Prepared for Transport Canada
Supplier: Ekos Research Associates Inc.
Contract Number: EP 363-140002/004/CY
Contract Value: $187,265.86 (including HST)
Award Date: November 15, 2017
Delivery Date: September 4, 2018
Registration Number: POR 48-17
For more information on this report, please contact Transport Canada at TC.Publicopinion-Opinionpublique.TC@tc.gc.ca
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français
Public Opinion Research Study: Oceans Protection Plan – Canadians Confidence in Marine Safety
Findings Report
Prepared for Transport Canada
Supplier name: Ekos Research Associates Inc.
Date: September 4, 2018
This public opinion research report presents the results of an online survey conducted by Ekos Research Associates Inc. on behalf of Transport Canada. The research study was conducted with 3,407 Canadians between February and March 2018. 15 Indigenous stakeholders were also conducted between March and June 2018.
Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre « Recherche sur l’opinion publique : Plan de protection des océans – la confiance des Canadiens à l’égard de la sécurité maritime ».
This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Transport Canada. For more information on this report, please contact Transport Canada at: TC.Publicopinion-Opinionpublique.TC@tc.gc.ca.
Transport Canada
330 Sparks Street
Ottawa, ON K1A 0N5
Catalogue Number:
T29-145/2018E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN):
978-0-660-27640-3
Related publications (registration number: POR 48-17):
Catalogue Number T29-145/2018F-PDF - (Final Report, French)
ISBN 978-0-660-27641-0
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, 2018
Ekos Research Associates
Contact: Susan Galley
Ottawa Office
359 Kent Street, Suite 300
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 0R6
Tel: (613) 235 7215
Fax: (613) 235 8498
E-mail: pobox@ekos.com
The largest investment ever made to protect Canada's coasts and waterways, the Oceans Protection Plan, was launched in late 2016 to improve marine safety and responsible shipping, protect Canada's marine environment, and offer new possibilities for Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities. This national strategy is intended to help establish a world-leading marine safety system that provides economic opportunities for Canadians today while protecting our coastlines for generations to come. Through partnerships with Indigenous Peoples of Canada – particularly in coastal communities, the Government of Canada looks for their cooperation and for them to play an active role in decisions about marine safety.
Transport Canada identified a need for public opinion research to measure Canadians' and, specifically, Indigenous groups' confidence in Canada's marine safety system, and their awareness of the Oceans Protection Plan. This research will inform communications planning, outreach, and engagement, as well as serve to measure improvement in relationships with Indigenous populations.
The survey is comprised of 3,407 completed cases, including 2,168 with the general public and 1,239 with Indigenous Peoples in Canada, with findings reported separately for each. The survey relied on a mix of panel and random public sources, with collection taking place online and through a team of trained, bilingual interviews between mid-February and mid-March 2018.
In a second phase, qualitative interviews were conducted by telephone with 15 individuals representing Indigenous coastal communities. This includes seven interviews conducted in the Pacific Region, two in the Arctic Region, five in Quebec, and one in the Atlantic Region. Interviews were conducted between March and June 2018.
There is limited awareness in the Canadian public regarding marine safety, including safe shipping practices in Canada and marine environment protection. Fewer than one in five in the survey rated themselves as aware and roughly half said they are unaware. Awareness is marginally higher among Indigenous Peoples in Canada and residents of coastal communities (about one in four). Most Canadians (75 to 83 percent) however, feel that marine safety and protecting the marine environment are important. The same level of importance is also found among Canada's Indigenous Peoples and those living in coastal communities.
Public confidence is modest with three in ten members of the general public as well as Indigenous Peoples in Canada. Confidence is even lower in coastal communities. Key sources of weaker confidence stem from stories people have heard or read in the news (half), what is witnessed in the community (one in five), or what people say on social media (one in nine). The results also suggest, however, that the trend is toward a slight bolstering of their confidence, given that one in five feel their in Canada's marine safety system has increased over the past five years, compared with 13 percent who feel it has eroded during that time. Results are largely the same among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, whereas erosion in confidence exceeds bolstered confidence in coastal communities.
Awareness of marine programs, regulations, or activities operated by the Government of Canada in these areas is quite high. Three in four are aware the government has a program to respond to accidents, such as oil spills contributing to marine pollution. Another two-thirds think there is a program to prevent accidents or monitor marine pollution, and just under half think that the Government of Canada works closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts and waterways. Awareness (or faith in the Government of Canada) is marginally lower among Indigenous Peoples in Canada and in coastal communities.
Slightly more than one in five said that they have heard or seen something about the Government of Canada's Oceans Protection Plan in the Canadian public and among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, although the awareness is marginally higher in coastal communities. While prompted awareness following a description of the program is substantially higher, self-reported recall is relatively low (just one in five have heard of the program). Key sources of awareness of the program are traditional media (television, newspapers and radio), as well as the Internet, followed at a distance by social media. The most prominent messages recalled relate to government efforts to prevent and respond to marine pollution and accidents, updating of regulatory and legislative regimes, and preserving and restoring the marine ecosystem. Recall of government collaboration with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities is marginally lower among Indigenous respondents.
There is limited distinction regarding the importance of key elements of the Oceans Protection Program, although strengthening polluter-pay principles to ensure companies take responsibility for spills sits at the top of the list with more than eight in ten seeing the value of this aspect of the program. This is followed by preserving coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping. Three in four also feel that improving how the Government of Canada responds to marine pollution incidents, or prevents marine safety pollution incidents, restoring vulnerable coastal marine ecosystems, investing in scientific research to support marine safety decisions, and updating rules and laws to protect people, vessels, and the environment are important. Rated importance is even higher in coastal communities. Community Response Teams in Indigenous communities, towing capacity, and new lifeboat stations are accorded marginally less importance among the general public.
The perceived impact of the Oceans Protection Program (OPP) is generally high. Nearly two-thirds of the general public believe that the OPP will have a positive impact on the health of marine animals and plants and the health of Canada's coasts and waterways. Slightly fewer feel that the plan will have a positive impact on the safety of the shipping industry. Half think there will be a positive impact on the health of people living in Indigenous Peoples and other coastal communities or on local economies near Canada's coasts and waterways. These results are echoed among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, although faith in the program to have an impact on the health of Indigenous, coastal, and local communities is stronger. Perceived impact is not as strong however, in coastal communities. Related to the program's three primary objectives, roughly four in ten Canadians feel confident the OPP will improve marine safety and responsible shipping practices and protect Canada's marine environment, and one in three are confident it will offer new possibilities for Indigenous and coastal communities. Confidence is marginally higher, however, among Indigenous Peoples in Canada (43 to 45 percent). Public confidence in the Oil Spill Response System is similarly modest, with just under four in ten indicating confidence in the system's ability to clean up an oil spill and/or provide a timely response to a spill. Three in ten feel confident the system can ensure that responsible private industry parties meet their obligations.
Results highlight a strong public preference for having all three levels of government play a significant role in developing marine safety. Eight in ten members of the public believe the federal government should play a strong role, and just over six in ten say their provincial government should be similarly tasked. Half would like their local or regional government to play a significant role. Indigenous respondents are marginally less supportive of a federal role, and slightly more strongly advocate for local government involvement.
Public perceptions of the role taken thus far, however, are weaker. Four in ten members of the general public believe that the federal government has played a lead role. One in five feel the same about their provincial government and one in six believe their local government has played a strong part. Results are marginally stronger, however, with respect to provincial and local governments among Indigenous Peoples in Canada.
Two in three members of the public, and eight in ten Indigenous respondents, believe it is important that Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities work closely with the federal government. Half of the public and two in three Indigenous respondents feel it is important for citizens to provide input into these decisions.
One in four members of the public and Indigenous Peoples in Canada have looked for information about marine safety, largely looking to the Internet, Transport Canada or other Government of Canada websites, and news from traditional media as sources. More detailed involvement, through participation in engagement sessions, is very low at four percent in the general public, although it is reported at nine percent among Indigenous Peoples in Canada.
According to eight in ten respondents, there is strong value perceived in the Government of Canada's reporting to Canadians about its performance in improving marine safety. Incidence and record of clean up related to spills, as well as implementation of new regulations to safeguard shipping practices, are seen as good performance indicators. Another two in three members of the public and eight in ten Indigenous Peoples in Canada also feel it is a good idea to report on training activities for Indigenous and coastal community residents.
For generations, the ocean has stimulated settlement along coastal communities and is a fundamental part of the culture, nourishment, transportation, and economy of indigenous costal communities. The ocean has historically served as a vital route of trade and supplies, and marine shipping continues to be important for many communities to receive food, fuel, and other goods. However, particularly among Indigenous communities located close to shipping lanes, there is concern about marine safety and the ecological impacts of large shipping vessels along Canadian coasts.
Most Indigenous communities interviewed believe that the Government of Canada should have a lead role in marine safety. Given the federal government's national interest and ability to develop regulations, most see the need for the Government of Canada to support the prevention of and response to marine accidents. Most also stress the need for constitutional changes regarding consultations with Indigenous communities regarding marine safety. Indigenous people living along the coast have an extensive understanding of the waterways in their region and a profound interest in protecting their people, livelihoods, and ecosystems.
Most Indigenous communities interviewed initially heard about the Oceans Protection Plan through announcements in late 2016 by the Government of Canada. Many noted their initial enthusiasm for the plan, given the substantial funding and the need to increase and coordinate the protection of Canada's coasts. However, although most of those interviewed have participated in a workshop hosted by OPP or other presentations or briefings from Transport Canada, almost all key informants said they continue to have limited knowledge of the goals and activities of the OPP.
