This public opinion research report presents the results of an online survey conducted by Ekos Research Associates Inc. on behalf of Public Services and Procurement Canada. The research study was conducted between June 14 and July 12, 2021, with 1,551 Canadians 18 years of age or older using a randomly recruited panel, as well as 501 Canadians responding to an open link announced by Public Services and Procurement Canada through stakeholder networks.
Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : « Enquête au sujet de la Cité parlementaire ».
This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Public Services and Procurement Canada. For more information on this report, please contact Public Services and Procurement Canada at: TPSGC.DGSIPEngagement-SPIBEngagement.PWGSC@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca or at:
Public Services and Procurement Canada
11 Laurier St, Phase III, Place du Portage Gatineau, QC K1A 0S5 Canada
Attention: General enquiry
Catalogue Number:
P4-95/2021E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN):
978-0-660-40044-0
Related publications (registration number: POR 029-20):
Table 1a: Visitors' Perceptions of Quality of Key Elements (Representative)
Table 1b: Visitors' Perceptions of Quality of Key Elements (Open)
Table 2: Response Rates
Table 3: Sample Characteristics
Executive Summary
A. Background and Objectives
The current public opinion research is intended to support the update to the 2006 Long Term Vision and Plan (LTVP), which establishes the framework for the major initiatives of the Science and Parliamentary Infrastructure Branch (SPIB), and supports their ongoing and future projects. The LTVP has taken a long-term view on restoring the Precinct's heritage buildings and landscapes, meeting evolving and growing parliamentarian accommodation requirements, and providing a secure and welcoming environment for parliamentarians, staff and visitors. It forms the backbone of a complex planning and construction program with an overarching vision and direction for physical change. Of particular note, one of the key themes to be addressed in the new master plan is visitor experience.
The public opinion research forms part of the public engagement strategy to obtain feedback on how their experience of Parliament Hill and the broader Precinct could be improved in the future, and how to ensure that the Precinct continues to be a welcoming place that reflects the values and aspirations of all Canadians.
Research findings are expected to guide the project teams responsible for implementing the SPIB program of work, helping to ensure that these initiatives are developed in such a way as to address the needs and interests of visitors, and more broadly the values that Canadians associate with the site. Elements of particular interest include the types of visitor facilities and amenities to provide, how to improve visitor arrival to the site, what types of experiences and/or destinations to develop or enhance, and the values that Canadians would like to see reflected in the Precinct.
B. Methodology
Representative Survey
The research findings are based on a representative survey of 1,551 Canadians, 18 years of age and older. The survey sample was randomly selected from a probability-based panel. The Probit panel, which is assembled using a random digit dial (RDD) process for sampling from a blended land-line cell-phone frame, provides full coverage of Canadians with telephone access. The distribution of the panel is meant to mirror the actual population in Canada (as defined by Statistics Canada). As such, our 120,000-member panel can be considered representative of the general public in Canada (meaning that the incidence of a given target population within our panel very closely resembles the public at large) and margins of error can be applied. Thirteen per cent of the survey cases were collected by trained, bilingual interviewers, while the rest were collected through online survey self-administration.
The survey was collected online and by telephone between June 14 and July 12, 2021, in both official languages. This followed testing to ensure public understanding was clear and consistent. The survey length averaged 15 minutes online and 17 minutes by telephone. The overall rate of participation was 24%.
This randomly recruited probability sample carries with it a margin of error of +/-2.5%. The margin of error for most subgroups is between 3.5% and 10.0%. Results are weighted to population proportions for region, age, gender, and education. Chi-square tests were used to compare subgroups to the remaining sample (e.g., Ontario vs. the rest of Canada; 65 years old and over vs. the rest of Canada; women vs. men). Because of the random nature of the sampling, along with weighting along key dimensions, the results can be extrapolated to the broader population of Canadians 18 years of age or older. Details on the rate of participation, as well as sample characteristics, can be found in Appendix A, and the full questionnaire is provided in Appendix B.
Parallel Survey
A parallel survey was also conducted, through an open-source link circulated by SPIB with existing stakeholders who in turn shared it within their networks, as well as to the general public via PSPC's social media, driving respondents to the web site. It relied on the same questionnaire as used to collect the general public sample, with slight modifications regarding sample characteristics collected and the additional comment box. The aim was to gather the views of Parliamentary Precinct stakeholders, as well as residents of the National Capital Region (NCR) who are likely to have visited the Precinct. A total of 506[1] individuals completed the survey. Results of this parallel survey are presented alongside the results for the general public survey in relevant sections. It should be noted that results of the open-source link are illustrative in nature, and are only projectable to these 506 individuals, rather than to the broader population.
C. Key Findings
Awareness of Rehabilitation Project
Awareness that Parliament Hill and the surrounding area are being rehabilitated and updated is high among those engaged on the issue, and residents living in closer proximity to the site, but low elsewhere in Canada.
Across the country, one in four of the representative sample is clearly aware and another one in three is vaguely aware. This rises to 64% among residents of the National Capital Region (NCR). Respondents to the open link, who are almost exclusively from the NCR, are much more likely to be aware (79% are clearly aware).
Considerations in the Design
Of the considerations for design tested, the most often rated as important in the rehabilitation and updating of Parliament Hill Area are a space that is welcoming and safe for visitors of all ages and abilities, an area that is open and accessible to the public, and a place to see Parliament in action, according to eight in ten in the representative sample. Nearly as many see it as important for Parliament Hill to be a place to commemorate Canadians and events of national significance (75%). These views are even more strongly espoused by respondents to the open link (88% to 94%).
In a second tier of importance, just over half feel it is important for Parliament Hill to be reflective of the cultural diversity of the country, to be a gathering place, reflective of Indigenous cultures, and a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors. Again, higher proportions of respondents in the open link said the same (80% for cultural diversity and 68% to 72% for the other design considerations).
When asked to select the three most important considerations of the eight tested, "a place to see Parliament in action" was selected most often - six in ten, with one in three saying it is the single most important consideration. This is followed by roughly half selecting "open and accessible to the public" or "welcoming and safe."
Six basic values or principles guiding the design were also explored. Roughly three in four Canadians in the representative sample said making the area more accessible for all and heritage conservation are important, followed by the provision of visitor amenities, according to seven in ten. Proportions are even higher among respondents to the open link (83% to 73%, respectively).
In a second tier of importance, ensuring high architectural and design quality, and making buildings more environmentally friendly were viewed as important by six in ten members of the representative sample and higher proportions of the open link sample. Engaging with Parliament and the work of Parliamentarians was also seen as important by just under six in ten.
In selecting the three most important values, heritage conservation and accessibility stood out - selected by six in ten, with close to one in four saying each was the single most important value to guide the design. Heritage conservation, in particular, was even more likely to have been selected as a top value among those responding to the open link.
Areas of Interest for Next Visit
In terms of key features of interest for a next visit to the Parliament Hill Area, three in four members of the representative sample and close to nine in ten responding to the open link said that the inside of the buildings would top the list. In the representative sample, the grounds and the outside of the buildings were a second tier of features to take in on a next visit, followed closely by special events and activities, as well as monuments (63% to 56%, respectively). Those responding to the open link typically expressed keener interest in the first three (86% to 76%, respectively), although interest is about the same as indicated in the representative sample in terms of monuments.
Previous Visit to the Parliament Hill Area
Two in three members of the representative sample have visited the Parliament Hill Area.
Virtually all of those responding to the open link have visited.
