Natural Resources Canada Poll

Public Opinion Research on Energy Issues 2011 - Report

Natural Resources Canada

Contract Number: 23483-12-0515

Contract Award Date: November 18, 2011 (Amended November 25, 2012)

January 25, 2012

Client contact information: [email protected]

« Le sommaire de ce rapport est disponible en français.

Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français sur demande.»

POR 037-11

Proprietary Warning

Any material or information provided by Natural Resources Canada and all data collected by Harris/Decima will be treated as confidential by Harris/Decima and will be stored securely while on Harris/Decima's premise (adhering to industry standards and applicable laws).

OTTAWA 1800-160 Elgin St. Tel: (613) 230-2200 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Fax: (613) 230-3793 K2P 2P7 MONTRÉAL 400-1080 Beaver Hall Hill Tel: (514) 288-0037 Montréal, Québec, Canada Fax: (514) 288-0138 H2Z 1S8 TORONTO 405-2345 Yonge St. Tel: (416) 962-2013 Toronto, Ontario, Canada Fax: (416) 962-0505 M4P 2E5 VANCOUVER 500-666 Burrard St. Tel: (778) 370-1373 Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Fax: (604) 601-2074 V6C 3P6

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................. 1

Executive Summary ................................................................................. 2

Sommaire ................................................................................................ 5

Detailed Findings ..................................................................................... 9

Top of Mind Issues Facing the Government of Canada – Situating Energy and Natural Resources ................................................................................................ 9

Impressions of the Energy Sector ...................................................................... 13

The Economy ...................................................................................................... 18

Job Creation, Economic Growth and the Energy Sector .................................... 22

Awareness of Events Impacting the Country’s Energy Resources ..................... 28

Government Action Related to the Energy Sector ............................................. 30

Conclusions ............................................................................................ 31

Study Methodology ............................................................................... 32

Quantitative Research ....................................................................................... 32

Qualitative Research .......................................................................................... 41

Appendix A: Survey Questionnaires ...................................................... 43

English ................................................................................................................ 43

French ................................................................................................................ 47

Appendix B: Recruitment Screeners ..................................................... 52

English ................................................................................................................ 52

French ................................................................................................................ 60

Appendix C: Discussion Guides.............................................................. 68

English ................................................................................................................ 68

French ................................................................................................................ 70

Appendix D: Data Tables ....................................................................... 74

Natural Resources Canada – Public Opinion Research on Energy Issues 2011 – Report

1

Introduction

Harris/Decima is pleased to present this report highlighting the findings of quantitative and qualitative research among Canadians regarding their attitudes towards energy issues.

Natural Resources Canada last conducted comprehensive public opinion research on energy issues in

2010, with a focus on awareness, understanding and attitudes toward energy production and use in

Canada, the balance between energy and the environment, and the economics of clean energy. Among

other things, findings indicated Canadians would welcome a federal government leadership role in

helping the nation transition towards cleaner energy.

With this new wave of research in 2011, the Government of Canada sought current understanding among the Canadian public on a wide-range of energy issues as a basis for on-going and future broad-based consultations around energy policy in Canada.

A qualitative and quantitative research program was undertaken to meet these objectives. To begin, a telephone survey of 2,025 Canadians (aged 18+) was conducted between November 26 and December 7, 2011. The survey was offered in both Official Languages and took an average of 11 minutes to complete. A sample of this size is accurate to within plus or minus 2.1 percent at the 95 percent confidence level.

Additionally, fourteen focus groups were conducted in seven centres across Canada. In each city, one session was held with participants with low to moderate household incomes and the other session was held with participants in higher household incomes. These groups were determined by combining household income and household size.

A more detailed description of the methodology used to complete this research is provided at the end of this report.

This report begins with an executive summary highlighting the key findings of the research. This is followed by detailed discussion of the research results. Appended to this report are the survey instruments and detailed tabular tables (under separate cover).

NOTE: Since this report includes results of a representative survey of Canadians and the results of a series of focus

groups, it is important to note that the ability to extrapolate results to the broader Canadian population varies

between the two types of methods employed. While the telephone survey component can be considered

representative of the adult Canadian population within a certain degree of accuracy at the 95% confidence level,

this is not the case for the focus group findings. Focus group research is a form of scientific, social, policy and public

opinion research. As structured, restricted, group interviews that proceed according to a careful research design

and attention to the principles of group dynamics, focus groups should be distinguished from “discussion groups”,

“problem-solving groups”, “buzz groups”, or “brainstorming groups”. They are not designed to help a group reach

a consensus or to make decisions, but rather to elicit the full range of ideas, attitudes, experiences and opinions of

a selected sample of participants on a defined topic. Because of the small numbers involved, however, the

participants cannot be expected to be thoroughly representative in a statistical sense of the larger population from

which they are drawn and thus, findings from focus groups cannot reliably be generalized beyond their number.


