Government of Canada in the News (All Locations)

At the beginning of each group, participants were asked what they had seen, read, or heard about the Government of Canada in recent days. A wide range of announcements and initiatives were recalled. These included a range of actions and initiatives from the federal government aimed at growing the housing supply across Canada, the decision by the Bank of Canada to leave its policy interest rate unchanged, the announcement of sustainability-focused rebates such as the Oil to Heat Pump Affordability Program, and the announcement that the Government of Canada would be raising the cost-of-living financial requirement for international student study permit applications as well as setting an intake cap on these applications for 2024. Additional actions recalled by participants included the introduction of the Canadian Dental Care Plan (CDCP), and a ruling by the Federal Court of Canada that the Government of Canada’s decision to declare a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act in early 2022 was unreasonable.

Participants also recalled activities related to the Government of Canada on the international stage. These included the provision of ongoing humanitarian assistance to civilians in Israel, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank impacted by the ongoing conflict in that region, as well as the announcement of temporary immigration measures that would allow foreign national family members of Canadian citizens and Permanent Residents (PRs) to apply for free-exempt study or open work permits. Some also mentioned hearing about ongoing tensions between Canada and India following an announcement that Canadian security agencies were in possession of intelligence potentially linking agents of the Government of India to the killing of a Canadian citizen in June of 2023, as well as the attendance of several federal officials at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) which was held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates from November 30^th, 2023, to December 12^th, 2023.

International Student Study Permits (Greater Montreal Area)

Participants residing in the Greater Montreal Area (GMA) briefly discussed the issue of international students and the recent decision by the Government of Canada to temporarily cap new international student study permits. Several were of the impression that there had been an influx of international students to Canada in recent years and that this had served to exacerbate existing challenges related to the housing supply.

Informed that the Government of Canada had announced a temporary 2-year cap on new international student study permits, while a small number viewed this as a step in the right direction, very few felt that this action on its own would be sufficient to address current issues related to housing and immigration. Discussing the potential impacts of this measure, several expected that this would have a negative financial impact on many Canadian post-secondary institutions. It was believed that the fees and tuition paid by international students represented a significant source of revenue for Canadian universities and colleges and that these institutions may have to undergo budget reductions in response to this measure.

Asked whether they felt the Government of Canada was on the right or wrong track when it came to managing the immigration system, all believed it was headed in the wrong direction. It was strongly believed that the rate of immigration needed to be temporarily stabilized to allow for municipalities to make necessary upgrades to existing infrastructure and services in order to accommodate higher populations in the years to come.

Government of Canada Priorities and Performance (Mid-Size and Major Centres Atlantic Canada, Hamilton Renters, Vancouver Middle Class Concerned About the Cost of Living, Manitoba, National Capital Region Quebec, Alberta Parents of Children under 12, Surrey, Quebec University Students, Mid-Size and Major Centres Manitoba Lower Income, Greater Toronto Area, Atlantic Canada, British Columbia Aspiring Homeowners)

Twelve groups took part in conversations related to the issues currently facing Canadians as well as their perspectives regarding the federal government’s management of these priorities. Participants were asked to identify areas in which they felt the Government of Canada was performing well and areas where they felt there was room for improvement. On a number of issues participants expressed a range of positive and negative views. These included immigration, climate change and the environment, supports for post-secondary students, and Canada’s reputation on the global stage.

Participants also identified a number of areas where they felt that the Government of Canada had performed well. Areas mentioned included the offering of a wide range of benefits and supports to Canadians, protecting and promoting diversity and multiculturalism within Canada, providing humanitarian assistance to civilians seeking protection from international conflicts, and its response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Additionally, participants mentioned a range of areas in which they believed the Government of Canada had room for improvement. These included health care, inflation and the cost of living, the affordability of housing, and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

Prompted to identify what they viewed as the most important priority areas for the Government of Canada to be focusing on, many reiterated the need for further action towards improving housing affordability, bolstering the health care system, addressing the cost of living, mitigating the impacts of climate change, and pursuing further reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. Other important priority areas identified by participants included increasing supports for the education system, stabilizing the rate of immigration, providing greater supports for seniors and persons living with disabilities, and increasing funding towards law enforcement and public safety.

Middle Class Issues (Mid-Size and Major Centres Atlantic Canada, Hamilton Renters, Manitoba, Vancouver Middle Class Concerned about the Cost of Living, National Capital Region Quebec)

Participants in five groups took part in discussions related to the challenges currently facing middle class Canadians and actions that the federal government had taken to support middle class households. All felt that supporting the middle class was an important priority for the Government of Canada to focus on, with several of the impression that the middle class had been disappearing in recent decades. Several reported having personally faced financial challenges over the past year and believed that factors such as inflation, high interest rates, and the cost of living in general had made it increasingly difficult to make ends meet financially. It was thought that the Government of Canada should work to expand the eligibility criteria for the benefits and supports it offers to account for the large portion of middle-class households who were believed to be struggling with the cost of living at present.

Discussing potential measures that the federal government could take to better support middle class Canadians, many felt that there needed to be a stronger focus on increasing the affordability of essential goods and services (such as groceries and gasoline) as well as reducing housing costs for homeowners as well as renters.

Participants in the group comprised of middle-income individuals residing in Vancouver who were concerned about the cost of living engaged in an extended conversation regarding their perspectives as members of the middle class. All felt that the quality of life for the middle class had changed in their lifetimes, with many believing that life had become considerably less affordable in recent years. Several expressed the view that it had become difficult for middle class families to get ahead financially and/or save for the future, due to what they perceived as a significant increase in prices across all sectors of the economy. Asked whether they felt that the Government of Canada cared about the middle class, very few believed that it did. Several strongly felt that greater urgency needed to be placed by the federal government on supporting middle class families and creating a long-term plan regarding how it would go about achieving this goal.

Official Languages (Quebec University Students)

Participants in the group comprised of university students residing in Quebec engaged in a brief conversation related to Canada’s official languages. Asked how they would describe the current state of the country’s official languages, a number were of the impression that there had been tension in their province as of late concerning this issue. This was thought to be mostly related to the Government of Quebec’s Bill 96 which was viewed as having primarily been enacted to promote the use of the French language in the province and affirm the status of French as the common language of Quebec.

Asked what role they felt the Government of Canada should play in protecting and promoting the language rights of Quebeckers, most believed that it should primarily be focused on ensuring that all federal services were available in both English and French in communities across the country. A few also believed that additional resources should be allocated by the federal government towards providing free or affordable language education in both official languages to all residents of Quebec, as well as Canada more broadly.

Groceries (Vancouver Middle Class Concerned about the Cost of Living, Atlantic Canada)

Participants in two groups were asked a few additional questions about recent measures taken by the Government of Canada related to the cost of groceries. Each group discussed activities from the federal government that had occurred in the days prior to the group being held.

The group based in Vancouver was provided with information related to a number of measures the Government of Canada had recently announced aimed at stabilizing rising grocery prices. While most reacted positively to these measures, a large number expected that the success of these actions would be largely dependent on how effectively they are implemented as well as the degree to which major grocery chains cooperate with these initiatives. Several believed that more urgent action needed to be taken by the Government of Canada on this front, and that a greater emphasis needed to be placed on creating a long-term plan to make groceries more affordable for all Canadians going forward.

At the beginning of their discussion, participants in Atlantic Canada were informed that the Government of Canada had sent a letter to the Competition Bureau, calling on it to start using the additional powers it had been provided to help compel major grocery chains to stabilize grocery prices for Canadians. While believing that it was important for the federal government to be focusing on this issue, participants felt that this action was unlikely to have much of an impact on the cost of groceries. A number believed that rather than imposing increased regulations, the federal government should be working to incentivize major grocers (through measures such as tax breaks) to stabilize or lower the prices they charge. It was also thought that more could be done to support smaller grocery businesses as well as to encourage greater competition within the grocery sector overall.

Housing (Hamilton Renters, Vancouver Middle Class Concerned about the Cost of Living, GTA Homeowners Expecting to Renew Mortgages in the Next Three Years, Atlantic Canada Homeowners, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions Quebec, Alberta Parents of Children Under 12, Surrey, Quebec University Students, Mid-Size and Major Centres Manitoba Lower Income, Yukon, Greater Montreal Area, Niagara Region Ontario, British Columbia Aspiring Homeowners)

Thirteen groups engaged in conversations related to housing. These discussions respectively focused on updates that the federal government could potentially make to its housing plan, issues impacting renters, opinions related to increasing densification in Canadian municipalities, and the perspectives of homeowners related to current interest rates and the mortgage renewal process.

Housing Plan (Atlantic Canada Homeowners, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions Quebec, Alberta Parents of Children Under 12, Surrey, Quebec University Students, Mid-Size and Major Centres Manitoba Lower Income, Yukon, Greater Montreal Area, Niagara Region Ontario, British Columbia Aspiring Homeowners)

Ten groups took part in conversations related to updates that the federal government was currently making to its housing plan. To begin, participants in the groups comprised of homeowners in Atlantic Canada, parents of children under 12 in Alberta, and residents of the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, and Côte-Nord regions of Quebec were asked how they would describe the current state of housing in Canada. All believed that the housing situation was facing considerable challenges, with a large number expressing the opinion that affordability and a limited supply of available housing had been significant issues in recent years. It was believed that these issues had made housing less affordable for homeowners while also making it difficult for prospective home buyers to qualify for mortgages. Asked what they felt to be the biggest drivers of housing unaffordability at present, participants identified a range of issues. These included the perceived rising costs of home ownership, the increased cost of building new homes, and a higher rate of immigration in recent years.

Asked what actions they felt needed to be taken to address the housing situation, participants shared a number of suggestions. Several believed that the Government of Canada should place a greater focus on the building of publicly funded housing as well as transitioning existing buildings (such as unused office space) into residential complexes. Discussing additional actions that could be taken, participants recommended measures such as making it easier for prospective first-time home buyers to qualify for a mortgage, the implementation of rental caps and stricter regulations on short-term rentals, and temporarily reducing the rate of immigration for the next few years.

Provided with information regarding updates that were being considered by the Government of Canada to its housing plan, participants engaged in an exercise where they were asked to select which of the measures listed would be most important towards making housing more affordable. On balance, participants were most supportive of the initiatives to build more affordable housing units and assist a greater number of Canadians in achieving home ownership. Many believed that these initiatives would have the greatest positive impact and would benefit the largest number of Canadians. Several also selected the initiative of making the math work for homebuilders. It was widely felt that the cost of constructing homes had risen substantially in recent years and a number believed that assisting developers in building more homes would be a critical factor towards increasing the housing supply. While also believed by many to be important, only a small number of participants selected the initiatives related to addressing homelessness, changing the way communities build homes, and launching an industrial strategy.

Discussing whether there were any additional aspects that they felt the Government of Canada’s housing plan should cover, participants suggested a number of areas. A number felt that the federal government should work to ensure that new arrivals to Canada were not just settling in major urban centres such as Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver, but were being evenly distributed throughout the country. It was felt that taking this approach would help to reduce the pressure on what were viewed as hot housing markets in Canada’s largest cities. Participants also believed that the federal government should focus on implementing greater protections for renters, including increased regulations related to practices such as renovictions as well as placing limits on rental increases by landlords while transitioning between tenants.