Four in ten visitors have been to the area within the last six years, while one in three visited six to twenty years ago, and one in five have not been since before 2000.
Summer is the most popular season for a visit according to half, while about one in three said they visited in the spring (17%) or the fall (19%). One in seven last visited in the winter.
Features or areas most often visited include the Centennial Flame and front lawn area, according to eight in ten. This is followed by six in ten taking in the area around Centre Block and Confederation Boulevard. The pathway along the river and Sparks Street have also been elements of the visit for about half, and one in three has been inside the buildings that are open to the public. This is interesting given that three in four Canadians in the representative sample said they would visit the inside of buildings open to the public on their next visit. This may suggest a greater interest sparked by the rehabilitation, or simply increased demand because of lack of availability over the past few years.
Most visitors arrive by private transportation (42%) or on foot (38%). Only one in ten use public transit, and even fewer arrive with a tour or by bicycle.
Visitors most often arrive with family (e.g., partner; 45%) or friends (31%). One in five bring children, although this is mostly among visitors who are between 35 and 64 (30% to 34%), with 20% also noting extended family in the visitor party.
Quality of Key Elements of the Parliament Hill Area
Among those who have visited and could provide a rating of quality, the sense of safety within the site and the quality of the greenspace and landscaping are rated positively in terms of quality, according to more than eight in ten. Ease of getting to and from, as well as around the area was rated positively among seven in ten in the representative sample, but six in ten in the open link.
Suggesting some need for attention, signs and maps as well as availability of bicycle parking were rated positively by half of those who visited and could comment, although this is considerably lower in the open link (30% to 31%).
Accessibility for those with disabilities was only rated positively among four in ten in the representative sample and one in three in the open link. This is a particular area for attention given that accessibility is accorded such importance in terms of considerations. Access to mobile-friendly tools availability of food services, washrooms, outdoor seating, shade, and parking were only rated positively by one in three to one in four, with larger proportions rating them poorly. Results are even lower in the open link and in the rating of shelter from weather. These results suggest considerable need for attention, particularly given the importance given to provision of amenities as a design principle, and given that private vehicles is the primary mode of transportation to and from the site.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Public awareness is fairly low outside of the NCR. As the pandemic ends and there are increased efforts to draw visitors from outside the region back to site, it will be important to draw attention to the rehabilitation of the site.
Fundamental considerations among the public for the rehabilitation include the Precinct showcasing Parliament in Action, and a site that is safe and welcoming, open and accessible to all, that also addresses the twin guiding principles of heritage conservation and provision of amenities to make the visit comfortable.
Although many previous visits have only included the outside of buildings, the grounds and surrounding area, the inside of buildings is likely to be the most sought-after feature of future trips. This highlights the likelihood of significantly increased demand for tours as the public begins to visit the Hill in larger numbers after the pandemic.
Provision of amenities must be guided by the fact that most arrive by private transportation or on foot, with family and friends.
Results suggest that a number of aspects of the services and features of the site require attention, based on the perceived quality of visitors over the past six years. While perceptions of the sense of safety and greenspace, as well as ease of arriving, leaving and moving around the Parliament Precinct Area are positive, signage and bicycle parking may need some attention.
Considerably greater attention may be required to increase the perceived quality of accessibility for those with disabilities, and the availability of food, washrooms, outdoor seating, shade and shelter from the elements, as well as parking, since each of which were given poor ratings.
D. Note to Readers
Detailed findings are presented in the sections that follow. Weighted results from the representative survey sample, collected from the panel, is the main focus of the report. Results are described for the overall national sample in the main portion of the narrative. Results are also described for cases collected in the open link, although in somewhat less detail, using a more comparative tone. Graphic or tabular presentation of results is also provided for both samples under the descriptive text. Results for the proportion of respondents in the sample who either said "don't know" or did not provide a response may not be indicated in the graphic representation of the results in all cases, particularly where they are not sizable (e.g., 10% or less). Results may also not total to 100% due to rounding.
Bulleted text is used to describe differences between key (e.g., demographic) subgroups of respondents in the representative sample. Only differences that are statistically and substantively different (e.g., five per centage points or greater from the overall mean) are presented. Any significant departures found in the open link from the patterns observed in the representative sample are also described in a more cursory fashion, since results from the open link are not considered projectable to the population.
Details of the methodology and sample characteristics can be found in Appendix A. The programmed survey instrument can be found in Appendix B.
E. Contract Value
The contract value for the POR project is $57,864.53 (including HST).
I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Ekos Research Associates Inc. that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Signed by: Susan Galley (Vice President)
Detailed Findings
A. Design Considerations
Awareness
From the single question in the survey asking about awareness, results indicate that those most engaged and living close to the site are generally aware, however, awareness outside the region is low. In the representative survey sample, 25% said they were clearly aware that Parliament Hill and the surrounding area are being rehabilitated and updated. Another 32% were vaguely aware, although 42% were not aware. Closer to the site, however, 64% of NCR residents in the representative sample said they were clearly aware of this and another 31% said they were vaguely aware.
By comparison, respondents in the open link, who are almost all NCR residents, were much more likely to be aware of the rehabilitation underway; 79% indicated they were clearly aware, and another 14% said they were vaguely aware. Only a small proportion (6%) was not aware that Parliament Hill and the surrounding area are being rehabilitated and updated.
Chart 1: Awareness
Chart 1: Awareness - Text Version
This chart with single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to three statements: clearly aware, vaguely aware, and not aware across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "Were you aware that Parliament Hill and the surrounding area are being rehabilitated and updated?"
Respondents selected:
Representative
Category "Clearly aware": 25%
Category "Vaguely aware": 32%
Category "Not aware": 42%
Open
Category "Clearly aware": 79%
Category "Vaguely aware": 14%
Category "Not aware": 6%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Q1. Were you aware that Parliament Hill and the surrounding area are being rehabilitated and updated?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
In the representative sample, men (30%) are more likely than women (22%) to say they were clearly aware of the rehabilitation.
Younger Canadians under age 45 in the representative sample are least likely to be aware of the work being done around Parliament Hill (22% were clearly aware). Those aged 55-64 are more likely than any other age group to say they were clearly aware (33%), while respondents aged 65 and over are apt to say they were vaguely aware (41%). This age-related pattern was not observed in the results from the open link.
Awareness varies by proximity to Parliament Hill. Residents of British Columbia and the Territories are least likely to say they were clearly aware (17%), along with 20% to 22% in Alberta, Manitoba/Saskatchewan and the Atlantic. Awareness is also relatively low, however, among residents of Quebec living outside of the NCR (18% clearly aware).
More recent visitors to the NCR (2015 or more recent) indicated greater awareness of the rehabilitation of Parliament Hill (51% were clearly aware).
Important Considerations
Over eight in ten (82%) respondents in the representative sample feel that it is important for the Parliament Hill Area to be a welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities. Eight in ten also believe it is important for the area to be open and accessible to the public or a place to see Parliament in action (80%). Three-quarters (75%) feel it is important for Parliament Hill to be a place to commemorate Canadians and events of national significance.
In a second tier of important considerations, as shown in the second of the two charts, 60% feel that it is important for Parliament Hill to be reflective of the cultural diversity of the country. Somewhat fewer, but still over half of Canadians, believe it is important for Parliament Hill to be a gathering place (56%), reflective of Indigenous cultures (56%), and a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors (52%).
