Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)

All groups were asked to share what they had seen, read, or heard about the Government of Canada in recent days. A wide range of announcements and initiatives were recalled, with many mentioning the federal government’s ongoing response to a series of tariffs imposed by the United States (U.S.), as well as actions it had taken to further trade negotiations with the U.S. government, including the announcement that it would be rescinding the Digital Services Tax (DST) as well as removing many of the counter tariffs that had been in place on U.S. imports since March 2025. A number also recalled having heard that the Government of Canada had taken action to provide $1.25 billion in funding to support Canada’s softwood lumber sector amidst these tariffs.

Additional actions and initiatives mentioned by participants included the hosting by the Government of Canada of the 2025 Group of Seven (G7) Leaders’ Summit, the introduction of the Canada Strong Pass, and the deployment of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel to assist in the evacuation efforts for communities in Manitoba that had been impacted by large-scale wildfires in the province. A few also recalled the announcement by the Air Canada flight attendants’ division of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) that its members would be taking strike action, and the subsequent ruling by the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) that this job action was illegal, requiring the flight attendants to return to work.

Government of Canada Priorities (Ontario Recent Graduates, Montreal Living Pay Cheque to Pay Cheque, Saint John, Ontario Parents of Children under 18, Vancouver, Small-to-Mid Size Centres Atlantic Canada, Manitoba Impacted by Wildfires, Hamilton Workers in Tariff-Impacted Industries, Montérégie Region Quebec)

Nine groups took part in conversations related to key priority areas that had been identified by the Government of Canada. At the outset of their discussions, participants in five groups, respectively comprised of recent graduates in Ontario, individuals in Montreal living pay cheque to pay cheque, and residents of Saint John, the Montérégie region of Quebec, and small and mid-sized centres in Atlantic Canada, were asked to share what they believed were the top issues that the federal government should be focusing on. A wide range of areas were mentioned, including the cost of living, housing affordability, health care, the Canada-U.S. relationship, education, and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

Asked whether they had recently seen, read, or heard anything about priority areas that had been announced by the Government of Canada, several recalled having heard that the federal government had been working to remove internal trade barriers within Canada, with the overall goal of promoting greater free trade across the country and increasing the strength of the Canadian economy. It was also thought that efforts had been taken by the Government of Canada to establish closer trading relationships with partners other than the U.S., with the aim of diversifying the country’s economic partnerships. Other actions or initiatives mentioned by participants included increasing the resiliency of Canada’s electricity grid, making housing more affordable for Canadians, stabilizing the rate of immigration, and increasing the defence budget, in part as a way of upholding Canada’s commitments to its allies in organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

Overall Impressions (Ontario Recent Graduates, Montreal Living Pay Cheque to Pay Cheque, Saint John, Small and Mid-Size Centres Atlantic Canada, Montérégie Region Quebec)

Five groups engaged in conversations related to their overall impressions of the priority areas that had been announced by the Government of Canada as well as their views regarding which of these priorities were the most important. Provided with a list of the priority areas that the federal government would be focusing on, while participants were largely positive in their reactions to these priority areas, a number questioned whether all of these priorities were achievable and/or whether the Government of Canada would be able to address all of these issues simultaneously. Identifying the individual priority areas that they felt especially positively about, participants mentioned initiatives such as building one Canadian economy, making housing more affordable, bringing down costs for Canadians, and protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe.

Participants next engaged in an exercise where they were asked to identify the three priority areas (out of the seven previously shown) that they felt were the most important for the Government of Canada to be focusing on. On balance, ‘Bringing down costs for Canadians’ and ‘Making housing more affordable’ received the highest level of support. It was felt that progress on these priority areas would likely have a positive impact on a large number of Canadians and would assist in bolstering the financial security of many households. The view was expressed that taking action on these priorities could also help to address other issues, such as homelessness and perceived rising crime, that were seen by some as being connected to broader challenges like the high cost of living and growing financial pressures on Canadians.

Several also selected ‘Establishing a new economic and security relationship with the U.S.’ and ‘Strengthening collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world’. Among those who believed that establishing a new economic and security relationship with the U.S. was an important priority, a number expressed the view that given the close geographical proximity and the perceived existing economic interconnectedness between the two countries, it was of critical importance for the federal government to re-establish a close, working relationship with the U.S. in order to promote economic prosperity for both countries.

A number also selected ‘Building one Canadian economy’ and ‘Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe’. For those who felt that it was important for the federal government to continue its efforts to build one Canadian economy, it was thought that this was the best way to strengthen and increase the country’s economic resiliency and that this approach would yield positive economic benefits for Canadians everywhere. Among the participants who selected protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe, it was widely felt that this was a key responsibility of the federal government and a priority that impacted all Canadians.

Only a small number selected ‘Spending less on government operations.’ For those who chose this priority area, concerns were expressed about the impact that the rising national debt would have on future generations and believed that it was important for the federal government to be working towards producing a balanced budget. Very few selected ‘Attracting the best talent in the world, while keeping overall immigration rates sustainable.’

Discussing whether there were any priorities not listed that they felt should be included, participants mentioned a number of areas. These included increasing investments towards Canada’s health care system, bolstering the quality of primary and secondary education in Canada and making post-secondary education more affordable, providing greater financial supports for seniors, increasing the amount of supports and resources available for those suffering from addiction, and protecting the environment and mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Individual Priority Areas (Ontario Parents of Children Under 18, Vancouver, Manitoba Impacted by Wildfires, Hamilton Workers in Tariff-Impacted Industries)

Four groups engaged in a more detailed conversation about each of the seven individual priority areas that had been identified by the federal government.

Establishing a new relationship with the U.S. and strengthening collaboration with global allies

Engaging in an exercise where they were shown a list of components related to the priority of establishing a new relationship with the U.S. and strengthening collaboration with global allies, participants were asked to select which they felt was the most important. A large number selected the component of working with other countries around the world to develop stronger trade relationships, with several of the impression that Canada had become too reliant on the U.S. in this area and that more needed to be done to diversify Canada’s trade relationships with other global partners going forward.

For those who selected the component of reaching an agreement with the U.S. on trade issues, several cited challenges related to higher consumer costs, potential large-scale job losses, and severe economic challenges for many important sectors that they believed would result from a prolonged trade dispute with the U.S.

Among the small number who selected protecting important economic sectors and workers, the view was expressed that addressing this component would be critical for maintaining the long-term viability of the Canadian economy and should be the key focus for the federal government, even ahead of its relationships with international partners.

Building one Canadian economy

Discussing the priority of building one Canadian economy, participants were provided with a list of potential actions that could be taken to make progress in this area and were asked to select which of these they felt was the most important for the federal government to be focusing on. The initiative of building a strong economy in Canada received the highest level of support amongst participants, with many of the view that this action represented the most important step when it came to increasing the resiliency of the Canadian economy and would provide a solid economic foundation upon which further economic growth and better trade relationships could be built going forward.

Several selected the component of removing internal trade barriers, with a number believing that this represented a tangible action that could be accomplished in the relatively near future that would benefit Canadian consumers as well as assist in increasing labour mobility across the country.

Only a small number selected the components of getting major energy and infrastructure projects built and working towards a more unified Canada. Related to the building of energy and infrastructure projects, a few reported selecting this initiative due to their perception that this represented the most specific and action-oriented of the components listed.

Bringing down costs for Canadians and helping them get ahead

Asked whether they viewed bringing down costs for Canadians and helping them get ahead as an important priority, all believed that it was. Many were of the impression that the cost of goods and products of all types had risen substantially in recent years, and in some cases had doubled or tripled in less than a decade. Several believed that higher consumer prices and the rising cost of living had placed an increasing number of Canadian households in financially precarious positions, with a number reporting having personally faced challenges in making ends meet. It was widely felt that by making progress in this priority area, the federal government would assist in improving the financial situation and overall quality of life of a large number of Canadians.

Making housing more affordable

Participants engaged in an exercise where they were presented with a list of initiatives related to making housing more affordable and asked to select the component that they felt was most important when it came to accomplishing this priority. Participants overwhelmingly identified the initiative of increasing the affordability of housing as being the most important action for the Government of Canada to be focusing on. Many were of the impression that the cost of housing in Canada, both to purchase and to rent, had risen substantially in recent years and that this had made it increasingly difficult for lower- and middle-income Canadians to obtain affordable housing in their communities.

Among the smaller number who selected the components of getting homes built faster, building a new housing industry in prefabricated and modular homes, and using Canadian products like lumber and steel to build more homes, the view was expressed that these initiatives represented more concrete actions that the Government of Canada could take (compared to the broader goal of increasing the affordability of housing) and, as such, progress could likely be made in these areas within a relatively faster timeframe.

Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe

Focusing on the priority of protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe, participants were provided with a list of components and asked to select which they felt was the most important. On balance, the component of reducing violent crime in participants’ respective communities received the highest level of support, with many of the impression that instances of violent crime had been on the rise in their areas in recent years. It was thought that increased investments and a greater focus from the Government of Canada towards reducing violent (and non-violent) crimes would be helpful in increasing Canadians’ feelings of public safety and would assist in the building of stronger communities as a result.

A large number also selected the initiative to end the opioid crisis. Several believed that perceived higher crime rates, homelessness, and the opioid crisis were interconnected, and felt that by addressing opioid addiction, the Government of Canada would simultaneously be making progress in these other areas. It was thought that by addressing this issue and providing increased resources for treatment and mental health, the federal government would be able to help many of those who were currently suffering from addiction.

The component of strengthening Canada’s national defence capabilities received a moderate level of support. Among those who selected this option, the view was reiterated that Canada had become too reliant on the U.S. for its defence and that, to bolster Canadian sovereignty, it was important for the Government of Canada to take steps to strengthen the CAF and ensure that Canada would be able to defend itself from potential threats and/or incursions to its territory.

Attracting the best talent in the world, while keeping overall immigration rates sustainable

Discussing the priority of attracting the best talent in the world, while keeping overall immigration rates sustainable, participants were asked whether they felt attracting skilled workers to Canada, returning the rate of immigration to a sustainable level, or neither, was the most important area for the federal government to be focusing on.

On balance, a slightly larger number selected the component of returning immigration to sustainable levels compared to those who chose the initiative of attracting skilled workers to Canada. Among these participants, several expressed the view that higher than usual rates of immigration in recent years had placed immense strain on areas such as housing, health care, and other important services and that these areas needed time to catch up and increase their respective operating capacities.

For those who selected attracting skilled workers to Canada as the most important component, it was felt that by placing an increased focus on recruiting top talent from around the world, the Government of Canada would be providing an effective solution to addressing perceived existing labour shortages in many key sectors.

Spending less on government operations

Focusing on the last of these seven priority areas, spending less on government operations, participants were shown a list of initiatives related to this priority and shared their opinions regarding which they felt was most important for the federal government to be working on.

Among participants, the priority of ensuring that the government was making the right choices in relation to investing and reducing spending received the highest level of support. Several thought that this priority represented a strategic, practical approach, with a number expressing that while it was important for the federal government to be focused on reducing its operating costs and working towards a balanced budget, it was critical that investments continued to be made towards important areas such as health care, education, and creating well paying jobs for workers.

A smaller number respectively selected the components of making investments aimed at growing the economy and reducing spending on government operations. Among those who felt that making investments aimed at growing the economy was the most important of these priorities, the view was expressed that the best way to strengthen the Canadian economy would be for the federal government to make investments towards protecting vital sectors and building new major infrastructure projects. For participants who chose reducing spending on government operations as their top priority, it was felt that several years of deficit spending had served to drastically increase the national debt and that it was important for the Government of Canada to prioritize returning to a balanced budget.

The Economy (Saint John, Yukon, Interior British Columbia, Prairies Indigenous Peoples, Ontario Recent Graduates)

Five groups engaged in conversations related to the Canadian economy. Four groups, respectively comprised of residents of Interior B.C., Yukon, and Saint John, as well as Indigenous peoples living in the Prairies, engaged in conversations related to the federal government’s efforts to build one Canadian economy, while the group comprised of recent graduates in Ontario shared their perspectives regarding the employment market and the Canadian economy overall.