All groups engaged in an exercise where they were shown a list of potential titles for the housing plan and asked to select which they felt best suited this initiative. On balance, Solving the Housing Crisis: Canada’s Housing Plan received the highest level of support among participants. Many believed it was the most straightforward title and effectively conveyed the gravity of the housing issue by referring to it as a crisis. Building Canada: Canada’s Renewed Housing Plan and A Road to Homereceived a moderate level of support from participants. Regarding the former, several reacted positively to the use of terms such as ‘building’ and ‘renewed’, commenting that the phrasing invoked thoughts of a revitalized housing market and the rebuilding of the country on a national level. Considering the latter, many believed that this was the most creative of all the names, and that the notion of establishing a home was something all Canadians could identify with and aspire to. Few selected Canada’s Enhanced Housing Planor The Blueprint: Canada’s 2030 Housing Plan .

Renters (Hamilton Renters)

Participants in the group comprised of renters residing in Hamilton engaged in a discussion related to issues facing renters at present. Asked how they would describe the housing situation in their community, almost all believed that housing costs (including rent) had risen considerably in recent years and that there was a significant shortage of affordable rental housing in their community. Several expressed the opinion that along with rising rental costs, the quality and size of the rental units available in their area had also worsened as of late. In addition to what they viewed as a widespread lack of affordable rental options, participants believed that issues such as the high cost of living, rising immigration rates, and the perceived tendency of developers to build larger, more expensive homes (rather than affordable units) had contributed to growing housing challenges in their community.

Discussing actions that could be taken to improve the housing situation, participants believed that a greater focus needed to be placed on increasing the supply of affordable homes and rental units for lower and middle-income families, implementing measures such as rent caps, and adjusting municipal zoning laws to eliminate red tape and make it easier to build more homes, faster.

Asked whether they were aware of any recent actions from the federal government aimed at addressing the issues facing renters and increasing the rate of home construction across Canada, participants identified a range of initiatives. These included the introduction of programs such as the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, First Home Savings Account (FHSA), the provision of a one-time $500 top up for eligible low-income renters through the Canada Housing Benefit (CHB), and the creation of the Housing Accelerator Fund. Provided with information about the Housing Accelerator Fund, all reacted positively, with several expressing that this initiative would likely assist in growing the housing supply and improving the overall affordability of housing.

Questioned whether the federal government was headed in the right direction when it came to making home ownership more attainable for first-time home buyers, most were uncertain or held mixed views, with a smaller number believing that it was headed in the wrong direction. Provided with information related to actions the Government of Canada was taking to assist first-time home buyers almost all felt that these measures would be helpful towards improving the housing situation and making home ownership more attainable for Canadians. Asked whether they had any questions regarding any of the initiatives they had been shown, several expressed interest in learning more about rent-to-own housing options and the specifics of how these programs operate.

Densification (Vancouver Middle Class Concerned about the Cost of Living)

Participants in one group, comprised of middle-class individuals residing in Vancouver, took part in a conversation related to the housing situation in their community and their perspectives related to the densification of housing. All described the housing situation in Vancouver as being very poor and felt that housing needed to be a top priority for the Government of Canda.

Discussing what came to mind when they heard the term ‘densification’, participants expressed concerns related to what they viewed as rapid increases to the number of people living in a specific neighbourhood or area, and an overall reduction to individual living space as a result. Asked whether they felt that greater density was something that should be encouraged in Canada’s larger cities, participants were mixed in their views. Among those who supported this action, it was felt that given the perceived high level of population growth in Canada over the past decade, that densification was a necessity in order to ensure a sufficient amount of housing would be available for everyone. For those who felt that densification should not be pursued, it was believed that taking this approach would lead to increased strain being placed on existing infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, waste management systems, and the energy grid.

Asked what types of infrastructure projects the Government of Canada should be investing in to best support growing communities, participants suggested a wide range of projects. These included expanding and repairing roadways and bridges, constructing new hospitals and health care facilities, increasing public transportation infrastructure, and building new community spaces including parks, playgrounds, and community gardens. Questioned whether they felt the Government of Canada should focus more on supporting the construction of affordable housing units, which are subsidized and rented at below-market rates or concentrate on maximizing the overall number of homes built, most believed that the primary focus should be on affordability. Among these participants, it was believed that affordability represented the most significant barrier related to housing in most parts of the country, and that increasing the supply of housing would do little to address the housing situation if the units built were not affordable.

Interest Rates and Mortgage Renewal (GTA Homeowners Expecting to Renew Mortgages in the Next Three Years)

Participants in one group, comprised of individuals residing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), engaged in an extended discussion related to interest rates and issues currently facing mortgage holders. All participants were homeowners who were planning to renew their mortgages within the next three years. Asked whether they were facing any significant challenges related to housing costs, many expressed concerns related to high interest rates and the impact that this would have on their financial situation going forward. Several were worried that their mortgage payments could as much as double when it came time to renew their mortgages in the next few years. A number also identified additional expenses related to homeownership, such as high energy costs and rising property taxes as other challenges that they were currently facing.

Asked what factors they felt contributed to changes in interest rates, many believed that the perceived high rate of inflation in recent years had played a significant role. Several believed that rising inflation had been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and had contributed to an overall increase in the cost of living.

Discussing the types of actions that they hoped to see from the Government of Canada in response to changing interest rates, several believed that efforts should be taken to reduce the overall cost of living and make life more affordable for Canadians, especially in terms of the cost of housing. A number believed that actions should be taken to support homeowners struggling with higher mortgage payments, including implementing measures to prevent these individuals from potentially losing their homes.

Focusing on their own housing situations, all believed that their mortgages were currently affordable. Several, however, reiterated that this would likely no longer be the case once it came time to renew their mortgages. A few indicated that they had already begun to cut back on household spending in areas such as travel and recreation in anticipation of facing higher mortgage payments in the near future.

Asked what role they felt the Government of Canada should play in supporting homeowners who were renewing their mortgages, participants suggested a range of potential actions and initiatives. Several believed that it could provide Canadians with increased educational resources, financial literacy training, and information regarding what to expect and look out for while navigating the mortgage renewal process. A number also believed that further action could be taken to regulate the mortgage market to ensure that all Canadians were being offered a fair rate and not being taken advantage of or placed in potentially financially precarious positions by lenders.

Provided with information related to the recently announced Canadian Mortgage Charter, while most felt this represented a positive step by the Government of Canada, several questioned what specific regulations would be put in place to enforce the guidelines and expectations outlined by this initiative. Discussing specific measures included in this Charter, a number believed that the removal of compound interest during difficult times would be very helpful for those with significant debt loads. It was also felt that earlier communication from banks related to renewing their mortgages would assist mortgage holders in being better prepared for this process. Some also felt that the introduction of flexible payment options as well as the ability to switch lenders more easily at renewal would assist homeowners in obtaining the best terms possible for their renewed mortgage.

All felt that the Canadian Mortgage Charter was on the right track when it came to supporting mortgage holders. It was widely thought that while this would not solve the overall issue of housing affordability, the measures included would likely provide some degree of relief to Canadian homeowners concerned about their future mortgage payments.

Budget 2024 (Surrey, Quebec University Students, Mid-Size and Major Centres Manitoba Lower Income, Yukon, Greater Montreal Area, Niagara Region Ontario, Greater Toronto Area, Atlantic Canada, British Columbia Aspiring Homeowners)

Participants in nine groups engaged in conversations related to the 2024 federal Budget, which was expected to be tabled by the Government of Canada in the coming months. Asked how they felt the Canadian economy was performing at present, most were of the impression that it had faced numerous challenges in recent years and had not been performing well as of late. Many cited the perceived high rate of inflation and rising cost of living over the past few years as factors that they felt had negatively impacted the Canadian economy. The view was expressed by several that wages in general had not kept pace with the cost of living, and that not enough well-paying jobs were currently available. It was felt that this had made it increasingly difficult for Canadians (and especially young people) to build wealth and save towards important goals such as purchasing a home.

Discussing what would need to happen for them to begin feeling optimistic about the Canadian economy, several believed that there would have to be observable growth of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) as well as the creation of more well-paying, full-time jobs for Canadians. A number expressed that they would begin to feel better about the Canadian economy once the cost of essentials such as groceries and gasoline became more affordable. Other factors mentioned by participants that they felt would inspire optimism in the economy included the lowering of interest rates, reduced federal spending, and increased efforts by the Government of Canada to address the national debt.

Participants next engaged in an exercise where they were presented with numerous items that could potentially be included in the 2024 Budget and asked to select those that they felt should be prioritized by the Government of Canada.

The initiative to address affordability and the high cost of living received the highest level of support among participants, with many believing that this would impact the largest number of households. The view was expressed that addressing this issue would be especially important for assisting groups such as younger Canadians and families with young children, who were believed to be facing considerable challenges in keeping up with the current cost of living.

Improving the health care system also received significant attention from participants. Many felt that health care had become increasingly inaccessible as of late, leading to an increasing number of negative health outcomes for Canadians.

Growing the housing supply and raising taxes on the wealthiest Canadians also received high levels of support. It was felt that increasing the housing supply would help to address the high demand for housing at present and would lead to lower housing costs in the long-term. Discussing the priority of raising taxes on the wealthiest Canadians, many believed that this would help to decrease what they viewed as the growing wealth gap between the richest and poorest Canadians and would assist in making life in Canada more equitable going forward.

There was a moderate level of support for actions such as maintaining a responsible plan for government spending, supporting the middle class, and providing more opportunities for good careers. Some also identified fighting climate change and promoting long-term economic growth through clean technology and energy as important priorities. Few participants selected the initiatives related to helping Canadians save for retirement, protecting seniors’ benefits, and unlocking pathways to the middle class.

Carbon Pricing (Mid-Size and Major Centres Atlantic Canada, Atlantic Canada)

Two groups based in Atlantic Canada, one comprised of individuals residing in mid-size and major centres and the other conducted among the general population, took part in discussions related to the federal government’s carbon pricing system. Asked whether, to the best of their knowledge, there was currently a price on carbon in their province, most believed that there was, while a smaller number were more uncertain. Provided with information related to the measures the Government of Canada was taking to reduce carbon pollution, most were unsure as to whether they supported this approach.

Several felt that while carbon pricing was an important initiative, they did not want Canadians to incur higher financial costs for goods and services, especially if other jurisdictions throughout the world were not also doing their part to reduce emissions.

Those in the group conducted among the general population were asked what they perceived to be the main objectives of the price on carbon pollution. While most believed that this initiative had been introduced as a method of encouraging Canadian households and businesses to reduce their emissions and partake in more environmentally sustainable behaviours, very few felt that this strategy had been effective. It was thought that many households did not have the option to reduce emissions related to activities such as driving and heating their homes, and that a price on carbon had only served to make life more expensive for these families while doing little to curb emissions. A number believed that, given the global scale of the issue of climate change, any actions taken by Canadians would be negated so long as major emitters in other jurisdictions continued their industrial activities unabated.

Asked whether they had seen, read, or heard anything about the Climate Action Incentive Payment (CAIP), a number indicated that they had. Unprompted, a few recalled that they had received one of these payments in recent months. Most were of the impression that these payments were primarily aimed at compensating Canadians for the increased costs incurred due to the price on carbon, though few were aware of the specific mechanisms used to calculate them. Asked whether, to the best of their knowledge, they or someone in their household had received this rebate, a roughly equal number reported that they had as those who were more uncertain or did not believe they had received a payment.

