre vous avez choisi (Le modérateur passera en revue chaque option.) ? Pourquoi avez-vous choisi cette option plutôt que les autres comme priorité absolue ?
- Combien d’entre vous n’ont choisi aucune des options ? Pourquoi ? Y a-t-il autre chose qu’il devrait plutôt faire ?
- Je vous ai demandé de choisir votre priorité absolue. Mais pensez-vous qu’ils devraient faire toutes ces choses ? Par ailleurs, y a-t-il des choses que vous pensez qu’ils ne devraient pas faire ? Pourquoi ?

DÉCOMPTE À MAIN LEVÉE :

Maintenant, je vais vous montrer une liste de possibles choses que les entreprises de médias sociaux pourraient potentiellement faire. Ensuite, je vous demanderai de me dire laquelle vous estimez devrait-être la priorité absolue du gouvernement du Canada. Encore une fois, si vous pensez qu’elles ne devraient faire aucune de ces choses, veuillez me le dire.
- Ajouter des filtres supplémentaires pour permettre aux utilisateurs d’identifier les contenus illégaux ou autrement nuisibles.
- Instaurer des sanctions plus strictes pour les récidivistes, y compris leur interdire l’accès à la plateforme.
- Se débarrasser des trolls et des robots conversationnels.
- Faire preuve d’une plus grande transparence quant à l’identité des récidivistes.
Le modérateur discutera des choix des participant(e)s.
- Combien d’entre vous avez choisi (Le modérateur passera en revue chaque option.) ? Pourquoi avez-vous choisi cette option plutôt que les autres comme priorité absolue ?
- Combien d’entre vous n’ont choisi aucune des options ? Pourquoi ? Y a-t-il autre chose qu’il devrait plutôt faire ?
- Je vous ai demandé de choisir votre priorité absolue. Mais pensez-vous qu’ils devraient faire toutes ces choses ? Par ailleurs, y a-t-il des choses que vous pensez qu’ils ne devraient pas faire ? Pourquoi ?
Laquelle de ces deux options se rapproche le plus de votre point de vue (AFFICHER LES ÉNONCÉS À L’ÉCRAN. DÉCOMPTE À MAIN LEVÉE) :
- Il ne devrait pas y avoir de réglementation accrue des plateformes de médias sociaux, même si cela signifie que des choses comme les discours haineux ou l’incitation à la violence peuvent faire du mal aux gens.
- Il faut renforcer la réglementation des plateformes de médias sociaux, même si cela signifie que du contenu légitime peut occasionnellement être signalé et/ou retiré.

PETITS RÉACTEURS NUCLÉAIRES (15 minutes) Nouveau-Brunswick
Changeant encore de sujet…

Que pensez-vous de l’énergie nucléaire par rapport aux autres sources d’énergie ? Le Canada devrait-il en faire plus ou moins avec l’énergie nucléaire ?
Avez-vous entendu parler de petits réacteurs nucléaires, ou petits réacteurs modulaires (PRM) ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT AU BESOIN
Les petits réacteurs modulaires (PRM) sont un secteur émergent de l’innovation en matière d’énergie nucléaire au Canada et dans le monde. Les PRM auront des caractéristiques de sécurité améliorées, une plus petite empreinte et produiront moins de déchets que les réacteurs d’énergie nucléaire traditionnels.

Que pensez-vous d’avoir plus de PRM au Canada ?
- SI PRÉOCCUPÉ : Quelles sont vos principales préoccupations ?
Certaines personnes affirment que c’est un bon moyen de réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre et d’amener le Canada à la carboneutralité. Que pensez-vous de cela — pensez-vous qu’il s’agit d’une bonne raison de construire davantage de réacteurs PRM au Canada, ou non ?
Certaines personnes disent que cela représente une occasion économique importante puisque plusieurs entreprises canadiennes ont la capacité de les fabriquer et qu’elles pourraient les vendre à d’autres pays. Cela permettrait donc de créer des emplois au Canada. Que pensez-vous de cela — Pensez-vous qu’il s’agit d’une bonne raison de construire davantage de réacteurs PRM au Canada, ou non ?