One Canadian Economy (Saint John, Yukon, Interior British Columbia, Prairies Indigenous Peoples)

To begin, participants were asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the Government of Canada’s plans to build one Canadian economy. On balance, a smaller number reported having heard something about this topic relative to those who had not. Among those who had heard something, several mentioned the federal government’s efforts to remove internal trade barriers between Canada’s provinces and territories, with a number also reporting having heard about potential initiatives to increase energy transmission across Canada with the aim of constructing a national energy corridor.

Provided with information regarding legislation that had recently been passed by the Government of Canada to remove federal trade barriers to internal trade and labour mobility, participants were largely positive in their reactions. Many expected that removing internal trade barriers and engaging in nation-building infrastructure projects would be mutually beneficial to the provinces and territories as well as the Canadian economy overall. A number also expressed that it was important for the federal government to be focused on removing barriers to labour mobility, believing that professionals in many sectors were currently limited in their ability to work in different parts of the country.

Participants engaged in an exercise where they were presented with a list of potential nation-building infrastructure projects and were asked to select the projects that they supported. On balance, the initiatives to build more high-speed railways and highways received the highest level of support among participants. Many believed that taking these actions would make it easier and more affordable for Canadians to get around the country as well as better facilitate the transportation of goods and resources to different parts of the nation.

A large number selected the initiatives to build new or expanded pipelines and long-distance electrical transmission lines. Among those who identified pipelines as an important focus area, several cited the perceived economic benefits of taking this approach, with a number expressing the opinion that Canada needed to do more to leverage its natural resources (such as oil and natural gas) for economic gain. For participants who chose long-distance electrical transmission lines, it was widely felt that building this type of infrastructure would assist in increasing energy connectivity and security throughout Canada and would be very helpful in preventing occurrences such as electricity grid overloads and blackouts.

Several also believed that the federal government should be investing in nation-building projects related to port expansions, increased mining for critical minerals, and hydroelectricity projects. Among participants who selected port expansions, it was thought that this would help to better facilitate the export of Canadian products and natural resources to trading partners and would help to make Canada more economically competitive on the global stage. Similarly, a number believed that increasing mining for critical minerals would help to strengthen the Canadian economy, especially given their perception that there was high global demand for these resources at present. For those who selected hydroelectricity projects, it was felt that hydroelectricity represented an affordable, clean, and renewable form of energy that could be better utilized to meet the energy needs of Canadians.

Participants also engaged in an exercise where they were shown a list of potential criteria that could be used by the Government of Canada when determining whether or not to approve new nation-building infrastructure projects. Among participants, the criterion of whether a project makes Canada more economically independent from the U.S. received the highest level of support, with many expressing the opinion that it was important that Canada not be too dependent on any one trading partner, with several believing that this was an especially important priority to be focusing on given the numerous tariffs that had recently been implemented by the U.S. on Canadian imports.

A large number also identified whether or not a project creates jobs as an important criterion. Several believed that the creation of more well-paying jobs for Canadians would have a positive impact on a large number of households, and especially those who were struggling to make ends meet financially. It was felt that nation-building projects that led to high levels of job creation would also help to strengthen the Canadian economy overall in that they would likely provide households with more disposable income as well as provide an increased tax base for the federal government to draw upon.

The criteria of whether a project would impact the habitat of endangered species and whether Indigenous communities have been part of the consultation on a project and agree it should move forward both received moderate levels of support among participants, while only a small number selected whether a project keeps Canada on track to meet its climate targets as a top criterion.

Economic Outlook (Ontario Recent Graduates)

Asked to share their perspectives regarding how the Canadian economy was doing at present, participants largely felt that while it was performing better than some countries, there was significant room for improvement going forward. Several believed that the Canadian economy had many well established industries and a strong economic foundation to build upon but had not been performing as well as it could have been as of late, with a number of the impression that there had been limited growth in terms of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in recent years. Discussing whether they believed the Canadian economy was growing or heading towards a recession, all believed that a recession was likely to occur in the near future. Describing why they felt this way, many cited perceived factors such as the high cost of living, including for essentials such as groceries, and a rising number of layoffs in Canadian communities.

Asked whether they were currently employed, most indicated that they were, with a smaller number reporting that they were searching for work. Among those who had jobs, only a few reported having found work in their field of study, with a number describing having taken on part-time or full-time employment in sectors unrelated to their education. Discussing how challenging they felt it was to find work in a field of interest to them, many believed that this had become increasingly difficult in recent years, with several reporting having personally faced issues on this front. The view was expressed that higher than usual rates of immigration over the past few years had led to the job market becoming increasingly competitive for prospective employees, further exacerbating the challenges they were facing in finding a job in their area of interest.

Canada-U.S. Relations (Saint John, Yukon, Interior British Columbia, Hamilton Workers in Tariff-Impacted Industries, Montérégie Region Quebec)

Five groups engaged in discussions related to the relationship between Canada and the United States (U.S.). Participants in the groups based in Saint John, Yukon, and Interior British Columbia (B.C.) focused on recent trade discussions between the Government of Canada and the U.S., while individuals in the groups comprised of workers from Hamilton in tariff-impacted industries and residents of the Montérégie region of Quebec shared their perspectives regarding the range of tariffs that had been implemented on Canadian goods by the U.S. and the actions that had been taken by the federal government in response.

Trade Discussions (Saint John, Yukon, Interior British Columbia)

Asked what they had recently seen, read, or heard about trade discussions between Canada and the U.S., several recalled having heard that the U.S. had announced that it would be imposing a 35 per cent tariff on all Canadian goods, with some of the impression that this measure was set to go into effect on August 1^st, 2025. Questioned as to how well they felt these trade discussions were going overall, most did not believe that much progress had been made as of late. While some were of the impression that the federal government had taken actions, such as removing the digital services tax (DST), to move these negotiations forward, few felt that this had been effective in making progress towards the establishment of a long-term trade agreement between the two countries.

Discussing whether they felt the federal government was standing up well for Canada, participants were mixed in their views. While some believed that the Government of Canada was doing the best that it could to protect the interests of Canadians and respond to what were viewed as constantly evolving economic measures from the U.S., a roughly equal number felt differently. Among these participants, it was thought that given the relatively limited progress that had been made on reaching a long-term trade agreement with the U.S. and removing the tariffs that it had placed on Canadian goods, it was difficult to say that the federal government was currently performing well on this front. Describing what else they felt the Government of Canada could be doing to stand up more effectively for Canada, a number felt that it should be working to implement further counter tariffs of its own in response to recent tariff increases by the U.S. on Canadian goods.

Informed that the federal government had recently announced that it was aiming to have a new trade deal in place by August 1^st, 2025, participants were asked whether they felt that an agreement would ultimately be reached within this time frame. On balance, very few expected that an agreement would be reached by this deadline, with several citing what they perceived as a lack of progress between the two countries on these negotiations.

Assuming that an agreement could be reached by the Government of Canada and the U.S. by August 1st, participants were asked what a good outcome would look like to them. For most, it was felt that a removal of all the tariffs that had been implemented by the U.S. since January 2025 and a return to free trade between Canada and the U.S. represented the most acceptable outcome when it came to resolving these negotiations. A number, however, believed that given what they perceived as the importance placed by the U.S. government on tariffs as a major part of its economic policy, a reduction of tariffs to a more manageable level, such as 10 or 15 per cent, represented the best outcome that the federal government could realistically achieve.

Tariffs (Hamilton Workers in Tariff-Impacted Industries, Montérégie Region Quebec)

At the outset of their conversations, participants were asked what they had seen, read, or heard as of late related to the implementation by the U.S. of tariffs on Canadian imports. A number recalled hearing about tariffs that had been imposed on Canadian steel, aluminum, and other products, with some in the group comprised of Hamilton workers in tariff-impacted industries reporting that they and/or their employers had been negatively impacted by these tariffs.

Discussing the ramifications of these measures by the U.S., almost all believed that they had negatively impacted Canadian workers and businesses across a wide range of sectors. Several believed that these tariffs had already led to decreased revenue and lost contracts for Canadian businesses, as well as layoffs in many different sectors, such as the auto industry and other industries that had been reliant on the free flow of goods across the Canada-U.S. border.

Presented with a number of potential actions that the Government of Canada could take to support impacted workers and industries many expressed support for the initiatives to promote a “Buy Canadian” approach, match workers on Employment Insurance (EI) with employers who currently have vacancies, and to establish new trade agreements that open up access to other markets for Canadian businesses.

Asked whether they thought it would be possible for the federal government to reach an agreement with the U.S. where all recently imposed tariffs would be completely removed, or whether they expected at least some tariffs would remain in place, many were uncertain. While a number believed that it was possible that an agreement could be reached at some point where all tariffs on Canadian imports would be removed, several felt that it was difficult to predict how these negotiations would unfold, especially given their perception that the concessions being sought by the U.S. seemed to be changing on a relatively frequent basis. A few expressed the view that even if an agreement were reached where all tariffs were removed, this did not guarantee that new tariffs would not be introduced by the U.S. at some point in the years to come.

Vaccinations (Ontario Recent Graduates, Montreal Living Pay Cheque to Pay Cheque, Yukon, Prairies Indigenous Peoples)

Four groups engaged in conversations related to vaccinations, with participants sharing their perspectives regarding the perceived safety of vaccines as well as their recent experiences in receiving a vaccine. Almost all indicated having received a COVID-19 vaccine at some point over the past five years, with a large number also reporting receiving another type of vaccine (such as a flu shot, a travel vaccine, or the shingles vaccine) during this time frame. Questioned as to whether they felt that it was safe to receive vaccines, almost all believed that it was, with many citing what they viewed as the rigorous testing processes and long-term track records of most of the vaccinations available to the general public.

Asked to share what their experiences receiving a vaccine had been like and whether they viewed this experience in a positive or negative light, participant responses primarily focused on vaccinations that they had received during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a large number reporting that this had been a positive experience overall. Among these participants it was thought that the vaccination process had been well-organized and efficient, and that the health care professionals they had met had been friendly and reassuring. For the smaller number who reported having faced challenges and/or barriers while getting vaccinated, participants mentioned that it had been difficult to obtain an appointment and/or that the booking system in their area had been somewhat complicated. Other issues recalled by participants included long lines at their vaccination locations, feeling overwhelmed by the large number of people getting vaccinated at the same time, and encountering negative after-effects from the vaccine.

Discussing what factors they felt would make it easier or more convenient to get vaccinated participants mentioned a number of potential actions including increasing the affordability and availability of vaccines, providing more information regarding where to get vaccinated and/or how to book an appointment, and increasing educational efforts to inform the public about vaccines, how they work, their potential side effects, and the health issues that they help to prevent.

Wildfires (Small-to-Mid Size Centres Atlantic Canada, Manitoba Impacted by Wildfires)

Two groups shared their perspectives related to the Government of Canada’s response to large-scale wildfires that had been occurring in several parts of the country in recent months. At the outset of their conversation, the group comprised of residents of Manitoba who reported having been personally impacted by wildfires were asked to share whether they had experienced serious impacts of wildfires, such as getting an evacuation alert or being evacuated from their home. Most indicated that they had, with several describing having been evacuated or displaced, and a few reporting that they had still been unable to return to their homes. Discussing how easy or difficult they had found it to access services and supports during these wildfires (whether they stayed in their own communities or whether they were evacuated), most recalled that it had been incredibly challenging.

Both groups were asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the response from the Government of Canada to the wildfires that had taken place in their respective regions. Only a small number reported having heard anything, with a few in Manitoba recalling that the federal government had deployed Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel to assist with the evacuation effort in some communities. Sharing their views regarding the Government of Canada’s response to these wildfires, a roughly equal number of those in Atlantic Canada felt positively about the response compared to those who were more uncertain or negative in their views, while most in Manitoba thought that there was significant room for improvement on this front.