Based on their understanding of the carbon pricing system, participants were asked if they felt this initiative had made them better or worse off financially. Several were uncertain and felt that it was difficult to determine the degree to which the price on carbon had impacted their financial situation, given that they were unsure as to how much they had paid in additional costs relative to the rebates they had received.

Heat Pumps (Atlantic Canada Homeowners, Atlantic Canada)

Participants in two groups based in Atlantic Canada, comprised of homeowners and members of the general population respectively, engaged in a conversation related to heat pumps and recent initiatives from the federal government aimed at encouraging Canadians to consider installing heat pumps in their own homes.

Those in the group comprised of homeowners were informed that the federal government would be increasing the amount of funding available for eligible homeowners looking to switch to a heat pump from $10,000 to $15,000, essentially making the average heat pump effectively free for low-to-median income households. While reacting positively to this initiative, several expected that their income would be too high to qualify for this assistance. It was felt that in order to be more impactful in encouraging a greater number of households to make the switch to using a heat pump, the income thresholds for these supports would likely need to be increased substantially.

Both groups were asked whether they currently heated their home with a heat pump. Several in the group comprised of homeowners indicated that they did, while very few in the general population group reported the same. Among those who did not have a heat pump, when asked if they would consider switching from their home heating system, many indicated that they would. A number, however, were skeptical as to whether a heat pump would be able to sufficiently heat their home. Some of those who had already installed a heat pump reported having found it necessary to install additional heat pumps and/or had combined their heat pumps with other home heating systems such as those powered by electricity or burning wood.

Participants in the group comprised of homeowners were asked an additional question regarding what these upfront payments should be called. On balance, participants expressed a preference for the term Heat Pump Bonus as opposed to Heat Pump Cheque. It was thought that the term cheque was somewhat outdated in the digital age, especially given how few people participants believed still used cheques on a regular basis. A number suggested alternative terms that the Government of Canada could use to describe this program, including ‘incentive’, ‘rebate’, or ‘initiative’.

Health Care (Mid-Size and Major Centres Atlantic Canada, Manitoba, Atlantic Canada)

Three groups took part in conversations related to health care and the issues currently impacting the health care systems in their respective provinces. Almost all believed that the health care system in their area was facing significant challenges. A large number had heard accounts of increasingly long wait times at emergency rooms and walk-in clinics, with several reporting having personally experienced waits of over 12 hours to receive care. Many believed that these long wait times were directly connected to what they viewed as a widespread shortage of doctors and nurses in their community. Discussing potential actions that could be taken by the federal government to address this issue, many believed that more needed to be done to recruit foreign-trained health professionals, as well as to streamline the certification process for these individuals, ensuring that they would be able to work in their fields of expertise upon arriving in Canada.

Participants residing in Manitoba and in mid-size and major centres in Atlantic Canada were presented with information regarding five priority areas that the Government of Canada had recently identified related to health care. These included addressing health worker shortages and reducing wait times, increasing access to family health services, improving long term care and home care, addressing mental health and substance use, and modernizing health data management and virtual care.

On balance, participants reacted largely positively to these priorities, with many expressing the view that all were important areas for the Government of Canada to be focusing on. Several believed that the priority of addressing health worker shortages and reducing wait times was of particular importance and felt that improvements on this front would likely have a positive impact on the rest of the priority areas listed above. The priorities of increasing access to family services, improving long term and home care, and addressing mental health and substance use were also viewed as being of critical importance going forward. While a few felt that the priority of modernizing health data management and virtual care was less pressing than the other areas listed, some felt differently, believing that expanding the capacity of virtual care and making it easier for health data to be transferred between different health care providers would provide patients (and especially those living rurally) with a wider range of options when it came to accessing health care.

Opioids (Hamilton Renters)

One group, comprised of individuals residing in Hamilton, engaged in a brief conversation related to opioid addiction, both in their communities as well as across Canada more broadly. Almost all felt that opioids represented a major concern in their communities at present, with several believing that this issue had worsened in recent years. Asked whether they were hopeful that progress could be made on addressing this issue in the coming years, almost all indicated that they were.

Prompted to share what came to mind when they heard terms such as ‘safe supply’ and ‘safe consumption sites’, most believed that these phrases related to ensuring that individuals suffering from addiction were not consuming toxic drugs and had a safe location where they could consume illicit substances (such as opioids) in the presence of health workers. While generally supportive of initiatives such as these, some believed that there needed to be additional actions taken to address what were viewed as the root causes of addiction, such as challenges related to homelessness, poverty, and mental health.

Provided with information related to the Substance Use and Addictions Program (SUAP) reactions were mixed among participants. While a number believed that harm reduction initiatives played an important role in supporting those suffering from addiction, several believed this additional funding should instead be directed towards the treatment of addiction and assisting individuals to stop using these substances in the long term. Discussing the potential impacts of increasing funding towards harm reduction programs, a number believed that this could lead to decreased stigma towards those suffering from addiction and increased education among the public regarding the challenges faced by these individuals.

Asked what more the Government of Canada could be doing to address these issues, it was suggested that actions should be taken to find affordable housing for those suffering from addiction, providing these individuals with the opportunity to live in a safe and drug-free environment.

Community Safety (Greater Toronto Area)

Participants residing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) engaged in a brief discussion related to crime and their perspectives regarding the safety of their community. Asked how big of an issue they felt crime was in their community, many were of the impression that the crime rate had risen in recent years, and that incidents such as assaults, property damage, drug crime, and automobile theft had been occurring with increasing frequency as of late.

Asked whether they viewed auto theft as a major issue in the GTA, many indicated that they did, with several indicating having personally known someone who had been impacted by this type of crime. Almost all believed that this issue had increased considerably in recent years and recalled having heard far more about this topic as of late, both on the news and from personal connections. Describing what they felt was behind this perceived rise in automobile thefts, a number attributed this to the advanced technology in newer vehicles, believing these innovations had provided more ways for criminals to potentially break into and steal vehicles. It was also felt that a perceived growth in the global market for stolen vehicles had contributed to the increasing frequency of these crimes in the GTA and across Canada more broadly.

Discussing what should be done by the Government of Canada in response to rising auto theft, a number believed that a greater focus should be placed on increasing surveillance and inspections of shipping crates at Canadian ports to ensure that stolen vehicles were not being trafficked overseas. Additional actions suggested by participants included introducing legislation to increase the penalties for automobile theft, mandating that automakers install global positioning technology (GPS) technology in all new vehicles, and seeking to address what were viewed as the potential root causes of auto theft, such as poverty and gang activity. Informed that the Government of Canada was in the process of organizing a National Summit on Combatting Auto Theft, while most believed this to be a step in the right direction, a number believed that more urgent action would need to be taken in order to address this issue.

Immigration (Greater Toronto Area)

Participants residing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) took part in a brief conversation about immigration. Asked how they would describe the current state of the immigration system, all expressed concerns regarding the country’s ability to maintain its current level of immigration while still being able to provide adequate housing and employment opportunities, health care, and education for those already living in Canada. All felt that the Government of Canada should decrease the rate of immigration going forward. While most supported continued immigration in the long term, it was felt that a temporary decrease would allow the country time to grow the housing supply and expand the capacity of important services and infrastructure to accommodate a larger population in the future.

Informed that the federal government had announced a temporary two-year cap on new international student study permits, participants expressed a range of reactions to this information. While some believed that this would have a positive impact on the housing situation, especially in terms of decreasing demand in the rental market, a roughly equal number were worried that this might lead to staffing and programming cuts at many Canadian universities and colleges which currently relied on the tuition paid by international students as a significant portion of their annual budgets.

Ukraine (Manitoba, National Capital Region Quebec)

Participants in two groups engaged in a discussion regarding the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine and the financial and military assistance provided to Ukraine by the Government of Canada over the course of this conflict. All reported being aware of this issue, though with varying levels of familiarity. While most in the group based in Manitoba reported that they were no longer as worried about the conflict as they had once been, a few expressed concerns regarding the potential impacts this conflict could have on the Canadian economy and fuel prices. In contrast, most residing in Quebec expressed high levels of concern about the conflict. These concerns focused on numerous factors, including potential economic issues, global security and stability concerns (related in particular to Russia’s possession of nuclear weapons), and a perceived lack of progress on negotiations towards a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

Asked if they felt it was important for Canada to continue to assist Ukraine, most in the group from Manitoba and all in Quebec felt that it was. Several highlighted the importance of this assistance to protecting the health and wellness Ukrainian civilians, who were believed to have suffered greatly due to this conflict. Among the small number in the group from Manitoba who viewed it as less important for Canada to help Ukraine, some expressed concerns regarding the financial cost of this ongoing support and whether these funds should instead be used to help Canadians in Canada who were currently struggling to make ends meet financially.

Discussing what they had seen, read, or heard regarding the federal government’s response to the war in Ukraine, many reiterated their understanding that Canada had been providing financial and military assistance throughout the entirety of the conflict and had brought in many Ukrainians who had been displaced from their homes. Some also recalled the imposition of several sanctions by the Government of Canada on Russia, as well as upon numerous Russian individuals and businesses. All felt that the Government of Canada was currently on the right track with its response. Asked whether they felt the federal government should be doing more or less in its response to the conflict, most believed that the current approach was ideal and should be maintained.

Most reported having been at least somewhat aware of the recent visit by the President of Ukraine to Canada. Provided with information related to financial and military commitments that the Government of Canada had made to Ukraine during this visit, several in Manitoba questioned how long the Government of Canada could feasibly support the defence effort in Ukraine and worried that this conflict would continue for several years to come. Conversely, all in the group from Quebec expressed positive sentiments, believing that this type of ongoing support was necessary to help the Ukrainian war effort.

No participants were aware of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA). Asked if it was important to have a free trade agreement with Ukraine, many expressed support for such an initiative, believing that this represented a non-violent, humanitarian approach to providing support to Ukraine that also had the potential to benefit Canadians and the Canadian economy.

Discussing whether they had ever come across information about this conflict that had seemed false or misleading, many reported that they had. Those who had encountered misinformation or disinformation reported that this had primarily come from sources on social media platforms such as Facebook. It was felt that, on balance, Canadian media organizations had been largely successful in filtering out misinformation and disinformation from their articles and broadcasts. This false and misleading information was viewed by many as a major issue that, at minimum, may result in a lack of knowledge about the facts of the conflict, or, more critically, erode Canadians’ support for Ukraine.

Government of Canada Wordmark (National Capital Region Quebec)

One group took part in a discussion related to the visual symbols and audio signature that the federal government uses to identify itself. Asked how they would typically go about identifying information as coming from the Government of Canada, many described a logo including the word ‘Canada’ and the Canadian flag that they believed accompanied all federal communications. Discussing specifically how they would determine whether information that they heard was emanating from the Government of Canada, several mentioned a jingle that typically followed federal advertisements or announcements on audio platforms such as the radio.

Presented with an image of the Government of Canada wordmark all recognized this symbol, with several confirming that this was the logo they had been referencing earlier. Asked what they felt the wordmark symbolized, many believed that it represented the federal government as well as Canada more broadly. Asked why they felt the Government of Canada included this symbol in its communications, most believed that it served as a visual indicator confirming that the information it accompanied was trustworthy and from an official source.