2

Executive Summary

Harris/Decima is pleased to present this report highlighting the findings of quantitative and qualitative research among Canadians regarding their attitudes towards energy issues.

Natural Resources Canada last conducted comprehensive public opinion research on energy issues in

2010, with a focus on awareness, understanding and attitudes toward energy production and use in

Canada, the balance between energy and the environment, and the economics of clean energy. Among

other things, findings indicated Canadians would welcome a federal government leadership role in

helping the nation transition towards cleaner energy.

With this new wave of research in 2011, the Government of Canada sought current understanding among the Canadian public on a wide-range of energy issues as a basis for on-going and future broad-based consultations around energy policy in Canada

A quantitative and qualitative research program was undertaken.

To begin, a survey of 2,025 Canadians (aged 18+) was conducted between November 26 and December 7, 2011. The survey was offered in both Official Languages and took an average of 11 minutes to complete. A sample of this size is accurate to within plus or minus 2.1 percent at the 95 percent confidence level.

Additionally, fourteen focus groups were conducted in seven centres across Canada. In each city, one session was held with participants with low to moderate household incomes and the other session was held with participants in higher household incomes. These groups were determined by combining household income and household size.

City Date Language

London (ON) November 29, 2011 English

Toronto November 30, 2011 English

Calgary November 30, 2011 English

North/West Vancouver December 1, 2011 English

Prince George December 3, 2011 English

Halifax December 5, 2011 English

Quebec City December 6, 2011 French

Appended to the report are the survey instruments and detailed tabular tables (under separate cover), and focus group recruitment screener and moderator guide.

Summary of findings:

• Top of mind, Canadians tend to cite the economy as the number one issue on which the Government of Canada should focus.

• The majority of Canadians considered the country’s economy to be at least “good”.


3

• Canadians offer varying opinions of each of several energy-specific industries in Canada and tended to have more positive impressions of hydroelectricity (80% rating it as excellent or good) and natural gas (67%) than of the oil (51%), oil sands (44%) nuclear (37%) and coal industries (20%).

• The focus groups included an exercise where participants were provided with a list of words and asked to select those that best described “Canada’s energy sector”. Participants tended to see the sector as complex, valuable, one of growth, as well as an area of opportunity.

• The sense that the sector is widely recognized as an area of opportunity was supported in the quantitative survey when respondents were asked to name the industries with the greatest potential for job creation and economic growth. By far, the most frequently mentioned responses were the group of sectors that are natural resource-based.

• Focus group participants recognized the importance of the energy sector to the Canadian economy while also tending to be quite conscious of the connection between energy and environment. The energy sector was widely recognized for two unique and positive characteristics:

o While other countries may ultimately face challenges due to energy shortages, Canadians may be protected from such challenges by having an abundance of domestic energy sources, although many felt Canadians are not realizing any sort of price discount benefit; and

o International markets for our energy products present not only stable long-term demand, but potential for diversification and growth.

• When asked about global markets for Canada’s natural resources, in particular oil and gas, most Canadians (68%) surveyed felt it was important to open up beyond current export to the U.S. and expand into new global markets such as Asia.

• Along these lines, focus group participants generally believed that there should be a diversification of export markets. Participants were well aware that the United States is our largest export market for oil (although many would underestimate the proportion of exports that market constituted) and that relationship was highly valued, logical and desirable. However, the sense from the groups was that it was not prudent to have “all the eggs in one basket” and therefore, it is advisable to expand oil and gas exports into additional markets.

• In the focus group discussions, expanding into Asia was by far the most commonly recommended approach to expanding oil and gas export markets, with China specifically mentioned most often as a desirable new market.

• In the survey, a small majority (55%) felt the benefits of exporting to new markets outweighed the environmental impacts of infrastructure and construction projects, while one in three (36%) felt that the environmental impacts were more important considerations than jobs and economic growth.