Provided with information about the actions that had been taken to assist their respective communities in responding to wildfires, participants were asked what more they felt the Government of Canada should be doing when it came to responding to wildfires. Participants mentioned a number of potential actions, including reaching out to other countries for assistance, placing an increased focus on performing preventative measures such as clearing underbrush and undertaking controlled burns, creating a dedicated national firefighting unit that would be ready to fight wildfires wherever they occur, and educating Canadians (and youth especially) about the dangers of forest fires and the role that they can play in preventing these natural disasters from occurring. It was also felt that the Government of Canada could provide more resources towards rehabilitating the surrounding environment in the aftermath of wildfires, as well as increase its investments towards infrastructure (such as back-up generators) that would provide impacted communities with additional power sources to draw upon both during and in the aftermath of these events.

Canada Strong Pass (Ontario Parents of Children under 18, Vancouver, Small-to-Mid Size Centres Atlantic Canada, Montérégie Region Quebec)

Four groups took part in discussions related to the recently introduced Canada Strong Pass. Asked whether they had previously heard about this initiative, very few indicated that they had. Provided with information about this program, however, a number recalled having heard certain details such as the free admissions to national parks, free and discounted Via Rail travel, and the initiatives had been targeted towards children and teens aged 17 and under, as well as youth aged 18 to 24. While very few reported having previously used the pass, many indicated that they would be interested in taking part in this program now that they had been made aware of it.

Discussing why they felt the Government of Canada had introduced the Canada Strong Pass, several felt that this initiative had primarily been offered as a way to incentivize for Canadians to choose to travel and vacation within Canada, with the aim of increasing domestic travel across the country and creating more economic opportunities for Canadian tourism-related businesses and destinations. Asked whether they felt that this was the type of initiative that the federal government should be doing, almost all believed that it was, with a number describing the economic and cultural benefits that they felt Canadians would gain from this program.

Asked whether they felt the Canada Strong Pass should be offered again next summer, almost all answered affirmatively, with a number mentioning that, while they had heard about this program too late this year to make use of it, they would be very interested in utilizing it in 2026. Invited to share any potential changes or suggested improvements that they felt could be made to the Canada Strong Pass if it were offered again, several believed that greater efforts needed to be taken by the federal government to market and communicate this program to Canadians, with a number reiterating that they would likely have utilized this program had they heard about it prior to these conversations.

Questioned as to whether they felt the Canada Strong Pass should be applied equally to everyone, or whether they thought some aspects should only be eligible for certain groups, participants overwhelmingly felt that it should be available to all Canadians. It was thought that all Canadians would benefit from it becoming more affordable to explore Canada and that the Canada Strong Pass would be especially helpful for lower- and middle-income families who were finding it challenging to afford to vacation at present.

Discussing what kinds of venues, activities, or events they felt should be included in this pass going forward, participants mentioned a wide variety of areas, including free or discounted entry to music festivals, art galleries, amusement parks, and theatres, as well as provincial/territorial parks and museums. A number also believed that efforts could be taken to provide more educational and skills training opportunities for Canadians (and youth especially) regarding basic outdoor survival skills and best practices to follow when spending time outdoors.

Canada Armed Forces Awareness Concept Testing (Interior British Columbia, Prairies Indigenous Peoples)

Two groups shared their opinions regarding advertising concepts that had been developed to promote greater awareness of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). These concepts were presented in storyboard format, and participants were informed that the final product would be 30-second, professionally produced videos that would appear on social media and other digital platforms. The three concepts were respectively titled Ready For, Full Picture, and All the Time. In addition to a storyboard, a script was also read to participants for the All the Time concept.

Discussing Ready For, participants were largely positive in their reactions, with a number feeling the concept was clear and to the point, and effectively communicated the many ways by which the CAF was working to protect Canadians from potential threats. Asked what they felt was the main message of this concept, most believed that it was to communicate that the CAF was ready to protect and defend Canadians against a wide range of potential threats and emergencies. A smaller number thought that this concept was also intended to serve as a recruitment advertisement for the CAF, encouraging more Canadians to join and assist in the protection of the country and its sovereignty. Asked what could be done to make this concept more effective, a few suggested that it could incorporate interviews or voiceovers from real individuals who were currently serving in the CAF to add greater authenticity to the ad.

Focusing on the Full Picture concept, most reacted positively to the visuals included in this concept, believing that they presented compelling imagery regarding the many different activities that the CAF was engaged in. Several, however, felt that the lack of a voiceover would make this ad difficult for viewers to follow. Discussing what they perceived as the main message of this concept, participants largely felt that it was aiming to communicate that there were many different aspects involved with the work that the CAF undertakes in keeping Canadians safe. A number also thought that this advertisement was seeking to reassure viewers that CAF personnel were highly skilled when it came to carrying out their responsibilities and would be well-prepared to defend the country against a wide range of potential threats. Discussing what else could be done to increase the effectiveness of this concept, participants suggested actions such as including more imagery of CAF personnel engaged in combat-oriented activities, personalizing the ad with stories featuring individual CAF members, and providing information related to the high-quality training and educational opportunities that the CAF offers.

Participant reactions to All the Time were highly positive, with several feeling that this advertisement was quite captivating and presented a realistic depiction of the many different areas that the CAF was responsible for. A number liked that this concept included visuals of a variety of activities, including those related to cybersecurity, protecting the Arctic, and CAF personnel engaging in rescue missions. A few also felt that the sound cues, such as the ticking clock and the heartbeat, would be very effective in conveying the intense energy of this ad. Discussing what they viewed as the main message of this advertisement, most believed that it was to reaffirm to viewers the commitment of armed forces personnel when it came to protecting Canadians from a variety of potential threats and the many actions that they were taking to accomplish this. Suggesting ways by which this ad could be improved, the view was expressed that more could be done to provide more imagery of larger groups of CAF personnel standing together/participating in a mission, and further visuals depicting the opportunities for adventure and excitement that were available to those who joined the armed forces.

Engaging in an exercise where they were asked to identify which of the three concepts they felt was the most effective in terms of showcasing the range of things that the CAF does, participants overwhelmingly selected All the Time, with a much smaller number choosing Ready for… and Full Picture. Describing why they made their selection, many of those who selected All the Time expressed the opinion that this concept was the most engaging and captivating of the three and believed that it would be very effective in showcasing the CAF to viewers. Several spoke positively of the concept’s blending of visuals, sounds, and voiceover together to create a multisensory presentation of the CAF and its activities.

Nine groups took part in conversations related to key priority areas that had been identified by the Government of Canada. At the outset of their discussions, participants in five groups, respectively comprised of recent graduates in Ontario, individuals in Montreal living pay cheque to pay cheque, and residents of Saint John, the Montérégie region of Quebec, and small and mid-sized centres in Atlantic Canada, were asked to share what they believed were the top issues that the federal government should be focusing on. A wide range of areas were mentioned, including:

• Cost of living – Many mentioned what they perceived as the high cost of living, with several of the impression that the prices for goods and services, including for essentials such as groceries, had risen substantially in recent years. It was felt that wages had not kept up with the rate of inflation as of late and that this had placed many households in increasingly challenging financial positions. A number expressed concern regarding the impact of the cost of living on groups, such as seniors, who relied on fixed incomes to make ends meet financially;
• Housing – A large number identified the affordability of housing as a major issue, with many believing that it had become increasingly expensive for Canadians to obtain housing (both to purchase and to rent) in their communities. Several also expressed the opinion that the high cost of housing had been a direct contributor to what they perceived as the rising rate of homelessness in many parts of the country;
• Health care – Several thought that a greater focus should be placed by the federal government on health care, with a number believing that action needed to be taken to address challenges such as long wait times for primary and emergency care, as well as difficulties Canadians were facing in finding family doctors and obtaining appointments with specialists;
• Relationship with the U.S. – It was also felt that more needed to be done by the Government of Canada to diversify its trade relationships, with many expressing the opinion that Canada had become too dependent on the U.S. when it came to trade, and that this had placed the country in a precarious economic position due to what they perceived as the growing unreliability of the U.S. as an economic ally. Also related to Canada’s relationship with the U.S., the view was expressed that a greater focus should be placed on increasing investments into the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), with some believing that Canada had become too reliant on the U.S. for its own defence;
• Education – A number felt that more investments needed to be made towards education in Canada, including at both the secondary and post-secondary levels; and
• Reconciliation – A few believed that greater efforts needed to be taken by the federal government towards reconciliation and addressing the challenges currently being faced by Indigenous peoples and communities.

The group comprised of individuals residing in Montreal who reported living pay cheque to pay cheque were asked additional questions regarding what they felt were the biggest challenges related to the cost of living, housing, and the employment market. Related to the cost of living, the view was expressed that more needed to be done to assist Canadian households with making ends meet financially, especially for families with young children who were struggling to afford expenses related to groceries, clothing, and child care. Focusing on housing, the view was reiterated that steps needed to be taken by the federal government to make housing more affordable for prospective homebuyers and renters alike, with the aim of reducing the portion of Canadians’ income that was devoted to housing each month. Regarding the employment market, it was felt that the Government of Canada could work to create more job opportunities for younger Canadians, including by providing additional funding for student and summer jobs programs. It was also thought that more could be done to streamline the foreign credential recognition process, making it easier for newcomers to work in their respective professions or fields of study.

All groups were asked whether they had recently seen, read, or heard anything about priority areas that had been announced by the Government of Canada. Among those who had heard something, several believed that the federal government had been working to remove internal trade barriers within Canada, with the overall goal of promoting greater free trade across the country and increasing the strength of the Canadian economy. It was also thought that efforts had been taken by the Government of Canada to establish closer trading relationships with partners other than the U.S., with the aim of diversifying the country’s economic partnerships. Other actions or initiatives mentioned by participants included increasing the resiliency of Canada’s electricity grid, making housing more affordable for Canadians, stabilizing the rate of immigration, and increasing the defence budget, in part as a way of upholding Canada’s commitments to its allies in organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

Overall Impressions (Ontario Recent Graduates, Montreal Living Pay Cheque to Pay Cheque, Saint John, Small and Mid-Size Centres Atlantic Canada, Montérégie Region Quebec)

Five groups engaged in conversations related to their overall impressions of the priority areas that had been announced by the Government of Canada as well as their views regarding which of these priorities were the most important. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

The Government of Canada has indicated it will focus on 7 priorities.

• Establishing a new economic and security relationship with the United States and strengthening its collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world;
• Building one Canadian economy by removing barriers to interprovincial trade and identifying and expediting nation-building projects that will connect and transform our country;
• Bringing down costs for Canadians and helping them get ahead;
• Making housing more affordable by unleashing the power of public-private cooperation, catalysing a modern housing industry, and creating new careers in the skilled trades;
• Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe by strengthening the Canadian Armed Forces, securing our borders, and reinforcing law enforcement;
• Attracting the best talent in the world to help build our economy, while returning our overall immigration rates to sustainable levels; and
• Spending less on government operations so that Canadians can invest more in the people and businesses that will build the strongest economy in the G7.

On balance, while participants were largely positive in their reactions to these priority areas, a number questioned whether all of these priorities were achievable and/or whether the Government of Canada would be able to address all of these issues simultaneously. While all priority areas received mostly positive reactions among participants, several identified the priorities of building one Canadian economy, making housing more affordable, bringing down costs for Canadians, and protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe as being especially important in their minds. Asked whether they had any questions about these priorities or whether they felt that any were unclear, a number thought that the statement ‘Bringing down costs for Canadians and helping them get ahead’ was somewhat vague and needed to include more information about the specific actions that would be taken to address this issue. Many expressed concerns about ‘Spending less on government operations’ and questioned what programs or services would be reduced or eliminated as a result of these spending reductions. A few also questioned whether it would be possible for the federal government to make progress in all of these priority areas while also making a commitment to spending less on government operations in the years to come.

