Oceans Protection Plan: Canadians' confidence in marine safety 2020

Findings Report

Prepared for Transport Canada

Supplier: Ekos Research Associates Inc.
Contract Number: T8053-190009/001/CY
Contract Value: $150,820.46
Award Date: January 6, 2020
Delivery Date: March 17, 2020

Registration Number: POR 057-19
For more information on this report, please contact Transport Canada at por-rop@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: February 28, 2020

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 2,702 Canadians in February 2020. Nineteen one-on-one interviews with Indigenous participants were also conducted during the same time.

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 2020.

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Public Services and Procurement Canada. For more information on this report, please contact Public Services and Procurement Canada at: tpsgc.questions-questions.pwgsc@tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca or at:

Transport Canada
330 Sparks Street
Ottawa, ON K1A 0N5

Catalogue Number: T29-158/2020E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-34536-9
Related publications (registration number: POR 130-16):

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, 2020

Table of Contents

• List of Tables
• List of Charts
• Executive Summary
  1. Background and Objectives
  2. Methodology
  3. Key Findings
  4. Note to Readers
  5. Contract Value
  6. Political Neutrality Certification
• Detailed Findings
  1. Summary of Findings from General Public Survey
  2. Summary of Findings from Indigenous Participant Interviews
• Appendices
  1. Methodological Details
  2. Indigenous Participant In-Depth Interviews
  3. Survey Questionnaire (English)
  4. Indigenous Participant Interview Guide

List of Tables

• Table 1: Sources of Concern
• Table 2: Sources of Hearing about the Oceans Protection Plan
• Table 3: Recalled Messaging for Oceans Protection Plan
• Table 4: Primary Sources for Information
• Table 5: Sample Characteristics

List of Charts

• Chart 1: Awareness of Marine Issues
• Chart 2: Importance of Marine Issues
• Chart 3: Confidence in Canada's Marine Safety System
• Chart 4: Changes in Confidence
• Chart 5ab: Awareness of Government Actions
• Chart 6: Awareness of Oceans Protection Plan
• Chart 7: Aided Awareness
• Chart 8ab: Importance of Oceans Protection Plan Aspects
• Chart 9ab: Impact of Oceans Protection Plan
• Chart 10: Confidence in Oceans Protection Plan
• Chart 11: Confidence in Marine Oil Spill Response System
• Chart 12: Preferred Roles in Developing Marine Safety
• Chart 13: Perceived Roles in Developing Marine Safety
• Chart 14: Importance of Having Input into Government of Canada Decisions
• Chart 15: Incidence of Searching for Marine Safety Information
• Chart 16: Importance of Reporting on Marine Safety
• Chart 17: Importance of Specific Types of Information
• Chart 18: Participation in Engagement Sessions

1. Executive Summary

A. Background and Objectives

The Oceans Protection Plan is the largest investment ever made to protect Canada's coasts and waterways. It was launched in late 2016 to establish a world-leading marine safety system that provides economic opportunities for Canadians today, while protecting our coastlines for generations to come.

Transport Canada identified a need for public opinion research to measure Canadians' and Indigenous Peoples' 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 Peoples in marine safety.

B. Methodology

The survey is comprised of 2,702 completed cases using a random probability sample with a margin of error of up to +/-1.9 %, including 2,141 with the general public (with an associated margin of error of up to +/- 2.1%) and 561 with Indigenous Peoples in Canada (with an associated margin of error of up to +/- 4.1%). The survey relied on a mix of panel and random public sources, with collection taking place online and through a team of trained, bilingual interviewers between late January and mid-February 2020. Findings are reported separately for the general public and Indigenous Peoples of Canada, and results are compared with a baseline survey of 3,407 (2,168 general public and 1,239 Indigenous Peoples).

In a second phase, qualitative one-on-one interviews were conducted by telephone with 19 individuals from Indigenous coastal communities. This includes five interviews conducted in the Pacific Region, one in the Arctic Region, six in Quebec, one in Ontario, and four in the Atlantic Region. Two more were also conducted with national Indigenous organizations. Interviews were conducted between early February and early March 2020.

The process for collection is described separately in Appendix A (Survey) and Appendix B Indigenous one-on-one interviews) Appendix C presents the survey questionnaire and Appendix D presents the interview guide for Indigenous one-on-one interviews.

C. Key Findings

Public Awareness, Perceived Importance and Confidence

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 respondents in the survey rated themselves as aware and roughly half said they are unaware. Awareness is marginally higher among Indigenous Peoples and residents of coastal communities. Most Canadians (76% to 84%) however, feel that marine safety and protecting the marine environment are important. The same level of importance is also found among Indigenous Peoples and those living in coastal communities.

Public confidence in Canada's marine safety system is modest with three in ten members of the general public and coastal communities responding that they are confident. In comparison, four in ten members of the general public and coastal communities indicate moderate confidence. Confidence is lower with Indigenous Peoples (22%), particularly those in coastal communities (17%).

The results for the general public are largely on par with 2018 results in terms of confidence, although there is a very slight increase from 29% to 32% amongst people living in coastal communities. In both the general public and Indigenous samples, confidence is considerably higher among those most aware. Key sources of weaker confidence stem from stories people have heard or read in the news (66%), what is witnessed in the community (28%), or what people say on social media (15%).

Awareness and Perceived Importance of Government Programs

Awareness of marine programs, regulations, or activities operated by the Government of Canada in these areas is quite high. Eight in ten 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 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 and in coastal communities.

One in five in the Canadian public said that they have heard or seen something about the Government of Canada's Oceans Protection Plan (one in four among Indigenous Peoples), with marginally higher awareness 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 these specific elements of the Plan is higher than in 2018. Recall of government collaboration with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities is marginally lower among Indigenous respondents.

There is limited distinction regarding the importance of most key elements of the Oceans Protection Program. Top elements considered important by more than eight in 10 members of the general public and of Indigenous Peoples are:

• Strengthening polluter-pay principles to ensure companies take responsibility for spills;
• Making marine pollution response stronger, better and faster;
• Protecting and restoring coastal ecosystems; and,
• Protecting Canada's endangered whale species.

Other areas seen as important among 6 to 8 members of the general public and Indigenous Peoples in Canada are:

• Investing in scientific research to support decisions about marine safety;
• Boosting marine safety in the Arctic; and,
• Bringing more Canadians and Indigenous peoples into the marine safety system.

Perceived Impact of Programs

The perceived impact of the Oceans Protection Plan is generally high. About two-thirds of the general public believe that the Plan 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 and other coastal communities, or on local economies near Canada's coasts and waterways.

These results are echoed, although marginally less strongly among Indigenous Peoples. Perceived impact is also not as strong in coastal communities. Related to the program's three primary objectives, just over one in three Canadians feel confident the Oceans Protection Plan will improve marine safety and responsible shipping practices and protect Canada's marine environment, and slightly fewer are confident it will offer new possibilities for Indigenous and coastal communities.

Confidence is marginally lower, however, among Indigenous Peoples in Canada (26% to 31%) and considerably lower than found in 2018. 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. Only one in four feel confident the system can ensure that industrial polluters will be made to pay and affected communities will be compensated.

Roles in Developing Marine Safety

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 two in three 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 more strongly advocate for local government involvement (63%).

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. Fewer than one in five feel the same about their provincial government and one in seven believe their local government has played a strong part. Results are weaker among Indigenous Peoples in terms of perceived role of the Government of Canada (34%) and marginally stronger with respect to Indigenous governments.

Seven in ten members of the public, and three in four Indigenous respondents, believe it is important that Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities work closely with the federal government. Half of the public and 62% of Indigenous respondents feel it is important for citizens to provide input into these decisions.

One in four members of the public and one in three Indigenous Peoples 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 three percent in the general public, although it is higher (11%) among Indigenous Peoples.

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 (88% to 90% of both the general public and Indigenous Peoples). Another two in three members of the public and eight in ten Indigenous Peoples also feel it is a good idea to report on training activities for Indigenous and coastal community residents.

Highlights of Indigenous Participant Interview Findings

The oceans and waterways have been a critical part of food security, transportation, recreation and economic prosperity for community members for generations, according to most participants. The identity and spirituality of these communities is interconnected with the ocean, and teachings and stories of creation are connected to the water, inlets and shores. Marine shipping has affected many of the communities. Most participants noted increased shipping traffic, shoreline erosion, and safety concerns with the ability to access the water and to marine harvesting limited.

According to most participants, the Government of Canada has the necessary role to establish policy, issue permits, enforce regulations that can be implemented to all jurisdictions to protect oceans and coastal waterways. Most participants noted that only the federal government has the capacity to provide funding to increase the science and activities that can help address ocean and shoreline issues. However, most participants believe that it is important for Indigenous and coastal communities to have the opportunity to identify needs and priorities in their regions, incorporate traditional knowledge in the development of activities and solutions, and have a larger role in protecting Canada's coast. Key participants support the idea of the Government of Canada continuing to provide Indigenous communities with training, equipment and expertise to help protect Canada's coasts

Most participants described the OPP as a comprehensive and wide-ranging plan, with the strength that it provides needed support and equipment to communities. Many stated that given the broad goals of the OPP, and the many initiatives, it is difficult to form a thorough understanding of the OPP, or discern why the initiatives were chosen or how they comprise a coordinated plan. Many participants indicated that although Indigenous communities were consulted and engaged through OPP, decisions about marine safety had already been made by the government prior to the consultations.

Many participants felt that OPP has been an effective tool for creating meaningful partnerships. Most stated that partnerships between the Government of Canada and Indigenous communities can be created through a foundation of mutual respect and require equitable voices in the partnership. Some participants believe that the relationship between the Government of Canada and Indigenous peoples has generally improved over the last decade and that OPP activities have contributed to the improved relationship in recent years though engagement and partnerships.