Most key informants feel that through the OPP, Indigenous communities can play an active role in decisions about marine safety. Many key informants believe that meaningful partnerships can be created between the Government of Canada and Indigenous communities, however, any partnership must involve respect and trust and involve consultation during early stages of planning to identify the activities needed, rather than informing communities after decisions are made. Most believe that consultation, partnerships and training with Indigenous peoples involved in the Oceans Protection Plan can contribute to improving relationships with the Government of Canada.
The contract value for the POR project is $187,265.86 (including HST).
Supplier Name: Ekos Research Associates
PWGSC Contract # EP 363-140002/004/CY
Contract Award Date: November 15, 2017
To obtain more information on this study, please e-mail: TC.Publicopinion-Opinionpublique.TC@tc.gc.ca
This certification is to be submitted with the final report submitted to the Project Authority.
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)
Late in 2016, the Prime Minister launched a $1.5 billion national Oceans Protection Plan to improve marine safety and responsible shipping, protect Canada's marine environment, and offer new possibilities for Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities. All Canadians will benefit from the Oceans Protection Plan. Some initiatives apply to the local context of a particular coast while others are national in scope. It is the largest investment ever made to protect Canada's coasts and waterways. This national strategy will help establish a world-leading marine safety system that provides economic opportunities for Canadians today while protecting our coastlines for generations to come.
Indigenous Peoples of Canada – particularly in coastal communities – have valuable insights and expertise to contribute to more effective response and protection of our coasts. Their partnership in the Oceans Protection Plan is a critical element of Canada's marine transportation system. By creating regional partnerships with Indigenous and local communities, the Government of Canada looks for their cooperation and for them to play an active role in decisions about marine safety. The Government of Canada will partner with Indigenous and coastal communities and seek their advice in a number of areas, including:
Given the mandate of the Oceans Protection Plan, Transport Canada identified a need for public opinion research to measure Canadians' and Indigenous groups' confidence in Canada's marine safety system, and their awareness of the Oceans Protection Plan. This research will be used in part to inform communications planning, outreach, and engagement. It will also serve to measure improvement in relationships with Indigenous populations.
The survey is comprised of 3,407 completed cases, including 2,168 with the general public and 1,239 with Indigenous populations, with findings reported separately for each. The process for collection is described separately for each below.
This randomly recruited probability sample of 2,168 carries with it a margin of error of up to +/-2.05 percent. This ranges between three and eight percent for all but a few segments of the sample explored in the analysis[1]. The sample source is largely an in-house Probit panel of randomly recruited Canadians. Ten percent of the sample was collected with cell phone only sample. Just over 40 percent of the sample (n=899) is comprised of residents living in coastal communities, located within 20 kilometres of an ocean, St. Lawrence Seaway or Great Lakes shoreline. Of these 899 cases, 450 were sampled from a different sample source than the Probit panel. These cases were completed by telephone, from a random sample of all communities located within roughly 10 to 20 kilometres of an ocean, St. Laurence Seaway or Great Lakes shoreline, provided the communities had a population of less than 20,000 residents. Once a sample frame was constructed and random sample drawn, these interviews were completed by our trained, bilingual interviewing team, to augment the representation of coastal communities in the general public sample. Therefore, of the overall sample of 2,168 roughly 30 percent were collected by trained, bilingual interviewers, while the majority were collected through online self-administration.
Probit panellists were selected using a random-digit dial (RDD) landline-cell phone hybrid sample frame. This is the same sample frame and sampling process used to conduct telephone surveys, which are considered to be representative of the population[2]. Once selected, they are contacted and recruited by telephone and asked to complete a basic profile (i.e. base survey instrument) including a range of demographic information about themselves. They are also asked if they would prefer to complete surveys online or by telephone. All sample members are eligible to participate, including those with cell phones only, those with no Internet access and those who simply prefer to respond by telephone rather than online. This panel represents a fully representative sample of Canadians, from which we can draw random samples and collect data in a more cost conscious and timely manner than would otherwise be possible in a traditional telephone survey. This panel of more than 95,000 individuals 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.
Prior to conducting the survey, the instrument was extensively tested, with 127 cases (86 in English and 41 cases in French). This included than initial round of testing with 25 individuals. Additional questions were placed on the pretest version of the online questionnaire asking about length, flow, clarity of wording and so on to elicit feedback from respondents. Following the initial testing some questions were removed due to length constraints and some items were re-ordered. A second test was subsequently conducted in order to ensure that length and flow were closer to optimal. In total, 88 cases were completed by telephone and 39 were completed online in order to test both versions of the questionnaire. Minimal changes were made as a result of the second round of testing (n=107), and these records were included in the final sample for analysis.
The online survey was administered between February 20 and March 12, 2018, using a bilingual questionnaire, installed on a secure web-server controlled by Ekos. The email invitation included a description and purpose of the survey (in both languages) along with a link to the survey website. The survey database was mounted using a Personalized Identification Number (PIN), so only individuals with a PIN were allowed access to the survey (the PIN was included in the email invitation). The questionnaire was prefaced with a brief introduction to the study and rationale for the research. The voluntary and confidential nature of the survey was also emphasized. A total of three mailings were sent: an initial invitation and two reminders. Survey data collection adhered to all applicable industry standards as set out by the Market Research Intelligence Agency (MRIA), of which Ekos is a Gold Seal member. All invited panel members were informed of their rights under current Privacy legislation, as well as how to obtain a copy of their response and results of the survey.
In completing the cases that were administered by telephone 1,092 panel sample members were called. Removing the numbers found not to be valid (36) leaves a valid sample of 1,056, of which 353 interviews were conducted for a participation rate of 37 percent. A total of 6,248 telephone numbers were also randomly drawn from the sample frame created of small, coastal communities. Of these 1,674 were found not to be valid, leaving a valid sample of 4,574. Of these, 461 interviews were completed for a response rate of 10 percent.
In the online portion of this survey, an initial sample of 13,728 was drawn. Based on sample attempted out of completed interviews combined with those found out of scope for the survey, the response rate was 16 percent[3]. The average length of the interview was 17 minutes.
Respondents were informed in the invitation that all responses are completely confidential and no responses will be linked to individual names.
Of the 2,168 cases collected overall, 978 cases were completed through an interviewer by telephone, and 1,190 cases were completed online. It is difficult to draw conclusions about the differences in results based on method of completion of the survey in a comparison of results between the two modes. This is because 564 of the 978 collected by telephone were collected among residents of smaller coastal communities. Only 354 of the 1,190 collected online were completed by residents of coastal communities, and these are mostly panel members living in larger urban centres such as Vancouver, Victoria, Montreal and Halifax. The report shows considerable differences in awareness and perceptions among residents of coastal and non-coastal communities, and also differences among those living in smaller coastal communities versus larger communities. This makes it difficult to isolate differences that are attributable to mode and not geography. Similarly, almost all of the cases collected among those under 25 were collected online, whereas almost half of the cases collected among those 25 or older were collected by telephone. The report also shows significant differences in awareness and perceptions based on age, with those under 25 less apt to be aware of or place a high degree of importance in these issues, again making it difficult to isolate mode effects. Since there are no questions in the survey that are presented in significantly different ways, no long passages of information that are more easily read by respondents on their own than heard on the telephone and relative few questions with long lists of categories (more easily read independently than heard on the phone), we believe that most of the systematic differences between results of cases collected online versus on the telephone are attributable to the heavy proportion of residents of smaller coastal communities and of older Canadians, rather than because of the mode of survey collection. The exception is the results for three specific questions where longer lists were provided both online and to interviewers. In these questions, online respondents were much more likely to select many options, whereas considerably fewer options were selected on the telephone. These differences are noted where applicable in the report.
The Indigenous sample was assembled within the four populations (First Nations residents of Indigenous communities, First Nations in Urban Centres, Métis and Inuit). Inuit were largely completed as telephone interviews based on random sample selected from the four geographical Inuit regions (Nunavut, Inuvialuit, Nunavik and Nunatsiavut). The First Nations in Indigenous Communities was sample from a frame of telephone numbers listed within geographical areas listed as reserves. Combining the two populations, a total of 30,142 telephone numbers were called. Of these 5,038 were found not to be valid, leaving a functional sample of 25,104. A total of 1,051 cases were completed, although it was later determined that some are not eligible (i.e., not Indigenous) and 500 cases were initially considered to be out of scope. The response rate for the combined sample is 6 percent. The online cases collected for the Indigenous sample largely included Métis and First Nations people, relying on an online panel. In total 3,254 emails were sent of which 469 cases were completed and 91 were found to be out of scope for a participation rate of 20 percent.
As with the general public, there are systematic differences in the type of respondent interviewed on the telephone (772) versus those who completed the survey online (467). In the case of the Indigenous sample, interviews conducted among Métis and urban First Nations are roughly equal (online versus telephone collection). Almost all of the interviews conducted with Inuit, however, were collected by telephone (167 out of 179), and more of the interviews conducted with First Nations living in Indigenous communities were collected by telephone (254 out of 329). These respondents are also more likely to live in small coastal communities and, therefore, more apt to be aware of and concerned with the issues in the survey. Overall, the online sample is more likely to include those who live in urban areas, while the telephone sample is much more like to include residents of rural and remote communities. As such it is, again, difficult to isolate mode differences from differences driven by other factors. The differences in results in the Indigenous sample, however, are not as striking as they are in the general public sample (with the exception of the three questions featuring longer response options).