4

• Slightly more than half (55%) of Canadians were aware of recent events impacting Canada’s resource industry. Of this group, when asked what specific stories they recalled, the Keystone pipeline in the U.S. (19%), oilsands or tarsands in general (12%), or a ‘pipeline controversy’ (19%) were among the most frequently cited topics.

• Focus group discussions also explored the notion of what role the Government of Canada can or should play when it comes to energy exports. The following are the key findings from that investigation:

o Foremost, participants saw the Government’s primary role as guarding against negative outcomes or undue environmental or public health impacts of energy sector activity. These relate to activities such as extracting, processing, using and transporting resources. Participants identified actions such as establishing and enforcing regulations and laws and providing oversight.

o Secondarily, participants indicated the Government’s role is to collect appropriate revenues in exchange for the extraction and export of resources.

o In addition to these two top-of-mind responses, probing revealed a default expectation and appreciation for the Government of Canada making efforts to establish new trading partners. Many were able to offer up additional suggestions for things the Government should point out about the Canadian energy sector in order to convince others to “buy Canadian.”

This research will be used to provide insight into Canadian general public awareness and perceptions about a range of energy issues and attitudes towards various potential directions or approaches. The total expenditure for this research was $136,506.13 plus HST. Harris/Decima Inc. certifies that the final deliverables comply with the political neutrality requirement in

section 6.2.4 of the revised Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research in the

Government of Canada.

Doug Anderson, Senior Vice President, Harris/Decima


5

Sommaire

Harris/Décima a le plaisir de soumettre le présent rapport qui révèle les résultats de la recherche quantitative et qualitative sur les attitudes des Canadiens à l’égard d’enjeux énergétiques.

En 2010, Ressources naturelles Canada a effectué une vaste recherche d’opinion publique sur des

enjeux énergétiques. Cette recherche portait plus particulièrement sur la connaissance, la

compréhension et les attitudes à l’égard de la production et de l’utilisation d’énergie au Canada,

l’équilibre entre l’énergie et l’environnement de même que les aspects économiques de l’énergie

propre. Les résultats ont notamment révélé que les Canadiens seraient favorables à ce que le

gouvernement fédéral assume un rôle de leadership pour aider le pays à opérer la transition vers une

énergie plus propre.

En 2011, le gouvernement du Canada a amorcé une nouvelle vague de la recherche pour connaître la compréhension actuelle de la population canadienne à l’égard d’un large éventail d’enjeux énergétiques afin de s’en servir éventuellement comme fondement pour de vastes consultations actuelles et futures sur la politique énergétique au Canada.

Un programme de recherche quantitative et qualitative a été mis en place.

Tout d’abord, du 26 novembre au 7 décembre 2011, 2 025 Canadiens (de 18 ans et plus) ont répondu à un sondage. Les participants pouvaient répondre dans les deux langues officielles et le sondage a duré en moyenne 11 minutes. Un échantillon de cette taille est précis à plus ou moins 2,1 pour cent à un intervalle de confiance de 95 pour cent.

Par ailleurs, 14 groupes de discussion ont eu lieu dans 7 villes partout au Canada. Dans chacune de ces villes, une séance a réuni des participants de ménages à revenu faible ou modéré, tandis que l’autre séance a réuni des participants de ménages à revenu élevé. Le revenu et la taille du ménage ont été combinés pour déterminer les groupes.

Ville Date Langue

London (Ontario) 29 novembre 2011 Anglais

Toronto 30 novembre 2011 Anglais

Calgary 30 novembre 2011 Anglais

North/West Vancouver 1er décembre 2011 Anglais

Prince George 3 décembre 2011 Anglais

Halifax 5 décembre 2011 Anglais

Québec 6 décembre 2011 Français

Les questionnaires du sondage et les tableaux sont annexés au rapport (sous pli séparé), tout comme le questionnaire de recrutement et le guide pour les groupes de discussion.

Sommaire des résultats :

• Les Canadiens ont tendance à nommer d’emblée l’économie comme l’enjeu sur lequel le gouvernement du Canada devrait le plus axer ses efforts.


6

• La majorité des Canadiens croient que l’économie du pays se porte à tout le moins « bien ».

• Les Canadiens font valoir diverses opinions à propos de chacune des industries de l’énergie au Canada et leur impression est généralement plus positive à l’égard de l’hydroélectricité (80 % d’entre eux l’évaluent comme excellente ou bonne) et du gaz naturel (67 %) qu’à l’égard du pétrole (51 %), des sables bitumineux (44 %), du nucléaire (37 %) et du charbon (20 %).