D. Note to Readers

Detailed findings are presented in the sections that follow. Overall results for the 2020 survey are presented in the main portion of the narrative and are typically supported by graphic or tabular presentation of results. Results are also compared in the text with the 2018 baseline survey findings, where relevant. Results of the 2018 survey are also presented in charts and tables in a column under the heading "2018". Results may not total to 100% due to rounding.

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^{Footnote 1} 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, and between 2020 and 2018 baseline results, these differences are described in the main paragraph or in the bulleted text.

E. Contract Value

The contract value for the POR project is $150,820.46 (including HST).

Supplier Name: Ekos Research Associates

PWGSC Contract Number: T8053-190009/001/CY

Contract Award Date: January 6, 2020

To obtain more information on this study, please e-mail por-rop@tc.gc.ca

F. Political Neutrality Certification

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)

2. Detailed Findings

A. Summary of Findings From General Public Survey

Perceptions of Marine Safety

Most of the Canadian public demonstrate limited awareness of marine safety and marine environment protection. Although 14% of the general public said that they are aware of marine safety issues including safe shipping practices in Canada, 29% are only moderately aware and over half (57%) are not aware. Similarly, only 16% of the general public said they are aware of the steps taken in Canada to protect the marine environment, whereas 36% are only moderately aware, and almost half (47%) are not aware of the steps taken. In both cases results are similar to those found in 2018 when 17% to 18% were aware.

As in 2018, awareness is somewhat higher among Indigenous People in Canada. One in five (19%) is aware of marine safety issues, although 26% are only moderately aware and half (51%) are not aware. In terms of steps taken to protect the marine environment, 26% are aware, although 32% are only moderately aware and 40% are not aware. Awareness of marine safety issues among Indigenous people is marginally lower than the 23% in 2018, although awareness of the steps taken to protect the marine environment is similar.

As in 2018, residents of coastal communities are typically more aware of these issues, with 20% indicating awareness of marine safety issues and steps taken to protect the marine environment, compared with 11% to 14% of residents of other parts of Canada. Awareness is also higher among Indigenous coastal residents (33% regarding marine safety and 40% in terms of the protective steps taken).

Chart 1: Awareness of Marine Issues

• In the general public, residents living in British Columbia and Atlantic Canada are more likely than those in other regions to say they are aware of both issues.
• Older Canadians, age 45 and over, are also more apt to be aware of both issues; also true of men, compared with women.
• Awareness is also higher in rural and remote regions compared with urban communities.
• Among Indigenous Peoples specifically, the Inuit population, made up exclusively of coastal residents, are typically more apt to be aware of both issues. The other patterns of increased awareness in British Columbia and Atlantic Canada, and rural and remote communities, as well as among older residents and men are also echoed in the Indigenous sample.

Most Canadians feel that marine safety and protecting the marine environment is important. As in 2018 where it was 75%, 76% of the general population feel that marine safety including safe shipping practices is important. Also similar to 2018, 83% believe that protecting the marine environment is important, and very few Canadians believe these issues are not important.

The perceived importance among Indigenous Peoples is on par with the general population and results from 2018, with 76% rating marine safety including safe shipping practices as important, and 84% believing the protection of the marine environment is important.

The importance of these issues is felt more strongly in coastal communities, with 87% indicating protecting the marine environment as important compared with 82% in non-coastal residents, and 80% saying that marine safety is important compared with 74% among non-coastal residents. Similarly, among Indigenous Peoples in coastal communities, 84% rate marine safety as important compared with 73% in non-coastal communities, and 89% rate protection of marine environment as important compared with 83% in non-coastal communities.

Chart 2: Importance of Marine Issues

• The general public living in British Columbia and Atlantic Canada are more likely than others across the country to say each factor is important.
• Older Canadians, age 55 and over (81%), are more apt than younger Canadians to see marine safety including shipping practices as important. While men are more apt to indicate higher awareness, women are more likely than men to say both issues are important (81% to 88%).
• In the Indigenous sample, Inuit are more likely than other Indigenous Peoples in Canada to see marine safety as an important issue. Indigenous People 55 to 64 years of age are more likely to see both of these issues as important than other age groups. Importance of protecting the marine environment also increases with education.
• In both the general public and Indigenous samples, awareness and perceived importance of these issues go hand in hand to some extent. That is, those more aware are also more apt to rate the importance as high (or vice versa).

As in 2018, 29% of the general public said they are confident in Canada's marine safety system, while 38% indicated moderate confidence and 15% are not confident.

Confidence in Canada's marine safety system is lower among Indigenous Peoples than among the general public, and compared with 2018 results, with 22% saying they are confident in Canada's marine safety system, and 26% indicating a lack of confidence (compared with 28% indicating confidence in 2018).

Confidence is similar in coastal communities to that of the general public, falling within a few percentage points of the broader public in terms of both lower and higher confidence. Confidence is lower among Indigenous residents of coastal communities (32%) compared with 24% among Indigenous Peoples elsewhere. This is a deeper divide than found in 2018 among Indigenous Peoples when 27% of coastal residents indicated low confidence, compared with 22% of residents living elsewhere. Results hint at a marginal shift in the general public in 2020 from moderate confidence (45% in 2018 to 41% in 2020) to confidence (29% in 2018 to 32% in 2020).

Chart 3: Confidence in Canada's Marine Safety System

• General public residents from British Columbia are typically less confident than others in Canada's marine safety system (27% are not confident).
• Men (35%) are more likely than women to be confident.
• Inuit are more apt than other Indigenous Peoples to say they are confident (31%) in Canada's marine safety system. Other patterns among Indigenous communities are similar to those found in the broader public including those in British Columbia expressing less confidence (51% lack confidence) than others across the country, and men indicating greater confidence than women (32%). Additionally, Indigenous residents in the Prairies are more apt to be confident (30%). Indigenous residents of rural areas, however, are less confident (35%) than those in urban areas and those with lower income (38%) are also less confident than those with greater income.
• In both the general public and Indigenous samples, and as with awareness and perceived importance of these issues, confidence is also higher among those most aware. That is, those more aware are twice as likely to express confidence (46% versus 23% among those least aware in the broader public, with a slightly wider margin in the Indigenous sample). The difference in confidence levels is not as wide based on perceived importance.

For those in the general population who are not confident in Canada's marine safety system, their opinion is shaped through various sources. The stories they have heard or read in the news (59%) is by far the main source and significantly increased from 2018 when it was 46%. What is witnessed in the community is a distant second source at 26%, although much higher for those living in coastal communities (39%). Evidence in the community has also increased from 21% in 2018. Social media is the third most prevalent source (13%); on par with 2018 results (12%). Other sources are described through verbatim responses among three percent or less.

Indigenous Peoples typically point to the same three sources, with more relying on what they see in their own community (33%) compared to the general population. This has also risen from 24% in 2018. What is seen in the community is by far the most prominent source (50%) among those living in coastal communities (compared with only 25% in non-coastal communities). Social media is also more prevalent among Indigenous Peoples compared with the general public at 19%, but on par with 17% in 2018.

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.

Only items with 2% or more shown

• The general public living in British Columbia (40%) or Atlantic Canada (33%), along with residents of remote communities (38%) are more likely than other regions to say what they see in their community makes them feel this way.
• Residents of Atlantic Canada (20%), along with younger Canadians (under age 35) (21% to 22%) are more apt to be concerned due to what people say on social media.
• Canadians with a university education (63%), along with those with higher income ($80,000 or higher), (65%) are more apt to form their opinion from stories in the news.
• Indigenous Peoples living in urban centres are more likely than those in other parts of Canada to form their opinion based on stories from the news (60%); those in rural (24%) or remote (38%) areas are more apt to point to social media. As with the general population, Indigenous Peoples in coastal communities in British Columbia or Atlantic Canada are more likely (48% in each) to cite what they see in their community.

Similar to 2018, the majority of Canadians in the general public (60%) indicated that their confidence in Canada's marine safety system has remained stable over the past five years. One in five (19%) have felt their confidence increase, although confidence has decreased for 15%.

Among Indigenous Peoples there has been a greater shift toward increased (26%) and decreased (23%) confidence over the past five years since 2018, relative to the general population, with fewer indicating confidence that has remained the same (47%).

Among both the general public and Indigenous Peoples results are similar between residents of coastal and non-coastal communities, with a marginally higher increase in confidence in non-coastal communities (28%) compared with coastal communities (22%) among Indigenous Peoples.

Chart 4: Changes in Confidence

• General public residents of Atlantic Canada are more likely than residents of other regions to have felt their confidence increase (33%). Those in British Columbia are more likely than others to have either increased (24%) or decreased (24%) in confidence.
• Older Canadians, age 65 and over, are more likely than their younger cohorts to say their confidence has increased (27%).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, residents in British Columbia (44%) are more likely to say confidence has decreased. Confidence is higher among younger Indigenous people under 35 years of age (39%), men (31%), and First Nations people who do not live on reserve compared with others.
• As described in other results for the general public and Indigenous samples, those most apt to be aware of, and value the importance of these issues are also more likely to report increased confidence in marines safety over the past five years. Again, the gap is wider among those most and least aware of these issues. For example, 32% of the general public most aware reported increased confidence compared with only 11% of the unaware. This gap narrows to 43% of the most aware of Indigenous Peoples compared with 21% among the least aware.