Higher proportions of respondents to the open link assigned importance to each of these, although the relative ordering is similar to that found in the representative sample. Nearly all (94%) feel it is important for Parliament Hill to be a welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities. Almost as many (91%) said it is important for Parliament Hill to be open and accessible to the public. Eighty-eight per cent believe that it is important for Parliament Hill to be a place to commemorate Canadians and events of national significance, and 87% believe it is important for the area to be a place to see Parliament in action.
Unlike the results from the representative sample, there is a less obvious drop in the proportion of respondents in the open link who feel it is important for Parliament Hill to be reflective of the cultural diversity of the country (80%). Nearly three-quarters also said it is important to be a gathering space (72%) and to be reflective of Indigenous cultures (72%). Two-thirds (68%) feel it is important for the Parliament Hill area to be a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors.
Chart 2: Considerations (1)
Chart 2: Considerations (1) - Text Version
This stacked bar chart shows the per centage of results for responses to four statements across three categories: unimportant, moderate, important and two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "How important is it for the Parliament Hill Area to be...?"
Respondents selected:
A welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 5%
Category "Moderate (3)": 11%
Category "Important (4-5)": 82%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": -
Category "Moderate (3)": 5%
Category "Important (4-5)": 94%
Open and accessible to the public
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 4%
Category "Moderate (3)": 14%
Category "Important (4-5)": 80%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": -
Category "Moderate (3)": 7%
Category "Important (4-5)": 91%
A place to see Parliament in action
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 5%
Category "Moderate (3)": 14%
Category "Important (4-5)": 80%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 3%
Category "Moderate (3)": 10%
Category "Important (4-5)": 87%
A place to commemorate Canadians and events of national significance
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 7%
Category "Moderate (3)": 17%
Category "Important (4-5)": 75%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": -
Category "Moderate (3)": 10%
Category "Important (4-5)": 88%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Q1aa-q1ah. How important is it for the Parliament Hill Area to be...?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Chart 3: Considerations (2)
Chart 3: Considerations (2) - Text Version
This stacked bar chart shows the per centage of results for responses to four statements across three categories: unimportant, moderate, important and two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "How important is it for the Parliament Hill Area to be...?"
Respondents selected:
Reflective of the cultural diversity of the country
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 17%
Category "Moderate (3)": 22%
Category "Important (4-5)": 60%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 6%
Category "Moderate (3)": 14%
Category "Important (4-5)": 80%
A gathering space
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 14%
Category "Moderate (3)": 27%
Category "Important (4-5)": 56%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 6%
Category "Moderate (3)": 22%
Category "Important (4-5)": 72%
Reflective of Indigenous cultures
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 20%
Category "Moderate (3)": 22%
Category "Important (4-5)": 56%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 10%
Category "Moderate (3)": 16%
Category "Important (4-5)": 72%
A place to enjoy activities and the outdoors
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 17%
Category "Moderate (3)": 29%
Category "Important (4-5)": 52%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 9%
Category "Moderate (3)": 23%
Category "Important (4-5)": 68%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Q1aa-q1ah. How important is it for the Parliament Hill Area to be...?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Other areas which a small number of respondents thought were important enough to describe included learning about Canadian history and the system of government, reflecting Canadian people from coast to coast (e.g., unity of all parts of Canada), and reflecting the equality of all Canadians. Concentrating on Parliament Hill as a workplace first, the safety and security of all and not necessarily making the site open and accessible to all for the sake of security was also raised by a few.
In the representative sample, Canadians who have visited the site, along with those with a university education, are more likely to feel all considerations are important.
Residents of Ontario are more likely than those in other regions to say it is important for Parliament Hill to be a place to see parliament in action (86% in the NCR and 85% elsewhere in Ontario), and a place to commemorate Canadians and events of national significance (82% in the NCR, and 78% elsewhere in Ontario).
Residents of the Atlantic are less likely to rate open and accessible as important (69%) compared with other parts of the country, which is also lower for reflecting of Indigenous cultures (47%).
Reflecting cultural diversity and Indigenous cultures are of less importance among residents of Manitoba and Saskatchewan, with 26% and 31% respectively rating these to be of limited importance. This is also the case in terms of the site being a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors (29%).
The importance of Parliament Hill being seen as a gathering place, a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors, or a place to commemorate Canadians and events of national significance increases with age. Younger Canadians (age 35 and younger) are least likely, while older Canadians (aged 65 and over) are most likely to rate these factors as important.
Women are more likely than men to say is it important for Parliament Hill to be reflective of the cultural diversity of the country (69% of women, 51% of men), and of Indigenous cultures (67% women, 45% men).
Considerations Deemed a Priority
In the representative sample, 61% of Canadians placed "a place to see Parliament in action" among their three most important considerations. About one-third (32%) rated seeing Parliament in action as their most important consideration; 16% rated it second and 14% rated this element third in terms of priorities. About half of Canadians in the representative sample rated "a welcoming and safe space for visitors" (50%), "open and accessible to the public" (49%), or "a place to pay tribute to Canadians and events of national significance" (46%) among their top three most important considerations for the Parliament Hill Area.
As presented in the second chart, 30% considered an area that is "reflective of the cultural diversity of the country" to be among their most important priorities, and about one-quarter (26%) considered it a top priority for Parliament Hill to be "reflective of Indigenous cultures." Considerably fewer indicated the importance of the Parliament Hill Area being "a gathering space" (13%) or "a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors" (11%) as top considerations.
Respondents in the open link reported the same hierarchy of priorities. Fifty-nine per cent of respondents identified "a place to see Parliament in action" as one of their top three priorities. About half said "a welcoming and safe space for visitors" (50%), "an open and accessible area to the public" (47%), or "a place to play tribute to Canadians and events of national significance" (45%) should be top priorities for consideration.
Chart 4: Priority Considerations (1)
Chart 4: Priority Considerations (1) - Text Version
This stacked bar chart shows the per centage of results for responses to four statements across three categories: 3rd, 2nd, 1st and two groups: representative and open. The column on the right shows the total results for representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "Which do you consider to be the most important considerations?
1st, 2nd or 3rd"
Respondents selected:
A place to see Parliament in action
Representative (Total: 61%)
Category "3rd": 14%
Category "2nd": 16%
Category "1st": 32%
Open (Total: 59%)
Category "3rd": 13%
Category "2nd": 20%
Category "1st": 28%
Open and accessible to the public
Representative (Total: 49%)
Category "3rd": 14%
Category "2nd": 20%
Category "1st": 17%
Open (Total: 47%)
Category "3rd": 13%
Category "2nd": 15%
Category "1st": 20%
A welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities
Representative (Total: 50%)
Category "3rd": 22%
Category "2nd": 16%
Category "1st": 14%
Open (Total: 50%)
Category "3rd": 19%
Category "2nd": 14%
Category "1st": 18%
A place to pay tribute to Canadians and events of national significance
Representative (Total: 46%)
Category "3rd": 16%
Category "2nd": 18%
Category "1st": 14%
Open (Total: 45%)
Category "3rd": 16%
Category "2nd": 17%
Category "1st": 12%
Base: Representative (n=1349-1462) - Open (n=495-504)
Q1ba-1bc. Which do you consider to be the most important considerations?
1st, 2nd or 3rd?
Base: Representative (n=1349-1462) - Open (n=495-504)
Chart 5: Priority Considerations (2)
Chart 5: Priority Considerations (2) - Text Version
This stacked bar chart shows the per centage of results for responses to four statements across three categories: 3rd, 2nd, 1st and two groups: representative and open. The column on the right shows the total results for representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "Which do you consider to be the most important considerations?