Including both the general public and Indigenous samples, the database was reviewed following data collection for data quality, outliers, coding requirements, weighting and construction of independent variables, and was used to explore sub-group patterns (e.g., by age, gender and so on) in the analysis. Weighting of the sample was based on population parameters according to the latest Census on age, gender and region of the country. For the general public it also controlled for coastal and non-coastal sample. For the Indigenous sample it also controlled for the four population types (First Nations people, Métis and Inuit).
Detailed findings are presented in the sections that follow. Overall results are presented in the main portion of the narrative and are typically supported by graphic or tabular presentation of results. Bulleted text is also used to point out any statistically and substantively significant differences between sub-groups of general public and Indigenous respondents. If differences are not noted in the report, it can be assumed that they are either not statistically significant[4] in their variation from the overall result or that the difference was deemed to be substantively too small to be noteworthy. Where there are significant differences between the general public and Indigenous populations, as well as between coastal and non-coastal community residents these differences are described in the main paragraph or in the bulleted text. The programmed survey instrument can be found in Appendix A.
The following table presents a sample profile for the general public and Indigenous populations in the survey. This includes demographic characteristics related to type of community, region, age, education, household income, whether they were born in Canada and gender. Each is presented for the sample of the general public and Indigenous Peoples in Canada. The sample distributions look similar, although socioeconomic status (education and income) is lower in the Indigenous sample and the regional concentration is marginally different (e.g., lower concentration in Quebec and slightly higher concentration in the West in the Indigenous sample relative to the broader public.
| Types of communities | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2168 | 1239 |
| A coastal community, within about 20 kilometres of an ocean, St. Lawrence Seaway or Great Lakes shoreline | 42%[5] | 26% |
| Rural community of fewer than 5,000 residents | 22% | 30% |
| Remote community that is further than 500 kilometres or a 5 hour drive of an urban community | 4% | 9% |
| None of these | 53% | 46% |
| Prefer not to say | 1% | 1% |
| Province or territory | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2167 | 1239 |
| Newfoundland and Labrador | 2% | 5% |
| Prince Edward Island | 3% | 1% |
| Nova Scotia | 5% | 4% |
| New Brunswick | 2% | 2% |
| Quebec | 23% | 18% |
| Ontario | 29% | 24% |
| Manitoba | 3% | 8% |
| Saskatchewan | 2% | 5% |
| Alberta | 9% | 8% |
| British Columbia | 17% | 13% |
| Yukon | 0% | 0% |
| Northwest Territories | 0% | 2% |
| Nunavut | 3% | 8% |
| Age categories | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2168 | 1239 |
| 18 to 24 | 7% | 6% |
| 25 to 34 | 14% | 16% |
| 35 to 44 | 15% | 14% |
| 45 to 54 | 21% | 21% |
| 55 to 64 | 20% | 24% |
| 65 or older | 23% | 19% |
| No answer | 1% | 1% |
| Level of Education | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2168 | 1239 |
| Grade 8 or less | 1% | 2% |
| Some high school | 5% | 14% |
| High school diploma or equivalent | 20% | 25% |
| Registered Apprenticeship or other trades certificate or diploma | 6% | 5% |
| College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma | 25% | 24% |
| University certificate or diploma below bachelor's level | 8% | 7% |
| Bachelor's degree | 21% | 14% |
| Post graduate degree above bachelor's level | 13% | 7% |
| Prefer not to say | 2% | 2% |
| Total annual household income | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2168 | 1239 |
| Under $20,000 | 8% | 19% |
| Between $20,000 and $39,999 | 13% | 19% |
| Between $40,000 and $59,999 | 14% | 15% |
| Between $60,000 and $79,999 | 12% | 11% |
| Between $80,000 and $99,999 | 11% | 10% |
| Between $100,000 and $149,999 | 15% | 9% |
| $150,000 or above | 12% | 6% |
| Prefer not to say | 16% | 10% |
| Location of birth | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2168 | 1239 |
| Born in Canada | 87% | 97% |
| Born outside Canada (Specify the country): | 2% | 2% |
| United Kingdom, England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales | 2% | 0% |
| European, All others | 2% | 0% |
| Gender | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2168 | 1239 |
| Male | 49% | 53% |
| Female | 51% | 47% |
| Prefer not to say | 1% | 0% |
In a second phase of the study, Ekos conducted qualitative interviews with individuals representing Indigenous coastal communities. An interview list was provided by OPP, identifying individuals from indigenous communities in the Atlantic, Arctic, Ontario, Quebec, and Pacific Regions. In total, 15 interviews were conducted; this includes seven interviews conducted in the Pacific Region, two in the Arctic Region, five in Quebec, and one in the Atlantic Region. Interviews were conducted between March and June, 2018. The interviews were conducted using a semi-structured guide, consisting of issues identified by OPP and questions developed collaboratively between OPP and Ekos. The interview guide was developed in English and translated to French and interviews were conducted in the interviewee's official language of choice. An honorarium of $125 was offered to participants. Most interviews lasted 45-60 minutes, all conducted by telephone.
Most of the Canadian public demonstrate limited awareness of marine safety and marine environment protection. Although nearly one in five (17 percent) of the general public said that are aware of marine safety issues including safe shipping practices in Canada, roughly three in ten (29 percent) reported moderate awareness and over half (53 percent) said they are not aware. Similarly, only 18 percent of the general public said they are aware of the steps taken in Canada to protect the marine environment, while nearly four (37 percent) in ten are moderately aware. More than half (44 percent) say they are not aware of the steps taken to protect the marine environment.
Awareness is somewhat higher among Indigenous People in Canada. Nearly one-quarter (23 percent) said they are aware of marine safety and marine environment protection, and another three in ten (29 percent) are moderately aware. Almost half (45 percent) of Indigenous Peoples in Canada, however, said they are not aware of marine safety issues. Likewise, one-quarter (24 percent) are aware of steps taken in Canada to protect the marine environment, although in this case 35 percent indicated moderate awareness and just over one-third (38 percent) said they are not aware.
Those living in coastal communities are generally more apt to be aware of these issues, with 29 percent in each saying they are aware of marine safety issues and steps taken to protect the marine environment respectively, compared with only 16 and 17 percent of residents of other parts of Canada. Awareness is higher among coastal residents in both the Indigenous and the general population, although comparatively greater among Indigenous residents of coastal communities.
Most Canadians feel that marine safety and protecting the marine environment is important. Three-quarters (75 percent) of the general population feel that marine safety including safe shipping practices is important, rating it a four or five on five. More than four in five (83 percent) also believe that protecting the marine environment is important. In both instances, fewer than one in ten believes these issues are not important.
Although Indigenous Peoples in Canada reported somewhat higher awareness of these issues, the rated level of importance is essentially the same as found in the general population. Nearly three-quarters (74 percent) said that marine safety including safe shipping practices is important, and just over four in five (82 percent) believe that protecting the marine environment is important.
The importance of these issues is felt more strongly among those who live in coastal communities, with 87 percent indicating protecting the marine environment as important (compared to 81 percent of non-coastal residents), and 82 percent saying that marine safety is important (compared to 72 percent of non-coastal residents). This difference is slightly more pronounced in the general public compared with Indigenous Peoples in Canada where the gap between coastal and other residents is not as wide.
Three in ten (29 percent) of the general public said they are confident in Canada's marine safety system, with another two in five (40 percent) reporting moderate confidence. Fifteen percent said they are not confident.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada are less confident in Canada's marine safety system. Although a similar proportion to the general population, over one-quarter (28 percent), said they are confident in Canada's marine safety system, a higher proportion said they are not confident (24 percent) compared to the general population (15 percent).
Those living in coastal communities also expressed less confidence than those living elsewhere in the country, with 21 percent stating they are not confident (compared to 17 percent of non-coastal residents). In fact, Indigenous residents of coastal communities are even less confident, with 27 percent indicating a lack of confidence.
For those in the general population who are not confident in Canada's marine safety system, their opinion is influenced through various sources. Most prominent are three sources; the stories heard or read in the news (46 percent), what is witnessed in the community (21 percent), or what people say on social media (12 percent). Other sources are described as open end response among two percent or less.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada typically point to the same three sources, with more relying on what they see in their own community (24 percent) and on social media (17 percent) compared to the general population.
Those who live in coastal communities are even more likely to rely on what they see in their community (31 percent, compared to 19 percent among other residents) to inform their confidence in Canada's marine safety system. Canadians living outside of coastal communities are more apt to rely on the stories they see or hear in the news (48 percent) or what people say on social media (15 percent).
Comparing the results of respondents who completed the survey online and those who completed the survey with an interviewer over the telephone, there is a much greater propensity toward most of the sources among online respondents. This is considered an artifact of the mode of the collection, since online respondents are able to see the list of options, and have the greater ability to select many sources from the list.
| Col1 | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 1871 | 1148 |
| Stories I hear or read in the news | 46% | 42% |
| What I see in my community/around me | 21% | 24% |
| What people say on social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) | 12% | 17% |
| Spills/accidents/dangerous leaks in the waters (volunteered in open response) | 2% | 3% |
| Losing ecosystems/animals, water polluted, invasive species/contaminated seafood and species (volunteered in open response) | 2% | 2% |
| Other | 1% | 2% |
| Don't know/No response | 20% | 20% |
Only items with 2% or more shown
The majority of Canadians in the general public (62 percent) indicated that their confidence in Canada's marine safety system has remained stable over the past five years. One in five (21 percent) have felt their confidence increase, however, confidence has been eroded for just over one in ten (13 percent). Over, results suggest a slight lean towards an increase in confidence.