Canadians in the general population are moderately aware of marine programs, regulations or activities operated by the Government of Canada in these areas. Specifically, 79% believe the government has a program in place to respond to accidents, such as oil spills contributing to marine pollution, which has increased from 74% in 2018. Two-thirds think there is a Government of Canada program to prevent accidents (66%) or monitor marine pollution (63%), which is similar to 2018 (63% and 62%, respectively). Half (49%) perceive that the Government of Canada works closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts and waterways, also similar to 2018 (46%).

As with 2018, significantly fewer Indigenous Peoples believe these same plans are in place. Two-thirds (66%) believe the government has a plan in place to respond to accidents such as oil spills. About half think there is a plan to prevent accidents (56%) or monitor marine pollution (51%), although belief in a plan to prevent accidents has increased from 50% in 2018. Four in ten (43%) feel that the Government of Canada works closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts and waterways, which is similar to 2018 results (40%).

Results are similar among residents of coastal and non-coastal communities, although members of the general public living in coastal communities are more likely to see programming that monitors marine pollution (67% versus 62% in non-coastal communities). Compared with 2018, members of the general public in coastal communities are marginally more likely in 2020 to say the Government takes action to respond to accidents (79% versus 72% in 2018), as well as prevent them (68% versus 61% in 2018). Among Indigenous Peoples living in coastal communities there is slightly less acknowledgement of a plan to prevent accidents (25% say there is not one versus 17% in other communities).

Chart 5a: Awareness of Government Actions

Chart 5b: Awareness of Government Actions

• The general public living in Alberta are more apt to indicate there are programs in place for all four factors. Those in British Columbia are less likely to say there is a program in place for all factors. Residents of Atlantic Canada are more likely to say there is a plan in place to respond to accidents, and that the government works closely with Indigenous Peoples.
• Men, along with those with higher household income, and higher education, are more likely to perceive the government has programs in place for all four actions.
• Inuit, along with First Nations people living on reserve, and those living in remote areas generally, are more apt than other Indigenous Peoples to say there is a plan for all four actions.
• Naturally, those most aware in general are the most apt to be aware of specific Government of Canada activities. Similarly, those most aware of specific activities are also among the most confident in Canada's marine system, with a 15 to 25 point spread between proportions of the most and least confident reporting awareness of specific measures being taken by the Government.

Awareness of the Oceans Protection Plan

As in 2018, relatively few Canadians have heard of the Oceans Protection Plan, with little increase in awareness since 2018. One in five (21%) have heard of the plan and another 13% are unsure, although 66% said they have not heard of the plan. Results among Indigenous Peoples in Canada are fairly similar to the general public and to 2018 results, with 25% having heard of the plan; 21% in 2018.

Those living in coastal regions are more likely to have heard of the Oceans Protection Plan, at 27% in the general public compared to 19% in other areas, and 33% among Indigenous Peoples in coastal communities compared with 22% in other areas.

Chart 6: Awareness of Oceans Protection Plan

• The general public in Atlantic Canada (30%), British Columbia (34%), and the Territories (36%), along with those living in rural and remote communities (24% to 27%) are more likely than those in other regions to have heard about the Oceans Protection Plan.
• Canadians 65 or older (27%) are also more likely to have heard of the plan compared with those who are younger.
• Indigenous Peoples in British Columbia (41%) are more likely to have heard about the Oceans Protection Plan than those in other regions.

Following a description of the Government of Canada Oceans Protection Plan, four in ten in the general population indicated they vaguely (33%) or clearly (8%) recall the initiative, which is similar to results from 2018. Among those who had previously indicated awareness (i.e., unprompted) 89% 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, 21% indicated awareness following the description, although few said they recalled it clearly (1%).

Four in ten Indigenous Peoples likewise recall hearing about the initiative either vaguely (24%) or clearly (15%), which is also generally similar to results from 2018 although clear recall is stronger in 2020. Again, recall among those who had initially said they recalled the program without the benefit of the description is very high (84%), although just over half said they vaguely recalled hearing or reading about it. One in five of those who did not initially recall the program said they remember reading or hearing something about it following the description, although few recalled it clearly (5%).

Those living in coastal communities (13% in the general public and 20% of Indigenous Peoples) are more likely than their non-coastal counterparts (7% and 13%, respectively) to clearly recall hearing about the Oceans Protection Plan.

Chart 7: Aided Awareness

• After hearing a further description, those in British Columbia and the Territories are more likely than those in other regions to clearly (20%) recall the plan. Those in Ontario were least likely to recall it (59%).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, it is residents of Ontario and the Territories who are least likely to recall the Plan (69% and 68%, respectively) compared with others across the country.

Over half (52%) of the general population who have heard about the Oceans Protection Plan learned of the plan through television (a slight decrease from 56% in 2018). Nearly one-third recall hearing about the Plan in newspapers (34%; an increase from 28%), while slightly fewer point to the Internet (29%), or radio (28%). Other sources include social media (18%) or word of mouth (14%). Transport Canada or other federal government websites (8%), community newspaper (6%), and magazines (5%) were mentioned with much lower frequency. 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 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.

Indigenous Peoples who have heard about OPP are marginally less likely to have heard about it through television (45%), which is also a slight decrease from 50% in 2018. This is also true for daily newspapers (21% compared with 34% in the general public). They are more likely than the general population, however, to have heard about OPP through social media (24%). Both results are fairly similar to 2018 findings.

The general public living in coastal communities are more likely to have learned about the OPP through newspapers, or radio newspapers compared with residents of other parts of the country.

• The general public living in Atlantic Canada are more likely than residents of other regions to have heard about the plan through word of mouth (20%). Those in British Columbia (13%) or the Territories (14%) are more apt to have learned through neighbourhood or community newspapers. Residents of Manitoba or Saskatchewan are more likely to point to television (75%).
• Men (57%), along with older Canadians (65+) (67%), and residents of remote areas (69%), are more likely than other Canadians to have learned through television. Younger Canadians are more likely than older counterparts to have learned through word of mouth (30%), work or school (20%), while those 25-34 are more apt to have learned through the Internet (47%), social media (33%), or the Transport Canada site (13%).
• Métis are more likely than other Indigenous Peoples to have heard about the plan through daily newspapers (32%).

Nearly half of Canadians in the general public who are aware of the Oceans Protection Plan recall hearing that the government plans to improve how it prevents and responds to marine incidents (47%, an increase from 40% in 2018), the government is updating Canada's regulatory and legislative regime to protect people, vessels, and the environment (48%, a notable increase from 33% in 2018) or the government is preserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems that are vulnerable to marine shipping (41%, an increase from 31%). One-third recall that the government is collaborating with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic (33%, an increase from 24%) or working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts (34%, up from 22% in 2018). In 2018, nearly two in ten (19%) could not recall specifically what they heard about the OPP; this has decreased to 13%.

The top mention among Indigenous Peoples was also that the plan involves the government improving how it prevents and responds to marine pollution incidents (51%). Indigenous respondents also recall that the plan involves government updating Canada's regulatory and legislative regime to protect people, vessels, and the environment (50%; an increase from 23% in 2018), preserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems (38%, compared with 30% in 2018), or collaborating with local communities to address issues related to marine traffic (32%, up from 15%). Far more Indigenous respondents than in 2018 recall hearing that the government will work closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coasts (42%, compared to 22% in 2018).

Indigenous residents of coastal communities are more likely than other Indigenous Peoples in Canada to recall that the government is preserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems (54% versus 30% among non-coastal communities).

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 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.

Only items with 2% or more shown

• The general public living in Quebec (48%) or Ontario (46%) are more likely to have heard that the government is preserving and restoring coastal marine ecosystems. Those in British Columbia (12%) or the Territories (15%) are more apt to have specified negatives about the plan, such as that it is not going to be effective, a waste of money, or general distrust.
• Residents of remote settings are more apt to say they heard how the government is improving how it prevents and responds (63%) or working closing with Indigenous Peoples and costal communities (52%).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, First Nations (65%) respondents not living on a reserve are more likely to say they heard how the government is improving how it prevents and responds to incidents.

Importance of the Oceans Protection Plan

The importance of eight priorities of the Oceans Protection Plan were considered by respondents. Strengthening polluter-pay principles to ensure that companies take responsibility for spills that damage marine environments (88%) remains at the top of the list among the general public, as in 2018 when it was 85%. Over four in five of the general public feel that the ability to make marine pollution response stronger, better, faster (85%); protecting and restoring coastal ecosystems (85%) or protecting Canada's endangered whale species (84%) are among the top of the list in terms of important priorities of the plan.

Investing in scientific research to support decisions on marine safety are important to four in five members of the general public (79%) and 75% say it is important to boost marine safety in the Arctic. Just under two in three (62%) support the importance of bringing more Canadians and Indigenous peoples into the marine safety system. Just under half (46%) believe it is important to remove wrecked and abandoned vessels.

Indigenous respondents rated the importance of strengthening polluter-pay principles to ensure that companies take responsibility for spills that damage marine environments equally high (88%) compared to the general public, but higher than found among Indigenous Peoples in Canada in 2018 when it was 81%. They are relatively more likely than the general public to associate a high degree of importance with the priorities of boosting marine safety in the Arctic (81%), bringing more Canadians and Indigenous peoples into the marine safety system (74%), and removing wrecked and abandoned vessels (56%).

Members of the general public living in coastal communities are more likely than others to rate a stronger marine safety response and protecting and restoring coastal ecosystems as important, along with removing wrecked and abandoned vessels and strengthening polluter pay responsibilities. Indigenous residents of coastal communities are more likely than those in other communities to see the importance of bringing Canadians and Indigenous communities together on marine safety and removing wrecked and abandoned vessels.