1st, 2nd or 3rd"
Respondents selected:
Reflective of Indigenous cultures
Representative (Total: 26%)
Category "3rd": 9%
Category "2nd": 9%
Category "1st": 8%
Open (Total: 27%)
Category "3rd": 10%
Category "2nd": 10%
Category "1st": 8%
Reflective of the cultural diversity of the country
Representative (Total: 30%)
Category "3rd": 13%
Category "2nd": 12%
Category "1st": 6%
Open (Total: 33%)
Category "3rd": 15%
Category "2nd": 13%
Category "1st": 6%
A gathering space
Representative (Total: 13%)
Category "3rd": 6%
Category "2nd": 4%
Category "1st": 3%
Open (Total: 15%)
Category "3rd": 7%
Category "2nd": 5%
Category "1st": 3%
A place to enjoy activities and the outdoors
Representative (Total: 11%)
Category "3rd": 4%
Category "2nd": 4%
Category "1st": 3%
Open (Total: 14%)
Category "3rd": 6%
Category "2nd": 5%
Category "1st": 4%
Base: Representative (n=1349-1462) - Open (n=495-504)
Q1ba-1bc. Which do you consider to be the most important considerations?
1st, 2nd or 3rd?
Base: Representative (n=1349-1462) - Open (n=495-504)
In the representative sample, women are more likely to identify a welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities (54%), reflective of the cultural diversity of the country (37%), and reflective of Indigenous cultures (33%) as the most important considerations. Men are apt to identify a place to see Parliament in action (66%) or open and accessible to the public (56%) as most important.
Younger Canadians (under age 35) are more likely than older Canadians to consider a place reflective of Indigenous cultures (34%) as most important. Those aged 45-54 are more likely to say that a place to pay tribute to Canadians and events of national significance (56%) is most important.
Regionally, residents of Quebec (16%) or the NCR (16%) are more likely than those in other regions to consider a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors as most important. Those living in British Columbia and the Territories and in the Atlantic[2] are marginally more likely to select cultural diversity as a top priority compared with others across the country (36%).
Those with a high school education (53%) are more likely to say a place to pay tribute to Canadians and events of national significance, compared to those with a university education (39%).
Design Values
Of the design principles explored in the survey, about three-quarters of Canadians in the representative sample assigned accessibility (76%), and heritage conservation (74%) as important in guiding design. Only slightly fewer rated visitor amenities (70%) as an important guiding principle. As shown in the second chart, more than six in ten indicated that it is important to ensure high architectural and design quality (63%) and to make buildings more environmentally friendly (61%). Slightly fewer (57%) rated engaging with Parliament and/or the work of Parliamentarians as an important feature of the design.
Respondents in the open link again were comparatively more likely to see each of these design principles as important. Over eight in ten indicated high architectural and design quality (86%), heritage conservation (85%), and accessibility (83%) as important in guiding the design. About three-quarters said it is important to make buildings environmentally friendly (74%) and provide visitor amenities (73%), followed by 62% believing it important to engage with Parliament and/or the work of Parliamentarians.
Chart 6: Design Values (1)
Chart 6: Design Values (1) - Text Version
This stacked bar chart shows the per centage of results for responses to three statements across three categories: unimportant, moderate, important and two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "How important to you are the following elements?"
Respondents selected:
Making the area more accessible for all
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 6%
Category "Moderate (3)": 16%
Category "Important (4-5)": 76%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 4%
Category "Moderate (3)": 13%
Category "Important (4-5)": 83%
Conserving heritage
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 7%
Category "Moderate (3)": 16%
Category "Important (4-5)": 74%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 3%
Category "Moderate (3)": 12%
Category "Important (4-5)": 85%
Providing visitor amenities
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 7%
Category "Moderate (3)": 22%
Category "Important (4-5)": 70%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 6%
Category "Moderate (3)": 21%
Category "Important (4-5)": 73%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Q2aa-q2ag. How important to you are the following elements?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Chart 7: Design Values (2)
Chart 7: Design Values (2) - Text Version
This stacked bar chart shows the per centage of results for responses to three statements across three categories: unimportant, moderate, important and two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "How important to you are the following elements?"
Respondents selected:
Ensuring high architectural and design quality
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 13%
Category "Moderate (3)": 22%
Category "Important (4-5)": 63%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 3%
Category "Moderate (3)": 11%
Category "Important (4-5)": 86%
Making buildings more environmentally friendly
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 14%
Category "Moderate (3)": 23%
Category "Important (4-5)": 61%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 6%
Category "Moderate (3)": 19%
Category "Important (4-5)": 74%
Engaging with Parliament and/or the work of Parliamentarians
Representative
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 13%
Category "Moderate (3)": 26%
Category "Important (4-5)": 57%
Open
Category "Unimportant (1-2)": 9%
Category "Moderate (3)": 27%
Category "Important (4-5)": 62%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Q2aa-q2ag. How important to you are the following elements?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Other areas described by a few respondents as principles to guide design included an emphasis on education and learning at the site (e.g., educational tours and learning stations) to find out about Canadian history and working of government, need for security on-site, as well as celebrate Canadian character/identity and diversity.
In the representative sample, women (68%) are more likely than men (54%) to value making buildings more environmentally friendly, while men (66%) are more likely than women (60%) to place importance on architectural and design quality.
Older Canadians (65 and over) are more likely than younger Canadians under age 35 to rate conserving heritage, providing visitor amenities, and ensuring high architectural and design quality as important.
Residents of Quebec (67%) are more likely than others across the country to say it is important to make buildings more environmentally friendly; those in Alberta or Manitoba/Saskatchewan are least likely to do so (25% rated low importance). Residents of the NCR are apt to emphasize the value of architectural and design quality (74%) or accessibility for all (83%) as important.
Those with a university education are more likely than those with less education to say that making the area more accessible for all (80%), ensuring high architectural and design quality (72%), making buildings more environmentally friendly (71%), or engaging with Parliament (63%) are important.
Respondents in the representative sample who visited the NCR are more likely than those who did not to find each of the design principles to be important.
Design Value Priorities
In the representative sample, 59% of Canadians placed "conserving heritage" or "making the area more accessible for all" among their three most important design principles when planning new projects in the Parliament Hill Area. Roughly four in ten Canadians identified "providing visitor amenities" (45%), "making buildings more environmentally friendly" (41%), "engaging with Parliament and/or the work of Parliamentarians" (39%) or "ensuring high quality architectural and design quality" (37%) as priorities.
A higher proportion of respondents in the open link indicated "conserving heritage" as a priority, 67% compared with 59% of the representative sample. Half or more in the open link said "ensuring high architectural and design quality" (54%, much higher than the 37% found in the representative sample) or "making the area more accessible for all" (50%) are priorities.
Chart 8: Design Value Priorities
Chart 8: Design Value Priorities - Text Version
This stacked bar chart shows the per centage of results for responses to six statements across three categories: 3rd, 2nd, 1st and two groups: representative and open. The column on the right shows the total results for representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "Which do you consider to be the most important considerations?
1st, 2nd or 3rd."