Among Indigenous Peoples in Canada there has been a slightly more polarizing shift toward increased (24 percent) or decreased (17 percent) confidence over the past five years, compared to the general population.
Canadians living in coastal communities are more likely than others to have experienced an erosion in confidence (18 percent, compared to 13 percent of non-coastal). This is even more prevalent among Indigenous Peoples in Canada living in coastal communities, where nearly one-quarter (23 percent) said their confidence has declined over time.
Canadians in the general population are moderately aware of marine programs, regulations or activities operated by the Government of Canada in these areas. Nearly three-quarters (74 percent) believe the government has a program in place to respond to accidents, such as oil spills contributing to marine pollution. Fewer than two-thirds think there is a Government of Canada program to prevent accidents (63 percent) or monitor marine pollution (62 percent). Just under half (46 percent) think that the Government of Canada works closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts and waterways.
Significantly fewer Indigenous Peoples in Canada believe these same plans are in place. Fewer than two-thirds (64 percent) believe the government has a plan in place to respond to accidents such as oil spills. Half think there is a plan to monitor marine pollution (51 percent) or prevent accidents (50 percent). Four in ten (40 percent) feel that the Government of Canada works closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts and waterways.
Those living in coastal communities, and particularly Indigenous Peoples in Canada living in coastal communities, are less likely to say that the Government of Canada has programs, regulations, or activities in place to address any of these issues.
Relatively few Canadians have heard of the Oceans Protection Plan. Just over one in five (22 percent) of the general public have heard of the plan and another one in ten (12 percent) are not sure. Two-thirds (66 percent) said they have not heard of the plan. These same results are reflected among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, with 21 percent having heard of the plan.
Those living in coastal regions are more likely to have heard of the Oceans Protection Plan, although the proportion is still modest at 27 percent (compared to 19 percent in other areas of the country).
When subsequently provided with a description of the Government of Canada Oceans Protection Plan, launched in November 2016, involving investment to better protect Canada's coasts and waterways and improve marine safety, nearly four in ten in the general population indicated that they vaguely (29 percent) or clearly (9 percent) recall the initiative. Among those who had previously indicated awareness (i.e., unprompted) 87 percent again confirmed their awareness following the description, although two in three said they vaguely recalled reading or hearing about the initiative. Among those who had not initially recalled hearing about the Oceans Protection Plan 20 percent indicated awareness following the description, although few said they recalled it clearly (2 percent).
Four in ten Indigenous Peoples in Canada likewise recall hearing about the initiative either vaguely (31 percent) or clearly (nine percent). Again, recall among those who had initially said they recalled the program without the benefit of the description is very high (88), although just over half said they vaguely recalled hearing or reading about it. One in four of those who did not initially recall the program said that they remember reading or hearing something about it following the description, although few recalled it clearly (4 percent).
Those living in coastal communities (14 percent) are more apt than those in non-coastal areas (eight percent) to clearly recall hearing about the Oceans Protection Plan.
Over half (56 percent) of the general population who have heard about the OPP learned of the plan through television. Roughly one-quarter recall hearing about the OPP in newspapers (28 percent), the Internet (24 percent), or radio (22 percent). Other sources include social media (15 percent) or word of mouth (11 percent). Transport Canada or other federal government websites (six percent), community newsletters (five percent), and magazines (four percent) were mentioned with less frequency, and other sources were cited by two percent or fewer. Comparing the results of respondents who completed the survey online and those who completed the survey with an interviewer over the telephone, there is a much greater propensity toward most of the sources among online respondents. This is considered an artefact of the mode of the collection, since online respondents see the list of options, and have the greater ability to select many sources from the list.
While half (50 percent) of Indigenous respondents similarly recall hearing of the OPP through television, they are more likely than the general population to have heard through social media (20 percent), and less likely to found out through daily newspapers (18 percent) or radio (15 percent).
Those living in coastal communities are more apt to have learned about the OPP through newspapers, radio, or community newspapers compared with residents of other parts of the country.
| Col1 | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 889 | 500 |
| Television | 56% | 50% |
| Daily newspapers | 28% | 18% |
| The Internet (general mention) | 24% | 23% |
| Radio | 22% | 15% |
| Social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube) | 15% | 20% |
| Word of mouth (through a friend, family or acquaintance) | 11% | 12% |
| Transport Canada or other Government of Canada website | 6% | 3% |
| Neighbourhood or community newspapers (i.e., non-daily) online | 5% | 6% |
| Magazines | 4% | 4% |
| Mail from the Government of Canada | 2% | 2% |
| Other | 3% | 4% |
| Don't remember | 3% | 4% |
Only items with 2% or more shown
Four in ten Canadians in the general public who are aware of the OPP recall hearing that the government plans to improve how it prevents and responds to marine incidents (40 percent). About one-third recall that the government is updating Canada's regulatory and legislative regime to protect people, vessels, and the environment (33 percent) or the government is preserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping (31 percent). Just under one-quarter recall that the government is collaborating with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic (24 percent) or working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts (22 percent). One in five (19 percent) do not recall specifically what they heard about the OPP.
The top mention among Indigenous Peoples in Canada was also that the plan involves the government improving how it prevents and responds to marine pollution incidents (37 percent). Indigenous respondents, however, were less likely to recall that the plan involves government updating Canada's regulatory and legislative regime to protect people, vessels, and the environment (23 percent) or collaborating with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic (15 percent). The same proportion of Indigenous respondents as found in the general population (22 percent in each) recall hearing that the government will work closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts.
Those living outside of coastal communities (24 percent) are more likely than residents of coastal communities (18 percent) to recall that the government will work closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts.
The results among respondents who completed the survey online and those who completed the survey with an interviewer over the telephone are different insofar as there is a much greater propensity toward most of the responses among online respondents. This is considered an artefact of the mode of the collection since online respondents see the list of options, and have the greater ability to select many sources from the list.
| Col1 | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 889 | 500 |
| Government improving how it prevents and responds to marine pollution incidents | 40% | 37% |
| Government updating Canada's regulatory and legislative regime to protect people, vessels, and the environment | 33% | 23% |
| Government preserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping | 31% | 30% |
| Government collaborating with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic | 24% | 15% |
| Government working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts | 22% | 22% |
| It exists, that it is a plan (volunteered in open response) | 2% | 2% |
| To get pipelines through, dealing with the future development of moving oil, response to more vessels (volunteered in open response) | 2% | 2% |
| Other | 1% | 2% |
| Don't know/No response | 19% | 23% |
Only items with 2% or more shown
Fourteen attributes of the Oceans Protection Plan were presented to respondents to assess the perceived importance of each. Four in five or more of the general public feel that the ability to strengthen polluter-pay principles to ensure that companies take responsibility for spills that damage marine environments (85 percent) or preserving coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping (80 percent) are at the top of the list in terms of important aspects of the plan. Improving how the Government of Canada responds to marine pollution incidents (78 percent), or prevents marine safety pollution incidents (77 percent), restoring coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping (77 percent), investing in scientific research to support decisions on marine safety (76 percent), or updating rules and laws to protect people, vessels and the environment are noted as important aspects by three quarters or more, forming a second tier of important elements. Slightly fewer feel that it is important to make ship navigation safer through better charting and radar, collaborate with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic, or expand the Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary in the Arctic to respond to emergencies and pollution incidents (73 percent each). Seven in ten (70 percent) said that working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts is also an important aspect. Two-thirds (67 percent) feel that building new lifeboat stations to improve response time to marine incidents is important. Relatively lower on the rankings are the increased towing capacity and disaster prevention with new tugboats (62 percent) or create Indigenous Community Response Teams so that Indigenous communities play a larger role in marine safety (57 percent).
Indigenous respondents rated the importance of the aspect to strengthen polluter-pay principles to ensure that companies take responsibility for spills that damage marine environments marginally lower (81 percent) by comparison with the general public. They accorded relatively greater importance than the general public to working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts (77 percent), create Indigenous Community Response Teams so that Indigenous communities play a larger role in marine safety (76 percent), and building new lifeboat stations to improve response time to marine incidents (72 percent).
Those living in coastal communities are more likely to rate the importance of all attributes higher than residents of other communities in Canada.
Nearly two-thirds of the general public believe that the OPP will have a positive impact on the health of marine animals and plants and the health of Canada's coasts and waterways (65 percent in each case). Almost six in ten (58 percent) feel that the plan will have a positive impact on the safety of the shipping industry. Roughly half think there will be a positive impact on the health of people living in Indigenous Peoples and other coastal communities (53 percent) or on local economies near Canada's coasts and waterways.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada similarly feel that the OPP will have a positive impact on the health of marine animals and plants (66 percent) or the health of Canada's coasts and waterways (65 percent). They are more apt than the general population to feel that the plan will have a positive impact on the health of people living in Indigenous and other coastal communities.
Those living outside of coastal areas are more likely to feel that the OPP will have a positive impact on each of the attributes.
Results suggest that Canadians have moderate confidence in the Oceans Protection Plan. Among members of the general public, four in ten (39 percent) say they are confident that the Oceans Protection Plan will improve marine safety and responsible shipping along Canada's waterways. The same proportion (39 percent) are confident that the program will protect Canada's marine environment. One-third (33 percent) believe the program will offer new possibilities for Indigenous communities. Between one in seven (14 percent) and one in five (20 percent) say they are not confident in the program's effectiveness in each of these areas.
Compared to the general public, Indigenous Peoples in Canada are somewhat more confident in the Oceans Protection Plan. Nearly half say that the program will improve marine safety and protect Canada's marine environment (44 percent in each case). Almost as many (43 percent) believe the program will offer new possibilities for Indigenous communities, which is a full ten-point increase in confidence over that expressed by the general public.