• Dans le cadre des groupes de discussion, les participants ont dû faire un exercice et consulter une liste de mots pour sélectionner ceux qui décrivaient le mieux « le secteur de l’énergie au Canada ». Les participants perçoivent généralement le secteur comme complexe, précieux, en croissance et porteurs d’occasions.

• Le sondage quantitatif, dans lequel les répondants devaient nommer les industries qui avaient le plus grand potentiel pour la création d’emplois et la croissance économique, confirme l’idée que le secteur est grandement reconnu comme porteur d’occasions. En effet, les industries que les répondants nomment le plus souvent sont de loin les secteurs qui reposent sur les ressources naturelles.

• Les participants aux groupes de discussion reconnaissent l’importance du secteur de l’énergie pour l’économie canadienne, tout en étant passablement conscients du lien entre l’énergie et l’environnement. Le secteur de l’énergie est également bien reconnu pour deux caractéristiques positives qui lui sont propres :

o Alors que d’autres pays seront peut-être confrontés à des défis en raison de pénuries d’énergie, les Canadiens pourraient être à l’abri de tels défis grâce à l’abondance de sources d’énergie au pays, même si bon nombre de participants croient que les Canadiens ne bénéficient d’aucune réduction de tarif;

o Les marchés internationaux pour nos produits énergétiques ne représentent pas uniquement une demande stable à long terme, mais aussi un potentiel de diversification et de croissance.

• Lorsque les Canadiens doivent se prononcer sur les marchés mondiaux pour les ressources naturelles du Canada, en particulier le pétrole et le gaz, la plupart d’entre eux (68 %) croient qu’il est important de s'ouvrir au-delà des exportations actuelles aux États-Unis et de développer de nouveaux marchés mondiaux, par exemple en Asie.

• De même, les participants aux groupes de discussion croient généralement qu’il faudrait diversifier les marchés d’exportation. Ils sont tous au courant que les États-Unis constituent notre plus grand marché d’exportation pour le pétrole (même s’ils sont nombreux à sous-estimer le pourcentage des exportations que représente ce marché), et cette relation est très importante, logique et souhaitable pour eux. Cependant, il ressort des groupes qu’il n’est pas prudent de « mettre tous ses œufs dans le même panier » et qu’il serait donc sage de développer les exportations de pétrole et de gaz dans d’autres marchés.

• Dans les groupes de discussion, l’approche que les participants mentionnent de loin le plus fréquemment pour accroître les exportations de pétrole et de gaz est le développement de


7

marchés en Asie, et ils désignent plus particulièrement la Chine comme nouveau marché souhaitable .

• Dans le sondage, une faible majorité de répondants (55 %) croient que les avantages associés aux exportations dans de nouveaux marchés l’emportent sur les impacts environnementaux des projets d’infrastructure et de construction, tandis qu’un répondant sur trois (36 %) croit qu’il faut de prime abord considérer les impacts environnementaux avant les emplois et la croissance économique.

• Un peu plus de la moitié des Canadiens (55 %) sont au courant d’événements récents qui ont un impact sur l’industrie des ressources énergétiques du Canada. Lorsque ces Canadiens doivent indiquer de quels événements précis ils se souviennent, le pipeline Keystone aux États-Unis (19 %), les sables bitumineux ou pétrolifères en général (12 %) ou une « controverse entourant un pipeline » (19 %) sont certains des sujets qu’ils citent le plus souvent.

• Les discussions des séances de groupe ont également permis d’explorer la conception du rôle que le gouvernement du Canada peut jouer ou devrait jouer dans le domaine des exportations d’énergie. Les principaux résultats de cette enquête sont les suivants :

o Tout d’abord, les participants pensent que le principal rôle du gouvernement est d’éviter les conséquences négatives ou les incidences indues des activités du secteur énergétique sur l’environnement ou la santé publique. Ils font référence ici aux activités telles que l’extraction, le traitement, l’utilisation et le transport des ressources. Les participants proposent des mesures, par exemple adopter et appliquer des lois et des règlements et assurer une surveillance.

o En second lieu, les participants indiquent que le rôle du gouvernement est de tirer des revenus appropriés en échange de l’extraction et l’exportation de ressources.

o Outre ces deux réponses fournies spontanément, un examen plus pointu révèle que, par défaut, les participants s’attendent à ce que le gouvernement du Canada déploie des efforts pour établir de nouveaux partenariats commerciaux et apprécient qu’il le fasse. Un grand nombre de participants ont été capables de formuler des suggestions supplémentaires quant aux renseignements que le gouvernement devrait signaler à propos du secteur canadien de l’énergie afin de convaincre les autres d’« acheter canadien ».