SERVICE DE GARDE (35 minutes) Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT, centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B.

Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT J’aimerais maintenant que l’on passe à une discussion sur la garde des enfants, et j’aimerais que vous pensiez à votre situation avant la pandémie, et non à votre situation actuelle. Donc, avec ceci en tête…

Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. J’aimerais maintenant passer à une discussion sur les services de garde des jeunes enfants. Que vous ayez ou non un enfant en garderie, nous voulons vous poser les questions suivantes en nous basant sur votre compréhension des services de garde des jeunes enfants avant la pandémie, et non sur la situation actuelle.

Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Que pensez-vous des services de garde dans votre secteur ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Que pensez-vous des services de garde dans votre secteur ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Qu’est-ce qui pourrait être amélioré ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. Croyez-vous qu’ils pourraient être améliorés ?
- DEMANDEZ AU BESOIN : des listes d’attente plus courtes, la qualité des services de garde, des coûts moins élevés, des endroits plus pratiques ?
Êtes-vous au courant des plans du gouvernement du Canada en matière de services de garde des jeunes enfants ?

ÉCLAIRCISSEMENT :
Le gouvernement du Canada a indiqué qu’il veut faire un important investissement à long terme et de façon soutenue pour créer un système pancanadien d’apprentissage et de garde des jeunes enfants, y compris un soutien supplémentaire pour l’apprentissage et la garde des jeunes enfants autochtones.

Que pensez-vous de cela ?
Croyez-vous qu’il est important que le gouvernement du Canada investisse dans les services de garde des jeunes enfants ou non ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT POUR LES PERSONNES QUI PENSENT QUE C’EST IMPORTANT : Certaines personnes peuvent penser que le gouvernement du Canada ne devrait pas investir davantage dans les services de garde des jeunes enfants alors qu’il enregistre actuellement un important déficit. Que leur diriez-vous en réponse à cela ?
- C’est-à-dire, quels genres de points soulèveriez-vous pour expliquer les avantages liés à un investissement accru dans les services de garde d’enfants ?
Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan, intérieur de la C.-B. POUR CEUX QUI PENSENT QUE C’EST IMPORTANT : Certaines personnes peuvent penser que le gouvernement du Canada ne devrait pas investir davantage dans les services de garde des jeunes enfants alors qu’il enregistre actuellement un important déficit. Que pensez-vous de ces préoccupations ? Est-ce qu’elles vous interpellent ?

Je vais maintenant vous montrer quelques raisons potentielles d’investir davantage dans les services de garde des jeunes enfants (AFFICHER LES POINTS À L’ÉCRAN, PUIS EN DISCUTER) :

a) Les services de garde des jeunes enfants sont importants, car ils permettent à un plus grand nombre de femmes d’entrer sur le marché du travail

b) Les services de garde des jeunes enfants font croître l’économie, car ils permettent à un plus grand nombre de personnes de travailler

c) Plus de places dans les services de garde des jeunes enfants signifie moins de pressions financières pour les familles de la classe moyenne, qui travaillent fort

Qu’en pensez-vous ? Y a-t-il des raisons convaincantes ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Laquelle de ces raisons trouvez-vous la PLUS convaincante ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
Maintenant que je vous ai présenté quelques raisons, pouvez-vous en trouver d’autres qui favorisent un plus grand investissement dans la garde des jeunes enfants au Canada ?

Maintenant, je vais vous montrer deux messages différents au sujet des services de garde des jeunes enfants pour voir ce que vous en pensez et lequel vous préférez. AFFICHER LES MESSAGES À L’ÉCRAN, PUIS EN DISCUTER

1. Investir dans des services de garde des jeunes enfants qui sont accessibles, de qualité, abordables et inclusifs n’est pas seulement bon pour les familles, c’est aussi une bonne chose sur le plan économique.

2. Des services de garde des jeunes enfants de haute qualité et abordables ne sont pas un luxe, mais une nécessité. C’est pourquoi nous sommes en train de créer un système national qui permettra de réduire les coûts et de créer plus de places.

Lequel de ces messages vous interpelle le plus ? Pourquoi ?

Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Je vais vous montrer différentes choses que le gouvernement du Canada pourrait mettre en œuvre dans le cadre de son plan pour un système pancanadien d’apprentissage et de garde des jeunes enfants. Nous allons les lire, puis nous procéderons à un sondage. MONTREZ D’ABORD LES ÉLÉMENTS À L’ÉCRAN. LANCER LE SONDAGE. Maintenant, veuillez choisir celui qui, selon vous, devrait être l’objectif du gouvernement du Canada.

- Réduire les frais de garde d’enfants de 5 000 $ par année d’ici l’an prochain, pour éventuellement les réduire de 7 500 $.
- Réduire de moitié les frais de garde d’enfants dans un premier temps, pour éventuellement les réduire de 75 %.
- Fixer un plafond de 20 dollars par jour pour les frais de garde d’enfants l’année prochaine, puis le ramener à 10 dollars par jour.
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT NOTE AU MODÉRATEUR : Après avoir voté, veuillez discuter des raisons pour lesquelles ils ont fait ce choix.
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Lequel parmi ceux-ci vous aiderait le plus ? Pourquoi ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT S’agit-il d’objectifs réalistes ?
Parents avec des enfants en garderie ou qui envisagent la garde d’enfants de la RGT Si le gouvernement du Canada devait réduire les frais de 5 000 $, serait-il préférable d’envoyer un remboursement aux parents pour ce montant OU devrait-il trouver un moyen de s’assurer que les frais réels facturés par le prestataire de services de garde diminuent ? Ou est-ce que cela n’a pas d’importance pour vous, pour autant que les coûts réels baissent ?

APPLICATION ALERTE COVID (20 minutes) Centres de taille moyenne et grande de la Saskatchewan

Est-ce que quelqu’un a entendu parler de l’application Alerte COVID du gouvernement du Canada ?
Est-ce que quelqu’un a téléchargé cette application ?
Savez-vous comment elle fonctionne ? Pouvez-vous l’expliquer brièvement ?

LE MODÉRATEUR DOIT CLARIFIER/LIRE À L’ENSEMBLE DES PARTICIPANT(E)S ET AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN
Au cours de l’été, le gouvernement du Canada a mis au point une application pour téléphone intelligent qui prévient ses utilisateurs s’ils se sont trouvés à proximité d’une personne ayant reçu un diagnostic de COVID-19.

L’application fonctionne en arrière-plan grâce à la technologie Bluetooth et, chaque fois que vous vous trouvez à moins de deux mètres d’une personne qui possède également l’application Alerte COVID, les deux téléphones échangent des codes aléatoires. Ces codes changent souvent et ne peuvent pas être utilisés pour vous identifier.

Si une personne utilisant l’application reçoit un diagnostic de COVID-19, elle peut choisir de télécharger les codes aléatoires envoyés par son téléphone, qui sont transmis à un serveur central. Le serveur ne reçoit que les codes, et non des informations sur la personne.

Chaque jour, lorsque votre téléphone est connecté à Internet, il obtient une liste des codes aléatoires des personnes qui ont signalé un diagnostic. S’il trouve un code qui correspond, l’application vous informe que vous avez été exposé et vous offre des directives.

LE MODÉRATEUR DOIT LIRE CE QUI SUIT : En février, l’application sera mise à jour afin de recueillir des informations supplémentaires. Je vais vous montrer quelques messages que le gouvernement du Canada prévoit de partager avec les gens sur les médias sociaux au sujet de ces changements. Je vais les lire avec vous et puis nous en discuterons.

AFFICHER À L’ÉCRAN

Messages :