Confidence is marginally lower among residents of coastal communities, in the general public and among Indigenous Peoples in Canada, when it comes to improving marine safety and responsible shipping as well as protecting marine environment, although this difference is not apparent in terms of offering new possibilities for Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities.
When Canada's Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime (MOSPRR) is described Canadians express varying degrees of confidence in it. About four in ten members of the general public indicated they are confident that the regime can effectively clean up an oil spill (38 percent, compared to 22 percent who would rate their confidence as low) and provide a timely response to an oil spill (37 percent versus 21 percent with low confidence). Views are far more mixed when it comes to holding private stakeholders to account; just 29 percent believe that Canada's Oil Spill Response System can ensure that private industry partners fulfill their obligations, compared to 34 percent who express doubts.
Indigenous respondents hold similar levels of confidence in the program, although they are slightly more likely to have doubts about the regime's ability to clean up an oil spill (27 percent express little to no confidence) relative to the general public.
Results indicate a strong public preference for having all three levels of government play a significant role in developing marine safety. Among members of the general public, eight in ten (78 percent) believe the federal government should play a strong role, while just over six in ten (64 percent) say their provincial government should be similarly tasked. Half (50 percent) would like their local or regional government to play a significant role in marine safety, although one in five (18 percent) would prefer their local government stay out of the matter.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada are somewhat less supportive of the federal government taking a significant role in developing marine safety (71 percent), although they are more likely to say that Indigenous governments should play a key role (60 percent).
Results reveal that the public's perceptions fall well short of its preferences when it comes to preferred involvement in developing marine safety. Four in ten members of the general public (39 percent) believe that the federal government has played a lead role. Just one in five (20 percent) feel their provincial government has played a significant role, compared to 29 percent who feel they have played a minimal role. Sixteen percent say their local government has played a strong part, while more than twice this proportion (41 percent) believes this has contributed little in this area.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada are slightly less likely to say that the federal government has played a key role (32 percent), while they are comparatively more apt to say their local (25 percent) or provincial government (25 percent) has played an important part.
Survey respondents were asked to rate the importance of allowing Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities, as well individual Canadians, to have input into Government of Canada decisions. Among members of the general public, two-thirds (68 percent) said it is important that Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities work closely with the federal government (compared to just 12 percent who assign little to no importance). Half (51 percent), meanwhile, place a high degree of importance on allowing average citizens to provide input into these decisions (versus 18 percent).
Indigenous respondents place considerably more importance on both levels of public input. Fully eight in ten (81 percent) said it is highly important that Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities work closely with the federal government, while two-thirds (66 percent) place a high degree of importance on input from individual Canadians.
Few Canadians have searched for information on marine safety. One-quarter of the general population (24 percent) have searched for this information, while three-quarters (74 percent) have not.
A similarly low proportion of Indigenous Peoples in Canada – one-quarter (25 percent) – have searched for information on marine safety.
Respondents were asked to list the sources they would be most likely to consult if they were searching for information about government programs, regulations, and activities intended to protect Canada's oceans, waterways, and coasts. Among the general public, two-thirds (68 percent) said they would use the Internet to search for this information, while roughly half (47 percent) would directly consult a Government of Canada website. One in five (21 percent) would rely on traditional media such as television, radio, or newspapers, while one in six (16 percent) would utilize a relevant not-for-profit organization. Roughly one in ten said they would turn to someone working in marine transportation (13 percent), 1-800-O-Canada (11 percent), or someone working in the shipping industry (ten percent). Other common responses include social media (eight percent), friends and family (seven percent), talk shows (six percent), local newspapers (five percent), and magazines (four percent).
Indigenous respondents are somewhat less likely to rely on an Internet search (61 percent), a Government of Canada website (35 percent), or a non-government organization (11 percent), while they would be slightly more likely to turn to social media (13 percent).
Comparing the results of respondents who completed the survey online and those who completed the survey with an interviewer over the telephone, there is a much greater propensity toward most of the sources among online respondents. This is considered an artefact of the mode of the collection since online respondents see the list of options, and have the greater ability to select many sources from the list.
| Col1 | General Public | Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| n= | 2167 | 1239 |
| The Internet (e.g., search engine such as Google) | 68% | 61% |
| Transport Canada or other Government of Canada website | 47% | 35% |
| News on television, radio or newspapers | 21% | 22% |
| Relevant non-government organization (e.g., environmental NGO) | 16% | 11% |
| To someone working in local marine transportation and safety | 13% | 10% |
| Call 1-800 O Canada or visit Government of Canada office | 11% | 13% |
| To someone working in the shipping industry | 10% | 7% |
| Social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) | 8% | 13% |
| To my friends, family or acquaintances | 7% | 7% |
| Talk shows on television, radio or newspapers | 6% | 6% |
| From neighbourhood or community newspapers | 5% | 6% |
| Magazines | 4% | 4% |
| Other | 2% | 3% |
| Don't remember | 4% | 7% |
Only items with 2% or more shown
Results reveal broad public demand for regular communication from the federal government about how it is performing in terms of improving marine safety and protecting Canada's marine environment. Among members of the general public, eight in ten (79 percent) feel that routine reporting is highly important. One in seven (14 percent) regard this information as moderately important and just one in twenty (five percent) feel it is of little to not importance.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada similarly place a great deal of importance on open communication. Fully eight in ten (80 percent) rate government communication as important.
When the scope of the question is narrowed to focus on specific types of information, results again demonstrate that Canadians place a high degree of importance on remaining informed about the federal government's role in protecting Canada's coasts and waterways. Nine in ten members of the general public (88 percent) feel it is important that the federal government keeps its citizens up to date on the incidence of accidents and spills, while a similar proportion (85 percent) would like to remain apprised of the government's record of cleaning up these spills. Eight in ten (80 percent) said it is crucial that the federal government routinely update its citizens on the implementation of new regulations to maintain safe shipping preferences. Activities to train residents of Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities are seen as a comparatively less important piece of information, although a clear majority (67 percent) see it as a key component of government communication.
Indigenous Peoples in Canada place similarly high levels of importance on receiving information related to incidence of spills (84 percent), cleanup records (82 percent), and the implementation of new regulations to maintain safe shipping practices (79 percent). Compared to the general public, these respondents are much more likely to rate receiving information on activities to train Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities (79 percent) as important.
Results highlight that very few Canadians have participated in an engagement session about marine safety or the Oceans Protection Plan. Just four percent of respondents from the general public indicated that they attended an engagement session, compared to 95 percent who have not.
Indigenous respondents are twice as likely to have participated in an engagement session (nine percent), although the vast majority (89 percent) still have not.
For Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities, the ocean is a fundamental element of their culture, nourishment, transportation, and economy. For Indigenous communities, the ocean has influenced their ancestors for generations and stimulated settlement along coastal communities. In this time, according to key informants, the ocean has been a source of "spiritual wonder" and inspired many legends. The ocean has been a critical source of food for coastal communities; as noted by one key informant, "the ocean is our breadbasket". The ocean has allowed for the harvest of food, including sea plants, urchins, salmon and other fish, shellfish, seals, and whales. Key informants also noted the vital role of the ocean in providing transportation for the coastal communities. The waterways allow for Indigenous and coastal communities to connect with other communities, expanded hunting and fishing regions, and allowed for trade and commerce. As observed by most key informants, members of Indigenous and coastal communities are on the water almost daily and have learned to navigate the water from the generations before.
For many key informants, marine shipping is important to their community as a source of vital supplies. Most acknowledge that "small scale" marine shipping brings goods to the community, to varying degrees. For a few communities, there is some road access to receive goods, for a few northern communities, supplies are received through shipping only during an intensive period in the summer. Many, particularly in the Pacific region, receive goods throughout the year by vessel. Many remote coastal communities are powered through diesel generators, and fuel is a necessity to be received through marine shipping, to prepare food and heat homes through the winter. Likewise, while many Indigenous and coastal communities source food through hunting and fishing, food, clothing, and other supplies are received through marine shipping.
Many key informants also indicated concerns with marine shipping, in terms of "large-scale" oil tankers, logging boats, and container shipping and its potential impact on the community. While one key informant in the Pacific region noted concern about large logging vessels, because of the impact of deforestation, most are concerned about marine safety and the potential for catastrophic accidents. Marine safety concerns are multifaceted. Notably in the Pacific Region, the increase in traffic raises concerns of collisions, either with other large vessels or with the small fishing vessels of the community. A few key informants noted the impact of increased shipping traffic not only on marine safety, but livelihoods as well. As expressed by one key informant, if an Indigenous fishing vessel must pull aside for a large shipping vessel, valuable fishing time is lost during potential critical times in factors such as either the appropriate tide level or fish availability. Some key informants are concerned about increased shipping traffic in terms of having new, additional vessels with crew who are unfamiliar with the area. The navigation by large vessels in rough waters, with large rocks under water, and narrow passageways are all of concern for these key informants. As noted by one, "If ships founder and end up crashing in the rocks or rip out their hull on the rocks, it can cause pretty severe damage," and several key informants pointed to examples of specific vessel wreckages that have contaminated or threatened to contaminate waters surrounding their community.
Some key informants are most ardently concerned with oil tanker shipping, and particularly an increase in this type of cargo in the Pacific Region. Due to the concerns with busy shipping lanes, narrow and rocky regions, these key informants feel it is "not if, but when" an accident will take place causing oil spills and ecological contamination.