The group was next provided with a recording of the Government of Canada’s audio signature. All were familiar with this jingle, with several describing it as being derived from the first four notes of the Canadian national anthem. Discussing what they felt to be the primary purpose of this jingle, all believed that (similar to the wordmark) it was used to confirm that audio information and advertisements were officially from the federal government and important to pay attention to.

Supplemented Foods Concept Testing (GTA Homeowners Expecting to Renew Mortgages in the Next Three Years)

Participants in one group were asked to share their perspectives related to creative concepts and messaging designed by the Government of Canada to highlight the potential risks related to supplemented foods, with a particular focus on products such as caffeinated energy drinks. Many felt that products such as energy drinks were being marketed too heavily towards younger Canadians and believed that this was an important issue for the federal government to be focusing on.

Shown a pair of visual concepts designed to highlight this issue, participants provided a wide range of reactions. While some thought that the campaign’s ‘read the label’ message stood out to a greater extent in the shopping cart concept (where it was included in the image and as a hashtag in the text), several believed that the energy drink concept placed a more direct focus on the issue of supplemented foods, specifically in its inclusion of images of an energy drink can and a mock-up of an ingredient label. Some also spoke positively of the caution-identifier referenced in the right-hand concept and believed that the inclusion of this feature on food products would be helpful for parents in determining which products were safe to purchase for their children. Discussing the advertisements more generally, many felt that the phrase ‘supplemented foods’ might be confusing to those who encounter it, with several expressing that they typically associated the term ‘supplemented’ with positive connotations such as bolstering one’s health through the use of supplemental micronutrients, such as vitamins or minerals, rather than potentially harming it.

Asked whether they believed that these concepts would catch their attention if they encountered them on social media, only a small number expected that they would. While a few felt that the inclusion of the Government of Canada wordmark, the verified checkmark, and the Healthy Canadians organization name would intrigue them and prompt them to learn more, most did not believe that the images and text used in the concepts would stand out amidst the rest of the content typically found on social media platforms. Discussing ways to improve these concepts, a number suggested that the mock-up of the ingredients label in the energy drink concept should be made more detailed as well as provide examples of potentially dangerous ingredients that parents and other consumers should be looking out for.

Community Challenges (Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions Quebec, Yukon, Niagara Region Ontario)

Participants residing in Yukon, Ontario’s Niagara region, and the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, and Côte-Nord regions of Quebec, engaged in discussions related to the challenges currently facing their respective communities. Asked to identify what they viewed as the most important issues impacting their communities at present that required greater attention from the federal government, participants in all three groups identified health care as a major area of concern. Many described what they perceived as increasing challenges related to accessing health services in their community, including issues such as long wait times for emergency and primary care, a lack of family doctors, and limited resources available to treat issues related to mental health and addiction. Housing affordability was also identified by all groups as a significant concern in their communities. It was believed that housing costs had increased substantially for both homeowners and renters in recent years, and that there was a widespread shortage of safe and affordable housing available at present. Several also described what they viewed as a lack of well-paying, full-time employment opportunities in their respective regions, with some believing this was a particular issue for those living in smaller or rural communities.

Discussing the most important industries in their respective communities, participants in the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, and Côte-Nord regions identified areas such as agriculture, forestry, paper production, mining, tourism, and construction as playing significant roles in their local economies. Those residing in the Niagara region mentioned tourism, wine production, and manufacturing as important local sectors, with some specifically recalling recent investments made by the federal government towards the increased production of electric vehicles (EVs) in their area. Participants in Yukon identified mining, tourism, the transportation of goods and materials, and the construction of new infrastructure as the most important sectors in their region. Several in this group were of the impression that there were significant staffing shortages across many of these sectors (as well as in key areas such as health care) at present and that more needed to be done by governments at the federal and territorial level to recruit and incentivize skilled professionals to work and reside in the region.

Thirteen groups engaged in conversations related to housing. These discussions respectively focused on updates that the federal government could potentially make to its housing plan, issues impacting renters, opinions related to increasing densification in Canadian municipalities, and the perspectives of homeowners related to current interest rates and the mortgage renewal process.

Housing Plan (Atlantic Canada Homeowners, Bas-Saint-Laurent/Gaspésie/Côte-Nord Regions Quebec, Alberta Parents of Children Under 12, Surrey, Quebec University Students, Mid-Size and Major Centres Manitoba Lower Income, Yukon, Greater Montreal Area, Niagara Region Ontario, British Columbia Aspiring Homeowners)

Ten groups took part in conversations related to updates that the federal government was currently making to its housing plan. To begin, participants in the groups comprised of homeowners in Atlantic Canada, parents of children under 12 in Alberta, and residents of the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, and Côte-Nord regions of Quebec were asked how they would describe the current state of housing in Canada. All believed that the housing situation was facing considerable challenges, with a large number expressing the opinion that affordability and a limited supply of available housing had been significant issues in recent years. A number also identified higher interest rates over the past two years as another recent challenge related to housing. It was believed that these issues had made housing less affordable for homeowners while also making it difficult for prospective home buyers to qualify for mortgages. Asked what they felt to be the biggest drivers of housing unaffordability at present, participants identified a range of issues. These included:

• Rising costs of homeownership – Several believed that homeowners had faced rising costs as of late in areas such as mortgage payments, energy bills, and renovation projects and that this had made it far more difficult to balance their housing expenses with other aspects of their monthly budgets. As a result of these rising costs, it was believed that owners of rental properties had found it necessary to charge higher rents to tenants. This was felt to be a compounding issue, in that increasing rental rates made it more difficult for prospective home buyers to save up for the down payment required to purchase a home;
• Increased cost of building new homes – It was widely thought that the cost of homebuilding materials, labour, and the overall construction process had risen substantially over the past decade and had been exacerbated by the high rate of inflation and increases to the cost of living in recent years.
• Immigration – A number identified what they viewed as a higher rate of immigration in recent years as a contributing factor to rising housing costs. It was believed that as more people entered the country, the increasing demand for housing had driven up housing prices even further; and
• Migration to rural or less-populated areas – Some participants, including several residing in Atlantic Canada, believed that the migration of Canadians from more populated provinces such as Ontario to areas such as the Maritimes had served to significantly drive up the housing prices in many smaller communities. This issue was believed to have increased considerably over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, where many were provided with the ability to work remotely and chose to move away from major urban centres.

Asked what actions they felt needed to be taken to address the housing situation, participants shared a number of suggestions. Several believed that the Government of Canada should place a greater focus on the building of publicly funded housing as well as transitioning existing buildings (such as unused office space) into residential complexes. A number thought that the federal government should provide greater oversight of the housing situation, including through the creation of a long-term housing plan and guidelines for provinces and territories to follow. It was felt that housing was a national concern and should not be primarily left to the provinces and territories to address. Discussing additional actions that could be taken, participants mentioned making it easier for prospective first-time home buyers to qualify for a mortgage, the implementation of rental caps and stricter regulations on short-term rentals, and temporarily reducing the rate of immigration for the next few years.

All groups were asked whether, as far as they knew, the Government of Canada had a plan to address the issues related to housing. Only a small number recalled hearing anything about a housing plan, and many expressed uncertainty regarding the specific actions that the federal government was currently taking related to housing. Among those who were aware of some initiatives from the Government of Canada related to housing, participants recalled actions such as the introduction of the First Home Savings Account (FHSA), the temporary ban on non-Canadians from purchasing residential property, the provision of a one-time $500 top-up to low-income renters through the Canada Housing Benefit, additional funding to build new housing provided to municipalities through the Housing Accelerator Fund, and the removal of the goods and services tax (GST) from the construction of new rental developments. A number in the group based in Yukon were of the impression that there had been significant federal investments towards the building of new housing in the territory in recent years.

To aid in the conversation, participants were shown the following information about the updates being considered to the Government of Canada’s housing plan:

The Government of Canada is currently in the process of updating its housing plan. The items being considered as a part of this housing plan include:

• Making the math work for homebuilders: Reduce construction costs so builders can construct new homes for less. This includes things like cutting the GST on construction materials;
• Changing the way communities build homes: Remove barriers to construction. This includes things like cutting red tape that prevents new homes from being built in communities;
• Launching an industrial strategy:
  • Develop and attract the skilled labour needed to build more homes faster. This includes things like supporting skills training programs and welcoming immigrants who have skills and expertise in construction.
  • Create a modular homes catalogue. These modular homes would be pre-designed, with parts that can be factory-built and then assembled on-site.
• Building more affordable housing units: Invest in the construction of non-market homes for low-income Canadians;
• Addressing homelessness: Provide long-term funding to communities to address homelessness; and
• Helping Canadians achieve homeownership: Offer programs like the First Home Savings Account and the First-Time Home Buyers Incentive.

Participants next engaged in an exercise where they were asked to select which two of the above measures they felt would be most important towards making housing more affordable. On balance, participants were most supportive of building more affordable housing units and assisting a greater number of Canadians in achieving home ownership.

Many believed that building more affordable housing units would likely have the greatest positive impact and would benefit the largest number of Canadians. It was felt by a number that housing represented an essential need and that it was of critical importance that middle- and lower-income families have access to housing that was safe and affordable. The view was expressed that going forward, federal funding should only be made available for affordable housing projects, and that no public money should be devoted to what were viewed as luxury housing developments. It was thought that a greater focus on building affordable housing would provide Canadians with greater financial stability and flexibility in the long-term, allowing them to devote a larger amount of their income to other important aspects of their lives.

A large number also viewed helping Canadians achieve homeownership as an important priority for the federal government to focus on. Homeownership was viewed by many as being an important financial step for young families, and several expressed concerns that if action was not taken soon, purchasing a home would become exceedingly difficult (and in some cases impossible) for future generations. Many felt it was important to focus on assisting more Canadians to become homeowners earlier in life, believing this would provide them with a greater time horizon for building equity in their home. It was also felt that taking this action would help to strengthen the middle class and help reduce what was viewed as a growing wealth disparity among Canadians. The view was also expressed that getting more people into the housing market would have the additional positive effect of taking pressure off the rental market and would help to reduce housing costs for both home buyers and renters alike.

Several also selected the initiative of making the math work for homebuilders. It was widely felt that the cost of constructing homes had risen substantially in recent years and a number believed that assisting developers in building more homes would be a critical factor towards increasing the housing supply. A number viewed subsidizing the cost of building materials as a particular area in which the federal government could have a positive impact on the homebuilding process. A few expressed the opinion that additional oversight would need to be implemented to ensure that federal financial support would be primarily directed towards the building of new affordable housing and not towards higher profits for housing developers.

While also believed by many to be important, only a small number of participants selected the initiatives related to addressing homelessness, changing the way communities build homes, and launching an industrial strategy.

Asked if they were confident that the Government of Canada would be able to make a positive impact on the housing situation by pursuing these initiatives, only a small number indicated that they were. Among those who did not express confidence, the view was expressed that while these initiatives sounded like steps in the right direction, participants would only begin to feel confident about this plan once they began to observe tangible progress in their own communities towards making housing more affordable. A number were of the impression that there was a significant labour shortage in the construction sector, and that this would have to be addressed if the pace of homebuilding was to be increased as planned. Concerns were also raised regarding whether developers would fully cooperate with these initiatives, with some believing that homebuilders would be likely to pursue profit over affordability at every opportunity possible. Among the smaller number who were more confident, it was felt that the country had previously dealt with significant housing issues at various points throughout its history and had always been able to overcome these challenges. It was felt that while the existing problems related to housing were significant and would take a long time to address, they were ultimately fixable, and housing could once again be made affordable for most Canadians.