À partir du XX février, de nouvelles données de performance seront recueillies à partir de l’application #AlerteCOVID pour mieux mesurer son efficacité à réduire la propagation de la #COVID19. Apprenez-en davantage : canada.ca/AlerteCOVID
Afin de soutenir le développement et l’évaluation continus de l’application #AlerteCOVID, le gouvernement du Canada commencera à recueillir des données limitées à même l’application tout en préservant l’approche de protection de la vie privée de celle-ci. Les données suivantes seront désormais incluses :
- Le nombre d’utilisateurs par province ou territoire
- Le nombre de notifications d’exposition envoyées
- Le nombre d’utilisateurs de l’application qui entrent une clé à usage unique après avoir reçu une notification
- Les données de performance technique
Ces données serviront à mieux évaluer l’efficacité de l’application, ainsi qu’à détecter et à résoudre plus rapidement tout problème afin d’offrir un meilleur service aux Canadiens. Apprenez-en davantage en visitant : canada.ca/AlerteCOVID
Afin de soutenir le développement continu de #AlerteCOVID, le #GC commencera à recueillir, à même l’application, des données limitées de performance liées à l’utilisation et au fonctionnement de l’application. Apprenez-en davantage : canada.ca/AlerteCOVID

Questions :

Quelles sont vos premières impressions par rapport à ces changements ?
Pour les personnes ayant téléchargé l’application, est-ce que cela fait en sorte que vous êtes plus enclin ou moins enclin à conserver l’application sur votre téléphone, ou est-ce que cela ne fait aucune différence ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire ça ?
Pour les personnes n’ayant pas téléchargé l’application, cela fait-il que vous êtes plus enclin ou moins enclin à la télécharger, ou cela ne fait-il aucune différence ? Qu’est-ce qui vous fait dire cela ?
SI L’ON N’EN FAIT PAS MENTION : Y en a-t-il parmi vous qui ont des préoccupations concernant la vie privée ?
- SI OUI : y a-t-il quelque chose de particulier dans ces messages qui suscite des préoccupations chez vous ?

CONCLUSION (5 minutes)

Appendix C – Advertising Concepts

Canada Wordmark (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, New Brunswick)

In the above image, the word ‘Canada’ is written in black font over a white background. Over the final ‘a’ there is a coloured, red and white, Canadian flag.

Vaccine Ads (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Vancouver Island Seniors)

A Dose of Facts A (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

A Dose of Facts B (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of six frames. The first frame is split vertically down the middle, on the left-hand side there is a dark grey background with large, white text reading ‘A dose of facts’ with the word ‘facts’ underlined. Below, in slightly smaller font, the text reads ‘COVID-19 vaccine’ with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. On the right-hand side of the frame, there is an image of a man and a younger man both reading a document. The second frame is, again, dark grey and white font reads ‘You can trust that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe’ with ‘safe’ being in yellow font. The third frame is the same dark grey with white text reading ‘because they meet the highest standards of safety, efficacy and quality’ with ‘highest standards’ in yellow font. The fourth frame is the same image of the man and a younger man both reading a document as was seen in the first frame. The fifth frame is back to the dark grey background that reads ‘Get informed. Get vaccine-ready.’ In white, bold font with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. At the bottom of the frame, yellow text presents the URL ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame ends on a white background with the Canada Wordmark in the middle.

A Dose of Facts C (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

The above figure consists of six frames. The first frame is split vertically down the middle, on the left-hand spite there is a dark grey background with large, white text reading ‘A dose of facts’ with the word ‘facts’ underlined. Below, in slightly smaller font, the text reads ‘COVID-19 vaccine’ with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. On the hand side of the frame, there is an image of a man in a plaid shirt who is drawing. The second frame is, again, dark grey and white font reads ‘The COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you and your community’ with ‘protect you and your community’ being in yellow font. The third frame is the same dark grey with white text reading ‘against serious illness, long-term health effects and even death.’ The fourth frame is the same image of the man in a plaid shirt who is drawing as was seen in the first frame. The fifth frame is back to the dark grey background that reads ‘Get informed. Get vaccine-ready.’ In white, bold font with an icon of a circle containing a vaccine syringe and vial to the left of the text. At the bottom of the frame, yellow text presents the URL ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame ends on a white background with the Canada Wordmark in the middle.