A few key informants belong to coastal communities that are not close to shipping lanes used by large vessels. As a result, these key informants say their communities have less interaction with large vessels and less general concern around marine shipping. However, a few key informants said that if there was an accident involving large scale marine shipping, depending on the currents, there is the potential for contamination of their community from oil, gas, or other cargo. As noted by one, "Anything that happens out of sight certainly has the potential to come down and affect [the community]."
A few key informants foresee a potential economic opportunity with the increase in marine shipping, particularly those with deep water ports. As noted by one, "The primary concern is obviously safety, but if it can be done in a safe and secure manner [communities] would like to realize economic benefits."
Most key informants believe that the Government of Canada has a lead role in marine safety, in terms of having a national interest and the ability to develop regulations. Most interviewees see the need for the Government of Canada to establish rules supporting the prevention of marine accidents; including activities such as the Pacific Pilotage Authority, supporting double hulled ships that can prevent fuel spills if one hull is damaged, enforcement of shipping lanes to lower risk of collision with vessels or land, the Oil Tanker Moratorium, online navigation tools, additional light stations, and ballast water rules to prevent invasive species.
Key informants also support the Government of Canada having an active role in the response to marine accidents. Many key informants view "marine safety" in terms of search and rescue. As such, many pointed to the role of the Canada Coast Guard in providing search and rescue operations and training, particularly with the Auxiliary Coast Guard. However, key informants in particularly remote areas, such as the Arctic Region and Northern Pacific region, observed that Coast Guard presence can be far away, resulting in hours long delays in response time. One key informant illustrated an example of a foreign vessel that lost power and began to drift ashore, and a tug boat assigned to assist took 40 hours to reach the vessel. Most key informants would like to see stronger support from the Government of Canada in preparation and guidance in the event of marine accidents, including those that involve the spill of hazardous marine cargo.
Although marine safety is a national interest, most key informants said there are strong regional interests and understanding in the need to protect coastal people and communities. Most called for increased coordination between federal and provincial governments to identify areas of need and activities already supported. Coordination with multiple levels of government can support regulations for protecting coasts and activities to respond to incidents.
Key informants also point to a constitutional responsibility to consult with Indigenous and coastal communities regarding marine safety. These individuals contend that Indigenous people living along the coast have an extensive understanding of the waterways in their region and a profound interest in protecting their people, livelihoods, and ecosystems.
Most key informants talked about several ways the Government of Canada can work with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coast. Primarily, most key informants would like to see engagement that involves working with communities to identify needs and work together to develop a plan. Funding for infrastructure is also seen as a role of the Government of Canada. For example, a few cited the need for appropriate docks to unload supplies as some in the Arctic Region use small vessels to unload larger vessels anchored off shore. One key informant identified infrastructure that was built with federal government funding, but lacks funding for maintenance.
Most key informants believe that coastal communities should be involved in the activities needed to protect Canada's coast. This could include the use of fleets, training, investment in capacity, monitoring, response training. Some key informants point to the Coast Guard Auxiliary as an example of how to effectively engage individuals in communities.
All key informants indicated that it is a good idea for the Government of Canada to provide Indigenous communities with support such as the Indigenous Community Response Training. While most are not familiar with the names of the various training available through the Government of Canada, particularly the Indigenous Community Response Training, many, particularly in the Pacific Region, noted training such as the Incident Command System Training provided by the Canadian Coast Guard. Many key informants would eagerly like to see training available for their communities to feel more empowered and involved in marine safety; however, some pointed out that the capacity of their community is limited in terms of having appropriate individuals available for training or that training should be supported through infrastructure as well (boats, lifejackets, communications equipment).
Some key informants identified several ways the Government of Canada could collect input and feedback about marine safety for their community. Most said that it is important for OPP representatives to come in to the community and otherwise include in-person discussions. A few key informants believe they have more formal information to share about marine safety, including having their own monitoring activities, guidelines or a "marine plan" for the community (such as restrictions on motorized vessels in certain areas) and employ trained "guardians" as stewards of the land.
"First Nations are situated in ideal locations along the coast, and First Nation individuals are out on the water often either fishing, gathering resources, or transportation. That is something that needs to be acknowledged. If the Government of Canada is looking to understand the waterways at various times of the year, First Nations hold that knowledge."
Most key informants initially heard about the Oceans Protection Plan (OPP) through announcements in late 2016 by the Government of Canada. Many key informants talked about their initial enthusiasm for the OPP as a substantial (due to the $1.5 billion in funding) and needed plan to increase and coordinate the protection of Canada's coasts. Although most have participated in a workshop hosted by OPP or other presentations or briefings from Transport Canada, almost all key informants said they have limited understanding of the goals of the OPP. The plan was described by many key informants as "vague" or "confusing". A few noted that initial meetings have been a forum to exchange information or transmit information from OPP to community representatives.
Many key informants expressed frustration or, if they are less aware of or involved in the plan, have a sense that the OPP is being implemented very slowly. These key informants noted the announcement date of November 2016, followed by a workshop or introduction of the plan at conference or other venue in 2017, and feel they have received no further clarity on the delivery of the OPP. A few have been involved in facilitating meetings between Indigenous groups and the government of Canada, or are participating in the delivery of an activity or pilot project, and noted this progress on implementation of the OPP. There is a prevalent sense of uncertainty and inertia on OPP, however, among participants, who see this as being in contrast to the large funding announcement.
"Over this whole period since the OPP has been announced in December 2016 to now, our FN has been negotiating a Reconciliation Framework Agreement with Canada and we were told it could be done within several months and it's been more than a year and still not concluded."
"There are no clear objectives about what they are trying to achieve, and in what year."
"I'm afraid it's going to be an opportunity missed again. A lot of money set aside but may not change [marine safety in the region]."
Many observed that the plan involves a large amount, perhaps 50 or 60, of activities; although a comprehensive list of these activities is not available. While one key informant specified that their organization would like to receive only the information that is relevant in their area, most said that they would like to understand the priorities and goals of the plan. This includes understanding how the plan or activities will be implemented, timelines, resources, responsibilities of each of the federal departments and any update on the status or progress.
Capacity of the communities was also noted by some key informants as a barrier to learning more about the OPP. As one key informant noted, "I have a fishery portfolio, and try to attend and find information, but it's hard because [we are] stretched thin and [it's] hard to participate in everything."
Key informants identified several areas to improve communication to Indigenous and coastal Communities under the OPP. While the workshops for those in the Pacific Region were attended by most key informants in the area, they were noted as being infrequent, with little follow up after the event to build on discussions. A few who attended a subsequent workshop felt the workshop replicated the original one without progressing further into the implementation activities of the OPP. Finally, many key informants, whether they attended workshops or information sessions/meetings (such as an OPP presentation at a sector event) suggested that invitations to these events should clearly specify the intended audience or participants, so that communities can send the appropriate individual (for those specializing in technical, administrative, or political areas).
Most key informants said they would like to have representatives to come to their communities to talk about OPP and see, first hand, the needs and capabilities of the community to be involved in marine safety. While they acknowledge there are many communities to visit, the in-person interactions are seen as an important means of building trust, and a richer and contextualized understanding. Some key informants relayed the pervasive perception among their constituents that decisions for coastal communities are being made by individuals with little understanding of marine life and coastal communities. As articulated by one, "I saw the presentations that [showed a] a digital rendition [of a shipping lane]. They were showing an ideal situation. That's the kind of stuff you [do not understand unless] you literally go into the communities rather than just look at a map."
Some key informants said they would like to be able to access an overview of the OPP that outlines the comprehensive and specific activities developed as part of the plan. This would include aspects noted earlier such as the listing of all activities, by region, funding levels, and responsibilities. Some participants identified that they have searched online for this type of information without success. This information, according to some key informants, should be readily available, on the Government of Canada website ("web-based and searchable"), as well as distributed at workshops, by mail, or other distribution channels.
As some key informants noted, information should be presented according to the learning style of Indigenous peoples. This can involve an interactive, visual, and oral learning style that allows for questions to be asked and answered. According to one key informant, hearing the questions from other participants can even help understanding. In terms of information online, some key informants indicated that an interactive map would be effective, where users can click on a region, see the activities that are planned, along with the relevant information per activity. Many key informants lamented the approach described as one often used by the Government of Canada, to present a PowerPoint presentation during meetings that is one-directional, not constructed in an Indigenous learning style, and often not customized in content (such as relevance to the region or community) for its audience. While there is often a call for questions during presentations, a few key informants observed that it can be intimidating to ask questions in a group or and difficult to ask about issues that were not presented. A few key informants also suggested the OPP set up booths at "trade shows", conferences, or sector meetings to give Indigenous and coastal community members the opportunity to have interactive discussions to garner more information about the plan.
"The standard government practice is just to put a Powerpoint presentation up there. Most First Nations get really tired of sitting through government presentations, they are not engaging and really tough to ask questions. There's 100 people in the room and if you want to ask a question, it's challenging to get good information."
Most key informants feel that the OPP can help Indigenous communities play an active role in decisions about marine safety. Most say that when they first heard of the OPP, they inferred that there would be consultations involved to determine what activities are needed and how communities can be involved. These key informants feel frustration that when OPP met with their community, they were presented with a plan, rather than being consulted to help develop the plan.
"The Government of Canada is in reactive mode of sharing information with First Nations regarding sharing information about this initiative that was developed in the absence of First Nations. Establishing a First Nation committee to provide advice and recommendations to government would have been a good way and can be a good way. It almost seems like there was an arbitrary announcement of all this money, but no details of how it was going to be rolled out. Now they are trying to engage with First Nations of how to roll these initiatives out. Discussions should take place to determine how the OPP could protect their traditional lands. Identify goals and meaningful career paths for First Nations to be involved in this initiative. Once again, it comes down to knowing the authority of who is going to be involved. Most people won't know about OPP aside from some that know they attended workshops. A lot of communication needs to take place."