Participants next engaged in an exercise where they were asked to identify the three priority areas (out of the 7 previously shown) that they felt were the most important for the Government of Canada to be focusing on. On balance, ‘Bringing down costs for Canadians’ and ‘Making housing more affordable’ received the highest level of support. It was felt that progress on these priority areas would likely have a positive impact for a large number of Canadians and would assist in bolstering the financial security of many households. The view was expressed that taking action on these priorities could also help to address other issues, such as homelessness and perceived rising crime, that were seen by some as being connected to broader challenges like the high cost of living and growing financial pressures on Canadians.

Several also selected ’Establishing a new economic and security relationship with the U.S.’ and ‘Strengthening collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world’. Among those who believed that establishing a new economic and security relationship with the U.S. was an important priority, a number expressed the view that given the close geographical proximity and the perceived existing economic interconnectedness between the two countries, it was of critical importance for the federal government to re-establish a close, working relationship with the U.S. in order to promote economic prosperity for both countries. A number also felt that it was important for the Government of Canada to be focused on strengthening its collaboration with trading partners around the world, with several commenting that due to the increasingly unpredictable behaviour of the U.S. in terms of its trade relationship with Canada, it was important to establish closer ties with other trading partners as a way of diversifying the Canadian economy going forward.

A number also selected ‘Building one Canadian economy’ and ‘Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe’. For those who felt that it was important for the federal government to continue its efforts to build one Canadian economy, it was thought that this was the best way to strengthen and increase the country’s economic resiliency and that this approach would yield positive economic benefits for Canadians everywhere. The view was expressed that a greater focus should be placed on manufacturing more products in Canada, with a number believing that this would be a helpful way to reduce the country’s level of economic reliance on international trade. For those who selected protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe, it was widely felt that this was a key responsibility of the federal government and a priority that impacted all Canadians. It was thought that, given the constantly evolving relationship between Canada and the U.S. government at present, it was important for the Government of Canada to be promoting greater self sufficiency when it came to the country’s national defence and to decrease Canada’s reliance in this area on allies such as the U.S.

Only a small number selected ‘Spending less on government operations.’ For those who chose this priority area, concerns were expressed about the impact that the rising national debt would have on future generations and believed that it was important for the federal government to be working towards producing a balanced budget. Very few selected ‘Attracting the best talent in the world, while keeping overall immigration rates sustainable.’ Related to this priority, a number expressed the view that the federal government should be focused on educating and training talented individuals already living in Canada rather than seeking to recruit top talent from around the world.

Discussing whether there were any priorities not listed that they felt should be included, participants mentioned a number of areas. These included increasing investments towards Canada’s health care system, bolstering the quality of primary and secondary education in Canada and making post-secondary education more affordable, providing greater financial supports for seniors, increasing the amount of supports and resources available for those suffering from addiction, and protecting the environment and mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Two groups, respectively comprised of residents of small and mid-sized centres in Atlantic Canada and individuals in the Montérégie region of Quebec, were asked an additional question as to whether they felt the Government of Canada had been making progress in any of these priority areas. Participants were mixed in their views, with a roughly equal number believing that the federal government had made some progress compared to those who felt otherwise or were more uncertain in their views. Among those who believed that progress had been made, participants mentioned actions such as the Government of Canada’s efforts to remove internal trade barriers, recent funding increases that had been announced for the CAF, and its actions to strengthen Canada’s international trade relationships with global allies. Asked whether they believed the federal government would ultimately succeed in achieving any of the priorities it had identified, most felt that it would. A number believed that reducing spending on government operations and removing internal trade barriers were likely achievable in the shorter term, while areas such as establishing a new relationship with the U.S., making housing more affordable, and bringing down costs for Canadians may take longer to achieve.

Participants in the group comprised of individuals in Montreal living pay cheque to pay cheque were asked whether they were aware of any recent announcements or initiatives from the federal government related to changes to the personal income tax rate for the middle class. On balance, very few indicated having been aware of this action by the Government of Canada. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

In addition to these priorities, the Government of Canada committed to reducing the personal income tax rate for the middle class from 15 per cent to 14 per cent, effective July 1^st, 2025.

This would reduce the tax rate applied to the first $57,375 (in 2025) of an individual’s taxable income, regardless of their income level.

The bulk of the tax relief will go to those with incomes in the two lowest tax brackets. The maximum tax savings will be $420 person in 2026.

Reacting to this information, while a number felt that this action by the Government of Canada represented a step in the right direction, few thought that it would make a major financial difference for lower and middle-income Canadians. Asked whether they felt this initiative would help with the cost of living, none believed that it would. The view was expressed that the maximum tax savings amount of $420 was not enough to have an impact given the current high costs of essentials such as groceries and housing. A few suggested that, in addition to providing tax relief for lower and middle-income Canadians, the federal government should also focus on increasing the tax rate for higher income individuals, with the goal of utilizing the increased tax revenue to provide greater financial assistance to those who are struggling with the cost of living.

Individual Priority Areas (Ontario Parents of Children Under 18, Vancouver, Manitoba Impacted by Wildfires, Hamilton Workers in Tariff-Impacted Industries)

Four groups engaged in a more detailed conversation about each of the seven individual priority areas that had been identified by the federal government. Participants were informed that they would be discussing each priority one by one and, to aid in conversation, were presented with the following list detailing the priority areas:

• Establishing a new relationship with the U.S. and strengthening collaboration with global allies
• Building one Canadian economy
• Bringing down costs for Canadians and helping them get ahead
• Making housing more affordable
• Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe
• Attracting the best talent in the world, while keeping overall immigration rates sustainable
• Spending less on government operations

Establishing a new relationship with the U.S. and strengthening collaboration with global allies

To begin, participants engaged in an exercise where they were shown a list of components related to the priority of establishing a new relationship with the U.S. and strengthening collaboration with global allies and asked to select the component that they felt was the most important. The list shown to participants included:

• Canada and the U.S. reaching an agreement on trade issues;
• Working with other countries around the world to develop stronger trade relationships; and
• Protecting important economic sectors and workers.

On balance, the component of working with other countries around the world to develop stronger trade relationships received the highest level of support. Several believed that more needed to be done to diversify the Government of Canada’s trade relationships, with a number of the impression that Canada had become too reliant on the U.S. in this area over the past few decades. A number believed that this component was especially important given what they viewed as the ever-evolving trade policy of the U.S. government in recent months. For those who selected the component of reaching an agreement with the U.S. on trade issues, several cited challenges related to higher consumer costs, potential large-scale job losses, and severe economic challenges for many important sectors that they believed would result from a prolonged trade dispute with the U.S. The view was expressed that, given the close proximity of the U.S. to Canada, the interconnectedness of the economies of the two countries, and the perception of the U.S. as an economic superpower, it was important for Canada to re-establish a productive relationship with the U.S. in order to protect the financial wellbeing of Canadian consumers, workers, and businesses. Among the small number who selected protecting important economic sectors and workers, the view was expressed that addressing this component would be critical for maintaining the long-term viability of the Canadian economy and should be the key focus for the federal government, even ahead of its relationships with international partners.

Building one Canadian economy

Discussing the priority of building one Canadian economy, participants were provided with a list of potential actions that could be taken to make progress in this area and were asked to select which of these they felt was the most important for the federal government to be focusing on. The list shown to participants included:

• Building a strong economy in Canada;
• Removing internal trade barriers;
• Getting major energy and infrastructure projects built; and
• Working towards a more unified Canada

Building a strong economy in Canada received the highest level of support amongst participants. Many were of the view that this action represented the most important step when it came to increasing the resiliency of the Canadian economy in that it would provide a solid economic foundation upon which further economic growth and better trade relationships could be built going forward. It was felt that increased efforts by the federal government to foster economic cooperation among Canada’s provinces and territories would likely have a positive impact for Canadian businesses and workers and would help to strengthen Canada’s economic position on the global stage. Several selected the component of removing internal trade barriers, with a number believing that this represented a tangible action that could be accomplished in the relatively near future and would benefit Canadian consumers as well as assist in increasing labour mobility across the country. A few were of the opinion that, if the overarching goal was to build one Canadian economy, it was counterintuitive for internal trade barriers to remain in place going forward. Only a small number selected the components of getting major energy and infrastructure projects built and working towards a more unified Canada. Related to the building of energy and infrastructure projects, a few reported selecting this initiative due to their perception that this represented the most specific and action-oriented of the components listed.

Bringing down costs for Canadians and helping them get ahead

Asked whether they viewed bringing down costs for Canadians and helping them get ahead as an important priority, all believed that it was. Many were of the impression that the cost of goods and products of all types had risen substantially in recent years, and in some cases had doubled or tripled in less than a decade. Several were of the impression that higher consumer prices and the rising cost of living had placed an increasing number of Canadian households in financially precarious positions, with a number reporting having personally faced challenges in making ends meet. The view was expressed that the higher cost of living had been especially difficult for younger Canadians who were trying to establish themselves financially as well as for families with young children, given all the additional costs that raising children was believed to entail. It was widely felt that by making progress in this priority area, the federal government would be able to assist in improving the financial situation and overall quality of life of a large number of Canadians. In addition to reducing consumer costs, the view was also expressed that more should be done to lower the cost of post-secondary education and other training programs in order to make it more affordable for prospective workers to acquire the skills they require to gain employment in fields of interest to them.

Making housing more affordable

Participants engaged in an exercise where they were presented with a list of initiatives related to making housing more affordable and asked to select the component that they felt was most important when it came to accomplishing this priority. The list shown to participants included:

• Making housing more affordable;
• Getting homes built faster;
• Building a new housing industry in prefabricated and modular homes; and
• Using Canadian products like lumber and steel to build more homes.

While all initiatives were viewed as being important, participants overwhelmingly identified increasing the affordability of housing as being the most important action for the Government of Canada. Many were of the impression that the cost of housing in Canada, both to purchase and to rent, had risen substantially in recent years and that this had made it increasingly difficult for lower- and middle-income Canadians to obtain affordable housing in their communities. A number expressed concerns regarding the impact that high housing costs were having on younger Canadians, including for prospective first-time home buyers who were believed to be facing significant challenges in entering the housing market. A few were worried that their children would never be able to own their own homes if housing prices continued to rise at the same rate as they had in recent years. Among the smaller number who selected the components of getting homes built faster, building a new housing industry in prefabricated and modular homes, and using Canadian products like lumber and steel to build more homes, the view was expressed that these initiatives represented more concrete actions that the Government of Canada could take (compared to the broader goal of increasing the affordability of housing) and, as such, would likely yield more tangible progress in addressing this priority area.

Protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe

Focusing on the priority of protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe, participants were provided with the following list of components and asked to select which they felt was the most important:

• Strengthening Canada’s national defence capabilities;
• Building equipment for the Canadian Armed Forces here in Canada;
• Reducing violent crime in my community; and
• Ending the opioid crisis.

The component of reducing violent crime in participants’ respective communities received the highest level of support. Many were of the impression that instances of violent crime had been on the rise in their areas in recent years and believed that addressing this issue would have a positive impact on a large number of communities across the country. A number expressed the opinion that there needed to be greater consequences and accountability for individuals who commit violent crimes, and especially so for repeat offenders. It was thought that increased investments and a greater focus from the Government of Canada towards reducing violent (and non-violent) crimes would be helpful in increasing Canadians’ feelings of public safety and would assist in the building of stronger communities as a result.

A large number also selected the initiative to end the opioid crisis. Several believed that perceived higher crime rates, homelessness, and the opioid crisis were interconnected, and felt that by addressing opioid addiction, the Government of Canada would simultaneously be making progress in these other areas. It was thought that by addressing this issue and providing increased resources for treatment and mental health, the federal government would be able to help many of those who were currently suffering from addiction. The view was also expressed that the opioid crisis had, in large part, been facilitated by gang activity and that by cracking down further on gangs, the Government of Canada would likely help in reducing the overall impact of opioids on Canadian communities.