Discussing whether there were any additional aspects that they felt the Government of Canada’s housing plan should cover, participants suggested several areas. A number felt that the federal government should work to ensure that new arrivals to Canada were not just settling in major urban centres such as Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver, but were being evenly distributed throughout the country. It was felt that taking this approach would help to reduce the pressure on what were viewed as hot housing markets in Canada’s largest cities. Participants also believed that the federal government should focus on implementing greater protections for renters, including increased regulations related to practices such as renovictions as well as placing limits on rental increases by landlords while transitioning between tenants.

Participants were next asked to focus on specific phrases mentioned as part of the housing plan and to share their thoughts regarding what each meant to them. The phrases discussed varied between groups.

Making the Math Work for Builders

Several understood this phrase to mean that in order for a large number of homes to be built at a fast pace, there needed to be assurances in place that doing so would be economically viable for housing developers and homebuilders. It was believed that by taking this approach, the Government of Canada would likely focus on providing incentives and supports to builders in areas such as the procurement and transportation of building materials, the provision of wage subsidies, and assistance with construction-related energy and fuel costs. Asked whether they would be in favour of additional supports (such as tax breaks) for builders as a way of increasing the rate at which homes are built, several indicated that they would. Many, however, reiterated the view that there would need to be regulations and oversight in place to ensure that these savings would be utilized by developers to increase the rate at which homes are built and not go towards increased profits. A number did not see how providing developers with tax breaks would help to accelerate the homebuilding process and, as such, did not believe that this was an action that the federal government should be taking.

Changing the Way Communities Build Homes

A number believed that this phrase referred to the process of densification and the aim of increasing the number of people living in a single area through the construction of multi-level apartment buildings and high rises. Looking at this phrase slightly differently, some perceived it as referring to the construction of many different types of homes (such as a combination of single-family homes, apartments, and condominiums), and following a less standardized approach towards the building of housing. A few believed that this could also refer to the creation of a more holistic strategy towards homebuilding, with communities focusing on making investments towards increasing the capacity of important services and infrastructure in proportion to the rate at which new housing developments were built. Asked whether they felt that this phrase related to ‘cutting red tape’, several believed that it did and viewed the phrases as being closely connected. While a number expected that the loosening of regulations regarding where and what type of homes could be built in municipalities would likely lead to more homes being constructed, a number expressed concerns about taking this approach. Among these participants it was felt that the removal of these types of regulations could have an adverse impact on the surrounding environment and ecosystem. A few were also concerned that cutting red tape might lead to lower quality homes being built, with developers potentially cutting corners under a less stringent regulatory framework.

Building More Affordable Housing Units

Most believed that this phrase referred to the construction of more housing that would be affordable for middle-and lower-income families. It was thought that this would include affordable housing available to purchase as well as subsidized or below-market rental rates. A few felt that this might also include an increased focus on the construction of co-op housing developments. Some viewed this phrase as referring to a more basic style of homebuilding, which focused on providing individuals with the bare necessities, with little in the way of additional features or amenities. Asked if they would be interested in receiving an incentive, such as a tax credit, in return for marking investments towards the creation of more affordable housing units in their community, a number indicated that they would. For many, however, it was expressed that their answer would depend on specific details of this type of program such as the size of the tax credit and whether they would receive any additional returns on their investment. Several expressed that while they believed that this was an intriguing initiative, they did not expect that they would be in a financial position to make this type of investment at any point in the foreseeable future.

Welcoming immigrants with the skills needed to help build more homes

While many were of the opinion that welcoming immigrants who are skilled in homebuilding would likely accelerate the pace of new home construction, several were concerned about the potential strain they felt this might place on what they perceived as an already overheated housing market. It was felt that taking this action would potentially be unfair to both Canadians and new immigrants alike if there was not enough housing and key services (such as health care and education) available to meet the needs of an increased population.

Launching an industrial strategy

A number viewed this as referring to the establishment of a long-term strategy to build housing, including changing the way materials are procured and built. A number believed that an industrial strategy would have a particular focus on the increased use of pre-fabricated homes, which would have the majority of their parts built in a factory and then assembled on site. Most felt that if this led to the construction of a larger number of affordable homes, it was a strategy worth pursuing by the Government of Canada. A few expressed concerns about whether this approach would lead to job losses in the construction sector, while some in Yukon questioned whether these types of homes would be able to withstand the extreme cold experienced in many Northern communities at certain times of the year.

Participants in the groups comprised of homeowners in Atlantic Canada, parents of children under 12 in Alberta, and residents of the Bas-Saint-Laurent, Gaspésie, and Côte-Nord regions of Quebec were asked an additional question as to whether they supported the federal government increasing the amount it spends on housing in order to achieve the objectives outlined in its housing plan. Regionally, participants in Atlantic Canada and Quebec expressed far greater support for this action than those residing in Alberta. Among those who supported an increase in federal spending, several clarified that while they believed housing was an important area to invest in, they felt increased spending should be reallocated from existing programs rather than through an increase to the overall budget. A number of those opposed to an increase in spending, worried that doing so would eventually lead to higher taxes for Canadians.

All groups engaged in an exercise where they were shown a list of potential titles for the housing plan and asked to select which they felt best suited this initiative. These included:

• Solving the Housing Crisis: Canada’s Housing Plan;
• Building Canada: Canada’s Renewed Housing Plan;
• The Blueprint: Canada’s 2030 Housing Plan;
• Canada’s Enhanced Housing Plan; and
• A Road to Home

On balance, Solving the Housing Crisis: Canada’s Housing Plan received the highest level of support among participants. Many believed it was the most straightforward title and effectively conveyed the gravity of the housing issue by referring to it as a crisis. It was thought that this title was also quite broad as to what it could encompass and would be appropriate for a multi-faceted, ambitious housing plan such as this.

Building Canada: Canada’s Renewed Housing Plan and A Road to Home received a moderate level of support from participants. Regarding the former, several reacted positively to the use of terms such as ‘building’ and ‘renewed’, commenting that the phrasing invoked thoughts of a revitalized housing market and the rebuilding of the country on a national level. Considering the latter, many believed that this was the most creative of all the names, and that the notion of establishing a home was something all Canadians could identify with and aspire to. A number, however, felt differently and believed that A Road to Home was too vague and should potentially be combined with another of the titles (such as A Road to Home: Canada’s Enhanced Housing Plan).

Few selected Canada’s Enhanced Housing Plan or The Blueprint: Canada’s 2030 Housing Plan. It was felt by some that referring to the housing plan as ‘enhanced’ might be taken by some to mean that the previous housing plan had not been successful and needed to be improved upon. A number also believed that the 2030 timeline outlined as part of the Blueprint title was both unrealistic considering the perceived size and scope of the housing problem, while also too far in the future for the housing plan to feel urgent and requiring immediate attention.

Renters (Hamilton Renters)

Participants residing in Hamilton engaged in a discussion related to issues facing renters at present. All had previously reported that they were currently renting their homes. Asked how they would describe the housing situation in their community, almost all believed that housing costs (including rent) had risen considerably in recent years and that there was a significant shortage of affordable rental housing in their community. Several expressed the opinion that along with rising rental costs, the quality and size of the rental units available in their area had also worsened as of late. A few were concerned about increasing density in their neighbourhoods, believing that a growing number of people were now living together in smaller spaces as a way of saving money on rent. In addition to what they viewed as a widespread lack of affordable rental options, participants believed that issues such as the high cost of living, rising immigration rates, and the perceived tendency of developers to build larger, more expensive homes (rather than affordable units) had contributed to growing housing challenges in their community.

Discussing actions that could be taken to improve the housing situation, participants believed that a greater focus needed to be placed on increasing the supply of affordable homes and rental units for lower and middle-income families, implementing measures such as rent caps, and adjusting municipal zoning laws to eliminate red tape and make it easier to build more homes, faster. Questioned how long they expected it would take to address the issues contributing to the perceived unaffordability of rental housing in Hamilton, most believed that this would take at least five-to-ten years to accomplish.

Asked whether they were aware of any recent actions from the federal government aimed at addressing the issues facing renters and increasing the rate of home construction across Canada, participants identified a range of initiatives. These included the introduction of programs such as the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, First Home Savings Account (FHSA), the provision of a one-time $500 top up for eligible low-income renters through the Canada Housing Benefit (CHB), and the creation of the Housing Accelerator Fund. Related to the latter, participants were provided with the following information:

The Housing Accelerator Fund is a fund designed to help cut red tape and incentivize municipalities to get the construction of new homes across Canada started more quickly. In addition to this, the Government of Canada has announced it is:

• Introducing a new law to remove the GST (federal sales tax) from the costs of building new rental apartments. The Ontario provincial government has also agreed to remove their portion of the HST (provincial sales tax); and
• Requiring local governments to end exclusionary zoning and encourage homes be built near public transit, in order to receive funding through the Housing Accelerator Fund.

All reacted positively to this information, with several expressing that these initiatives would likely assist in growing the housing supply and improving the overall affordability of housing. A few felt that these actions could lead to increased density in their neighbourhoods and as a result could potentially place strain on important services such as health care and public transportation. It was widely believed, however, that this concern could be addressed so long as municipalities engaged in long-term planning and made corresponding investments towards upgrading infrastructure to accommodate a larger population. A number expressed the view that actions should be taken by the federal government to ensure that the housing built through these measures would be affordable to lower- and middle-income Canadians. Asked whether, having seen these measures, they felt the Government of Canada was on the right track when it came to housing, all believed that it was.

Questioned whether they hoped to be homeowners one day, almost all reported they did. Asked how likely they felt it was that they would eventually be able to achieve this goal, most expected that they would. Discussing whether the federal government was headed in the right direction when it came to making homeownership more attainable for first-time home buyers, most were uncertain or held mixed views, with a smaller number believing that it was headed in the wrong direction. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information related to actions the Government of Canada was taking to assist first-time home buyers:

• Introducing a new Tax-Free First Home Savings Account to allow Canadians to save up to $40,000, tax-free, to help buy their first home;
• The First-Time Home Buyer Incentive, a shared-equity mortgage with the Government of Canada which provides a 5% or 10% down payment towards the purchasing of a first home;
• Expanding the First Time Home Buyer Incentive to allow more flexibility and making it easier for single Canadians to access;
• Doubling the First-Time Home Buyers’ Tax Credit to provide up to $1,500 in direct support to home buyers to offset closing costs involved in buying a first home; and
• Investing $200 million to increase rent-to-own housing options.

Almost all felt these measures would be helpful towards improving the housing situation and making home ownership more attainable for Canadians. Asked whether they had any questions regarding any of these initiatives, several expressed interest in learning more about rent-to-own housing options and the specifics of how these programs operate. The view was expressed that the federal government should do more to communicate information about these initiatives to Canadians, with a number believing that many renters and aspiring home buyers were currently unaware of the supports available to them.