Key informants proposed that Indigenous communities could be involved directly in decisions about marine safety as members of these communities have been stewards of the land and water for generations. These key informants feel there is vast knowledge to be garnered in terms of how and when to safely navigate the water and through activities such as monitoring changes in the ecosystem. Once needs are identified, most key informants believe that the community can play a role in implementing the initiatives of OPP, and identify areas of incident prevention. Most key informants further see a role that can include building capacity of the community to serve in a manner similar to the Auxiliary Coast Guard. Community members can be trained to respond to marine incidents, including search and rescue but also hazardous material containment and remediation.
In order to establish the role of Indigenous communities in decision making, most key informants said that consultation must begin early, in order to be part of the decision making, and support needs to be available through funding and training. Many key informants also said that responsibilities must be clearly outlined to alleviate community concerns that they will be held responsible for activities without sufficient training and support.
Many key informants believe that meaningful partnerships can be created between the Government of Canada and Indigenous communities. Several key informants emphasized that, fundamentally, any partnership must involve respect and trust and involve consultation during early stages of planning to identify the activities needed, rather than informing communities after decisions are made. Some communities have begun their relationship with OPP through establishing an agreement, and many said that an agreement such as a "Framework Agreement" or an MOA is important to formalize the process and identify financial support. Many also stipulated that there needs to be a clear identification of the roles of all parties involved in the partnership. Some described partnership structures that have been successful, primarily involving an appointed leader from both parties and the establishment of a committee that has authority to make decisions on behalf of the organization. Some also said that establishing partnerships with existing organizations (such as Marine Councils) can be very helpful, leveraging expertise and existing networks, although limitations were also described because of capacity, emphasizing that support may be needed to build additional capacity to be available for OPP initiatives. A few said that an initial step of having one "Liaison Officer" from OPP, that represents the initiative, dedicated to one community, cluster of communities or sub-region, can help improve communication, particularly when a community wishes to ask questions that may pertain to the multiple federal departments involved.
All key informants acknowledged that the OPP is in the early stages of implementation, and most said that their involvement to date with the OPP has been minimal. These key informants described that interaction with the OPP as primarily involving some early meetings or workshops to learn more about the plan and, for some, to discuss the potential role of the community in OPP activities. As such, many key informants said that it is too early to identify what is working well in the implementation of OPP, as they are not yet aware of the specific goals and activities of the plan. Many pointed to the goal of doing more to support marine safety in Canada as a reason for excitement and interest in the plan. Many also said that the stated intent of the plan to engage Indigenous and coastal communities in supporting marine safety is a welcomed aspect of the plan. As emphasized by one key informant, "It's not happening in Ottawa, it's happening on our coast line." For those more familiar with OPP, particularly a few key informants in communities participating with a OPP associated pilot program, there is encouragement that projects are identified, being implemented, and their communities are engaged in the process. A few also noted the willingness of federal staff to work with Indigenous communities and identify ways to support marine safety. As articulated, "I am encouraged that there seems to be a genuine willingness to do better [by government staff]" and "They are being fairly proactive, been very impressed with [federal department]. Everyone has been very pleasant to deal with.". Finally, a few key informants are encouraged by the funding provided to Indigenous communities to participate in the OPP, from funding identified in a Framework Agreement to "funding enveloped" for individuals representing Indigenous communities to participate in workshops.
Key informants identified several areas that could be improved during the implementation phase of the OPP. Most key informants said they would like the "consultation" and "engagement" element of OPP to involve discussions with communities during the decision making stage; and involve working with organizations to identify needs and develop a plan for implementation. Many key informants expressed concerns that the current process has involved OPP representatives communicating the plan to communities after decisions have already been made. Most key informants would like better information regarding OPP generally, with improvements to be made in the communicating the initiatives that have been developed. Some key informants would like to have a specific representative appointed, such as a "Liaison Officer", from the federal government for communities to contact regarding OPP or marine safety generally. As noted, with several departments involved, it is not clear which department is responsible for what areas, or the individual within a department to contact.
Most key informants believe that consultation, partnerships and training with Indigenous peoples involved in the Oceans Protection Plan can contribute to improving relations between them and the Government of Canada. Some key informants said that consultation and discussion with Indigenous peoples, particularly in the conceptual states of a plan, can be beneficial in providing trust and reconciliation.
"My view on consultation and engagement, is that it's way easier for First Nations to give approval on accommodation interests if we are actually involved on the inside with the nitty gritty of the process."
"That's the whole goal is that we are making good decisions together, rather than doing our own thing together and finding that we don't agree. Have a plan that we can all work together on."
"I am more hopeful and optimistic that the government is trying to shift the relationships."
"Any opportunity for government to get into a room with First Nation communities and talk about how to move forward in a good way, is a positive way. Government is continuing to learn how FNs would like to be engaged and receive information."
"It's a step in the right direction."
Appendix A: Survey Questionnaire
INTRO
Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey dealing with current issues of interest to Canadians.
Si vous préférez répondre au sondage en français, veuillez cliquer sur « Français » dans le coin supérieur droit.
Your participation is voluntary and your responses will be kept entirely confidential and anonymous. The survey takes about 15 minutes to complete and is registered with the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA). This survey is being directed by Ekos Research, and is being administered according to the requirements of the Privacy Act.
Click here if you wish to verify the authenticity of this survey. To view our privacy policy, click here.
If you require any technical assistance, please contact online@ekos.com.
Your decision on whether or not to participate will not affect any dealings you may have with the Government of Canada.
The personal information you provide to Transport Canada is collected in accordance with the Privacy Act in accordance with the Treasury Board Directive on Privacy Practices. We only collect the information we need to conduct the research project. In addition to protecting your personal information, the Privacy Act gives you the right to request access to and correction of your personal information.
For more information about these rights, or about our privacy practices, please contact Transport Canada's Privacy Coordinator at 613-993-6161. You also have the right to file a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada at www.priv.gc.ca if you think your personal information has been handled improperly.
Q30
Do you consider yourself to be an Indigenous person or member of a First Nation?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know 8
Refuse 9
Q30B
YES
Which of the following best describes you? Are you a First Nations person, Métis, or Inuk?
First Nations 1
Métis 2
Inuk 3
Other (specify) 77
Refuse 99
Q31
Do you live in an Indigenous or First Nation community for at least 6 months of the year?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know 8
Refuse 9
QCOMM [1,4]
Do you live in one of the following types of communities?
Select all that apply
A coastal community, within about 20 kilometres of an ocean, St. Lawrence Seaway or Great Lakes shoreline 2
Rural community of fewer than 5,000 residents 3
Remote community that is further than 500 kilometres or a 5 hour drive of an urban community 4
None of these 98
Prefer not to say 99
PQ1
How would you characterize your level of awareness (e.g., the degree you feel informed) about each of the following?
Q1A
Marine safety issues including safe shipping practices in Canada
Not at all aware 1 1
2 2
Moderately aware 3 3
4 4
Very aware 5 5
Don't know 98
Q1B
Steps taken in Canada to protect the marine environment
Not at all aware 1 1
2 2
Moderately aware 3 3
4 4
Very aware 5 5
Don't know 98
PQ2
How important would you say that each of the following are to you?
Q2A
Marine safety including safe shipping practices
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Somewhat important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q2B
Protecting the marine environment
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Somewhat important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q39
How confident are you in Canada's marine safety system?
Not at all confident 1 1
2 2
Moderately confident 3 3
4 4
Very confident 5 5
Don't know 98
Q40 [1,4]
Confident/Not Confident
Can you point to something that you have heard or seen that makes you feel this way?
Select all that apply
Stories I hear or read in the news 1
What people say on social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) 2
What I see in my community/around me 3
Other (specify) 77
Don't know/No response 98
Q6
Confident/Not Confident
Has your confidence in Canada's marine safety system increased, decreased or stayed the same compared with five (5) years ago?
Decreased a lot 1 1
2 2
Same as 5 years ago 3 3
4 4
Increased a lot 5 5
Don't know/ No response 98
PQ4
As far as you know, does the Government of Canada have programs, regulations or activities in place to:
Q4A
prevent accidents, such as an oil spill, that contribute to marine pollution
Yes 1
No 2
Unsure 98
Q4B
monitor marine pollution
Yes 1
No 2
Unsure 98
Q4C
respond to accidents, such as an oil spill, that contribute to marine pollution
Yes 1
No 2
Unsure 98
Q4D
work closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts and waterways
Yes 1
No 2
Unsure 98
Q8
Have you seen, read or heard anything about the Government of Canada's Oceans Protection Plan?
Yes 1
No 2
Unsure 98
Q9
[Q8 = 1]As you may be aware, the[else]The Government of Canada launched the Oceans Protection Plan in November 2016. It involves an investment to better protect Canada's coasts and waterways and improve marine safety. Do you recall hearing or reading about this initiative?
Yes clearly 1
Yes vaguely 2
No 3
Unsure 98
Q10 [1,15]
If Yes
Where do you recall hearing about Canada's Oceans Protection Plan?
Select all that apply
Television 1
Radio 2
Daily newspapers 3
Neighbourhood or community newspapers (i.e., non-daily) online 4
Magazines 5
The Internet (general mention) 6
Social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube) 7
Transport Canada or other Government of Canada website 8
Mail from the Government of Canada 9
Magazines 10
Word of mouth (through a friend, family or acquaintance) 11
Other, specify (try to be as specific as you can): 77
Don't remember 98
Q11 [1,6]
If Yes
What do you recall hearing about the Plan?