Respondents selected:
Conserving heritage
Representative (Total: 59%)
Category "3rd": 18%
Category "2nd": 20%
Category "1st": 25%
Open (Total: 67%)
Category "3rd": 16%
Category "2nd": 22%
Category "1st": 30%
Making the area more accessible for all
Representative (Total: 59%)
Category "3rd": 19%
Category "2nd": 21%
Category "1st": 22%
Open (Total: 50%)
Category "3rd": 16%
Category "2nd": 19%
Category "1st": 16%
Engaging with Parliament and/or the work of Parliamentarians
Representative (Total: 39%)
Category "3rd": 12%
Category "2nd": 11%
Category "1st": 18%
Open (Total: 38%)
Category "3rd": 12%
Category "2nd": 10%
Category "1st": 17%
Making buildings more environmentally friendly
Representative (Total: 41%)
Category "3rd": 15%
Category "2nd": 16%
Category "1st": 12%
Open (Total: 45%)
Category "3rd": 17%
Category "2nd": 18%
Category "1st": 11%
Ensuring high architectural and design quality
Representative (Total: 37%)
Category "3rd": 13%
Category "2nd": 16%
Category "1st": 10%
Open (Total: 54%)
Category "3rd": 19%
Category "2nd": 19%
Category "1st": 18%
Providing visitor amenities
Representative (Total: 45%)
Category "3rd": 22%
Category "2nd": 16%
Category "1st": 10%
Open (Total: 34%)
Category "3rd": 18%
Category "2nd": 10%
Category "1st": 7%
Base: Representative (n=1349-1462) - Open (n=495-504)
Q2ba-2bc. Which do you consider to be the most important considerations? 1st, 2nd or 3rd.
Base: Representative (n=1349-1462) - Open (n=495-504)
In the representative sample, women are more likely to say making the area more accessible for all (26%) or making buildings more environmentally friendly (15%) are top considerations. Men are more apt to report engaging with Parliamentarians (22%) or ensuring high architectural and design quality (13%) are important.
Younger Canadians (under age 35) are more likely to say making buildings more environmentally friendly (23%) is the most important consideration, especially when compared to those aged 55-64 (5%) or 65 and over (6%).
Residents of Quebec are more likely than those in other regions to report conserving heritage (30%) or making buildings more environmentally friendly (18%) as their number one priority. Residents of British Columbia and the Territories (24%) or Manitoba/Saskatchewan (27%) are more likely to say engaging with Parliament and/or the work of Parliamentarians is the most important design principle.
Considering the first, second and third priorities collectively, residents of the Atlantic are considerably more likely to see accessibility for all as a priority (71% compared with 57% to 64% in other regions). Residents of the NCR are more likely than others to place heritage conservation on the list of priorities (68%), along with high architectural and design quality (48%).
Those with a high school education are more likely to say providing visitor amenities (14%) is a most important consideration; those with a university education are more likely to consider making buildings more environmentally friendly (16%) or ensuring high architectural and design quality (13%) important.
Key Attractions
Three-quarters (75%) of Canadians in the representative sample said if they were planning a visit to the Parliament Hill area after the pandemic, they would be most likely to explore the inside of buildings open to the public, suggesting a high demand for indoor tours. Close to two-thirds would explore the grounds (63%) or the outside of buildings (63%). Over half said they would explore special events and activities taking place outside (58%) or monuments in the Parliament Hill Area (56%). Twelve per cent of the representative sample does not plan to visit.
Among respondents in the open link, most expect they would visit the inside of buildings open to the public (87%), the grounds (86%), or the outside of buildings (82%). About three-quarters (76%) would explore special events and activities taking place outside. Over half (59%) said they would be likely to explore monuments.
Chart 9: Key Attractions
Chart 9: Key Attractions - Text Version
This chart with single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to six statements across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "If you were planning a visit to the Parliament Hill Area after COVID-19, what aspects would you be likely to explore?"
Respondents selected:
Inside of buildings open to the public
Group "Representative": 75%
Group "Open": 87%
The grounds
Group "Representative": 63%
Group "Open": 86%
Outside of buildings open to the public
Group "Representative": 63%
Group "Open": 82%
Special events and activities taking place outside
Group "Representative": 58%
Group "Open": 76%
Monuments
Category "Representative": 56%
Category "Open": 59%
Do not plan to visit
Group "Representative": 12%
Group "Open": 1%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Q3. If you were planning a visit to the Parliament Hill Area after COVID-19, what aspects would you be likely to explore?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
Other areas described by a few respondents in each sample include watching Question Period/Parliament in session, seeing the Library of Parliament, guided tours inside and outside, walking or biking along the river pathways, and seeing monuments/the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, dedicated to Canada's fallen soldiers.
In the representative sample, men (60%) are more likely than women (54%) to say they would explore monuments.
Residents of Ontario are more likely than those who live in other regions to say they would visit the grounds (69%) or special events and activities taking place outside (65%). The grounds (75%) and special events outside (68%) are also chosen more often by residents of the NCR. Residents of Alberta are more likely to say they would visit monuments (66%).
More recent visitors of the NCR (since 2015) are more likely than those who visited earlier or never visited to say they would explore the inside of buildings (83%), the grounds (78%), outside of buildings (73%) or special events (70%).
B. Visits
Nearly two in three (64%) respondents in the representative sample have visited the Parliament Hill Area, although 36% have not. Nearly all (98%) of respondents in the open link have visited the Parliament Hill Area.
Chart 10: Visited
Chart 10: Visited - Text Version
This chart with double single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to two statements: yes, no across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "Have you ever visited the Parliament Hill Area?"
Respondents selected:
Yes
Group "Representative": 64%
Group "Open": 98%
No
Group "Representative": 36%
Group "Open": 2%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
QVISIT1. Have you ever visited the Parliament Hill Area?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
In the representative sample, likelihood of visiting the Parliament Hill Area increases with age. Those over 65 years of age are the most likely to have visited (70%), while those under 35 are the least likely to have done so (59%).
As expected, those living in the NCR (97%) are the most likely to have visited, followed by those living in Ontario (76%) and Quebec (69%) outside of the NCR. Residents of British Columbia or the Territories and Alberta are least likely to have visited (38%), as are those in Manitoba or Saskatchewan (48%).
Likelihood of visiting the Parliament Hill Area also increases with education; ranging from 57% among those with high school to 81% among those who attended university.
Recency of Visit
Among representative sample respondents who have visited the Parliament Hill Area, four in ten (40%) have done so in 2015 or more recently. One in three (34%) visited between 2000 and 2014[3] and two in ten (21%) visited in or before the year 2000.
The majority of respondents from the open link (86%) have visited in 2015 or more recently. Only 6% reported a visit between 2000 and 2014.
Chart 11: Recency of Visit
Chart 11: Recency of Visit - Text Version
This chart with double single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to three statements across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "When was your most recent visit to the Parliament Hill Area?"
Respondents selected:
2015 or later
Group "Representative": 40%
Group "Open:" 86%
2000-2014
Group "Representative": 34%
Group "Open": 6%
Before 2000
Group "Representative": 21%
Group "Open": 1%
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
QVisit2. When was your most recent visit to the Parliament Hill Area?
Base: Representative (n=1551) - Open (n=506)
In the representative sample, those under 54 years of age are more likely to have visited in 2015 or later (35-44; 51% and under 35; 49%; 45 to 54; 48%). Those 65 or over are more likely to have visited in 2000 or earlier (39%).
Regionally, residents of the NCR are most likely to have visited recently (73% in 2015 or more recently), while those in British Columbia or the Territories are most likely to have visited in 2000 or earlier (37%). Residents of Quebec and the Atlantic are more likely than others to have visited between 2000 and 2004 (16% and 17%, respectively).
University graduates are more likely to have visited in 2015 or later (49%) while high school graduates are more apt to report a visit prior to the year 2000 (27%).