Densification (Vancouver Middle Class Concerned about the Cost of Living)

Participants in one group, comprised of middle-class individuals residing in Vancouver, took part in a conversation related to the housing situation in their community and their perspectives related to the densification of housing. All described the housing situation in Vancouver as being very poor, with many of the impression that both the affordability and availability of housing in their area had significantly worsened in recent years. A number reported that the cost of housing had become a major source of stress in their lives as of late. All felt that housing needed to be a top priority for the Government of Canada and that urgent action needed to be taken to make housing more affordable for homeowners and renters alike.

Asked whether they were aware of any recent actions or initiatives from the federal government, a few believed it had made announcements related to increasing the housing supply over the next few years though none could recall any specific details. Questioned whether they had heard anything about the Government of Canada providing additional funding to municipalities that commit to reducing red tape in order to build more housing, none indicated that they had. While several indicated support for this type of action, a few felt that they required more information regarding the types of regulations that would be modified and whether there would be any potential negative impacts to doing so.

Discussing what came to mind when they heard the term ‘densification’, participants expressed concerns related to what they viewed as rapid increases to the number of people living in a specific neighbourhood or area, and an overall reduction to individual living space as a result. To aid in conversation, it was clarified that densification refers to the process of increasing the number of homes in a given area, typically by building more housing units or adding to existing structures. Asked whether they felt that greater density was something that should be encouraged in Canada’s larger cities, participants were mixed in their views. Among those who supported this action, it was felt that given the perceived high level of population growth in Canada over the past decade, that densification was a necessity in order to ensure a sufficient amount of housing would be available for everyone. For those who felt that densification should not be pursued, it was believed that taking this approach would lead to increased strain being placed on existing infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, waste management systems, and the energy grid.

Focusing on densification in Vancouver specifically, a few thought that this could have a positive impact on the local economy and address perceived worker shortages in many sectors. Several felt otherwise, believing that many parts of Vancouver were already quite densely populated and that key services such as health care, child care, and education would potentially become overwhelmed if further densification were to occur.

Participants were next provided with information related to the Government of Canada’s Housing Accelerator Fund:

The Government of Canada’s Housing Accelerator Fund provides money to municipalities that agree to cut red-tape to build more homes faster. This money can be used for a range of things, including investing in local infrastructure projects needed to help support growing communities.

Asked what types of infrastructure projects the Government of Canada should be investing in to best support growing communities, participants suggested a wide range of projects. These included expanding and repairing roadways and bridges, constructing new hospitals and health care facilities, increasing public transportation infrastructure, and building new community spaces including parks, playgrounds, and community gardens. Questioned whether they felt the Government of Canada should focus more on supporting the construction of affordable housing units, which are subsidized and rented at below-market rates or concentrate on maximizing the overall number of homes built, most believed that the primary focus should be on affordability. Among these participants, it was believed that affordability represented the most significant barrier related to housing in most parts of the country, and that increasing the supply of housing would do little to address the housing situation if the units built were not affordable.

Interest Rates and Mortgage Renewal (GTA Homeowners Expecting to Renew Mortgages in the Next Three Years)

Participants in one group, comprised of individuals residing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), engaged in an extended discussion related to interest rates and issues currently facing mortgage holders. All participants were homeowners who were planning to renew their mortgages within the next three years. Asked whether they were facing any significant challenges related to housing costs, many expressed concerns related to high interest rates and the impact that this would have on their financial situation going forward. Several were worried that their mortgage payments could as much as double when it came time to renew their mortgages in the next few years. A number also identified additional expenses related to homeownership, such as high energy costs and rising property taxes as other challenges that they were currently facing.

Asked what factors they felt contributed to changes in interest rates, many believed that the perceived high rate of inflation in recent years had played a significant role. Several believed that rising inflation had been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and had contributed to an overall increase in the cost of living. Questioned who they thought was responsible for setting interest rates, almost all believed that this was primarily the responsibility of the Bank of Canada. Discussing the types of actions that they hoped to see from the Government of Canada in response to changing interest rates, several believed that efforts should be taken to reduce the overall cost of living and make life more affordable for Canadians, especially in terms of the cost of housing. A number believed that actions should be taken to support homeowners struggling with higher mortgage payments, including implementing measures to prevent these individuals from potentially losing their homes.

Discussing their own housing situations, all believed that their mortgages were currently affordable. Several, however, reiterated that this would likely no longer be the case once it came time to renew their mortgages. A few indicated that they had already begun to cut back on household spending in areas such as travel and recreation in anticipation of facing higher mortgage payments in the near future.

Prompted to select one word to describe how they felt about renewing their mortgage, almost all participants chose words with negative connotations such as ‘uncertain’, ‘scared’, and ‘fearful’. Several expressed concerns that they would face increased financial instability in the coming years, especially if interest rates did not decrease by the time it came for them to renew their mortgage. Asked about their relationship with their mortgage lenders, most described their interactions with lenders as having been largely positive and believed that the process of obtaining a mortgage had been relatively quick and straightforward. Questioned as to whether they were aware of any supports or services available to help them with managing their mortgage and/or planning for its renewal, none indicated that they were. Describing where they would go to learn more about the mortgage relief measures potentially available to them, a number indicated that they would likely turn to their bank or mortgage lender as well as individuals in their lives who had knowledge about mortgages. Few identified the federal government as a place they would look to for this type of information.

Asked what role they felt the Government of Canada should play in supporting homeowners who were renewing their mortgages, participants suggested a range of potential actions and initiatives. Several believed that it could provide Canadians with increased educational resources, financial literacy training, and information regarding what to expect and look out for while navigating the mortgage renewal process. A number also believed that further action could be taken to regulate the mortgage market to ensure that all Canadians were being offered a fair rate and not being taken advantage of or placed in potentially financially precarious positions by lenders. A few felt that the Government of Canada should also consider providing some form of financial assistance to households facing difficulties in affording their mortgage payments upon renewal. Questioned whether they had seen, read, or heard anything about the federal government’s Fall Economic Statement, few indicated that they had, and none could recall any specific details. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

In its Fall Economic Statement, the Government of Canada announced the Canadian Mortgage Charter. The charter outlines guidelines and expectations for mortgage lenders to offer reasonable and tailored assistance to borrowers in need. It aims to ensure that those struggling with mortgage payments get timely and fair support from their mortgage lender, using all available resources to help them during tough times.

While most felt that the introduction of a Canadian Mortgage Charter represented a positive step by the Government of Canada, several questioned what specific regulations would be put in place to enforce the guidelines and expectations outlined by this initiative. Participants were next provided with information regarding specific elements of the Charter:

• Extending Mortgage Payment Periods for Those in Need: Homeowners facing financial challenges can have their mortgage payment period extended temporarily;
• No Extra Fees for Help: Banks will not charge extra fees for measures that help homeowners struggling with their mortgages;
• Ease in Switching Lenders at Renewal: If you have an insured mortgage, you will not need to go through a new qualification process when switching to a different lender at the time of renewing your mortgage;
• Early Communication about Mortgage Renewal: Banks will contact homeowners 4-6 months before their mortgage is due for renewal to discuss different options;
• Flexible Payment Options for Struggling Homeowners: Homeowners facing financial difficulties can make large one-time payments or sell their homes without facing penalties, to avoid increasing their loan amount; and
• No Compound Interest During Hard Times: If the relief measures cause the mortgage balance to temporarily increase, banks will not charge extra interest on the added interest amount.

On balance, participants were mostly positive in their reactions to these measures. A number believed that the removal of compound interest during difficult times would be very helpful for those with significant debt loads. It was also felt that earlier communication from banks related to renewing their mortgages would assist mortgage holders in being better prepared for this process. A few believed that this was already taking place and reported having received calls from their bank related to renewing their mortgage. Some also felt that the introduction of flexible payment options as well as the ability to switch lenders more easily at renewal would assist homeowners in obtaining the best terms possible for their renewed mortgage. While most supported the initiative to extend mortgage payment periods for those in financial need, a few were concerned that this initiative would also serve to prolong the debt loads of mortgage holders, potentially leading to larger debt payments being necessary in the future. Some questioned which department or agency would be responsible for administering and enforcing this charter, while others were curious as to how subjective criteria such as ‘struggling’ would be determined by the federal government.

All felt that the Canadian Mortgage Charter was on the right track when it came to supporting mortgage holders. It was widely thought that while this would not solve the overall issue of housing affordability, the measures included in this initiative would likely provide some degree of relief to Canadian homeowners concerned about their future mortgage payments. Participants hoped that the implementation of this Charter would facilitate increased competition among mortgage lenders and would hopefully lead to lower mortgage rates for Canadians going forward.

Two groups based in Atlantic Canada, one comprised of individuals residing in mid-size and major centres and the other conducted among the general population, took part in discussions related to the federal government’s carbon pricing system. Asked whether they were aware of any steps the Government of Canada had taken to reduce carbon pollution in Canada, participants mentioned a range of initiatives. These included the provision of financial supports for home retrofitting projects (such as the installation of solar panels) through the Canada Greener Homes Grant, as well as incentives to encourage Canadians to make the switch to more environmentally friendly technology such as heat pumps and electric vehicles (EVs). Asked whether, to the best of their knowledge, there was currently a price on carbon in their province, most believed that there was, while a smaller number were more uncertain.

Participants in the group comprised of those living in mid-size and major centres were provided with the following information related to the carbon pricing system:

The Government of Canada is undertaking several measures to reduce carbon pollution. These measures include setting a price on carbon pollution, setting clean fuel standards, investing in renewable energy and clean technologies, and investing in energy efficiency programs. For today, we will be focusing on the first measure: setting a price on carbon pollution.

There are two parts to carbon pollution pricing – a fuel charge, which applies to things like oil and gas, and a separate system for industry. In provinces where the federal fuel charge applies, all direct proceeds are returned to Canadians, mostly through the pollution price rebate, also known as the Climate Action Incentive payments (CAIP), to households. Most households receive more money back through these payments than they pay on the fuel charge.

The goal of this system is to encourage people to reduce their emissions, while also giving them the flexibility to decide when and how to do it. The idea is that the more changes a household makes (e.g., using different modes of transportation, switching from a natural gas furnace to an electric heat pump), the more they will save by not having to pay the fuel charge. Rebate amounts are based on the number of individuals in a household, not how much energy a household uses, and most households receive more money back through the pollution price rebate than they pay on the fuel charge.

Questioned whether, having seen this information, they supported or opposed the implementation of a price on carbon, most were uncertain in their views. Several felt that while this was an important initiative, they did not want Canadians to incur higher financial costs for goods and services, especially if other jurisdictions throughout the world were not also doing their part to reduce emissions. A number expressed skepticism regarding whether the amounts they received back through Climate Action Incentive payments (CAIPs) truly reflected the increased costs of the price on carbon, and questioned how the federal government had gone about determining the amounts households would be receiving through these payments.

Those in this group were also provided with the following information related to increased payments for those living rurally:

For residents of small and rural communities, the pollution price rebate initially included a rural supplement of 10% (i.e., a 10% top up to their payments), since Canadians in these communities do not necessarily have the same options available to reduce their emissions, particularly when it comes to transportation.

On October 26, 2023, the Government of Canada announced it would be doubling the rural top-up for pollution price rebates from 10% to 20%, starting April 2024, in recognition of rural Canadians’ different energy needs – for example having to commute longer distances and having fewer available alternatives like public transit.