Chart 8a: Importance of Oceans Protection Plan Priorities

Strengthen polluter-pay principles to ensure that companies take responsibility for spills that damage marine environments

General Indigenous

Public Respondents

Not important (1-2) 2% 3%

Moderately (3) 6% 4%

Quite important (4-5) 88% 88%

Don't Know 4% 5%

Making marine pollution response stronger, better, and faster

General Indigenous

Public Respondents

Not important (1-2) 2% 2%

Moderately (3) 9% 11%

Quite important (4-5) 85% 82%

Don't Know 4% 4%

Protecting and restoring coastal ecosystems

General Indigenous

Public Respondents

Not important (1-2) 3% 4%

Moderately (3) 8% 7%

Quite important (4-5) 85% 86%

Don't Know 3% 3%

Protecting Canada's endangered whale species

General Indigenous

Public Respondents

Not important (1-2) 3% 3%

Moderately (3) 9% 9%

Quite important (4-5) 84% 85%

Don't Know 3% 3%

Chart 8b: Importance of Oceans Protection Plan Priorities

• Older Canadians are more likely than younger counterparts to feel most of the priorities are important, with the exception of strengthening polluter pay and protecting whales, where ratings did not vary by age.
• Women are more likely than men to feel that each is important.
• Those born outside of Canada (75%) are more likely to say it is important to bring more Canadians and Indigenous peoples into the marine safety system.
• Those with lower income are more likely to say it is important to bring more Canadians and Indigenous peoples into the marine safety system.
• Canadians from Quebec are more likely to say it is important to make marine pollution response stronger, better, faster (89%), or protecting and restoring coastal ecosystems (90%).
• Residents of Ontario (86%) are more likely to say it is important to protect Canada's endangered whale species, while those from British Columbia (80%) or Alberta (74%) are least likely to do so.
• Residents of British Columbia (63%), Atlantic Canada (59%) and Quebec are more likely to say it is important to remove wrecked and abandoned vessels. This is also true of those with lower income (under $40,000) (56%), and those born outside of Canada (55%) compared with their counterparts.
• Among Indigenous Peoples, Inuit (74%) are less likely than others to say it is important to protect Canada's endangered whale species, however, contrary to the general population, those in British Columbia (96%) are more interested.
• Inuit are also less likely than other Indigenous Peoples to say it is important to strengthen polluter pay principles.
• Indigenous people with a university education (85%) are more likely than those with less education to say it is important to invest in scientific research to support decisions on marine safety.

Impact of the Oceans Protection Plan

Essentially unchanged from 2018, two-thirds of the general public believe that the Oceans Protection Plan will have a positive impact on the health of marine animals and plants (67%) and the health of Canada's coasts and waterways (66%). Over half (55%) 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 and other coastal communities (52%), or on local economies near Canada's coasts and waterways (48%). Results are generally similar to those captured in 2018.

Indigenous Peoples similarly feel that the Oceans Protection Plan will have a positive impact on the health of marine animals and plants (61%, lower than 66% reported in 2018) or the health of Canada's coasts and waterways (62%). Fewer feel that the Plan will impact the safety of the shipping industry (49%) than in 2018 (57%). Over half (54%) still feel that the Oceans Protection Plan will positively impact the health of people living in Indigenous and coastal communities. Fewer also believe the Plan will have a positive impact on local economies near Canada's coasts and waterways (43%, lower than 51% reported in 2018).

Members of the general public living outside of coastal areas are no more likely to feel that the Oceans Protection Plan will have a positive impact on each of the attributes. Among Indigenous residents of coastal communities, however, there is a slight lean toward a more negative impact from OPP (14% to 21%) compared with Indigenous residents of non-coastal areas.

Chart 9a: Impact of Oceans Protection Plan

The health of marine life and plants

Coastal

2020 2018 2020 2018

Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig

Public Resp. Public Resp. Public Resp. Public Resp.

Negative (1-2) 3% 9%

No impact (3) 14% 16%

Positive (4-5) 67% 61% 65% 66% 67% 52% 62% 62%

Don't Know 17% 14%

The health of Canada's coasts and waterways

Coastal

2020 2018 2020 2018

Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig

Public Resp. Public Resp. Public Resp. Public Resp.

Negative (1-2) 2% 7%

No impact (3) 15% 17%

Positive (4-5) 66% 62% 64% 65% 67% 55% 62% 60%

Don't Know 17% 13%

The safety of the shipping industry

Coastal

2020 2018 2020 2018

Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig. Gen. Indig

Public Resp. Public Resp. Public Resp. Public Resp.

Negative (1-2) 5% 14%

No impact (3) 21% 22%

Positive (4-5) 55% 49% 58% 57% 55% 48% 57% 57%

Don't Know 19% 16%

Chart 9b: Impact of Oceans Protection Plan

• The general public living in Quebec are more likely than other Canadians across the country to say the Oceans Protection Plan will have a positive impact on the health of Canada's coasts and waterways (73%), the health of marine life and plants (75%), the health of people living in Indigenous and costal communities (61%), and the safety of the shipping industry (61%). Those in Alberta are least likely to say the plan will positively impact local economies (38%).
• Women, as well as older Canadians (65+), are more likely than men and younger Canadians to feel that the OPP will have a positive impact on all five areas. Those under 25, however, are also more likely than those 25-64 to say the plan will impact the health of Canada's coasts and waterways (75%) and the health of marine life and plants (78%).
• First Nations people not living on a reserve (51%) are more likely to feel that the plan will have an impact on local economies.
• While there is not a very sizable difference between those who are aware and those who are not aware in terms of perception, naturally those who are more confident generally in marine safety, are also more apt to rate impacts in a variety of areas as positive. Those who see marine safety as important, however, are significantly more likely to rate impacts in all of the areas as positive. These patterns are reflected among both the general public and Indigenous samples.

Confidence in the Oceans Protection Plan

Results suggest that Canadians have moderate confidence in the Oceans Protection Plan. Among members of the general public, 37% say they are confident that the Oceans Protection Plan will improve marine safety and responsible shipping along Canada's waterways. The same proportion (35%) is confident that the program will protect Canada's marine environment. Three in ten (29%) believe the program will offer new possibilities for Indigenous communities. Between 18% and 23%, however, say they are not confident in the program's effectiveness in these areas. Results are similar, if perhaps marginally lower than in 2018.

Compared to the general public, Indigenous Peoples in Canada are somewhat less confident in the Oceans Protection Plan. One in three says that the program will improve marine safety (31%) and protect Canada's marine environment (32%). These results, however, are considerably lower than results among Indigenous Peoples in Canada in 2018 when 45% and 44%, respectively, said they same. As with the general public, confidence among Indigenous Peoples in Canada is lowest on the potential to offer new possibilities for Indigenous communities (26%). This is 17-point drop, however, from the 43% expressing confidence in 2018.

Confidence is lower among Indigenous residents of coastal communities compared with those living in other areas, in each of the three areas. In fact, 33% of Indigenous residents of coastal communities say their confidence is low when it comes to Oceans Protection Plan offering Indigenous and coastal communities the opportunity to participate in Canada's marine safety system.

Chart 10: Confidence in Oceans Protection Plan

• Compared to other regions of Canada, residents of Quebec are more confident that the Oceans Protection Plan improves marine safety (44%) and protects Canada's marine environment (35%). Residents of British Columbia, followed by residents of Alberta are consistently less confident than others across the country (31% and 27%, respectively are not confident regarding marine safety; 37% and 28%, respectively are not confident regarding the protection of Canada's marine environment; and 30% and 28%, respectively are not confident when it comes to offering possibilities for Indigenous participation).
• Those who live in remote communities consistently convey more confidence in the Oceans Protection Plan than those in urban or rural settings when it comes to improving marine safety and responsible shipping (52%) and protecting Canada' marine environment (46%).
• Youth (i.e., those under 25) and seniors (i.e., those ages 65 and over) consistently express higher than average levels of confidence.
• Among Indigenous Peoples, Inuit are more likely to express confidence that the Oceans Protection Plan will improve marine safety (45%) and offer new possibilities for Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities (43%) compared with their counterparts. First Nations residents living on a reserve are also more confident about the Plan's ability to improve marine safety and responsible shipping (39%) compared with other First Nations (31%) and Métis (27%).
• Regionally, Indigenous Peoples living in Quebec are the most confident in the Plan across all three areas. This is also true of residents of the Territories with regard to marine safety and responsible shipping and offering new possibilities of Indigenous participation in marine safety. Indigenous residents of Ontario and British Columbia are least confident in the OPP in all three areas. In fact, 33% to 46% expressed a lack of confidence.
• Indigenous residents of remote communities are more confident than others among the protection of Canada's marine environment (42%).
• Indigenous young people (under 35 years of ager) are more confident than older Indigenous Peoples when it comes to marine safety and protecting the environment.
• Among the general public, those who are aware of these areas are more likely to also express confidence in improvements in marine safety and responsible shipping practices, protect marine environment and offer new possibilities for Indigenous and coastal communities. Among Indigenous Peoples this is only the case with improvements in marine safety and responsible shipping practices.

Confidence in Canada's Oil Spill Response System

When Canada's Marine Oil Spill Response System is described Canadians express varying degrees of confidence in it. As in 2018, just under four in ten members of the general public indicated they are confident that the regime can effectively clean up an oil spill and provide a timely response to an oil spill (37 % versus 23 % with low confidence in both cases). Canadians express even less trust that polluters will be made to pay for a spill or accident, with just 23% believing the system will ensure that polluters fulfill their obligations, compared to 39% who are doubtful of this; highlighting even less trust than felt in 2018.