Cette recherche servira à donner un aperçu de la connaissance et des perceptions du grand public canadien sur divers enjeux énergétiques ainsi que ses attitudes à l’égard de diverses orientations ou approches possibles. Le coût total de la recherche s’élève à 136 506,13 $. Harris/Décima Inc. certifie que les produits livrables finals sont conformes à l’exigence de neutralité

politique décrite à la disposition 6.2.4 de la Procédure de planification et d’attribution de marchés de

services de recherche sur l’opinion publique au sein du gouvernement du Canada nouvellement

amendée.


8

Doug Anderson, vice-président principal, Harris/Décima


9

Detailed Findings

This report is divided into five sections. The first part situates the natural resources sector in general when it comes to issues Canadians feel the Government of Canada should focus on. The following section focuses on impressions of the energy resources specifically. The third section presents the findings on the economy in general, followed more specifically by a section discussing results on job creation, economic growth and the energy sector. Subsequently, the findings detailing awareness of current events impacting Canada’s natural resource industry are presented. The last part of this report focuses on the role of the federal government in the energy sector.

Top of Mind Issues Facing the Government of Canada – Situating Energy and Natural Resources As was the case in the 2010 survey, participants were first asked a general unprompted question about issues facing the country today, and which one the Government of Canada should focus on most. The top issue mentioned this year was once again the economy, with almost a quarter (23%) saying that was the most important issue, similar to the previous survey (22%). The second issue also remained the same: Health care, at 13% (14% in 2010). While “jobs” were mentioned more often this time (8%, compared to 5% in 2010), the environment dropped somewhat in importance, from 12% to 7%. Education rounded out the top five, being mentioned by 4% (up from 2% in 2010).

Other issues mentioned, by 2% or less, were poverty, other economic or financial issues such as unemployment, taxes or the HST and debt, as well as immigration and government integrity.

Issues related to energy or natural resources were not mentioned top-of-mind as the most important task for the Government of Canada to deal with at the moment.


10

Most Important Issue Facing GoC Today (2011 and 2010)

Base: All respondents (n=2,025)*Responses only shown if 2% or more in 2011

1A. Thinking of the issues facing Canada today, which one would you say the Government of Canada should focus on most?


11

Even when respondents were asked to name other issues beside their top priority, energy issues did not come to the foreground as another area of priority. When looking at all mentions in aggregate, the most important issues remain the economy (30%), health care (27%), jobs and the environment (14% each) and education (13%).

Qualitative Findings

Focus group findings echoed findings from the survey. Participants generally did not situate energy or natural resources as top-of-mind agenda items for the Government of Canada. The discussions in the groups were more likely to focus on the economy (including jobs), health care, other social issues (e.g., education and seniors) with fiscal management also raised regularly. Also in the economic realm, a few participants mentioned international trade. If any mention was made of issues surrounding Canada’s natural resources or energy, it tended to be regionally-relevant, with participants in Western Canada more commonly referring to these aspects.

Survey results also showed that top-of-mind issues tended to have a regional character as well. For example:

• The economy was seen as least important in Quebec (19%), especially compared to Alberta (28%), Ontario (25%) and BC (27%); among men (28%) compared to women (19%); among those aged 34-54 (27%, compared to 17% among those younger and 24% among those older); and

Top-of-Mind Issues (NET)1A. Thinking of the issues facing Canada today, which one would you say the Government of Canada should focus on most?

1B. Are there any others?

Base: All respondents (n=2,025)*Responses only shown if 2% or more


12

among those in urban (27%) and large urban areas (30%) across the country. Mentions of the economy also rose in number as income and education levels rose.

• Health care was mentioned more than twice as often by women (18%) than by men (8%). While the economy tended to be more of a (large) urban issue, health care was more often a rural or small town issue.

• Jobs were an important issue in Atlantic Canada (13%) and Ontario (12%), while less important in Quebec (4%) and Saskatchewan/Manitoba (3%).

• The environment was most often mentioned in Quebec (14%), receiving about three times as many mentions in that province than in Atlantic Canada (4%), Ontario, BC, Alberta and Saskatchewan/Manitoba (all 5%). This, too, was more likely to be mentioned in large urban areas (11%).