A roughly equal number believed that this approach to carbon pricing was fair to those living in rural and smaller communities as those who felt otherwise. Among those who believed this action was fair, participants expected that the top-up would be greatly helpful to those living rurally and would go a long way towards accounting for the increased costs they were likely now paying due to the price on carbon being in effect. Among those who felt differently, it was thought that even with this rural supplement, the amounts received by rural households would be unlikely to offset the increased costs they were now paying. A small number expressed the view that the CAIP should be income-tested and did not believe that those living rurally with high household incomes should be provided with this additional supplement.

Those in the group conducted among the general population were asked what they perceived to be the main objectives of the price on carbon pollution. While most believed that this initiative had been introduced as a method of encouraging Canadian households and businesses to reduce their emissions and partake in more environmentally sustainable behaviours, very few felt that this strategy had been effective. It was thought that many households did not have the option to reduce emissions related to activities such as driving and heating their homes, and that a price on carbon had only served to make life more expensive for these families while doing little to curb emissions. A number believed that, given the global scale of the issue of climate change, any actions taken by Canadians would be negated so long as major emitters in other jurisdictions continued their industrial activities unabated. A few expressed the opinion that rather than implementing a price on carbon, the Government of Canada should instead be focusing on providing increased financial supports and additional incentives such as tax breaks to assist households in adopting more sustainable behaviours.

Asked whether they had seen, read, or heard anything about the CAIP, a number indicated that they had, with a few of the impression that they had received one of these payments in recent months. Most were of the impression that these payments were primarily aimed at compensating Canadians for the increased costs incurred due to the price on carbon, though few were aware of the specific mechanisms used to calculate them. To aid in conversation, participants in this group were provided with the following information:

Newfoundland and Labrador, PEI, and Nova Scotia began using the federal carbon pricing system July 1, 2023. New Brunswick also began using the carbon pricing system’s federal fuel charge, but they continued to use their own system for industry.

Under the federal system, all proceeds collected from the price on carbon pollution in each province will stay in that province. Using Newfoundland as an example - 90% of proceeds will be returned directly to Newfoundlanders through a rebate. A family of 4 will receive about $1,312 each year, with payments going out quarterly, or every three months. The other 10 per cent will be used to support certain small businesses and Indigenous groups, as well as farmers.

Residents of small and rural communities receive an extra 10% top-up beyond the base rebate amount. Starting April 2024, the Government will double the rural top-up to 20%, because of the increased energy needs of rural residents and their reduced access to transportation options.

Reacting to this information, several questioned why the majority of the funds collected through the price on carbon were being returned to Canadian households. A number believed that these funds should instead be reinvested towards the development and implementation of green initiatives and innovations. Asked whether, to the best of their knowledge, they or someone in their household had received this rebate, a roughly equal number reported that they had as those who were more uncertain or did not believe they had received a payment.

Based on their understanding of the carbon pricing system, participants were asked if they felt this initiative had made them better or worse off financially. Several were uncertain and felt that it was difficult to determine the degree to which the price on carbon had impacted their financial situation, given that they were unsure as to how much they had paid in additional costs relative to the rebates they had received. A few believed that, if households were indeed receiving most of what they paid into the system back via CAIPs, the price on carbon had likely only had a limited impact on their finances. A small number were of the impression that they would have been impacted far more negatively by this initiative had the Government of Canada not made the decision to temporarily exempt home heating oil from the carbon pricing system.

Asked how they felt information about this rebate should be communicated to households, participants believed that the federal government should be proactively informing Canadians about this initiative on television, radio, and social media, through official federal websites, and via communications from agencies such as the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA).

Participants in two groups based in Atlantic Canada, comprised of homeowners and members of the general population respectively, engaged in a conversation related to heat pumps and recent initiatives from the federal government aimed at encouraging Canadians to consider installing heat pumps in their own homes. Asked whether they were aware of a recent announcement from the Government of Canada that it would be temporarily pausing the price on carbon for home heating oil until April 1^st, 2027, a number indicated that they were. While most viewed this as an action that the federal government should be taking, few expected that it would benefit them personally. Several felt that this exemption should be expanded to all forms of home heating, especially given the high cost of living at present.

Those in the group comprised of homeowners were additionally informed that the federal government would be increasing the amount of funding available for eligible homeowners looking to switch to a heat pump from $10,000 to $15,000, essentially making the average heat pump effectively free for low-to-median income households. While reacting positively to this initiative, several expected that their income would be too high to qualify for this assistance. A number believed that given the significant financial barriers many lower- and middle-income Canadians faced in purchasing a home, this program would likely only be useful to the small number of individuals who owned their own homes but were also considered low or middle income. It was felt that in order to be more impactful in encouraging a greater number of households to make the switch to using a heat pump, the income thresholds for these supports would likely need to be increased substantially.

Participants in both groups were asked whether they currently heated their home with a heat pump. Several in the group comprised of homeowners indicated that they did, while very few in the general population group reported the same. Among those who did not have a heat pump, when asked if they would consider switching from their home heating system, many indicated they would. A number, however, were skeptical as to whether a heat pump would be able to sufficiently heat their home. Several of those who already utilized heat pumps reported that a single heat pump was not able to fully warm their home on its own. Some heat pump users reported having found it necessary to install additional heat pumps and/or had combined their heat pumps with other home heating systems such as those powered by electricity or burning wood.

Both groups were informed that in addition to increasing the funding available to households for the purchase and installation of heat pumps, the Government of Canada would be providing an upfront payment of $250 for low- to median-income households who heat their homes with oil and want to make the switch to a heat pump. Asked whether knowing about this initiative made them more likely to switch to a heat pump, very few indicated that it did, with several reiterating concerns about whether heat pumps would provide enough heating to warm their homes. A small number of those who did not own their own homes reported that while they would like to make use of these financial supports, they had no ability to do so as they were currently renting.

Participants in the group comprised of homeowners were asked an additional question regarding what these upfront payments should be called. On balance, participants expressed a preference for the term Heat Pump Bonus as opposed to Heat Pump Cheque. It was thought that the term cheque was somewhat outdated in the digital age, especially given how few people participants believed still used cheques on a regular basis. Several, however, thought that referring to this program as a bonus was also somewhat misleading, given their perception that a bonus was typically a reward for positive performance and was not really an accurate descriptor of these payments. A number suggested that the Government of Canada should instead consider using words such as ‘incentive’, ‘rebate’, or ‘initiative’, to describe this support.

Participants in three groups took part in conversations related to health care and the issues currently impacting the health care systems in their respective provinces. Almost all believed that the health care system in their area was facing significant challenges. A large number had heard accounts of increasingly long wait times at emergency rooms and walk-in clinics, with several reporting having personally experienced waits of over 12 hours to receive care. Many believed that long wait times were directly connected to what they viewed as a widespread shortage of doctors and nurses in their area, as well as across Canada more broadly. Several specifically mentioned having encountered difficulties in finding a family doctor and believed that many in their area were currently without a general practitioner and unable to access this type of care. It was felt that with fewer family doctors available, more people were turning to emergency rooms and/or walk-in clinics for their non-emergent health care needs, placing further strain on these services. The opinion was expressed that these challenges were felt to an even greater extent by those living in small or rural communities, who often had to travel significant distances to access a doctor or medical facility. A few who lived rurally reported that it was quite difficult to retain doctors and nurses in their area, believing that many health workers often opted to practice in larger, urban centres once these opportunities became available.

Asked what they felt to be the most pressing challenges related to health care in their respective areas, most reiterated concerns related to long wait times, pervasive shortages of doctors and nurses, and difficulties in finding a family doctor. Related to worker shortages, several believed that greater action needed to be taken to recruit foreign-trained health professionals, as well as to streamline the certification process for these individuals, ensuring that they would be able to work in their fields of expertise upon arriving in Canada. A few thought that efforts should be made to further expand the roles of other health professionals such as nurse practitioners and pharmacists, allowing these individuals to engage in activities such as diagnosing patients and writing prescriptions as a way of taking pressure off the limited number of available doctors at present. A number also believed that a greater focus needed to be placed on increasing investments in mental health treatment and resources. It was believed that many Canadians were currently struggling with issues related to their mental health, and that there were very few affordable resources available to assist these individuals.

Participants residing in Manitoba and in mid-size and major centres in Atlantic Canada were presented with information regarding five priority areas that the Government of Canada had recently identified related to health care. These included:

• Addressing health worker shortages and reducing wait times;
• Increasing access to family health services;
• Improving long term care and home care;
• Addressing mental health and substance use; and
• Modernizing health data management and virtual care.

On balance, participants reacted largely positively, with many expressing the view that all were important areas for the Government of Canada to be focusing on. Several believed that the priority of addressing health worker shortages and reducing wait times was of particular importance and felt that improvements on this front would likely have a positive impact on the rest of the priority areas listed above. The priorities of increasing access to family services, improving long term and home care, and addressing mental health and substance use were also seen as being of critical importance going forward. While a few felt that the priority of modernizing health data management and virtual care was less pressing than the other areas listed, some felt differently. Among these participants, it was believed that by expanding the capacity of virtual care and making it easier for health data to be transferred between different health care providers, patients (and especially those living rurally) would be provided with a wider range of options when it came to accessing health care in a timely fashion.

One group, comprised of individuals residing in Hamilton, engaged in a brief conversation related to opioid addiction, both in their communities as well as across Canada more broadly. Almost all felt that opioids represented a major concern in their communities at present, with several believing that this issue had worsened in recent years. Asked whether they were hopeful that progress could be made on addressing this issue in the coming years, almost all indicated that they were. Prompted to share what came to mind when they heard terms such as ‘safe supply’ and ‘safe consumption sites’, most believed that these phrases related to ensuring that individuals suffering from addiction were not consuming toxic drugs and had a safe location where they could consume illicit substances (such as opioids) in the presence of health workers. While generally supportive of initiatives such as these, some believed that there needed to be additional actions taken to address what were viewed as the root causes of addiction, such as challenges related to homelessness, poverty, and mental health.

Participants were next provided with the following information related to the Substance Use and Addictions Program (SUAP):

Through the Substance Use and Addictions Program (SUAP), the Government of Canada is funding projects that address the harms associated with substance use. More specifically, through this program, the Government of Canada is funding safer supply and consumption site services, and they are also funding projects that focus on things like overdose prevention, education, detox support, peer support, outreach, mentorship, mental health supports, among other initiatives.

Reactions to this information were mixed. While a number believed that harm reduction initiatives played an important role in supporting those suffering from addiction, several believed this additional funding should instead be directed towards the treatment of addiction and assisting individuals to stop using these substances in the long term. Discussing the potential impacts of increasing funding towards harm reduction programs, a number believed that this could lead to decreased stigma towards those suffering from addiction and increased education among the public regarding the challenges faced by these individuals. A few expressed concerns regarding the negative impact that an expansion of harm reduction programs could have on the surrounding community. Among these participants, it was felt that these initiatives could potentially lead to more individuals (and young people in particular) being compelled to try these substances, knowing these safeguards were in place. Asked what more the Government of Canada could be doing to address these issues, it was suggested that actions should be taken to find affordable housing for those suffering from addiction, providing these individuals with the opportunity to live in a safe and drug-free environment.