Areas Visited
Of the respondents in the representative sample who had visited the Parliament Hill Area since 2015, over eight in ten (82%) visited the Centennial Flame and Front Lawn area during their most recent visit. Two in three (66%) saw the Centre Block and surrounding areas while somewhat fewer (61%) visited Confederation Boulevard. Half visited the pathway along the Ottawa River (52%) or Sparks Street (51%). Just over one-third (36%) saw inside the buildings open to the public. This last result is particularly striking given that most people said they would include a tour of the inside of buildings in a future visit, suggesting a possible sharp spike in demand for tours.
Among those responding to the open link, attendance was higher in all listed areas; 85% visited the Centennial Flame and Front Lawn, 75% saw Sparks Street, 73% saw Centre Block and surrounding areas, and 71% took in Confederation Boulevard. Somewhat fewer visited the pathway along the Ottawa River (61%) or saw inside buildings open to the public (55%).
Chart 12: Areas Visited
Chart 12: Areas Visited - Text Version
This chart with single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to six statements across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "Where on Parliament Hill and its surrounding area did you visit?"
Respondents selected:
Centennial Flame and Front Lawn area
Group "Representative": 82%
Group "Open": 85%
Area around Centre Block with monuments and lookouts
Group "Representative": 66%
Group "Open": 73%
Confederation Boulevard (Wellington Street)
Group "Representative": 61%
Group "Open": 71%
Pathway along the Ottawa River
Group "Representative": 52%
Group "Open": 61%
Sparks Street
Group "Representative": 51%
Group "Open": 75%
Inside the buildings open to the public
Group "Representative": 36%
Group "Open": 55%
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
QVisit3. Where on Parliament Hill and its surrounding area did you visit?
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
In the representative sample, those aged 65 or over (59%) are more likely than younger Canadians to have visited inside the buildings open to the public. Those under 35 (88%) are somewhat more apt to say they have seen the Centennial Flame and Front Lawn compared with older respondents.
Ontario residents are more likely than others across the country to have visited the Centennial Flame and Front Lawn (90%), along with the Centre block and surrounding area (73%). NCR residents (63%) are more apt to report a visit to Sparks Street compared with other Canadians.
University graduates are more likely than others to have visited Confederation Boulevard (68%), Sparks Street (60%) and the pathway along the Ottawa River (58%).
Season
Nearly half (48%) of respondents in the representative sample who had visited the Parliament Hill Area since 2015 did so in the summer months. Closer to two in ten visited in fall (19%) or spring (17%). Only 13% visited in the winter.
Results from the open link are similar, although three in ten reported a spring visit (30%). Another four in ten (39%) visited in summer while fewer did so in fall (15%) or winter (12%).
Chart 13: Season
Chart 13: Season - Text Version
This chart with double single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to four statements across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "In which season did you visit?"
Respondents selected:
Spring
Group "Representative": 17%
Group "Open": 30%
Summer
Group "Representative": 48%
Group "Open": 39%
Fall
Group "Representative": 19%
Group "Open": 15%
Winter
Group "Representative": 13%
Group "Open": 12%
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
QVisit4. In which season did you visit?
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
Those 55 or older are least likely to visit in winter (3%), while visitors under 35 are most likely to have done so (19%).
Transportation
Four in ten representative sample respondents visiting since 2015 used a private vehicle (42%) or walked (38%) to get to the Parliament Hill Area. One in ten (11%) used public transit. Least often used methods of transportation include tour bus (4%), bicycle (3%) and ride-hailing or sharing (2%).
Similarly, four in ten respondents to the open link walked (41%) and slightly fewer (36%) used a private vehicle. Transit was used by 13% and bicycling by 8%.
Chart 14: Getting There
Chart 14: Getting There - Text Version
This chart with double single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to six statements across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "How did you get to the Parliament Hill Area? Please select the main way you arrived."
Respondents selected:
Private vehicle
Group "Representative": 42%
Group "Open": 36%
Walking
Group "Representative": 38%
Group "Open": 41%
Transit
Group "Representative": 11%
Group "Open": 13%
Tour bus
Group "Representative": 4%
Group "Open": 1%
Bicycle
Group "Representative": 3%
Group "Open": 8%
Ride hailing/sharing
Group "Representative": 2%
Group "Open": 1%
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
QVisit5. How did you get to the Parliament Hill Area? Please select the main way you arrived.
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
Respondents in the representative sample, who are 65 or over are more likely than those who are younger to report taking a private vehicle (55%) or a tour bus (14%). This is also the case among those coming from Quebec outside of the NCR (53% and 12% respectively).
Those under 35 are more likely to say they walked (45%) and are least likely to have used a private vehicle (29%).
Residents of Ontario outside of the NCR (52%) are more likely to report walking to the Parliament Hill Area. Those living in the NCR and Quebec outside of the NCR are the least likely to have walked (23% and 25%, respectively). NCR residents, however, reported using transit (20%) and bicycle (9%) more often than those from other regions.
Party Composition
Among respondents in the representative sample who visited the Parliament Hill Area since 2015, nearly half (45%) visited with their spouse or partner. Nearly one-third visited with friends (31%). Two in ten came with their children (22%) or extended family members (20%). Slightly fewer (14%) visited by themselves. Relatively few visited with school or tour groups (5%), and with co-workers or for a work event (3%).
Roughly one-third of respondents in the open link visited with their spouse or partner (36%) or came alone (31%). Nearly one-quarter visited with friends (23%), and close to two in ten came with children (21%) or extended family (15%).
Chart 15: Party Composition
Chart 15: Party Composition - Text Version
This chart with double single bars shows the per centage of results for responses to seven statements across two groups: representative and open.
Respondents were asked: "Who was in your party on your last trip to the Parliament Hill Area?"
Respondents selected:
Spouse/partner
Group "Representative": 45%
Group "Open": 36%
Friends
Group "Representative": 31%
Group "Open": 23%
Children
Group "Representative": 22%
Group "Open": 21%
Extended family members
Group "Representative": 20%
Group "Open": 15%
Alone
Group "Representative": 14%
Group "Open": 31%
Groups (e.g., school, organized tour)
Group "Representative": 5%
Group "Open": 4%
Colleague/co-worker, organized work event
Group "Representative": 3%
Group "Open": 5%
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
QVisit6. Who was in your party on your last trip to the Parliament Hill Area?
Base: Visitors since 2015 in the Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
Respondents under 35 years of age are the most likely age group to visit with friends (41%) or alone (20%), and the least likely to have visited with their spouse/partner (30%) or children (6%). Conversely, those 35-64 are the most likely segments to have visited with their children (35-44; 33%, 45-54; 30%, 55-64; 34%).
Those 35-44 are also most likely age group to have visited with colleagues or through a work event (9%).
Respondents between 55 and 64 (30%) reported visiting with extended family more often than other age cohorts, while those over 65 (11%), along with women (8%), are more likely to have visited with a tour or school group.
Residents in Quebec outside the NCR are more likely to have visited with their spouse or partner (55%). Those in the NCR (21%) report visiting alone more often than other visitors.
College graduates are also more likely to have visited with their spouse or partner (55%).
Perceived Quality of Elements
Visitors to the Parliament Hill Area since 2015 were asked to rate the quality of 14 different aspects of the site based on their most recent visit. Almost all visitors were able to comment on their sense of safety, and the greenspace, as well as the ease of getting to, from and around the site. Just over half were able to comment on[4] most of the other elements. Only 17% to 30%, however, were able to comment on accessibility, mobile-friendly tools and bicycle parking. Results shown in the second and third columns of Table 1 present the per centages of those able to comment among the 433 who had visited the site since 2015.[5] Ratings were very positive with regard to visitors' sense of safety within the site (88%) and the quality of the greenspace and landscaping on site (83%). Ease of getting to, from and around the site were also recalled favourably (75%).