A Dose of Facts D (Vancouver Island Seniors)

Ask an Expert A (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Ask a COVID-19 vaccine expert’ with the words ‘vaccine expert’ in yellow font. The second frame depicts a young, smiling man against a light background, with the words ‘How do the COVID-19 vaccines work?’ to the right in dark green font. The third frame depicts Dr. Howard Njoo, Deputy Chief Public Health Officer (with his name and title overlaid in text on the bottom right of the frame) sitting at his desk. Below, the text reads ‘Dr. Howard Njoo (to camera) They word with your immune system so your body will be ready to fight the virus if you are exposed.’ The fourth frame depicts the same young man previously shown, although he is against a darker grey background now, and the text to the right reads ‘Make an informed decision about vaccination’ in white font. Below this text, smaller yellow test reads ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Canada Workmark in the middle.

Ask an Expert B (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Ask a COVID-19 vaccine expert’ with the words ‘vaccine expert’ in yellow font. The second frame depicts a young, smiling woman against a light background, with the words ‘How were the COVID-19 vaccines developed so quickly?’ to the right in dark green font. The third frame depicts Dr. Caroline Quach, Medical Lead, Infection Prevention and Control, CHU Ste-Justine (with her name and title overlaid in text on the bottom right of the frame) smiling towards the camera. Below, the text reads ‘Dr. Caroline Quach (to camera) The COVID-19 vaccines were developed quickly thanks to advances in science, international collaboration and increased funding.’ The fourth frame depicts the same young woman previously shown, although she is closer up and is against a darker grey background now, and the text to the right reads ‘Make an informed decision about vaccination’ in white font. Below this text, smaller yellow test reads ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Canada Workmark in the middle.

Ask an Expert C (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘Ask a COVID-19 vaccine expert’ with the words ‘vaccine expert’ in yellow font. The second frame depicts an older woman against a light background, with the words ‘Why should I get vaccinated against COVID-19?’ to the right in dark green font. The third frame depicts Dr. Evan Adams, Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Indigenous Services Canada (with his name and title overlaid in text on the bottom right of the frame). Below, the text reads ‘Dr. Evan Adams (to camera) The COVID-19 vaccines can help protect you and your community against serious illness, long-term health effects and even death.’ The fourth frame depicts the same older woman previously shown, although she is against a darker grey background now, and the text to the right reads ‘Make an informed decision about vaccination’ in white font. Below this text, smaller yellow test reads ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Canada Workmark in the middle.

Ask an Expert D (Vancouver Island Seniors)

The Vaccine and You A (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The Vaccine and You B (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

The Vaccine and You C (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

The above figure consists of five frames. The first frame has a yellow background was six animated figures shown (in order from left to right, there is a woman with light skin and white hair, a woman with darker skin and black hair in a bun, a light skin male with short, blond hair, a male with darker skin and short, brown hair, a male with light skin, short brown hair and a blue face mask, and a woman with darker skin and dark brown curly hair), all wearing dark green shirts. There is also text in the middle of the frame. Smaller white font reads ‘the COVID-19 vaccine’ with a maple leaf to the right. Underneath, in larger white font reads ‘vaccines & you’ with the word ‘you’ in yellow font. The second frame has the same yellow background with white font on the left-hand side reading ‘Why should I get vaccinated against COVID-19?’ to the right-hand side, the darker skin female with black hair in a bun animated figure is looking straight out. The next slide has a dark grey background with white text reading ‘There is no way to know how COVID-19 will affect you but it can cause severe complications. A COVID-19 vaccine can help protect you.’ The next slide has a similar dark grey background, at the top, there is small yellow font reading ‘Find out more about’ with ‘The COVID-19 vaccines & you’ below. To the right of the word ‘COVID-19’ there is a maple leaf and the word ‘you’ is in yellow. At the bottom of the frame, there is white font reading ‘Canada.ca/coronavirus.’ The final frame has a white background with the Government of Canada Wordmark in the middle.

The Vaccine and You D (Vancouver Island Seniors)

Infographic: Progress on lifting long-term drinking water advisories on public systems on reserves (Northern Ontario Indigenous Peoples)

Continuous Qualitative Data Collection of Canadians’ Views – January 2021

Final Report

Prepared for the Privy Council Office

Supplier name: The Strategic Counsel

Contract number: 35035-182346/001/CY

Contract value: $1,618,838.00

Award date: December 18, 2020

Delivery date: March 23, 2021

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

January 2021

Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Rapport final - Collecte continue de données qualitatives sur les opinions des canadiens – janvier 2021.