The component of strengthening Canada’s national defence capabilities received a moderate level of support. Among those who selected this option, the view was reiterated that Canada had become too reliant on the U.S. for its defence and that, to bolster Canadian sovereignty, it was important for the Government of Canada to take steps to strengthen the CAF and ensure that Canada would be able to defend itself from potential threats and/or incursions, including in areas such as the Arctic. Very few selected the component of building more equipment for the CAF domestically in Canada as their top priority related to protecting Canadian sovereignty and keeping Canadians safe.

Attracting the best talent in the world, while keeping overall immigration rates sustainable

Discussing the priority of attracting the best talent in the world, while keeping overall immigration rates sustainable, participants were presented with the following options and asked to select which aspect of this priority they felt was the most important:

• Attracting skilled workers to Canada;
• Returning immigration to sustainable levels; or
• Neither are a priority.

On balance, a slightly larger number selected the component of returning immigration to sustainable levels compared to those who chose the initiative of attracting skilled workers to Canada. Among those who selected returning immigration to sustainable levels as their top priority, several expressed the view that higher than usual rates of immigration in recent years had placed immense strain on areas such as housing, health care, and other important services. It was thought that, in order to give these areas time to catch up and increase their capacity, efforts needed to be taken to stabilize the rate of immigration at a more manageable level going forward. Among the participants who selected attracting skilled workers to Canada as the most important component, it was felt that by placing an increased focus on recruiting top talent from around the world, the Government of Canada would be providing an effective solution to addressing perceived existing labour shortages in many key sectors. Describing the specific sectors that they expected would benefit from this approach, participants mentioned areas such as health care, education, construction, and the trades. A small number felt that neither of these areas should be a priority for the federal government. Among these participants, it was felt that the federal government’s focus should be placed on further reducing the rate of immigration to Canada as well as encouraging employers to hire Canadians rather than recruiting skilled workers from outside of the country.

Spending less on government operations

Focusing on the last of these seven priority areas, spending less on government operations, participants were shown the following list of initiatives and shared their opinions regarding which they felt was most important for the federal government to be working on:

• Making investments aimed at growing the economy;
• Reducing spending on government operations; and
• Ensuring the government is making the right choices on where to invest and reduce spending.

The priority of ensuring that the government was making the right choices in relation to investing and reducing spending received the highest level of support among participants. Several thought that this priority represented a strategic, practical approach, with a number expressing that while it was important for the federal government to be focused on reducing its operating costs and working towards a balanced budget, it was critical that investments continued to be made towards important areas such as health care, education, and creating well paying jobs for workers. The opinion was shared that it would be important going forward for the Government of Canada to be transparent about the areas that it would be investing/reducing spending in, as well as for it to communicate its rationale when making these decisions. A smaller number respectively selected the components of making investments aimed at growing the economy and reducing spending on government operations. Among those who felt that making investments aimed at growing the economy was the most important of these priorities, the view was expressed that the best way to strengthen the Canadian economy would be for the federal government to make investments towards protecting vital sectors and building new major infrastructure projects. For participants who chose reducing spending on government operations as their top priority, it was felt that several years of deficit spending had served to drastically increase the national debt, placing the country and future generations of Canadians in a vulnerable economic position in the years and decades to come. With this in mind, it was thought that returning to a balanced budget needed to be a top priority for the Government of Canada moving forward.

Focusing on the seven priority areas as a whole, participants were asked whether they felt the federal government had made progress on any of these priorities and their components. Those in the group of Ontario parents of children under 12 shared their perspectives while discussing each priority in turn, while those in the groups comprised of residents of Vancouver, individuals in Manitoba impacted by wildfires, and Hamilton workers in tariff-impacted industries were shown the following overview at the conclusion of their discussion:

On balance, while a small number felt that progress had been made in some areas, most were of the opinion that progress in others had remained mostly the same in recent months and in some cases, such as the cost of living, had gotten worse. While a number believed that the Government of Canada had been working to address major issues, such as reducing costs for Canadians as well as making housing more affordable, very few reported having personally noticed any tangible progress in these areas. Among those who did believe that some progress had been made, participants mentioned actions such as the federal government taking steps to remove internal trade barriers, efforts to remove red-tape and increase the rate at which homes are being built in Canada, the strengthening of economic and security ties with global allies, and the announcement that greater investments would be made towards the CAF and national security. A few were also of the impression that Canadians overall had become more unified as of late, especially in terms of their efforts to work together to stand up for Canadian sovereignty and build one Canadian economy. Asked whether they felt the Government of Canada would successfully achieve any of these priorities or components, a large number felt that while progress would likely be made over time, achieving these priorities would be a slow-moving and gradual process, especially given the perceived significant size and scope of many of these areas.

Discussing whether there were any priority areas that they felt were missing, several mentioned health care, with many believing that a significant focus needed to be placed by the Government of Canada on this sector, with a particular focus on increasing Canadians’ accessibility to primary and emergency care as well as investing more resources towards issues such as mental health and treatment for addiction. Other areas identified by participants included climate change and the environment, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, and reducing the rate at which Canadians are taxed.

Five groups engaged in conversations related to the Canadian economy. Four groups, respectively comprised of residents of Interior B.C., Yukon, and Saint John, as well as Indigenous peoples living in the Prairies, engaged in conversations related to the federal government’s efforts to build one Canadian economy, while the group comprised of recent graduates in Ontario shared their perspectives regarding the employment market and the Canadian economy overall.

One Canadian Economy (Saint John, Yukon, Interior British Columbia, Prairies Indigenous Peoples)

To begin, participants were asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the Government of Canada’s plans to build one Canadian economy. On balance, a smaller number reported having heard something about this topic relative to those who had not. Among those who had heard something, several mentioned the federal government’s efforts to remove internal trade barriers between Canada’s provinces and territories, with a number also reporting having heard about potential initiatives to increase energy transmission across Canada with the aim of constructing a national energy corridor. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

The Government of Canada recently passed legislation to remove federal barriers to internal trade and labour mobility, including how nation-building infrastructure projects will be identified and approved more quickly. The goal is to build a stronger, more competitive, and more resilient Canadian economy that works for all Canadians.

The Government of Canada will determine whether a major project is in the national interest based on consultations with provinces, territories, and Indigenous peoples.

Examples of such projects include highways, railways, ports, airports, pipelines, nuclear facilities, electrical transmission projects, mines, and critical minerals.

Participants were largely positive in their reactions to this legislation, with many expecting that removing internal trade barriers and engaging in nation-building infrastructure projects would be mutually beneficial to the provinces and territories as well as the Canadian economy overall. A number also expressed that it was important for the federal government to be focused on removing barriers to labour mobility, believing that professionals in many sectors were currently limited in their ability to work in different parts of the country. While supportive of nation-building projects in general, a few were worried that this legislation could be used to expedite and/or bypass what they viewed as important steps in the development/construction process such as performing environmental impact assessments as well as engaging in appropriate consultations with Indigenous peoples and communities.

Participants next engaged in an exercise where they were presented with a list of potential nation-building infrastructure projects and were asked to select the projects that they supported. The list shown to participants included:

• New or expanded pipelines;
• Long-distance electrical transmission lines;
• Liquified natural gas terminals;
• Port expansion;
• Carbon capture and sequestration facilities;
• Offshore wind turbines;
• Increasing mining for critical minerals;
• Hydroelectricity projects;
• Nuclear energy facilities;
• High-speed railways; and
• Highways

On balance, the initiatives to build more high-speed railways and highways received the highest level of support among participants. Many believed that taking these actions would make it easier and more affordable for Canadians to get around the country as well as better facilitate the transportation of goods and resources to different parts of the nation. It was thought that expanding the use of high-speed railways and highways would be helpful in encouraging increased tourism within Canada as well as greater connectivity amongst the country and its citizens. The view was also expressed that an increased emphasis on road and rail travel would likely produce less emissions compared to air travel and, as a result, focusing on these projects would also be beneficial to the environment and the fight against climate change.

A large number selected the initiatives to build new or expanded pipelines and long-distance electrical transmission lines. Among those who identified pipelines as an important focus area, several cited the perceived economic benefits of taking this approach, with a number expressing the opinion that Canada needed to do more to leverage its natural resources (such as oil and natural gas) for economic gain. For participants who chose long-distance electrical transmission lines, it was widely felt that building this type of infrastructure would assist in increasing energy connectivity and security throughout Canada and would be very helpful in preventing occurrences such as electricity grid overloads and blackouts.

Several also believed that the federal government should be investing in nation-building projects related to port expansions, increased mining for critical minerals, and hydroelectricity projects. Among participants who selected port expansion, it was thought that this would help to better facilitate the export of Canadian products and natural resources to trading partners and would help to make Canada more economically competitive on the global stage. Similarly, a number believed that increasing mining for critical minerals would help to strengthen the Canadian economy, especially given their perception that there was high global demand for these resources at present. For those who selected hydroelectricity projects, it was felt that hydroelectricity represented an affordable, clean, and renewable form of energy that could be better utilized to meet the energy needs of Canadians. A few, however, expressed concerns that the construction of dams or other infrastructure that displaced or interrupted the natural flow of waterways could have negative impacts on the surrounding environment and ecosystems where these projects are built.

A relatively smaller number selected the initiatives to build liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals, offshore wind turbines, carbon capture sequestration facilities, and nuclear energy facilities. Though a number felt that projects related to building more LNG terminals, offshore wind turbines, and nuclear energy facilities could help to further strengthen the Canadian economy and serve as a source of new, high-paying jobs for Canadians, several expressed concerns related to the potential environmental impact of these projects. Among those who selected carbon capture sequestration facilities, while it was felt that this could have a positive impact on reducing and removing carbon emissions from the atmosphere, a number expressed that they did not know much about this technology and/or how it worked.

Participants then engaged in an exercise where they were shown a list of potential criteria that could be used by the Government of Canada when determining whether or not to approve new nation-building infrastructure projects. Participants were asked to select which criteria they felt were most important, with a maximum of two responses. The list shown to participants included:

• Whether or not it creates jobs;
• Whether it makes Canada more economically independent from the United States;
• Whether Indigenous communities have been part of the consultation on the project and agree it should move forward;
• Whether it will have an impact on the habitat of endangered species; and
• Whether it keeps Canada on track to meet its climate targets.

The criterion of whether a project makes Canada more economically independent from the U.S. received the highest level of support. Many felt that it was important that Canada not be too dependent on any one trading partner, with several believing that this was an especially important priority to be focusing on given the numerous tariffs that had recently been implemented by the U.S. on Canadian imports. The view was expressed that the best way for the federal government to protect the country economically would be to increase the self-sufficiency of the Canadian economy and manufacture more goods and products within Canada.

A large number also identified whether or not a project creates jobs as an important criterion. Several believed that the creation of more well-paying jobs for Canadians would have a positive impact on a large number of households, and especially those who were struggling to make ends meet financially. It was felt that nation-building projects that led to high levels of job creation would help to strengthen the Canadian economy overall in that they would likely provide households with more disposable income as well as provide an increased tax base for the federal government to draw upon.

The criteria of whether a project would impact the habitat of endangered species and whether Indigenous communities have been part of the consultation on a project and agree it should move forward both received moderate levels of support among participants. Among those who selected the criteria related to protecting the habitats of endangered species, it was felt that while the federal government should be focused on investing in nation-building projects, these cannot come at the expense of harming the endangered species and vulnerable ecosystems that are found in many parts of the country. For participants who selected whether or not Indigenous communities have been consulted and agree that a project should move forward as a top criterion, it was felt that it was important for the Government of Canada to be working in collaboration with Indigenous peoples who reside on or nearby the lands that would be utilized for these projects and that no project should move forward without the approval of these communities. Only a small number selected whether a project keeps Canada on track to meet its climate targets as a top criterion.

Asked an additional question as to whether they thought the federal government investing in nation-building infrastructure projects would help to make the Canadian economy less reliant on the U.S., most in the group based in Saint John believed that it would. It was felt that new large-scale infrastructure projects, especially those related to increasing the rate at which energy and natural resources could be transported across the country, would help to build a stronger national economy and would make Canada much more competitive in its global trade relationships. The view was expressed that while these projects may have high costs in the short-term, they would ultimately pay for themselves in the long-term given the additional economic prosperity they were expected to bring.