Indigenous respondents are even less trusting than the general public in the system's ability to address spills (30% indicating confidence and the same proportion indicating a lack of confidence). This is also the case with regard to the system's ability to provide a timely response, where 27% are confident, but 32% lack confidence. In both of these cases, confidence has slipped considerably since 2018. In terms of ensuring that polluters pay, Indigenous Peoples express about the same level of distrust as the general public, with 45% indicting a lack of confidence and only 24% feeling confident. This result is also lower than the 31% indicating confidence in 2018.

Chart 11: Confidence in Marine Oil Spill Response System

* Wording in 2017: Ensure that responsible parties in private industry met their obligations

• Residents of British Columbia consistently express lower levels of confidence in Canada's Oil Spill Response System. In fact, 36% to 46% indicate a lack of confidence. Residents of Quebec are more likely than others across the country to rate themselves as confident (44% to 45% on marine clean up and timeliness, and 28% on polluters paying).
• Those who reside in rural communities are more likely to say they are confident that Canada's Oil Spill Response System can ensure that polluters pay and compensate affected communities (34%).
• Those under the age of 25, as well as those with high school or less education are consistently more likely to rate themselves as confident.
• Members of the general public who are generally more aware of marine safety and environmental protection issues are more confident in each of the three areas. Among Indigenous Peoples there is greater confidence among the aware only in polluters paying.

Preferred Roles in Developing Marine Safety

When asked about the role that governments should play in marine safety, most members of the general public (84%) say they believe the federal government should play a significant role, while just over six in ten (66%) say their provincial government should be similarly tasked. Half (48%) would like their local or regional government to play a significant role in marine safety, although one in five (21%) believe their local government have a very limited role. Results are very similar to those found in 2018, although perhaps the general public is slightly more likely to see a strong role for the federal government than in 2018 (78%).

Indigenous Peoples are marginally less likely than the general public to see a strong role for the federal government in developing marine safety (79%), although more significant than captured in 2018, when it was only 71%. As with the general public and in 2018, two in three Indigenous Peoples see a significant role for their provincial government (68%). Indigenous People, however, are considerably more likely than the general public to see a strong role for their Indigenous government to play (63%), as was also found in 2018 (60%).

Although results are similar among residents of coastal and non-coastal communities in both the general public and among Indigenous Peoples, residents of coastal communities are somewhat more likely to argue for a strong role for their local (or Indigenous) government compared with other residents (51% in coastal communities versus 45% in non-coastal communities in the general public, and 69% of Indigenous coastal residents versus 61% among other Indigenous residents).

Chart 12: Preferred Roles in Developing Marine Safety

• Compared with other residents in the general public those living in Ontario and Quebec (87%) are more likely to argue for a strong federal role.
• This is also true of women compared with men (86% versus 81%), and those with a university level of education (88%) compared with other members of the general public.
• Compared to other regions of Canada, residents in Atlantic Canada are more likely to say their provincial government should have a strong role to play (73%). The least likely to say this are residents of the Prairies (54%) and Alberta (56%). Women again argue this more strongly than men (72% compared with 60%).
• With regard to local government, residents of Alberta are more likely than others across the country to argue for a limited role (38%), as are men (27%) compared with women, who are more apt to argue for a stronger role (53% compared with 42% among men).
• Among Indigenous respondents, First Nations not living on a reserve (85%) and Métis (82%) are more likely to say that the federal government should play a key role in developing marine safety. This view is also more prevalent in the Prairies (84%) and in an urban setting (91%).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, it is men who are more likely to argue for a stronger federal role (83% compared with 73% among women). This is also more likely among those with a university level of education (90%), and those reporting the highest household incomes (85%), compared with those reporting less education and/or income.
• Urban First Nations are also most likely to argue for a strong provincial role (77%) as are residents of British Columbia (80%) compared with other across the country.
• A strong role for Indigenous governments is more likely to be supported among residents of British Columbia (79%) than other Indigenous Peoples across the country. This is also true of a higher proportion (75%) of those reporting the lowest household incomes ($40,000 or lower).
• Members of the general public and Indigenous People who are more aware of these issues are more likely to advocate for strong roles for local or Indigenous government. Indigenous People who are more aware are also more likely to argue for a strong role for provincial governments.

Perceived Roles in Developing Marine Safety

Results highlight the modest role that the general public and Indigenous Peoples believe governments have played in addressing marine safety. Four in ten members of the general public (41%) believe that the federal government has played a significant role. Only 18% feel their provincial government has played a key role, compared to 30% who feel they have played a minimal role. Fewer still (13%) believe their local government has played a strong part, with triple that (40%) seeing the contribution as limited.

Indigenous Peoples are less likely than the general public to say that the federal government has played a key role (34%), but similar to the general public in their views about the modest role played by provincial governments (20%). Although still considered a slight role at 19%, Indigenous Peoples are somewhat more positive about the role that Indigenous governments have played in addressing marine safety, compared with the view of the general public about local or regional governments.

There is little difference between the views of residents of coastal and non-coastal communities, although perceptions of very limited roles is more prevalent among non-coastal residents, who are less apt to "see" any impact of such efforts.

Chart 13: Perceived Roles in Developing Marine Safety

• Residents of Atlantic, British Columbia and Quebec are more likely to perceive a moderate to strong role played by their provincial government has played at least a moderate role in developing marine safety practices (62%, 58% and 56%, respectively). Residents in Alberta and the Prairies are much more likely to believe their provincial governments have played a limited role (56% and 46%, respectively). Residents of Arctic Communities are more apt to feel the federal government has played a major role (63%).
• Patterns are similar in Quebec and Alberta with regard to local governments.
• Compared to women, men are more likely to believe that their provincial government has played a limited role (36% versus 25%). The same pattern exists with regard to local governments (46% of men indicating a limited role compared with 35% among women).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, Inuit are more likely to perceive their local or regional government as having played a strong role (32%), but least likely to have seen a role played by the federal or provincial/territorial governments (23% and 38% indicating a limited role for both, respectively).
• Indigenous residents of British Columbia are the most likely to have seen a strong role played by the Government of Canada (45%) and their provincial government (35%). Those living in the Territories are also more likely than others across the country to have seen a strong federal role (44%). Indigenous residents of Quebec are most likely to have seen their Indigenous government play a strong role (34%).
• Generally, Indigenous residents of remote communities are more positive about the role played by the Government of Canada (44%) and the role of their own Indigenous governments (31%). Indigenous Peoples in urban areas are also more positive about the role of the Government of Canada (40%) compared with those living in rural areas (27%).
• Indigenous Peoples who are 55 or older are much less confident than those who are younger about the role of their provincial or Indigenous governments, with 31% to 48% observing a limited role for each.
• Those most aware of these issues are more likely to have noted stronger roles that have been played by all levels of government in the past.

Importance of Having Input into Government of Canada Decisions

Among members of the general public, half (51%) feel it is important to them personally to provide input into these decisions, and only 19% assigning this limited importance. In terms of the Government working closely with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities, 70% feel this is important, and only 12% assign it limited importance.

More than the general public, three in four Indigenous Peoples (77%) believe it is highly important that Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities work closely with the federal government. Two-thirds (62%) place a high degree of personal importance on having input into Government decisions.

Indigenous Peoples living in coastal communities place even greater importance on public input; personally (72% compared with 58% in other communities) and from Indigenous or coastal community members more broadly (89% compared with 73%). Members of the general population living in coastal areas are also somewhat more apt to place high importance on personal input, although the difference is less dramatic (56% compared with 48% in non-coastal communities).

Chart 14: Importance of Having Input into GC Decisions

• As in 2018, importance of personally having input is higher among residents of British Columbia and Quebec (63% and 61%, respectively), where ocean and seaway coastlines are prevalent. It is lowest among residents of the interior provinces Alberta and Ontario (30% and 23%, respectively).
• Residents of Quebec (79%) are more likely to place importance on input from Indigenous and coastal communities.
• Residents in Alberta (22%), as well as those living in urban areas more generally (23%) are more likely than other Canadians to place limited importance on personal input.
• Those ages 65 years and older are somewhat more likely to place high importance on having personal input (58%) and on input from Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities (74%). Personal input is also more often valued among those 55 to 64 years of age (62%) compared with younger Canadians. Those 25 to 34 years are the most likely to see personal input as having limited importance (29%).
• Consistent with 2018 findings, women are more likely to place importance on co-operation with coastal/Indigenous communities (78% compared with 61% among men).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, residents of remote communities (85%), as well as those between the ages 55 and 64 (76%), Quebecers (76%) and the Inuit (78%) are comparatively more likely to place importance on personal input, as are those reporting the lowest household incomes ($40,000 or less; 73%).
• In terms of input from Indigenous communities, importance is highest among Indigenous residents of British Columbia (93%), followed by Quebec (89%).
• Those in the general public who are more aware of these issues are also more likely to emphasize the importance of having input about marine safety, although this is not the cases among Indigenous Peoples. Neither group vary in the level of importance of having Indigenous and coastal communities working closely with the Government on decisions, based on awareness.

Incidence of Searching for Marine Safety Information

As seen in 2018, few Canadians (23%) have searched for information on marine safety. This proportion is higher (32%) among Indigenous Peoples, which is also an increase from 25% in 2018.

As expected, residents of coastal communities are far more likely to have sought information on marine safety: 28% among coastal communities in the general public compared with 20% in other areas; and 43% among Indigenous Peoples in coastal communities compared with 27% in other communities.

Chart 15: Incidence of Searching for Marine Safety Information

• In the general public, residents of British Columbia (37%) and the Territories (32%) are more likely than others to have searched for this information. This is also true of rural residents (28%) compared with those living in urban areas (19%).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, Métis are more likely than others (42%) to have looked for this information, which is also more prevalent among residents of remote communities (41%) and among men (39%) than among other Indigenous Peoples in Canada.
• Members of the general public and Indigenous samples who are more aware of these issues are also more likely to have looked for information about marine safety. This is also true of those who are aware of the OPP specifically.