Although 53% were positive about the quality of signs and maps on site, 15% rated the quality of these as poor. Results are similar for bicycle parking. Even fewer (42%) had a favourable impression of the accessibility (among the 30% able to comment), and 25% provided a poor rating. This is an area for critical attention given the high degree of importance given to accessibility in design considerations described earlier.
Perceptions of 6 of the 14 aspects were fairly poor, with more people rating them negatively than rating them positively. This includes access to mobile-friendly tools (34% rating this as good, but 41% rating it as poor) and availability of nearby parking, where only 27% provided a positive rating, but twice as many (51%) rated the quality as poor. The least positively rated element tested for the site was shelter from weather, rated positively by only 14%. Parking is an important area for attention given that more visitors arrive by private vehicle than any other mode of transportation. These other areas are also an area of concern given the importance placed by the public on provision of amenities, and that almost all visitors arrive in a group of family or friends, suggesting an outing rather than a quick visit.
While similarly positive ratings were provided for their sense of safety within the site (84%) and ease getting to/from Parliament (72%), results from the open link are less positive in most cases compared with the representative sample. For example, visitors were not as positive about the quality of the greenspace (65% rated the quality as good) or moving around the site (65%) compared with the representative sample. Results are poor with regard to accessibility (34% rating it as good), signs and maps (31%), and bicycle parking (30%). The remainder is rated positively by only one in five or fewer and only 5% were positive about shelter.
Table 1a: Visitors' Perceptions of Quality of Key Elements (Representative)
Col1
Used/Recall Service
Poor
Good
QVisit7a-n. How would you rate the quality of these elements of the Parliament Hill Area from your most recent visit? (n=433)
--
--
--
Sense of safety within the site
90%
3%
88%
Quality of greenspace and landscaping
88%
4%
83%
Ease getting to and from the Parliament Hill Area
93%
9%
75%
Ability to easily move within the Parliament Hill Area
90%
7%
72%
Signs and maps on site
62%
15%
53%
Availability of bicycle parking
17%
22%
52%
Accessibility for people with disabilities
30%
25%
42%
Access to mobile-friendly tools related to the site
24%
41%
34%
Availability of food services
56%
45%
33%
Availability of washrooms
54%
41%
31%
Availability of outdoor seating
60%
40%
28%
Availability of shade
65%
44%
27%
Availability of nearby vehicle parking
60%
51%
27%
Availability of shelter from weather
60%
57%
14%
Base: Visitors to Parliament Hill Area since 2015 in Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
Table 1b: Visitors' Perceptions of Quality of Key Elements (Open)
Col1
Used/Recall Service
Poor
Good
QVisit7a-n. How would you rate the quality of these elements of the Parliament Hill Area from your most recent visit? (n=426)
--
--
--
Sense of safety within the site
94%
4%
84%
Quality of greenspace and landscaping
95%
11%
65%
Ease getting to and from the Parliament Hill Area
98%
8%
72%
Ability to easily move within the Parliament Hill Area
94%
9%
65%
Signs and maps on site
70%
35%
31%
Availability of bicycle parking
39%
43%
30%
Accessibility for people with disabilities
49%
35%
34%
Access to mobile-friendly tools related to the site
43%
68%
14%
Availability of food services
69%
63%
15%
Availability of washrooms
69%
50%
22%
Availability of outdoor seating
79%
60%
16%
Availability of shade
79%
59%
15%
Availability of nearby vehicle parking
66%
54%
21%
Availability of shelter from weather
72%
75%
5%
Base: Visitors to Parliament Hill Area since 2015 in Representative sample (n=443), Open link (n=426)
In terms of age-related patterns:
Those 65 years of age or older were more likely to be positive about their sense of safety within the site (97% rated high), along with the availability of shade and shelter (30%).
Those 55 or older are more likely to rate the quality of greenspace and landscaping as high (93%).
Those 45 to 54 (83%) are more likely to rate the ease of getting to and from the Parliament Hill Area as high. Getting around the site, however, is slightly more likely to be rated poorly (14%) among those 55 to 64.
Visitors between 35 and 44 are more likely to provide poor ratings for availability of shelter (69%), washrooms (54%), food services (58%), and shade (54%). This likely stems from the increased likelihood of having young children at the site.
Availability of vehicle parking is more of a source of concern for visitors under 35, where 67% provided a poor rating.
NCR residents are more likely to have provided negative ratings of the quality for access to mobile-friendly tools related to the site (65% poor), the availability of shelter from weather (71% poor) and of washrooms (54% poor).
Men are more positive about the availability of bicycle parking (64% versus 40% among women).
Appendices
A. Methodological Details
The survey questionnaire was developed cooperatively between the Ekos Research team and the Working Group formed by the Project Authority. The average time it took respondents to complete the survey was 15 minutes online and 17 minutes by telephone. The survey was pre-tested with 48 respondents (28 in English, 20 in French). Since no significant changes were made, these cases were retained in the final sample.
Respondents to the online survey were 18 years of age and older and were randomly selected. The sample included all provinces and territories, and the survey was administered in English and French, as well as with an accessible link for those using a mobile phone or screen-reading technology. The survey sample relied on an Ekos' Probit panel, which is assembled using a random digit dial process for sampling from a blended landline cell-phone frame and provides full coverage of Canadians with telephone access. The distribution of the recruitment of the participants' process is meant to mirror the actual population in Canada (as defined by Statistics Canada). As such, our 120,000-member panel can be considered representative of the general public in Canada (meaning that the incidence of a given target population within our panel very closely resembles the public at large) and margins of error can be applied. All households/individuals in the Probit panel are contacted by telephone, the nature of the panel is explained in greater detail (as are Ekos' privacy policies) and demographic information is collected. At this time, the online/off-line as well as landline/cell phone status is ascertained to determine the method of completing surveys (i.e., online, telephone, or mail). This variable of “type of telephone service” (cell phone only, landline only or both) collected at the time of screening is used to determine cell phone-only samples. As with any random digit-dialling sample, Probit panel cases are considered to be a probability-based sample.
A total of 1,551 cases were completed in the sample collected between June 14 and July 12, 2021. The associated margin of error is up to plus or minus 2.5%, at a .95 confidence interval (i.e., 19 times out of 20) for the overall sample and between 10% and 4% for most subgroups.
Survey data collection adhered to the Government standard for public opinion research as well as all applicable industry standards. Ekos informed respondents of their rights under the Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act and ensured that those rights were protected throughout the research process. This included: informing respondents of the purpose of the research; identifying both the sponsoring department and the research supplier; informing respondents that their participation in the study is voluntary, and that the information provided would be administered according to the requirements of the Privacy Act.
Once the survey data was collected, each database was reviewed for data quality. Coding was also completed. Survey results were weighted based on Statistics Canada 2016 Census data according to age, gender, education and region to ensure the sample was representative of the general public aged 18 years and older.
Data tables were created for each survey to isolate results for major subgroups to be used in the analysis (e.g., results for each age segment, gender, and region).
Response Rates and Non-Response Bias
The response rate for the survey was 24% (33% in the sample collected online and 8% in the sample collected by telephone), using the Government of Canada standards for public opinion research. Online, a total of 4,252 invitations were sent by email, of which 119 were returned as undeliverable, for a resulting valid sample of 4,133. A total of 1,355 valid cases were completed, as the responding numerator in the calculation of the response rate of 32.8%. By telephone, 2,318 cases were attempted, of which 49 were found to be invalid, resulting in a valid remaining sample of 2,269. Of these, 196 were completed by telephone, for a resulting response rate of 8.6%.