Economic Outlook (Ontario Recent Graduates)

Asked to share their perspectives regarding how the Canadian economy was doing at present, participants largely felt that while it was performing better than some countries, there was significant room for improvement going forward. Several believed that the Canadian economy had many well-established industries and a strong economic foundation to build upon, but had not been performing as well as it could have been as of late, with a number of the impression that there had been limited growth in terms of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in recent years. Discussing whether they believed the Canadian economy was growing or heading towards a recession, all believed that a recession was likely to occur in the near future. Describing why they felt this way, many cited perceived factors such as the high cost of living, including for essentials such as groceries, and a rising number of layoffs in Canadian communities.

Questioned as to whether they were aware of the current unemployment rate in Canada, most were uncertain, though a number were of the impression that it was quite high, especially for younger Canadians. To aid in conversation, participants were informed that the national unemployment rate was recorded at 7 per cent in May 2025, compared to 6.6 per cent in February 2025, 5.4 per cent in 2023, and 5.7 per cent in 2019 (prior to the COVID-19 pandemic). Reacting to this information, participants expressed concern regarding the number of Canadians that were currently searching for and unable to find work, as well as the negative financial implications that this could have for Canadian households. Informed that the unemployment rate for youth aged 15-24 was currently at 14.2 per cent as of May 2025 and that this was the highest level since 2021, a number worried about the impacts that this would have on young people (including themselves) as they sought to build their careers and establish themselves financially.

Asked whether they were currently employed, most indicated that they were, with a smaller number reporting that they were searching for work. Among those who had jobs, only a few reported having found work in their field of study, with a number describing having taken on part-time or full-time employment in sectors unrelated to their education. Discussing how challenging they felt it was to find work in a field of interest to them, many believed that this had become increasingly difficult in recent years, with several reporting having personally faced issues on this front. The view was expressed that higher than usual rates of immigration over the past few years had led to the job market becoming increasingly competitive for prospective employees, further exacerbating the challenges they were facing in finding a job in their area of interest. Questioned as to whether they felt the Government of Canada was headed in the right direction when it came to creating good jobs in Canada, a roughly equal number felt that it was headed in the wrong direction as those who were more uncertain in their views.

Five groups engaged in discussions related to the relationship between Canada and the United States (U.S.). Participants in the groups based in Saint John, Yukon, and Interior British Columbia (B.C.) focused on recent trade discussions between the Government of Canada and the U.S., while individuals in the groups comprised of workers from Hamilton in tariff-impacted industries and residents of the Montérégie region of Quebec shared their perspectives regarding the range of tariffs that had been implemented on Canadian goods by the U.S. and the actions that had been taken by the federal government in response.

Trade Discussions (Saint John, Yukon, Interior British Columbia)

Asked what they had recently seen, read, or heard about trade discussions between Canada and the U.S., several recalled having heard that the U.S. had announced that it would be imposing a 35 per cent tariff on all Canadian goods, with some of the impression that this measure was set to go into effect on August 1^st, 2025. Questioned as to how well they felt these trade discussions were going overall, most did not believe that much progress had been made as of late. While some were of the impression that the federal government had taken actions, such as removing the digital services tax (DST), to move these negotiations forward, few felt that this had been effective in making progress towards the establishment of a long-term trade agreement between the two countries. A number were more uncertain in their views regarding these discussions, believing that while the federal government was working hard to negotiate a new deal with the U.S., it was difficult to say how much progress had been made as many of the conversations between Canadian and American officials had been taking place in private.

Discussing whether they felt the federal government was standing up well for Canada, participants were mixed in their views. Regionally, while several in the groups based in Saint John and Interior B.C. felt that the Government of Canada was doing the best that it could to protect the interests of Canadians and respond to what were viewed as the ever-evolving economic measures from the U.S., almost all in the group in Yukon were more negative in their views. Among these participants, it was thought that in addition to not yet having reached an agreement with the U.S. to stabilize trade and remove U.S. tariffs on Canadian exports, the federal government had not been effective in looking after the needs of its citizens, including Indigenous peoples and communities that continued to lack sufficient access to clean drinking water.

Describing what else the Government of Canada could be doing to stand up more effectively for Canada, a number felt that it should be working to implement further counter tariffs of its own in response to recent tariff increases by the U.S. on Canadian goods. The view was expressed that the federal government should consider applying export duties to Canadian utilities and resources, such as electricity and lumber, that participants believed played a vital role in meeting the energy and construction needs of many U.S. states. Some also spoke positively of the Government of Canada’s efforts to establish closer trade relationships with other global partners and believed that further steps should be taken to diversify Canada’s trade partnerships away from the U.S. going forward.

Informed that the federal government had recently announced that it was aiming to have a new trade deal in place by August 1^st, 2025 (revised from an earlier timeline of July 21^st, 2025), participants were asked whether they felt that an agreement would ultimately be reached within this timeframe. On balance, very few expected that an agreement would be reached by the deadline that had been announced by the federal government. Expanding upon their views, several cited what they perceived as a lack of progress between the two countries on these negotiations thus far and did not expect that this situation would change by the beginning of August. It was also questioned whether the U.S. was truly interested in reaching a deal in the near future, with some believing that it was intentionally prolonging these negotiations with the aim of extracting further economic concessions from the Government of Canada in the future. Discussing whether they felt the two sides would be able to reach an agreement at some point in the future, participants were again mixed in their views. While some felt that a deal would eventually be reached (with a few believing it was possible that this could happen by the end of the year), a roughly equal number did not expect that the Canada and the U.S. would reach an agreement on trade at any point in the foreseeable future.

Assuming that an agreement could be reached by the Government of Canada and the U.S. by August 1^st, participants were asked what a good outcome would look like to them. For most, it was felt that a removal of all the tariffs that had been implemented by the U.S. since January 2025 and a return to free trade between Canada and the U.S. represented the most acceptable outcome when it came to resolving these negotiations. Several, however, believed that given the perceived importance that they felt had been placed by the U.S. government on keeping tariffs in place for most countries, it was unlikely that these economic measures would be removed entirely. With this in mind, a number commented that an agreement that reduced tariffs to a more manageable level, such as 10 or 15 per cent, represented the best outcome that the federal government could realistically achieve. A few also felt that any trade agreement reached with the U.S. should be one that was mutually beneficial for both sides and ensured the long-term protection of Canada’s natural resources and vital sectors such as lumber, steel, and aluminum.

Tariffs (Hamilton Workers in Tariff-Impacted Industries, Montérégie Region Quebec)

At the outset of their conversations, participants were asked what they had seen, read, or heard as of late related to the implementation by the U.S. of tariffs on Canadian imports. A number recalled hearing about tariffs that had been imposed on Canadian steel, aluminum, and other products, with some in the group comprised of Hamilton workers in tariff-impacted industries reporting that they and/or their employers had been negatively impacted by these tariffs. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

The United States has imposed tariffs on various Canadian goods going to the U.S., including steel and aluminum, auto parts, and Canadian energy. Goods that are compliant with the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) are exempt.

Discussing the ramifications of these measures by the U.S., almost all believed that they had negatively impacted Canadian workers and businesses across a wide range of sectors. Several believed that these tariffs had already led to decreased revenue and lost contracts for Canadian businesses, as well as layoffs in many different sectors, such as the auto industry and other industries that had been reliant on the free flow of goods across the Canada-U.S. border. A number who reported working in the construction sector reported having faced higher costs for raw materials and other supplies imported from the U.S. since the imposition of these tariffs, increasing their business costs and making it less affordable to build new projects.

Participants were provided with the following information regarding actions that the Government of Canada had taken to support workers and businesses that had been impacted by these tariffs:

The Government of Canada recently announced some changes to the Employment Insurance (EI) program that will allow affected workers to reduce their hours and receive EI benefits if there is a decrease in business beyond the employer’s control. The federal government also announced support for affected businesses, including funding to help companies that export find new markets for their products and offering loans to impacted businesses.

While several felt that these supports would likely be helpful in the short-term in helping Canadian workers and businesses continue to make ends meet financially, few saw these as an effective long-term response to U.S. tariffs. A number expressed concerns that, similar to the financial assistance provided during the COVID-19 pandemic, recipients of these supports might have to pay these amounts back later on, leading to potential financial challenges for them in the future. Asked whether there was anything more that the Government of Canada should be doing to support the industries they work in specifically, a number in the group based in Hamilton believed that actions should be taken to encourage more Canadian businesses to use Canadian-made materials (such as steel) and to ensure that other countries were unable to flood the Canadian market with cheaper, lower-quality products. While not related to a specific sector, a few in the group based in Quebec’s Montérégie region believed that the federal government should establish a system where laid off workers could quickly be trained and deployed to other in-demand sectors that may be experiencing labour shortages.

Participants were next presented with a number of potential actions that the Government of Canada could take to support impacted workers and industries. These included:

• Additional financial support for companies that struggle to keep workers employed;
• A “Buy Canadian” approach for the Government of Canada, where it prioritizes Canadian companies for all federal government purchases;
• Extending EI for long-tenured workers;
• Tools to match people on EI with employers who currently have vacancies; and
• New trade agreements that open up access to other markets for Canadian businesses.

Asked whether they supported any of these ideas, many expressed support for all of these potential actions, with several specifically mentioning the initiatives to promote a “Buy Canadian” approach, match workers on EI with employers who currently have vacancies, and to establish new trade agreements that open up access to other markets for Canadian businesses. While not in opposition to any of the ideas listed, a few expressed concerns that these could lead to increased spending by the federal government and could bring about higher deficits and a larger national debt in the long term. A small number in the group comprised of Hamilton workers in tariff-impacted industries felt that the provision of tools to match EI recipients with employers who currently have vacancies could be helpful to them when it came to filling vacancies at their own workplace that required specialized skills that they were struggling to find qualified candidates for.

Participants next engaged in an exercise in which they were asked to share where they felt they would land on a hypothetical scale where 1 represents that Canada should make as many concessions as needed, in order to negotiate an agreement with the U.S., and 10 represents that Canada should not make any concessions, no matter how painful for Canada. On balance, the largest number of participants selected a 5, with several of the opinion that while the Government of Canada should be firm and ensure that it is standing up for Canadians, they did not want to see it take an approach that would lead to escalating tariffs that could cause considerable economic challenges for workers and businesses. It was thought that, given the considerably greater size of the U.S. economy compared to that of Canada’s, a prolonged and escalating trade disruption would likely have a much larger negative impact on the financial wellbeing of Canadians relative to those residing in the U.S. A smaller number selected 6 or 7, believing that the Government of Canada should be firmer in its approach to negotiations with the U.S. going forward, while a few chose 4, feeling that making more smaller concessions to the U.S. would be helpful in terms of achieving progress on these trade discussions.

Discussing whether they thought it would be possible for the federal government to reach an agreement with the U.S. where all recently imposed tariffs would be completely removed, or whether they expected at least some tariffs would remain, many were uncertain. While a number believed that it was possible that an agreement could be reached at some point where all tariffs on Canadian imports would be removed, several felt that it was difficult to predict how these negotiations would unfold, given their perception that the concessions being sought by the U.S. seemed to be changing on a relatively frequent basis. Expanding upon this, it was mentioned that the federal government had already taken steps, such as removing the DST and bolstering its efforts to increase the security of the Canada-U.S. border, to address concerns expressed by the U.S. government and that these actions had yielded little in the way of progress when it came to these negotiations. A few expressed the view that even if an agreement were reached where all tariffs were removed, this did not guarantee that new tariffs would not be introduced by the U.S. at some point in the years to come.