Primary Sources for Information

Among the general public who have looked for information about government programs, regulations, and activities, 74% said they would use the Internet to search for information, which is up somewhat from 68% in 2018. Two-thirds (62%) would consult a Government of Canada website; a considerable notable increase from 47% in 2018. Three in ten (29%) would rely on traditional media such as television, radio, or newspapers (up from 21% in 2018), and 25% would utilize a relevant not-for-profit organization (up from 16% in 2018). Roughly one in five said they would turn to someone working in marine transportation (21%), which has increased from 13% in 2018. Fewer said they would look to the shipping industry (16%) or call 1-800-O-Canada (15%). Other less commonly cited sources are noted in the table, including social and traditional media, as well as friends and family.

While reliance on these sources has increased among Indigenous Peoples compared with 2018, Indigenous respondents are still somewhat less likely than the general public to rely on an Internet search (68%), a Government of Canada website (52%), or a non-government organization (20%). Likelihood of accessing traditional media is also lower than among the general public (23%). Other common sources include social media (used more than in the general public at 17%), calling 1-800 O Canada (19%), the shipping industry (18%), family and friends (15%).

Members of Indigenous communities and the general public living in coastal communities are more likely to say they would access information on marine safety from family and friends (23% and 15%, respectively), from community and local newspapers (15% and 14%, respectively), or from someone working in the shipping industry (23%, and 20%, respectively).

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 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.

Only items with 2% or more shown

• Those between the ages of 25 and 34 are more likely than other age groups to access the Internet (81%) and those 25 years or younger report higher likelihood of using social media for this purpose (25%). Respondents who are 65 and older are more apt to make use of traditional news media (42%), talk shows (21%), community newspapers (13%) or magazines (13%).
• Members of the general public in British Columbia are more likely than others across the country to speak with someone in the marine transportation and safety industry (31%), while residents of Quebec are more likely than others to rely on traditional media (34%) or talk shows (21%). Albertans are the most likely across the country to rely on the Transport Canada or other GC website (71%).
• Residents of remote communities report greater reliance on someone local working in marine transportation and safety (33%), friends or family (26%), a community or local newspaper (21%) or social media (21%). Those in urban areas are more liable to make use of relevant NGOs (28%).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, reliance on social media is highest amongst Inuit (36%) and First Nations living on-reserve (27%), as well as among those under 35 (24%).
• Indigenous residents of remote (31%) and rural communities (22%), as well as First Nations living on a reserve (26%) are more likely to speak with family and friends.
• Indigenous Peoples reporting household incomes of less than $40,000, along with those with a high school education are more likely to rely on traditional news media (33% and 32%, respectively), along with social media (30% and 26%, respectively), as well as to speak with family and friends (24% and 26%, respectively). They are also more apt to watch or listen to talk shows (14% and 15%, respectively) for information on marine safety.
• Use of a Government of Canada website is highest among Indigenous Peoples who have graduated university (68%), as well as those reporting household incomes of over $80,000 (64%).
• Indigenous residents living in the Prairies (30%) are more likely than others to go to 1-800 O Canada compared with other regions. Residents of British Columbia, along with those reporting middle household incomes of $40,000 to $80,000 are more likely to access a relevant NGO (35% and 31%, respectively).

Importance of Reporting on Marine Safety

As in 2018, results highlight a strong demand for regular communication from the federal government about how it is performing in marine safety and protecting Canada's marine environment. Among members of the general public, eight in ten (82%) feel that routine reporting is highly important.

Indigenous Peoples place a similarly high level of importance on open communication (84%), as was also the case in 2018 (80%). This importance is even more strongly emphasized among Indigenous residents of coastal communities, where 89% believe regular communication about marine safety to be important.

Chart 16: Importance of Reporting on Marine Safety

• Importance of regular communication is even more likely to be seen as important among members of the general public living in the Territories (93%), as well as those who are 55 years or older (87%), and women (87%).
• Importance is emphasized even more strongly among First Nations people who are not living on a reserve (90%), Indigenous residents of Ontario (91%) and Indigenous Peoples between the ages of 55 and 64 (95%) compared with others.

Importance of Specific Types of Information

In terms of specific types of information, information about the incidence of accidents and spills (89%) and the government's record of cleaning up these spills (88%) are at the top of the general public's list. Eight in ten (79%) also feel information about new regulations to maintain safe shipping preferences is important. Although somewhat less important to some, activities to train residents of Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities are also seen as important to 67% of the general public. These results are on par with those found in 2018.

Indigenous Peoples place similarly high levels of importance on receiving information related to incidence of spills (90%), and cleanup records (89%); both increased from 84% and 82%, respectively in 2018. Information about the implementation of new regulations to maintain safe shipping practices is also important to more than eight in ten (83%). Compared with the general public, Indigenous Peoples are much more likely to see information on activities to train Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities as important (82%).

Information on the incidence of spills is considered more important among members of the general public living in coastal communities (92%) compared with other communities. Among Indigenous Peoples, higher proportions of residents of coastal communities value information on records of cleaning spills (93%), and the implementation of regulations to maintain safe shipping practices (88%).

Chart 17: Importance of Specific Types of Information

• The importance of reporting on activities to train residents in Indigenous and coastal communities is higher among women than men (89% versus 75% among men). This is also the case with information about regulations to maintain safe shipping (90% compared with 76% among men), as well as in accidents and spills and the record of cleaning them (92% and 90%, respectively among women). A similar pattern is seen among Indigenous men and women.
• The perceived importance of reporting on implementation of regulations decreases with household income (from 90% among those earning less than $40,000 to 80% of those earning $80,000 or more). This is also true among Indigenous Peoples.
• The importance of reporting on activities to train residents in Indigenous and coastal communities is also higher among the general public in Quebec and the Atlantic (72% and 73%, respectively compared with other parts of the country), and among those 65 or older (77%).
• Among Indigenous Peoples, those in Quebec are most apt to rate reporting of incidence and spills as important (97%). Those living in British Columbia are more likely than others across the country to rate the record of cleaning spills (97%) and implementation of regulations (96%) as important.

Participation in Engagement Sessions

Consistent with 2018 results, findings highlight that very few Canadians have participated in an engagement session about marine safety or the Oceans Protection Plan (3%). Indigenous respondents are more than three times more likely to have participated in an engagement session (11%). Naturally, participation is somewhat higher among those living in coastal communities (6% in the general public and 14% among Indigenous Peoples in coastal areas).

Chart 18: Participation in Engagement Sessions

• Regionally, participation in these sessions is somewhat more prevalent in British Columbia (9%), the Territories (7%) and the Atlantic regions (6%). Because it is higher in coastal communities it is also higher in remote communities (16%), compared with those in rural and urban areas (3% and 2%, respectively).
• The same is true among Indigenous Peoples (from 23% in remote communities, compared with 11% in rural communities and 8% in urban centers).
• Inuit (35%) and First Nations residents living on a reserve (21%) are considerably more likely than urban Indigenous peoples to have participated in an engagement session.
• Past participants in engagement sessions are more likely to be aware of these issues, and of OPP specifically.

B. Summary of Findings From Indigenous Participant Interviews

Importance of the Ocean

The ocean is a fundamental part of the culture of Indigenous and coastal communities, according to most participants. The oceans and waterways have been a critical part of food security, transportation, recreation and economic prosperity for community members for generations. As one participant stated, "it's essential to a way of life". Some participants described the historical significance of oceans and waterways as means of hunting and gathering, as well as a main source of transportation, commerce, communication and connection to others.

As articulated by many, the identity and spirituality of these communities is interconnected with the ocean, and teachings and stories of creation are connected to the water, inlets and shores. For some, the ocean represents the transfer of knowledge from generation to generation or a connection to ancestors, and for many it serves an important role in traditions and ceremonies. For example, a few participants mentioned Water Carriers, a role typically held by women who serve an important position as knowledge holders and teachers in the community. Another spoke about fishing and other trips out to sea providing an opportunity for younger generations to learn from previous generations about their culture and the responsibility they have to preserve the integrity of land and water.

Many noted that the land and the ocean are part of the greater ecosystem; what happens on the land has an impact on the water, and what happens to marine life has an impact on humans. Some participants emphasized that oceans and waterways are part of a larger system. They noted a high importance on maintaining balance and respecting the connection of all things. A few mentioned specific terms in their traditional languages associated with these beliefs such as; Silas: an Inuit term for 'everything,' representing interconnectedness, Nteulimr: meaning to harvest only what is needed, to give something back and give thanks and respect for what has been taken, and Netukulimk: meaning the use of natural bounty provided by the creator without jeopardizing the environment.

Impact of Marine Shipping

Marine shipping has affected many of the communities, with the impact dependent on the location of the community. For those located near ports and in shipping lanes, shipping has "transformed the territory". Many noted concerns around increased shipping traffic and related sub-surface noise, speed, diesel output and potential for harmful incidents. On the pacific coast a few noted specific concerns around the Trans Mountain Pipeline and the associated increases in industrialization of coastal areas and marine shipping traffic should it be built. Conversely, a few pointed to the importance of marine shipping from an economic perspective, highlighting the number of goods and materials being imported and exported.

Key participants from coastal communities further from ports identified heightened concern regarding marine safety issues and adequate response time in the case of search and rescue operations. In these more remote areas many participants highlighted a lack of preparedness on risk and emergency management, and stressed the need for increased funding and infrastructure in order to support local marine safety efforts. A few participants, particularly those from remote coastal communities, noted the necessity of shipping in their area for supplies to the community or in terms of transportation.