Table 2: Response Rate
Col1
Online
Telephone
Total
Total invited
4,252
2,318
6,570
Invalid
119
49
168
Total valid
4,133
2,269
6,402
Non-responding
2,633
1,943
4,576
Refused/incomplete
145
130
275
Responding units
1,355
196
1,551
Ineligible
0
0
0
Completed
1,355
196
1,551
Response rate (R/(U+IS+R)
32.8%
8.6%
24.2%
Parallel Survey
A parallel survey was also conducted through an open-source link circulated by SPIB with existing stakeholders who in turn shared it within their networks. It relied on the same questionnaire as used to collect the general public sample, with slight modifications regarding sample characteristics collected and the additional comment box. The aim was to gather the views of privacy specialists, academics and other national security stakeholders. A total of 506[6] surveys were completed in this sample. Results of this parallel survey are presented alongside the results for the general public survey in relevant sections. It should be noted that results of the open source link are illustrative in nature, and are only projectable to these 506 individuals, rather than to the broader population.
Sample Characteristics
Following are the characteristics of the representative 1,551-case sample of the general public, collected through the Probit panel. All results are based on weighted data with the exception of those characteristics used in the development of the weight. The characteristics of the 506 individuals responding to the open link are also included.
College, Registered Apprenticeship or other non-university certificate or diploma
35%
17%
University certificate or diploma
41%
76%
Prefer not to answer
1%
3%
Age
n=1551 (unweighted sample)
n=506
Under 35
25%
31%
35-44
18%
31%
45-54
19%
21%
55-64
16%
11%
65 up
21%
3%
Prefer not to say
1%
4%
Gender
n=1551 (unweighted sample)
n=506
Male
47%
43%
Female
50%
53%
Another gender
1%
1%
Prefer not to say
1%
4%
Minorities
n=1551
n=506
A person with a disability
12%
6%
A visible minority
10%
14%
An Indigenous person
4%
1%
None of these
73%
71%
Prefer not to answer
3%
8%
A comparison of the unweighted sample with 2016 Census figures from Statistics Canada suggests that there are similar sources of systematic sample bias in the survey, following patterns typically found in most general public surveys. There is also an under-representation of women (47% compared with 51% in the population). There is a slight under-representation of youth (25% compared with 28% in the population are under 35). The survey sample is, however, considerably more educated than found in the population, with 41% reporting university degrees, compared with 23% in the population. As previously described, each sample was weighted by age, gender, education, and region.
B. Survey Questionnaire
Web Introduction
Have your say on the future of parliament hill and surrounding area!
Si vous préférez répondre au sondage en français, veuillez cliquer sur français.
Parliament Hill is located in the heart of Ottawa, our nation's capital. It is the home of Parliament where Canadian laws are made. It is also the workplace of Parliamentarians who represent Canadians in shaping our democracy. Prior to COVID-19, Parliament was visited by over a million visitors each year. Part of our goal is to plan years ahead for the future of buildings and spaces in the Parliament Hill area—when Canadians can visit Parliament Hill again once COVID-19 restrictions, including physical distancing and travel limitations, have been lifted.
We are interested in the views of Canadians to understand the needs and interests of visitors. The information gathered from this survey will support the planning for the Parliament Hill area and major projects, including the rehabilitation of Centre Block and buildings across from Parliament Hill (for more information on these updates, please click here).
The Government of Canada has hired Ekos Research Associates to deliver the survey. The survey takes about 10 minutes to complete and your participation is voluntary and confidential. Your answers will remain anonymous and the information you provide will be administered according to the requirements of the Privacy Act, the Access to Information Act, and any other pertinent legislation.
If you need an alternative means of accessing the survey, click the following link: [Accessible version] .
The survey is registered with the Research Verification Services operated by the Canadian Research Insights Council (CRIC). [Click here if you wish to verify its authenticity (project code 20210527-EK841)]. To view our privacy policy, click here.
Q1
About the Parliament Hill Area
Canada's Parliament Hill Area in Ottawa is made up of 35 buildings and surrounding lands, including the Centre Block and the Peace Tower, the Library of Parliament, East and West Blocks, the Confederation Building and the Justice Building, Blocks 1-2-3 and the Senate of Canada Building.
Were you aware that Parliament Hill and the surrounding area are being rehabilitated and updated?
Clearly aware: 1
Vaguely aware: 2
Not aware: 8
No response: 9
PQ1A
How important is it for the Parliament Hill Area to be... ?
Q1AA
reflective of the cultural diversity of the country
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AB
open and accessible to the public
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AC
reflective of Indigenous cultures
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AD
a gathering space
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AE
a place to enjoy activities and the outdoors
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AF
a place to commemorate Canadians and events of national significance
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AG
a welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AH
a place to see Parliament in action (public galleries to witness debates, public committee meetings, etc.)
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1AI
other (please specify):
Not at all important 1: 1
2: 2
Moderately important 3: 3
4: 4
Extremely important 5: 5
Not sure: 9
Q1BP
In the last questions, you rated some items as important. Which do you consider to be the top 3 most important considerations?
(Select one item as 1st, another as 2nd and a final item as 3rd)>
Q1BA
1st
Q1AA = 4,5
Reflective of the cultural diversity of the country: 1
Q1AB = 4,5
Open and accessible to the public: 2
Q1AC = 4,5
Reflective of Indigenous cultures: 3
Q1AD = 4,5
A gathering space: 4
Q1AE = 4,5
A place to enjoy activities and the outdoors: 5
Q1AF = 4,5
A place to pay tribute to Canadians and events of national significance: 6
Q1AG = 4,5
A welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities: 7
Q1AH = 4,5
A place to see Parliament in action (public galleries to witness debates, public committee meetings, etc.): 8
Q1AI = 4,5
Other: 77
Not sure: 99
Q1BB
2nd
Q1AA = 4,5
Reflective of the cultural diversity of the country: 1
Q1AB = 4,5
Open and accessible to the public: 2
Q1AC = 4,5
Reflective of Indigenous cultures: 3
Q1AD = 4,5
A gathering space: 4
Q1AE = 4,5
A place to enjoy activities and the outdoors: 5
Q1AF = 4,5
A place to pay tribute to Canadians and events of national significance: 6
Q1AG = 4,5
A welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities: 7
Q1AH = 4,5
A place to see Parliament in action (public galleries to witness debates, public committee meetings, etc.): 8
Q1AI = 4,5
Other: 77
Not sure: 99
Q1BC
3rd
Q1AA = 4,5
Reflective of the cultural diversity of the country: 1
Q1AB = 4,5
Open and accessible to the public: 2
Q1AC = 4,5
Reflective of Indigenous cultures: 3
Q1AD = 4,5
A gathering space: 4
Q1AE = 4,5
A place to enjoy activities and the outdoors: 5
Q1AF = 4,5
A place to pay tribute to Canadians and events of national significance: 6
Q1AG = 4,5
A welcoming and safe space for visitors of all ages and abilities: 7
Q1AH = 4,5
A place to see Parliament in action (public galleries to witness debates, public committee meetings, etc.): 8
Q1AI = 4,5
Other: 77
Not sure: 99
PQ2A
When planning new projects in the Parliament Hill Area, how important to you are the following elements?