Four groups engaged in conversations related to vaccinations, with participants sharing their perspectives regarding the perceived safety of vaccines as well as their recent experiences in receiving a vaccine. Almost all indicated having received a COVID-19 vaccine at some point over the past five years, with a large number also reporting receiving another type of vaccine (such as a flu shot, a travel vaccine, or the shingles vaccine) during this time frame. Questioned as to whether they felt that it was safe to receive vaccines, almost all believed that it was, with many citing what they viewed as the rigorous testing processes and long-term track records of most of the vaccinations available to the general public. A number also identified their own personal experiences as being a reason for their confidence in the safety of vaccines, with several describing having received numerous vaccines over the course of their lifetimes and not having been negatively impacted in any way. A few took a more nuanced view, believing that while most vaccines were generally safe, the approval and deployment process for the COVID-19 vaccine may have been expedited due to the public health emergency at the time and, as such, may have gone through a slightly different process as other vaccinations.

Participants in the groups comprised of recent graduates in Ontario and individuals in Montreal living pay cheque to pay cheque were asked to share the reasons that had informed their decisions to get vaccinated. Focusing on the COVID-19 vaccine, several reported having gotten vaccinated during the pandemic out of a desire to protect themselves and others, with some mentioning having elderly relatives who they feared would experience serious negative health outcomes from contracting COVID-19. Also related to the COVID-19 vaccine, a number recalled having made the decision to get vaccinated primarily due to mandates that had been implemented at their workplaces and/or the post-secondary institutions that they had been attending at the time. Unrelated to the pandemic, some also reported having gotten vaccinated in recent years out of a desire to avoid contracting serious illnesses while travelling, or in response to personal medical issues that they had been experiencing.

All groups were asked to share what their experiences receiving a vaccine had been like and whether they viewed this experience in a positive or negative light. Participant responses primarily focused on vaccinations that they had received during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a large number reporting that this had been a positive experience overall. Among these participants it was thought that the vaccination process had been well-organized and efficient, and that the health care professionals they had met had been friendly and reassuring. For the smaller number who reported having faced challenges and/or barriers while getting vaccinated, a number mentioned that it had been difficult to obtain an appointment and/or that the booking system in their area had been somewhat complicated. Other issues recalled by participants included long lines at their vaccination locations, feeling overwhelmed by the large number of people getting vaccinated at the same time, and encountering negative after-effects from the vaccine. A few reiterated that they had been compelled to get vaccinated only to comply with the vaccine requirements at their school or workplace. Unrelated to the COVID-19 vaccine, a few mentioned having encountered challenges related to obtaining a prescription for certain vaccines, such as the tetanus vaccine for employment purposes, as well as difficulties in affording what they perceived as the high costs for some vaccines that are not publicly funded.

Thinking about what they had learned or heard about vaccinations in recent years, participants in the groups based in Ontario and Montreal were asked if they could recall where they had encountered this information. A wide range of sources were mentioned, including television and radio, social media, a family doctor or pharmacist, and vaccine clinics that had been set up at participants’ post-secondary institutions. Questioned as to how often they came across false information related to vaccines, while a few reported having seen misinformation and disinformation about vaccines on social media, most did not recall having encountered this issue. Discussing how they would go about determining whether they could trust an information source about vaccines, several mentioned that they would likely verify any questionable information they encountered with additional sources such as government websites, peer-reviewed academic journals, information posted by health organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), online services such as Google and ChatGPT, and trusted health care providers.

All groups were asked, based on their personal experiences, to share what factors they felt would make it easier or more convenient to get vaccinated. Several potential actions were mentioned including increasing the affordability and availability of vaccines, providing more information regarding where to get vaccinated and/or how to book an appointment, and increasing educational efforts to inform the public about vaccines, how they work, their potential side effects, and the health issues that they help to prevent. Recalling their interactions with the health care system over the last few years (whether this related to their experiences receiving care or trying to access primary care) participants were asked how these experiences had affected the way they felt about vaccines. On balance, very few reported having changed their perspectives related to vaccines due to their experiences with the health care system, with almost all reiterating a generally high level of trust in vaccinations and the science and research behind them.

Two groups shared their perspectives related to the Government of Canada’s response to large-scale wildfires that had been occurring in several parts of the country in recent months. At the outset of their conversation, the group comprised of residents of Manitoba who reported having been personally impacted by wildfires were asked to share whether they had experienced serious impacts of wildfires, such as getting an evacuation alert or being evacuated from their home. Most indicated that they had, with several describing having been evacuated or displaced, and a few reporting that they had still been unable to return to their homes. Asked whether their mental health, physical health, or overall wellbeing had been impacted by the wildfires, many reported having faced challenges related to their mental health, especially as it relates to the anxiety and uncertainty that they were feeling about the potential long-term impacts that these wildfires might have had on their own lives and their broader communities. Discussing how easy or difficult they had found it to access services and supports during these wildfires (whether they stayed in their own communities or whether they were evacuated), most recalled that it had been incredibly challenging. A number expressed feeling disappointed that more supports had not been available, recounting that most of the supports they did receive had primarily been the result of community-driven initiatives rather than from the provincial or federal government.

Both groups were asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the response from the Government of Canada to the wildfires that had taken place in their respective regions. Only a small number reported having heard anything, with a few in Manitoba recalling that the federal government had deployed Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel to assist with the evacuation effort in some communities. Sharing their views regarding the Government of Canada’s response to these wildfires, a roughly equal number of those in Atlantic Canada felt positively about the response compared to those who were more uncertain or negative in their views, while most in Manitoba felt that there was significant room for improvement on this front. Among those who felt that the federal government had been on the right track in its response, a number mentioned steps that it had taken including providing resources to fight these fires, assisting with the evacuation of impacted communities, and providing support for displaced individuals to find temporary housing and/or afford essentials such as food and clothing. For those who thought that the Government of Canada was on the wrong track, it was thought that it needed to take greater measures to prevent, prepare for, and respond to wildfires, with a number feeling that this area had not been prioritized highly enough in recent years. A small number reported having not heard much about this issue and felt that the federal government needed to do more to promote its actions on this front.

To aid in conversation, participants were provided with information related to the Government of Canada’s response to the wildfires in their respective regions:

Atlantic Canada:

In response to Requests for Federal Assistance from Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia, the Government of Canada is providing resources to support efforts to battle the wildfires. This can include things like deploying Canadian Armed Forces personnel and resources to assist with firefighting, providing airlift resources, as well as logistics and planning support. The Canadian Coast Guard also provide personnel and equipment, such as helicopters flying reconnaissance missions, ships on standby to help if needed, and portable equipment, such as comfort trailers for firefighters.

Manitoba:

In response to requests for federal assistance from Manitoba, the Government of Canada is providing resources to support efforts to battle the wildfires. This can include things like providing airlift resources and humanitarian workforce support for emergency evacuation and sheltering activities (e.g. congregate shelters and reception centres, meals, mental health supports, first aid).

Asked what else they felt the Government of Canada should be doing when it came to responding to wildfires, participants mentioned actions such as reaching out to other countries for assistance, placing an increased focus on performing preventative measures such as clearing underbrush and undertaking controlled burns, creating a dedicated national firefighting unit that would be ready to fight wildfires wherever they occur, and educating Canadians (and youth especially) about the dangers of forest fires and the role that they can play in preventing these natural disasters from occurring. Additional measures mentioned by participants included providing increased housing support for individuals who had been displaced and/or had lost their homes, including taking steps to ensure that insurance companies were swiftly processing and paying out claims to impacted households. It was also felt that the Government of Canada could provide more resources towards rehabilitating the surrounding environment in the aftermath of wildfires, as well as increase its investments towards infrastructure (such as back-up generators) that would provide impacted communities with additional power sources to draw upon both during and in the aftermath of these events.

The group based in Atlantic Canada were provided with additional information specific to their region regarding recent actions taken by Parks Canada to help reduce the risk of wildfires. Participants were shown the following:

Due to ongoing wildfires and an effort to reduce the risk of wildfires, Parks Canada has also implemented some measures such as:

• Temporarily closing parts of some national parks and sites, for example, all backcountry access in Gros Morne National Park;
• Implementing fire bans at some national parks and sites, for example, Kejimkujik National Park and National Historic Site; and
• Temporarily closing trails at some national parks and sites, for example Cape Breton Highlands National Park.

Note that national parks and sites are not fully closed. For example, at Cape Breton Highlands National Park, visitors can still access front country camping, beaches, day-use areas, and the Cabot Trail.

Discussing what they thought about these measures from Parks Canada, most felt that these were important temporary actions and were reasonable steps to assist in preventing further large-scale wildfires from taking place. The view was expressed that, given the substantial risk posed by wildfires and the perceived ease by which they seemed to be occurring, it was important to have strict measures such as these in place to deter individuals from taking part in activities that could exacerbate this issue. A smaller number felt differently, believing that while there should be harsh consequences for those who engage in behaviours (such as building campfires) that could result in wildfires, they did not believe that these natural areas should be closed off to those seeking to enjoy the outdoors. The view was expressed that, for many, exploring the outdoors was an important component of their mental health and that by restricting access to these natural areas, these actions by Parks Canada could have a detrimental impact on the lives of some Canadians.

Four groups took part in discussions related to the recently introduced Canada Strong Pass. Asked whether they had previously heard about this initiative, very few indicated that they had. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

The Government of Canada introduced the Canada Strong Pass so Canadians can enjoy free or discounted admissions in various Canadian travel destinations over the course of this summer, from June 20 to September 2, 2025. This includes:

• Free admission for all visitors to national parks, national historic sites, national marine conservation areas administered by Parks Canada and a 25 per cent discount on camping fees;
• Free admission for children and teens aged 17 and under and a 50 per cent discount for youth aged 18 to 24 at national museums and the Plains of Abraham Museum;
• Free Via Rail travel for children and teens aged 17 and under when accompanied by an adult, and a 25 per cent discount for young adults aged 18 to 24; and
• Free admission for children and a 50 per cent discount for young adults aged 18 to 24 at participating provincial and territorial museums and galleries.

Asked whether, now that they had been provided with this information, they recalled having heard anything about the Canada Strong Pass, a number indicated that they had, with some recounting details such as the free admissions to national parks, free and discounted Via Rail travel, and that the initiatives had been targeted towards children and teens aged 17 and under, as well as youth aged 18 to 24. Discussing whether they felt there was anything confusing or unclear about the Canada Strong Pass, almost all believed that it was a straightforward and easily understandable initiative. While very few reported having previously used the pass, many indicated that they would be interested in taking part in this program now that they had been made aware of this information. A number, however, commented that due to being above the age of 24, they would be unlikely to qualify for many of the initiatives targeted towards younger Canadians, and hoped that additional discounts could be provided to individuals in other age ranges at some point in the future.

Discussing why they felt the Government of Canada had introduced the Canada Strong Pass, several felt that this initiative had primarily been offered as a way to incentivize for Canadians to choose to travel and vacation within Canada, with the aim of increasing domestic travel across the country and creating more economic opportunities for Canadian tourism-related businesses and destinations. It was also thought that this action had been taken to provide people with more affordable access to Canada’s cultural and educational attractions, with the aim of further strengthening Canadian national identity and fostering greater unity across the country. Asked whether they felt that this was the type of initiative that the federal government should be doing, almost all believed that it was, with a number reiterating the economic and cultural benefits that they felt Canadians would gain from this program.

Questioned as to whether they felt the Canada Strong Pass would entice them to explore Canada during the summer, several believed that it would. It was felt that by making it more affordable to travel to and visit places such as national parks, museums, and other cultural/historical sites, the Government of Canada would be removing a key barrier that they felt was currently preventing some Canadians from enjoying these attractions. The view was expressed that this initiative would be especially helpful for families with young children who were interested in exploring more of Canada with their kids.

Asked whether they felt the Canada Strong Pass should be offered again next summer, almost all answered affirmatively, with a number mentioning that, while they had heard about this program too late this year to make use of it, they would be very interested in utilizing it in 2026. A small number felt somewhat differently, believing that the federal government should first study the uptake and the financial impact of the initial year of this program before deciding whether it should be extended.