Many indicated that marine shipping has created safety issues for smaller vessels navigating the busy waterways, affecting the harvest of marine foods and impeding cultural activities such as canoeing. As articulated by one, marine shipping "effectively cut off the community from the [water]". Many participants identified that marine shipping has contributed to pollution of the water (including oil and fuel spills) and is a source of concern for future shipping accidents. A few noted that pollution and damage to marine environments have direct affects on their communities from both a food security and economic perspective.

Role of the Government of Canada

Most participants said the Government of Canada has a strong, if not the primary role to play in developing marine safety including safe shipping and a responsibility to protect the oceans. According to participants, it is of "national importance" and appropriate for the federal government to take a leadership role in coordinating activities that can lead to a healthy marine environment. The Government of Canada has the "necessary role" to establish policy, issue permits, enforce regulations that can be implemented to all jurisdictions to protect oceans and coastal waterways. Most participants noted that only the federal government has the capacity to provide funding to increase the science and activities that can help address ocean and shoreline issues. While some lauded the Oceans Protection Plan as a vital first step, most participants noted that further investment in resources and infrastructure are necessary to make a greater impact. Some participants said that work to protect the ocean is "long overdue" with coordination and implementation as necessary in areas of surveillance, safety and emergency response, pollution, traffic of shipping lanes.

Many participants said the role should be that of coordination, funding, scientific expertise and capacity support. Many participants cautioned that the ocean is part of an ecosystem and not confined by jurisdictions; the federal government needs to involve provincial and municipal governments, Indigenous rights holders/nations and integrate communication within federal departments in order to effectively identify and develop marine safety activities to protect the oceans. A few participants in Quebec specified they prefer oceans and waterways to remain primarily under federal jurisdiction. As one participant stated, "we already have enough things delegated".

Some participants put forward specific recommendations for the Government of Canada in terms of policy, regulation, or areas of focus including research and development projects, ballast water sterilization, introduction of new vessel safety standards, increased oceans spatial planning, designated shipping lanes and other traffic control improvements.

Increased role of Indigenous and Costal Communities

Most participants believe that Indigenous communities should have a larger role in protecting Canada's coast. Participants said it is important for Indigenous and coastal communities to have the opportunity to identify needs and priorities in their regions, along with incorporating Traditional Knowledge in the development of activities and solutions. Key participants view Indigenous and coastal communities as "experts" on the local needs and intricacies of the waterways and are directly impacted by events on the ocean.

Potential roles of Indigenous communities in protecting the ocean identified by participants include information sharing and shared decision-making, along with "front line" work. Front line activities noted by participants involve enforcing safety by monitoring speeds and shipping lanes, expanded marine incident response training and infrastructure to more communities, and monitoring and stewardship programs. While existing partnerships through the OPP have increased preparedness on the part of local coastal communities, most participants said while there is interest in an increased role, the capacity of communities must continue to be increased in terms of infrastructure and personnel. In more remote coastal communities, many stressed the need for building local capacity specifically to provide first response for marine incidents.

Providing Indigenous communities with training and equipment

Key participants support the idea of the Government of Canada continuing to provide Indigenous communities with training, equipment and expertise to help protect Canada's coasts, and point to the Oceans Protection Plan (OPP) activities as examples of how this can be effective. Many pointed to the training and infrastructure provided to create the Indigenous Auxiliary Coast Guard as successful in helping to build up communities' on-water search and rescue capacity. A few pointed to the Collaborative Situational Awareness Portal as an effective way for Indigenous and coastal communities to have the means to monitor passing ships. Key participants indicated that communities have benefited from being empowered in protecting Canada's coasts, and the Government of Canada have benefited from Indigenous involvement to provide expanded monitoring activities and timely, localized, response to smaller incidents.

Some participants, however, stressed the need to expand involvement and partnership to a broader range of communities to provide more well-rounded protection of Canada's vast coastal areas and others said it's essential that support be sustainable and long term in order to be effective.

Further ways to work together

Some participants identified additional ways that the Government of Canada can work with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coast. Mostly, this involves further partnerships to share information, most critically to be part of the decision-making rather than having the Government of Canada only sharing what has already been decided. Many stressed the need for having coastal communities' input, feedback, and concerns not only being heard, but acted upon and taken seriously. These participants feel that though consultation is taking place, and is an essential responsibility of the Government of Canada, there is a lack of follow through to action.

Some participants stressed the need to conduct "nation to nation" discussions or implement "co-governance" agreements to work together to protect Canada's coast and use the mechanisms already in place (regional associations, councils) for discussions. At the very least, participants emphasized the need for Government of Canada representatives to go into communities in-person "and be prepared to listen". As quoted by one participant, "'Tell me and I may forget, show me and I'll remember, involve me and work with me, and together we'll better understand each other'. Whether that's (on) policy development or going into our communities and having a conversation with our fishers."

Some participants suggested growing awareness and increasing information sharing of ongoing initiatives related to marine safety in coastal communities to boost local participation. They emphasized that information sharing should be done in a less technical, more user-friendly, and accessible manner. Some suggested that information resources be made available in the local language of communities, and that translators be provided at meetings to bolster support and understanding.

Other ways to work together, mentioned by a few participants, include continuing the network of search and rescue operations with training and infrastructure, having Indigenous students and members trained as scientists to conduct primary research and monitoring activities within the communities, and general information sharing (such as centralized repositories of information online) that is logical and easy to access by communities.

Familiarity with the Oceans Protection Plan

Most participants described the Oceans Protection Plan (OPP) as a "comprehensive" and wide-ranging plan. A few perceive that the OPP was developed to focus on the Pacific region, particularly to mitigate the effects of oil shipping. Key participants have been involved with the plan through meetings or forums. Most were contacted by the Government of Canada to participate in OPP initial meetings; however, some said they reached out to the federal government to participate after learning about the OPP through the media or other communities.

Many participants indicated that, given the broad goals of the OPP, and the many initiatives (more than 50), it is difficult to have a thorough understanding of the OPP, or how initiatives relate to or affect their communities. Certainly, some participants said it is difficult to discern why the initiatives were chosen or how they comprise a coordinated plan. Some participants also pointed out that confusion in the goals, priorities, and timelines of OPP is amplified with the multiple federal departments involved, and the staff turnover of the civil servants.

Although participants included in the study are aware of the OPP, some noted that there are many communities not involved, and that awareness within their own community is often limited to the Chief and those in fisheries or environmental stewardship roles. Many participants agree that it is the role of community representatives involved in the OPP to communicate the plan further to community members. Some participants said that they would like to have access to, or be informed of, material online that could include help to inform them of factors such as activities, progress, other participating communities, and achievements.

Key participants offered some ways in which the Government of Canada could support understanding of the OPP in their community. Although many said that there is no need for everyone in the community to be aware of the details of OPP, some suggested using social media, radio, or public meetings to inform the broader public. When communicating to the broader members of a community, participants suggested using plain language, outlining the benefits of the program, ways to get involved, explaining the relationship of the activities, and referring to sources of further information (websites). To support greater understanding of the OPP, participants suggested targeting those who are most appropriate to be involved to develop partnerships through in-person communication in order to have community representatives "personally and professionally invested" and become proponents of OPP.

At this point in the plan, some participants said communication should involve information on the status of the initiative, the difference it has made, what has worked well, identifying next steps, case studies to "make it real", and generally articulate some "specific and quantifiable goals" of the OPP, beyond protecting Canada's oceans.

Involvement in the Oceans Protection Plan

Most participants have been involved in the OPP through meetings to provide feedback, along with connecting the government with members of the community. Many have been involved in specific activities, such as receiving training and equipment as part of the Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary. A few have been involved in the Proactive Vessel Management Project, the Cumulative Impact Assessment on Marine Shipping, or the Enhanced Maritime Situational Awareness Project. The Enhanced Maritime Situational Awareness Project is viewed by one participant as having the benefit of bringing together other Indigenous communities from across the country to learn how each nation applies the project, to show innovation, and how it can be shared. A few others described general funding for infrastructure building projects or work on the abandon boats program.

Engagement of Indigenous communities

Some participants feel the OPP can help Indigenous and coastal communities play an active role in decisions about marine safety. Many participants specified, however, that although Indigenous communities were actively consulted and engaged in the process, in many cases it seems that decisions about marine safety had already been made by the government prior to the consultations.

Many participants indicated that the OPP has helped Indigenous communities become more involved in activities such as monitoring and to have more infrastructure and capacity to participate in marine safety activities. Some participants said that the OPP has given a "platform" to participate, and an opportunity to connect Indigenous communities.

What is working well

Many participants said that the OPP allows for activities that contribute to marine safety and protecting Canada's oceans. The OPP includes many activities and can benefit coastal communities, the shipping industry, and all Canadians. As articulated by one, "It's a bit of a bright light for Canadians to see the government is seriously taking into account the value of our oceans". Key participants said that the strength of OPP is that it provides support and the provision of equipment to communities, which is welcomed and greatly needed.

Many see the value in existing partnerships with various government bodies and emphasize that efforts around marine safety are best served when all parties involved bring their unique expertise to the table. They want to see an increasing number and strengthening of partnerships with coastal Indigenous communities in order to provide more well-rounded mitigation of marine safety risks.

Some participants indicated that, through the OPP, the Government of Canada is engaging with and seeking the input of Indigenous communities across Canada. Through this process, a few participants acknowledged their belief that the government can understand the needs of communities and the desire of Indigenous and coastal communities to be involved.