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:

International Standard Book Number (ISBN):

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

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2021

Political Neutrality Certification

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: __________________________________

Donna Nixon, Partner The Strategic Counsel

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

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

Detailed Approach

Group Locations and Composition

Key Findings

Part I: COVID-19 Related Findings

Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)

Greenhouse Gas Reductions (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

Unprompted, most participants had not heard anything about the Government of Canada’s recent announcement to reduce greenhouse gases by 2030.

Following further clarification, participants expressed support of new greenhouse gas reduction measures and almost all participants indicated that they were more supportive of the idea of increasing the price on carbon, pending answers to a myriad of questions.

Two groups were asked if they had heard of the Climate Action Incentive Payment. Awareness across all groups was very low and participants were generally unfamiliar with this initiative.

COVID-19 Outlook (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

In several groups participants discussed the evolving situation with respect to COVID-19 and the impact of the pandemic on their lives.

Behaviours (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

Impact of COVID-19 (GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-sized and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

Performance of the Government of Canada (Major Francophone Centres, New Brunswick, GTA Parents with Children in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan)

Travel Restrictions (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients)

Vaccine Ads (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant, Vancouver Island Seniors)

Awareness of COVID-19 Vaccine (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick)

Participants in the above-noted groups had heard about varying announcements and reports regarding a COVID-19 vaccine, pertaining to the following aspects:

Assessment of the Government of Canada’s Performance (GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-Size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

Procuring and Distributing the Vaccine

Compared to Other Countries

Government of Canada’s Vaccine Plan (Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C.)

Participants were shown three statements about the Government of Canada’s vaccine plan and asked how they felt about each.

Participants were asked to review the statements again and specifically consider which one of the three was the worst or least helpful. Most focused on Canada is vaccinating its citizens at over double the global rate because it tended to prompt some skepticism for a number of reasons.

Timing of Vaccinations (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick)

Vaccine Intentions and Hesitancy

Plans to be Vaccinated (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Francophone Centres, Vancouver Island Seniors, New Brunswick; GTA Parents with Kids in Daycare or Considering Daycare, Mid-Size and Major Centres Saskatchewan, Interior B.C., )

In several of the groups, participants were asked if they planned to be vaccinated. Most participants responded affirmatively, while a few were unsure or indicated they would not.

Exploring Vaccine Hesitancy (Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians, GMA Vaccine Hesitant)

In a select number of groups the issue of vaccine hesitancy was explored in more depth. Some felt they were not at a particularly high risk and, as a result, felt comfortable holding off and/or being part of the last group to be vaccinated

When asked whether the ad concepts they had just seen would cause them to re-consider and/or make them feel more inclined to get vaccinated, most said they would not. Additional information and hard data would help to increase levels of trust and ultimately sway them towards being vaccinated.

Vaccine Messages (Manitoba and Saskatchewan Indigenous Peoples)

Those identifying as Indigenous people residing in both Manitoba and Saskatchewan were shown multiple statements related to COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID Alert App (Mid-size and Major Centres Saskatchewan)

A discussion was held among a group in Saskatchewan on the topic of the COVID Alert app and its ongoing development. The conversation centered on participants’ awareness of and reactions to the app as well as to recent updates to it.

To ensure that all participants had some basic information about the app, participants were provided with a brief overview (further details can be found in the detailed findings section of this report).

Overall, participants were supportive of the proposed modifications to the app however, a few expressed skepticism and felt that the collection of additional personal data could lead to more invasive infringement upon personal freedoms and sharing of personal data to third parties.

CERB Repayment (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, Major Centres Ontario Vaccine Hesitant, Mid-size and Major Centres Alberta Racialized Canadians)

Government of Canada’s Performance in Providing COVID-19 Financial Support

CERB Repayment

Participants were then asked, for those Canadians who received the CERB by mistake, which of the following three options made the most sense:

Focused Discussion (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients)

Part II: Other Issues

Canada Wordmark (Newfoundland and Labrador Former CERB Recipients, Quebec City Former CERB Recipients, New Brunswick)

Donna Nixon, Partner
The Strategic Counsel