Invited to share any potential changes or suggested improvements that they felt could be made to the Canada Strong Pass if it were offered again, several believed that greater efforts needed to be taken by the federal government to market and communicate this program to Canadians, with a number reiterating that they would likely have utilized this program had they heard about it prior to these conversations. It was also thought that the Government of Canada could work to establish partnerships with provincial/territorial governments and municipal governments in major tourism areas to find ways to increase the number of benefits available to Canadians via this program.

Discussing whether they felt the Canada Strong Pass should be applied equally to everyone, or whether they thought some aspects should only be eligible for certain groups, such as the 25 per cent discount for young adults traveling by Via Rail, but not for adults aged 25+, participants overwhelmingly felt that this program should be available to all Canadians. It was thought that all Canadians would benefit from it becoming more affordable to explore Canada and that the Canada Strong Pass would be especially helpful for lower- and middle-income families who were finding it challenging to afford to vacation at present. Asked what kinds of venues, activities, or events they felt should be included in this pass going forward, participants mentioned a wide variety of areas, including free or discounted entry to music festivals, art galleries, amusement parks, and theatres, as well as provincial/territorial parks and museums. A number also believed that efforts could be taken to provide more educational and skills training opportunities for Canadians (and youth especially) regarding basic outdoor survival skills and best practices to follow when spending time outdoors.

Describing how else the federal government could encourage Canadians to travel within Canada or promote engagement with Canadian culture and heritage, several mentioned what they perceived as the high financial costs of travelling to different parts of the country and believed that more needed be done to assist Canadians with the cost of domestic air, rail, and road travel. It was also felt that greater efforts should be taken by the Government of Canada to increase the affordability of accommodations such as hotels and motels, with a number believing that these had become prohibitively expensive for many Canadian families. Additionally, it was thought that actions could be taken to reduce or eliminate admissions fees for historical and cultural attractions on a year-round basis as a way of further increasing the reach and impact of the Canada Strong Pass going forward.

Two groups shared their opinions regarding advertising concepts that had been developed to promote greater awareness of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). These concepts were presented in storyboard format, and participants were informed that the final product would be 30-second, professionally produced videos that would appear on social media and other digital platforms. The order in which these concepts were shown to participants varied between the two groups.

Ready for…

Participants were presented with the following storyboard:

The storyboard features six panels, depicting different activities related to the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and concludes with the CAF logo. The top left panel features a boat, with a number of CAF personnel riding on it as it travels over a crashing wave. The word “READY” is displayed in the centre-left of the image, and the image is accompanied by the VO: “Ready…Ready for”. The upper middle panel features two individual scuba diving under what appears to be icy arctic waters. The phrase “READY FOR EVERY ENVIRONMENT” appears in the centre of the image, with the VO: “Ready for every environment”. The top right panel features three medical personnel surrounded by equipment appearing to be in the process of providing medical assistance to someone. The text “READY FOR EMERGENCIES” appears on the screen, with the VO: “Ready for emergencies…ready for cyber threats”. The bottom left panel features a man working at a laptop in a darkly lit room, surrounded by computer equipment. The words “READY FOR ANY THREAT” appear on screen, accompanied by the VO: “Ready for any threat…ready for threats to sovereignty”. The lower middle panel shows a man in full military gear from the shoulders up against a grayish blue sky, as sunlight shines on his face. The phrase “READY FOR IT” appears on the screen, and the VO: “Ready for overseas operations…Ready for it”. The bottom right panel showcases the CAF Logo and the text “SEE HOW WE STAY READY AT FORCES.CA”. Text at the bottom right corner of the storyboard informs participants that the phrase “Ready for whatever comes” will be superimposed over the final slide, and that the advertisement will conclude with the Government of Canada logo.

On balance, participants were largely positive in their reactions to this concept, with a number feeling that this advertisement was clear, to the point, and effectively communicated the many ways by which the CAF was working to protect Canadians from potential threats. While not negative in their reactions, a number in the group comprised of Indigenous peoples residing in the Prairies felt that the superimposed words over the images would be somewhat distracting and would make the advertisement more difficult to follow.

Asked what they felt was the main message of this concept, most believed that it was to communicate that the CAF was ready to protect and defend Canadians against a wide range of potential threats and emergencies. A smaller number thought that this concept was also intended to serve as a recruitment advertisement for the CAF, encouraging more Canadians to assist in the protection of the country and its sovereignty. Questioned as to whether this concept provided them with a better understanding of what the CAF does, a number in the group based in Interior British Columbia (B.C.) thought that it did, while most in the group comprised of Indigenous peoples in the Prairies reported that their understanding had remained mostly unchanged.

Discussing whether anything about this advertisement surprised them, a few mentioned the depictions of the CAF combatting threats related to cybersecurity as well as partaking in underwater activities such as scuba diving, with some expressing that they did not know that these were areas that the CAF was involved in. Questioned as to what could make this concept more effective, a few suggested that it could incorporate interviews or voiceovers from real individuals who were currently serving in the CAF to add greater authenticity to the ad. The view was also expressed that, in order to be as effective as possible, this advertisement would need to select background music that aligned with the exciting imagery depicted on screen.

Full Picture

Participants were shown the following concept and informed that, rather than utilizing a voiceover, this advertisement would present its message through imagery and accompanying superimposed text.

The storyboard features six panels depicting different activities related to the CAF, concluding with the CAF logo. The top left panel showcases a dark room with a slit of light in the middle and an individual’s head on the right side of this light. In the middle left the phrase “MOST NEVER SEE WHAT WE DO”. Below the image is the description “We’ll open using very closely cropped footage. Too cropped – all relevant context should be removed – where this is, what they’re doing, who the person is. The upper middle panel shows an individual jumping out of what appears to be a helicopter into the ocean below. There is a large naval ship in the background and the frame of another individual as they watch their fellow CAF member jump. The text “WE DO” is super imposed on the screen, and the description below “The entire image is then revealed. Its expansion covers the first four words of the super. The top right panel features a man working at a laptop in a darkly lit room, surrounded by computer equipment. The words “WE DO” are again super imposed on the screen, the description below reading “Roll through full-screen clips of the people in action”. The bottom left panel depicts a boat, with a number of CAF personnel riding on it as it travels over a crashing wave. The words “WE DO” appear in the middle of the screen, with the description reading “crop in on last image” and a note that the full super imposed message will say “WE DO IT ALL”. The lower middle panel includes a soldier, followed by others in the shadows behind him, in full military gear, holding his weapon. On his middle left is the word “TO” on his right is the word “STAY” and on the far right of the screen is the word “READY”. The ad concludes on the CAF logo and the tagline “SEE THE FULL PICTURE AT FORCES.CA”. Participants are informed that the advertisement will end with the Government of Canada logo.

While most reacted positively to the visuals included in this concept, believing that they provided compelling imagery regarding the many different activities that the CAF is engaged in, several felt that the lack of a voiceover would make this ad difficult for viewers to follow. Discussing what they perceived as the main message of this concept, participants largely felt that it was aiming to communicate that there were many different aspects involved in the work that the CAF undertakes in keeping Canadians safe. A number also thought that this advertisement was seeking to reassure viewers that CAF personnel were highly skilled when it came to carrying out their responsibilities and would be well-prepared to defend the country against a wide range of potential threats.

While very few felt that this advertisement provided them with a better understanding of what the CAF does, a small number believed that it was effective in increasing their sense of national pride and confidence in the abilities of the country’s armed forces. None reported being surprised by anything that had been included this concept, with a number expressing that the imagery chosen for this advertisement for the most part had aligned with their existing impressions of the duties of CAF personnel. Asked what their impressions of the CAF were after having viewed this advertisement, a few said that the concept made them feel like the armed forces were powerful, skilled, and engaged in a wide variety of actions and activities to protect Canadians. Discussing what else could be done to increase the effectiveness of this concept, participants suggested actions such as including more imagery of CAF personnel engaged in combat-oriented activities, personalizing the ad with stories featuring individual CAF members, and providing information related to the high-quality training and educational opportunities that the CAF offers.

All the Time

In addition to the storyboard below, participants were also read an accompanying script for this concept:

This storyboard features 8 panels depicting different activities related to the armed forces and concluding with the CAF logo. The top right image showcases a group of CAF soldiers in full tactical gear, one is kicking in the door on a structure with the rest of the group having their weapons drawn and prepared to enter. VO: “It’s all the time” and the sound of a clock ticking. The upper middle features three soldiers running behind a truck on an aircraft carrier at sea, with a helicopter flying above them. VO: “We put in hundreds of thousands of hours”, with the sound of the helicopter’s rotors. The top right panel features four men, two on the right in camouflage and two on the left in bright orange jumpsuits, holding four corners of a stretcher. They are departing from a landed helicopter in the background. VO: “to respond in split-seconds”, with the sound of a heartbeat. The centre left panel features a long line of snowmobiles being driven across an Arctic-type setting. VO: “It’s where…” and the sound of an engine humming. The centre panel features the back profile of a man working at a computer in a darkly lit room with a lot of important looking security technology and screens. He is surrounded by other coworkers who are also busy at different tasks. VO: “And when…”, with the sound of the typing of a keyboard. The middle right panel depicts a boat, with a number of CAF personnel riding on it as it travels over a crashing wave. VO: “It’s every time”, and the sound of crashing waves. The bottom left panel is blank. The bottom centre shows a line of soldiers marching, from behind, on a grassy field towards a forest of trees. VO: “It’s all the time”, with the sound of boots marching. The bottom right panel concludes with the CAF logo and the tagline “LEARN MORE AT FORCES.CA”. VO: “It’s our time”, with the sound of boots marching.

Participant reactions to this concept were largely positive, with several feeling that this advertisement was quite captivating and presented a realistic depiction of the many different areas that the CAF was responsible for. A number liked that this concept included visuals of a variety of activities, including those related to cybersecurity, protecting the Arctic, and CAF personnel engaging in rescue missions. A few also felt that the sound cues, such as the ticking clock and the heartbeat, would be very effective in conveying the intense energy of this ad.

Discussing what they viewed as the main message of this advertisement, most believed that it was to showcase the many different priority areas that the CAF focuses on and to reaffirm to viewers the commitment of armed forces personnel when it came to protecting Canadians from a variety of potential threats. A number also believed that this concept was meant to communicate to viewers (including prospective applicants) that the CAF was an exciting place to work and that there were many different career paths open to those who were interested in applying to join the armed forces. While a few felt that they were now more aware of the vast scope of activities that the CAF undertakes (particularly as it relates to cybersecurity and Canada’s North), none thought that there was anything surprising that had been included in the ad.

Asked to share what their impressions were of the CAF now that they had seen this advertisement, most reported feeling positive about the armed forces and thankful that the CAF was there to protect Canadians and ensure the country’s safety. Suggesting ways by which this ad could be improved, the view was expressed that more could be done to provide imagery of larger groups of CAF personnel standing together/participating in a mission, and more visuals depicting the opportunities for adventure and excitement that were available to those who joined the armed forces. It was also thought that a QR code could be included at the end of the advertisement that viewers could scan if they wanted to learn more.

Engaging in an exercise where they were asked to identify which of the three concepts they felt was the most effective in terms of showcasing the range of things that the CAF does, participants overwhelmingly selected All the Time, with a much smaller number choosing Ready for… and Full Picture. Describing why they made their selection, many of those who selected All the Time expressed the opinion that this concept was the most engaging and captivating of the three and believed that it would be very effective in showcasing the CAF to viewers. Several spoke positively of the concept’s blending together of visuals, sounds, and voiceover to create a multisensory presentation of the CAF and its activities. A number believed that this ad provided a reassuring representation of the CAF, communicating to viewers that the armed forces were constantly at work protecting the safety of Canadians across a multitude of different areas.

Asked whether they felt that seeing a wider range of what the CAF does would make them more or less likely to recommend it as a career to someone else, participants were mixed in their opinions. While some felt that these advertisements effectively showcased the many different career paths that were available in the CAF, a number thought that there needed to be more imagery and further details about what specific jobs within the armed forces looked like on a day-to-day basis and the benefits and opportunities that were available to CAF members.