The outreach by the government of Canada to Indigenous and coastal communities is identified by participants as having improved since the introduction of the OPP. Some participants said that the relationship between the Government of Canada departments of DFO and Transport Canada have improved through the working relationship established by OPP. "It allowed for people to open a dialogue with the government". "There seems to be a relatively high level of autonomy to civil service to try innovative approaches to consultation; goes beyond the boilerplate consultation that was done in the past".

Areas for Improvement

Key participants identified a range of areas of improvement for the OPP. Many reiterated earlier concerns surrounding meaningful consultation and partnership between the Government of Canada and Indigenous communities. Some re-emphasized the need to continue to develop capacity and infrastructure in Indigenous communities. A few expressed a desire to continue incorporating greater use of Indigenous Traditional Knowledge in the approach taken in marine safety.

Some participants expressed a desire for more information available on project outcomes. A few said they would like to see communication of outcomes, or a case study of a project, presented in non-traditional formats (to "look less like government documents"), such as using video or audio that can also show Indigenous involvement of "what is happening and what can be done".

Some participants pointed to the challenges of working with multiple federal government departments, and called for better coordination of priorities, meetings, calls for feedback and participation to reduce the capacity strain on communities. A few participants identified some frustration with turnover in federal staff and the resulting need to start over with building new relationships. Another pointed to a lack of coordination between the federal and provincial governments.

As one participant highlighted, Indigenous Peoples' lens of interconnectedness can make it challenging for communities to identify with the boundaries of government departments' jurisdiction, and the limitations of programs and initiatives such as the OPP. Another participant likewise indicated that OPP 'targets' can be viewed as artificial or a "ceiling" to Indigenous peoples and creates some mistrust or suspicion. This can be mitigated, according to the participant, through communication and discussion to ensure all parties understand the other's perspective. These participants suggested efforts should be made to communicate programs in a way that is consistent with Indigenous perspectives.

A few participants said that the OPP lacks an "overall vision" or any clarity in the decisions to select or the design of the various initiatives. This includes "vagueness" in the details of the OPP; for example, one respondent noted that the word "marine" can be interpreted in different ways and that there is no definition on the OPP website to provide clarity on what is meant by the term. Others said there is a challenge in the uncertainty of funding for continuation of programs once OPP ends; for example, search and rescue infrastructure can be self-sustaining, but there will be the need for training of new people.

A few participants suggested improvements to specific initiatives within the plan, such as the consultation process to include Gender Based Analysis (GBA) or expanding the Vessel of Concern program to include vessels smaller than 15 feet.

Creating Partnerships

Most participants said that partnerships between the Government of Canada and Indigenous communities can be created through a foundation of "mutual respect". Some participants emphasized that Indigenous communities are "Nations" and require a "Nation to Nation" dialogue with equitable voices in the partnership. These participants said that consultations need to be "real" and constructive; not simply occurring in order to "tick a box". Consultations also need to take place earlier in the process, according to some participants, to identify needs and build solutions, rather than presenting decisions already made by the government.

Some participants suggested that relationships need to be developed in-person in order to build trust, with a few advising that the contact should be consistent, with minimal change in government personnel to the extent possible. Further, several participants said that senior government officials need to come to communities to understand the issues, show commitment and credibility.

Many participants believe the OPP has been an effective tool for creating meaningful partnerships. There are improvements to be made, according to some participants, in terms of meaningful engagement, and having Indigenous communities identify needs and be part of the decision-making process. Nonetheless, some key informants feel that progress has been made. Some participants believe that the relationship between the Government of Canada and Indigenous peoples has generally improved over the last decade, and that the OPP has contributed to the improved relationship in recent years. One participant highlighted the opportunities to address broader reconciliation efforts through OPP partnerships across sectors.

3. Appendices

A. Methodological Details

The survey is comprised of 2,702 completed cases, including 2,141 with the general public and 561 with Indigenous Peoples, 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 in between January 27 and February 20, 2020.

In a second phase, qualitative interviews were conducted by telephone with 19 Indigenous interview participants. This includes five conducted in the Pacific Region, one in the Arctic Region, six in Quebec, one in Ontario, and four in the Atlantic Region. Interviews were conducted in February and early March 2020.

The process for collection is described separately for each below.

General Public

This randomly recruited probability sample of 2,141 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^{Footnote 2}. 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. One-third of the sample (n=707) is comprised of residents living in coastal communities, located within 20 kilometres of an ocean, St. Lawrence Seaway or Great Lakes shoreline. Of these 707 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 2,141 roughly 27 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^{Footnote 3}. 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 120,000 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 tested with 31 cases (20 in English and 11 cases in French; 21 completely online and 10 completed by telephone). 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. Minimal changes were made as a result of the testing, therefore 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 Canadian Research Insights Council (CRIC). 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 2,242 panel sample members were called. Removing the numbers found not to be valid (127) leaves a valid sample of 2,115, of which 287 interviews were conducted for a participation rate of 23 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^{Footnote 4}. The average length of the interview was 15 minutes.

Respondents were informed in the invitation that all responses are completely confidential and no responses will be linked to individual names.

Of the 2,141 cases collected overall, 582 cases were completed through an interviewer by telephone, and 1,559 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.

Indigenous Peoples in Canada

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 37,640 telephone numbers were called. Of these 8,997 were found not to be valid, leaving a functional sample of 28,643. A total of 320 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 6.5 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 (372) versus those who completed the survey online (189). 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).

Sample Characteristics

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.

Table 5: Sample Characteristics

B. Indigenous Participant In-Depth Interviews

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, 19 interviews were conducted; this includes five interviews conducted in the Pacific Region, one in the Arctic Region, six in Quebec, one in Ontario, and four in the Atlantic Region, as well as two with national Indigenous organizations. Interviews were conducted between February and March 2020. 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.

C. Survey Questionnaire (English)

Intro

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey dealing with current issues of interest to Canadians and Indigenous peoples.

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. The survey takes about 15 minutes to complete and is registered with the Canadian Research Insights Council's (CRIC) Research Verification Service. This survey is being directed by Ekos Research, and is being administered according to the requirements of the Privacy Act.

Your decision on whether or not to participate will not affect any dealings you may have with the Government of Canada and Indigenous peoples.

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.

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, the St. Lawrence Seaway or a Great Lake shoreline 2

Rural community of fewer than 5,000 residents 3

Remote community that is further than 500 kilometres or a 5 hour drive from an urban community 4

None of these 98

Prefer not to say 99

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

FN

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

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 a $1.5 billion 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 [1,11]

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 web site 8

Mail from the Government of Canada 9

Word of mouth (through a friend, family or acquaintance) 10

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 2

Government collaborating with local communities to address 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?

Q15A

Bringing more Canadians and Indigenous peoples into the marine safety system

Not at all important 1 1

2 2

Moderately important 3 3

4 4

Very important 5 5

Don't know 98

Q15B

Making marine pollution response stronger, better, and faster

Not at all important 1 1

2 2

Moderately important 3 3

4 4

Very important 5 5

Don't know 98

Q15C

Protecting Canada's endangered whale species

Not at all important 1 1

2 2

Moderately important 3 3

4 4

Very important 5 5

Don't know 98

Q15D

Protecting and restoring coastal ecosystems

Not at all important 1 1

2 2

Moderately important 3 3

4 4

Very important 5 5

Don't know 98

Q15E

Removing wrecked and abandoned vessels

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

Q15G

Boosting marine safety in the Arctic

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 life 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 as well as 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 to participate 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

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 Marine 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 polluters pay and that impacted communities are compensated for a ship-source spill or marine accident

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 for non-Indigenous, non-coastal

How much of a role should each of the following have in developing marine safety including safe shipping in your area?

Q21A

The Government of Canada

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

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

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

The Government of Canada

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

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

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

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 coasts and waterways, 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 web site 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

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

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

THNK

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey, it is greatly appreciated.

D. Indigenous Participant 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 that will increase the Government of Canada's capacity to prevent and improve response to marine pollution incidents.

This study was first conducted in 2018. As in the first round, 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.

• What does the ocean mean to you and your community?
  • What about it is important to you?
  • Is marine shipping^{Footnote 6} important to you and your community? How so?
  • How is marine shipping affecting your community (in the past and in the present)?
• What kind of a role should the Government of Canada have in developing marine safety^{Footnote 7} including safe shipping in your area?
  • How can the Government of Canada improve the prevention of and response to marine pollution incidents?
• Do you feel that Indigenous communities should have a larger role in protecting Canada's coast? What role should your community have?
• What do you think of the idea of the Government of Canada providing Indigenous communities with training and equipment to help protect Canada's coasts, including preventing and responding to accidents, as well as generating science related to marine safety?
• How else can the Government of Canada work with Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities to protect Canada's coast?
  • What are some of the ways the Government of Canada could collect input and feedback about marine safety from your community?
• Have you heard about the Oceans Protection Plan? What did you hear?
• Do you feel you have a good understanding of what the Oceans Protection Plan is about?
• What are some ways the Government of Canada could support understanding of the Oceans Protection Plan within your community?
  • What about in-person meetings? social media?, information on a website? direct mail? Anything else?
• Are you and your community currently involved or planning to be involved in delivering the Oceans Protection Plan? In what ways?
• Do you feel that the Oceans Protection Plan can help Indigenous communities play an active role in decisions about marine safety? Why/Why not?
• What is working well with regards to the Oceans Protection Plan?
• What could be improved with regards to the Oceans Protection Plan?
• How can partnerships between the Government of Canada and Indigenous communities be created?
  • What are the best ways to make sure these are effective partnerships?
  • What do you consider to be a "meaningful partnership"?
  • Is the Oceans Protection Plan an effective tool to help create and maintain meaningful partnerships?