Select all that apply
Government improving how it prevents and responds to marine pollution incidents 1
Government preserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping 2
Government collaborating with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic 3
Government working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts 4
Government updating Canada's regulatory and legislative regime to protect people, vessels, and the environment 5
Other (specify) 77
Don't know/No response 98
PQ15
How important are each of the following aspects of the Government of Canada's Ocean Protection Plan?
Q15A1
Half Sample
Improving how the Government of Canada prevents marine pollution incidents
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15A2
Half Sample
Improving how the Government of Canada responds to marine pollution incidents
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15B1
Half Sample
Preserving coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15B2
Half Sample
Restoring coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15C
Collaborating with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15D1
Half Sample
Working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15D2
Half Sample
Create Indigenous Community Response Teams so that indigenous communities play a larger role in marine safety
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15E
Updating the Government of Canada's rules and laws to protect people, vessels, and the environment
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15F
Investing in scientific research to support decisions on marine safety
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15G1
Half Sample
Building new lifeboat stations to improve response time to marine incidents
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15G2
Half Sample
Increase towing capacity and disaster prevention with new tugboats
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15H
Half Sample
Expanding the Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary in the Arctic, to respond to emergencies and pollution incidents
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15I
Make ship navigation safer through better charting and radar
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q15J
Strengthen polluter-pay principles to ensure that companies take responsibility for spills that damage marine environments
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
PQ16
What kind of impact do you think the Ocean Protection Plan will have on the following?
Q16A
The health of Canada's coasts and waterways
Very negative impact 1 1
2 2
No impact 3 3
4 4
Very positive impact 5 5
Don't know 98
Q16B
The health of marine animals and plants
Very negative impact 1 1
2 2
No impact 3 3
4 4
Very positive impact 5 5
Don't know 98
Q16C
The health of people living in Indigenous and other coastal communities
Very negative impact 1 1
2 2
No impact 3 3
4 4
Very positive impact 5 5
Don't know 98
Q16D
The safety of the shipping industry
Very negative impact 1 1
2 2
No impact 3 3
4 4
Very positive impact 5 5
Don't know 98
Q16E
Local economies near Canada's coasts and waterways
Very negative impact 1 1
2 2
No impact 3 3
4 4
Very positive impact 5 5
Don't know 98
PQ29
The Oceans Protection Plan is a $1.5 billion national strategy intended to help establish a world-leading marine safety system that provides economic opportunities for Canadians today while protecting our coastlines for generations to come. How confident are you that the Oceans Protection Plan will:
Q29A
Improve marine safety and responsible shipping along Canada's waterways and coasts
Not at all confident 1 1
2 2
Moderately confident 3 3
4 4
Very confident 5 5
Don't know 98
Q29B
Protect Canada's marine environment
Not at all confident 1 1
2 2
Moderately confident 3 3
4 4
Very confident 5 5
Don't know 98
Q29C
Offer new possibilities for Indigenous and coastal communities, such as working closely together on safe shipping practices, as well as training for residents?
Not at all confident 1 1
2 2
Moderately confident 3 3
4 4
Very confident 5 5
Don't know 98
PQ32
Canada's Marine Oil Spill Preparedness and Response Regime was established in 1995 as a partnership between government and industry. As the federal department responsible for the regime, Transport Canada sets and enforces its guidelines and regulations.
How confident are you that Canada's Oil Spill Response System can do each of the following?
Q32A
Clean up an oil spill
Not at all confident 1 1
2 2
Moderately confident 3 3
4 4
Very confident 5 5
Don't know 98
Q32B
Provide a timely response to an oil spill
Not at all confident 1 1
2 2
Moderately confident 3 3
4 4
Very confident 5 5
Don't know 98
Q32C
Ensure that responsible parties in private industry met their obligations
Not at all confident 1 1
2 2
Moderately confident 3 3
4 4
Very confident 5 5
Don't know 98
PQ21
Half Sample
How much of a role should each of the following have in developing marine safety including safe shipping in your area?
Q21A
Half Sample
The federal government
No role at all 1 1
2 2
A moderate role 3 3
4 4
A very strong role 5 5
Don't know 98
Q21B
Half Sample
Your provincial government
No role at all 1 1
2 2
A moderate role 3 3
4 4
A very strong role 5 5
Don't know 98
Q21C
Half Sample
Your [Q31 = 1]Indigenous[else]local or regional government
No role at all 1 1
2 2
A moderate role 3 3
4 4
A very strong role 5 5
Don't know 98
PQ24
Half Sample
As far as you know, in the past few years how much of a role have each of the following played when it comes to addressing marine safety including safe shipping practices in your area?
Q24A
Half Sample
The federal government
No role at all 1 1
2 2
A moderate role 3 3
4 4
A very strong role 5 5
Don't know 98
Q24B
Half Sample
Your provincial government
No role at all 1 1
2 2
A moderate role 3 3
4 4
A very strong role 5 5
Don't know 98
Q24C
Half Sample
Your [Q31 = 1]Indigenous[else]local or regional government
No role at all 1 1
2 2
A moderate role 3 3
4 4
A very strong role 5 5
Don't know 98
Q27
Half Sample
How important is it to you to have input into or feedback on decisions the Government of Canada makes about marine safety including safe shipping practices in your area?
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q28
How important is it for Indigenous and coastal communities to be working closely with the Government of Canada on decisions about marine safety including safe shipping practices in your area?
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q42
Have you ever looked for information about marine safety in Canada?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know 98
Q43 [1,13]
If you wanted to know more about Government of Canada programs, regulations and activities to protect Canada's oceans, waterways and coasts, where or who would you be most likely to go to for information?
Select all that apply
News on television, radio or newspapers 1
Talk shows on television, radio or newspapers 2
From neighbourhood or community newspapers 3
Magazines 4
The Internet (e.g., search engine such as Google) 5
Social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) 6
Transport Canada or other Government of Canada website 7
Call 1-800 O Canada or visit Government of Canada office 8
To my friends, family or acquaintances 9
To someone working in the shipping industry 10
To someone working in local marine transportation and safety 11
Relevant Non-Government Organization (e.g., environmental NGO) 12
Other, specify (try to be as specific as you can) : 77
Don't remember 98
Q44
Half Sample
How important do you think it is for the Government of Canada to report to Canadians about how it is performing in improving marine safety and generally protecting Canada's marine environment?
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
PQ45
How important do you think it is for the Government of Canada to provide the following types of information to Canadians about its role in protecting Canada's coasts and waterways?
Q45A
Incidence of accidents/spills
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q45B
The record of cleaning up spills
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q45C
Activities to train residents in Indigenous and coastal communities
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q45D
Implementation of new regulations to maintain safe shipping practices
Not at all important 1 1
2 2
Moderately important 3 3
4 4
Very important 5 5
Don't know 98
Q46
Have you ever participated in an engagement session in your area about marine safety or the Oceans Protection Plan?
Yes 1
No 2
Don't know 98
QFSA
What are the first three digits of your postal code?
77 77
Prefer not to say 99
QPROV
Prefer not to say
In which province or territory do you live?
Newfoundland and Labrador 1
Prince Edward Island 2
Nova Scotia 3
New Brunswick 4
Quebec 5
Ontario 6
Manitoba 7
Saskatchewan 8
Alberta 9
British Columbia 10
Yukon 11
Northwest Territories 12
Nunavut 13
None of the above 99
QAGE
In what year were you born?
Note: answer the full year, i.e. 1977 As "1977"
Year 1
No answer 99
QAGE2
No answer
In which of the following age categories do you belong?
18 to 24 1
25 to 34 2
35 to 44 3
45 to 54 4
55 to 64 5
65 or older 6
No answer 99
QEDUC
What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?
Grade 8 or less 1
Some high school 2
High school diploma or equivalent 3
Registered Apprenticeship or other trades certificate or diploma 4
College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma 5
University certificate or diploma below bachelor's level 6
Bachelor's degree 7
Post graduate degree above bachelor's level 8
Prefer not to say 99
QINC
Which of the following categories best describes your total annual household income, including income from all household members, before taxes are deducted?
Under $20,000 1
Between $20,000 and $39,999 2
Between $40,000 and $59,999 3
Between $60,000 and $79,999 4
Between $80,000 and $99,999 5
Between $100,000 and $149,999 6
$150,000 or above 7
Prefer not to say 99
QBORN
Where were you born?
Born in Canada 1
Born outside Canada (Specify the country): 2
Prefer not to say 99
QGENDR
Are you ...
Male 1
Female 2
Prefer to self-describe (specify) 3
Prefer not to say 99
Appendix B: Indigenous Stakeholder Interview Guide
Ekos Research Associates Inc. has been hired by Transport Canada to conduct public opinion research to measure confidence in Canada's marine safety system, and awareness of the Oceans Protection Plan. The national Oceans Protection Plan is designed to achieve a world-leading marine safety system for our country's context that will increase the Government of Canada's capacity to prevent and improve response to marine pollution incidents.
A component of this study involves interviews with key individuals involved with or representing indigenous groups that share ties to Canada's coasts and waterways. Interviews are expected to last 45 minutes and will be conducted by telephone. Responses are kept completely confidential and findings are reported in aggregate form and not attributed to you as an individual.
Please note that some of these questions may not apply to your experience or you may not have enough information to answer. If this is the case, please let the interviewer know.