Participants residing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) engaged in a brief discussion related to crime and their perspectives regarding the safety of their community. Asked to identify what they viewed as the most important issues impacting the GTA at present, participants mentioned areas such as the high cost of living, a perceived lack of affordable housing, difficulties accessing public transportation, and public safety. Questioned as to how big of an issue they felt crime was in their community, many were of the impression that the crime rate had risen in recent years, and that incidents such as assaults, property damage, drug crime, and automobile theft had been occurring with increasing frequency. Discussing whether they felt their community was safe, views were mixed. Among those who felt their area was relatively safe, it was believed that while crime was on the rise in some parts of the GTA, this issue was primarily contained to certain parts of the city and had not impacted their own neighbourhoods. While few of those who viewed their community as being somewhat unsafe expressed concerns for their personal safety, it was felt that property and auto theft was now far more of an issue than in years past.

Asked whether they viewed auto theft as a major issue in the GTA, many indicated that they did, with several indicating having personally known someone who had been impacted by this type of crime. Almost all believed that this issue had increased considerably in recent years and recalled having heard far more about this topic as of late, both on the news and from personal connections. Asked what they felt was behind this perceived rise in automobile thefts, a number attributed this to the advanced technology in newer vehicles, believing these innovations had provided more ways for criminals to potentially break into and steal vehicles. It was also felt that a perceived growth in the global market for stolen vehicles had contributed to the increasing frequency of these crimes in the GTA and across Canada more broadly. Describing steps that they had taken in response to rising concerns related to auto theft, a few reported having taken actions such as having purchased a lock for their steering wheel as well as driving older, less expensive cars in order for their automobile to be perceived as less of a target.

Discussing what should be done by the Government of Canada in response to rising auto theft, a number believed that a greater focus should be placed on increasing surveillance and inspections of shipping crates at Canadian ports to ensure that stolen vehicles were not being trafficked overseas. Additional actions suggested by participants included introducing legislation to increase the penalties for automobile theft, mandating that automakers install global positioning technology (GPS) technology in all new vehicles, and seeking to address what were viewed as the potential root causes of auto theft, such as poverty and gang activity. Asked whether they were aware of any actions taken by the federal government in the past few years on this front, a few believed that it had established a task force to investigate and devise solutions to reduce auto theft going forward. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

The Government of Canada is organizing a National Summit on Combatting Auto Theft. This summit will gather various groups, like government officials, law enforcement, and community leaders, to develop a coordinated response to auto theft. The focus will be on short and long-term solutions involving policing, border security, and other efforts that combat organized crime.

While most reacted positively to this information and felt that this was an important action for the Government of Canada to take, some believed that this issue needed to be approached with greater urgency, including providing law enforcement agencies with additional powers to open and inspect trucks and shipping crates they suspect may contain stolen vehicles.

Participants residing in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) took part in a brief conversation about immigration. Asked how they would describe the current state of the immigration system, all expressed concerns regarding the country’s ability to maintain its current level of immigration while still being able to provide adequate housing and employment opportunities, health care, and education for those already living in Canada. Describing what they viewed as the benefits of welcoming new immigrants, several believed that immigration provided the opportunity to increase Canada’s diversity and introduce new cultures and perspectives to the country’s population. A few also believed that immigration brought potential economic benefits, bringing in more skilled professionals to work in Canadian industries. Asked to what degree they agreed with the statement “Canada needs to welcome more new immigrants to fill labour shortages and grow the economy”, almost all disagreed, reiterating concerns that the country would not be able to accommodate a further rise to its population. It was felt by a number that it would not be fair to bring in immigrants to contribute to the Canadian economy if there was not enough housing or service capacity in areas such as health care to meet their needs.

All felt that the Government of Canada should decrease the rate of immigration going forward. While most supported continued immigration in the long term, it was felt that a temporary decrease would allow the country time to grow the housing supply and expand the capacity of important services and infrastructure to accommodate a larger population in the future. A few also believed that future immigration should be more targeted and focused on bringing in skilled workers in sectors which were experiencing labour shortages at present. Asked whether they had seen, read, or heard anything about recent actions or initiatives from the federal government related to immigration, while several recalled hearing that action had been taken to temporarily cap the number of new international student study permits, none could recall any specific details. To aid in conversation, participants were provided with the following information:

The Government of Canada has announced a temporary 2-year cap on new international student study permits. With this cap, the Government of Canada is expecting 364,000 approved study permits in 2024, a decrease of 35% from 2023

Participants expressed a range of reactions to this information. While some believed this would have a positive impact on the housing situation, especially in terms of decreasing demand in the rental market, a roughly equal number were worried that this might lead to staffing and programming cuts at many Canadian universities and colleges which currently relied on the tuition paid by international students as a significant portion of their annual budgets.

Participants in two groups engaged in a discussion regarding the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine and the financial and military assistance provided to Ukraine by the Government of Canada. All reported being aware of this issue, though with varying levels of familiarity. Many shared that while they had previously followed the conflict quite closely, they felt that they were no longer as well-informed as they had once been. For most, this was either due to a declining personal interest in seeking out information related to the conflict, or the impression that information was no longer as accessible through news and social media sources as it had once been. While most in the group based in Manitoba reported that they were no longer as worried about the conflict as they had once been, a few expressed concerns regarding the potential impacts this conflict could have on the Canadian economy and fuel prices. In contrast, most residing in Quebec expressed high levels of concern about the conflict. These concerns focused on numerous factors, including potential economic issues, global security and stability concerns (related in particular to Russia’s possession of nuclear weapons), and a perceived lack of progress on negotiations towards a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Few in either group reported having been personally impacted by the conflict or had known someone who had.

Discussing how the conflict had shaped their perspectives regarding the current global security situation, many expressed that it was shocking to see countries in Europe engaged in an active military conflict. Some shared that this had made them feel that the world was a less stable and secure place than they had once believed. Others believed that this situation served as an indication of the erosion of what they had perceived as a rules-based international order, under which developed countries typically did not engage in open armed conflict with one another. A large number expressed gratitude that they lived in Canada, which they viewed as being far removed from military conflicts in other parts of the world and highly unlikely to experience an invasion by another country. Discussing additional global impacts that they believed had been caused by this conflict, participants mentioned issues such as rising fuel and energy costs, increased transportation costs, and higher prices for essentials such as groceries.

Asked if they felt it was important for Canada to continue to assist Ukraine, most in the group from Manitoba and all in Quebec felt that it was. Several highlighted the importance of this assistance to protecting the health and wellness of Ukrainian civilians, who were believed to have suffered greatly due to this conflict. Among the small number in the group from Manitoba who viewed it as less important, some expressed concerns regarding the financial cost of this ongoing support and whether these funds should instead be used to help Canadians in Canada who were currently struggling to make ends meet financially.

Engaging in an exercise where they were asked to select one word to describe the Government of Canada’s approach to the war in Ukraine, participants provided a wide range of responses. Several selected words with positive connotations such as ‘generous’, ‘humanitarian’, and ‘pillar’, believing that Canada’s support had been impactful in assisting Ukraine in defending itself as well as in taking in Ukrainian civilians seeking safe haven from the conflict. A roughly equal number, however, chose terms with more negative implications such as ‘fear’, ‘slow’, and ‘skittish’. Among these participants, it was felt that Canada’s contributions had not had much of an impact and that Ukraine’s efforts to end the conflict had stalled, with little hope for peace in the foreseeable future.

Asked what they had seen, read, or heard regarding the federal government’s response to the war in Ukraine, many reiterated their understanding that Canada had been providing financial and military assistance throughout the entirety of the conflict and had brought in many displaced Ukrainians. Some also recalled the imposition of several sanctions by the Government of Canada on Russia, as well as upon numerous Russian individuals and businesses. All felt that the Government of Canada was currently on the right track with its response. Unprompted, a number residing in Manitoba shared that while they were satisfied with the current approach by the federal government, they did not want to see Canada become further involved in the conflict. Asked whether their view of the federal government’s performance on this front had changed over time, all reported that their opinions had remained relatively stable since the beginning of the conflict.

Discussing whether they thought the Government of Canada should be doing more or less in its response to the conflict, most believed that the current approach was ideal and should be maintained. A number in the group from Quebec expressed the opinion that while they felt the current level of military assistance from the federal government should remain the same, they would be in support of increasing the amount of humanitarian support (such as medical and food supplies) sent to assist Ukrainian civilians. Others were of the view that the best way the Government of Canada could support Ukraine would be to impose harsher economic penalties on Russia and its businesses and oligarchs. Asked whether they were aware of the implementation of any sanctions by the federal government on Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine, several believed that Canada had imposed numerous sanctions on Russia, as well as Russian individuals and business entities. Asked to gauge the overall impact of the Government Canada’s support for Ukraine, almost all expressed uncertainty, with many feeling that they did not have enough information to properly evaluate the effectiveness of these measures.

Most reported having been at least somewhat aware of the recent visit by the President of Ukraine to Canada. To aid in the conversation, participants were provided with the following clarification:

President Zelenskyy recently addressed the House of Commons in Canada. During this visit, the Government of Canada committed to providing $650 million in financial and military aid over three years, which will include supplying Ukraine with 50 armoured vehicles made in Canada.

Reacting to this information, several in Manitoba expressed the view that three years would be a long time for this conflict to continue for and questioned how long the Government of Canada could feasibly support the defence effort in Ukraine. A few in this group were of the opinion that these investments should instead be directed to the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), which they believed were currently underfunded, underequipped, and using antiquated equipment. Conversely, all in the group from Quebec expressed positive sentiments, believing that this type of ongoing support was necessary to help the Ukrainian war effort.

No participants were aware of the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA). To clarify, participants were provided with the following information:

The Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement is designed to improve the business relationship between Canada and Ukraine. It does this by giving special treatment to goods traded between the two countries and by setting up new rules for trading services and investment. The agreement now has added sections that focus on fair trade, which includes support for smaller businesses, ensuring trade benefits both men and women equally, and benefits Indigenous Peoples. This agreement is intended to support Ukraine as it rebuilds its economy after the invasion by Russia.

Asked if it was important to have a free trade agreement with Ukraine, many expressed support for such an initiative, believing that this represented a non-violent, humanitarian approach to providing support to Ukraine that also had the potential to benefit Canadians and the Canadian economy. Discussing the types of long-term assistance that Ukraine might need from Canada and the rest of the international community once the conflict had been resolved, many believed that the primary areas of support would likely concern the physical reconstruction of damaged infrastructure, buildings, and homes, as well as economic and financial support to help rebuild the country’s economy. Several also shared their view that Ukraine would require security guarantees from the international community to ensure that it would not be attacked again.

Discussing whether they had ever come across information about this conflict that had seemed false or misleading, many reported that they had. Discussing examples of this information, several mentioned having encountered stories about how Ukraine had initiated the conflict against Russia, or in some way had provoked Russia into an invasion. Others reported seeing articles about how the Government of Russia was fighting to free the citizens of Ukraine from oppression, and that its invasion was supported by most of the Ukrainian people. Those who had encountered misinformation or disinformation reported that this had primarily come from sources on social media platforms such as Facebook. It was felt that, on balance, Canadian media organizations had been largely successful in filtering out misinformation and disinformation from their articles and broadcasts. Several, however, worried that the continued perpetuation of false and misleading information could result in a lack of knowledge about the facts of the conflict, or, more critically, erode Canadians’ support for Ukraine. Asked whether they believed that false or misleading information was impacting their own abilities to discern the truth regarding this conflict, no participants felt this to be the case.