Top Four Top-of-Mind Issues (Demographics)

27%

28%

23%

25%

19%

21%

24%

27%

17%

19%

28%

23%

10%

12%

11%

14%

15%

17%

12%

15%

11%

18%

8%

13%

8%

7%

3%

12%

4%

13%

10%

8%

7%

8%

9%

8%

5%

5%

5%

5%

14%

4%

7%

6%

10%

8%

7%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

BC

Alberta

Man/Sask

Ontario

Quebec

Atlantic

55+

35-54

18-34

Women

Men

Total

Economy Health Care Jobs Environment

30%

27%

22%

23%

20%

31%

31%

24%

23%

12%

23%

12%

9%

15%

15%

16%

12%

11%

10%

17%

15%

13%

7%

8%

8%

10%

8%

7%

8%

8%

8%

13%

8%

11%

6%

6%

6%

6%

10%

6%

6%

7%

7%

7%

0% 50% 100%

Urban 500k

Urban 100k -…

Town 10k - 100k

Rural 5k - 10k

Rural <5000

100k+

80k-100k

60-80k

40-60k

<40k

Total

Base: All respondents (n=2,025)

Gender

Age

Region

Income

Population

1A. Thinking of the issues facing Canada today, which one would you say the Government of Canada should focus on most?


13

Impressions of the Energy Sector


Following the discussion on the top issue for government, the focus groups included an exercise where participants were provided with a list of words and asked to select three that best described “Canada’s energy sector”. While a qualitative exercise, the analysis reveals clear themes in how participants viewed the sector. Participants tended to see the sector as complex, valuable, one of growth, as well as an area of opportunity.

• Complex: When describing the sector as “complex,” participants tended to see the sector as varied, highly technical, and covering many areas. As additional evidence of complexity, participants also noted that the energy sector crosses multiple geographic jurisdictions – local, provincial, national, and international. Further, the vast amount and diversity of energy resources, with some widely varying characteristics, benefits and drawbacks add to the sense of complexity.

• Valuable: Virtually all participants would describe Canada’s energy sector as valuable and there tended to be two reasons frequently offered. First and foremost, there was a sense that the sector has significant economic value, with many pointing out the value as being both direct (the sector itself is an economic benefit) and indirect (the sector’s activity influences the economic success of a variety of other sectors, particularly in certain regions; and, the sector’s activity generates revenues for governments). The other aspect of perceived value of resources was an appreciation for the good fortune that these resources are “in (our) backyard”. The sector’s value was also seen in the notion of comfort that no matter what economic turmoil may come, this sector is a reliable contributor. Some of this sentiment was more akin to national pride – being proud of what Canada has to offer its people and the world.

• Opportunity: Similar to other words, participants’ use of “opportunity” to describe the sector was based upon several commonly-held perceptions. First, they saw the sector as an area in which Canada could be a leader. Additionally, others saw the sector as an opportunity to greatly contribute to the economy now and in the future. It was also seen as an area where there is potential for jobs directly resulting from the opportunities this sector possesses.

• Growth: Virtually all felt that this was a sector that was growing in size. There was a sense that the sector was expanding in terms of jobs, contribution to the economy, as well as expanding our international trade. Further, there was near unanimity that the energy sector would continue to expand.

The word cloud below shows the adjectives chosen to describe the sector.


14


15

Qualitative Findings (cont’d)

Participants were also asked to select a word that they felt did not describe the energy sector. Three words most commonly selected by participants: cheap, sustainable, and green. The reasons for selecting these words are presented below.

• Cheap: Most used home heating and gasoline for vehicles as their reference point when believing that the sector is not cheap. Their sense was that the products they buy are expensive, and more expensive in comparison to what others pay for gas or home heating.

• Sustainable: Participants who selected this word did so because of the perception that the primary sources of energy, e.g., oil and gas, are not renewable. Consequently, “once the oil is gone, it’s gone”. Thus, these people felt that based on those specific parts of the energy sector, the word “sustainable” may not appropriately describe the sector at large.

• Green: A number of participants recognized that Canada has made improvements in certain aspects of green energy (e.g., wind farms were commonly cited). However, some still felt that the sector overall did not have enough green sources. Therefore, they felt that the term green did not apply to the sector overall.

The word cloud below shows the adjectives that participants felt do not describe the sector.

The survey indicates that Canadians tended to have more positive impressions of hydroelectricity and natural gas than of the oil, nuclear and coal industries. Across the country, regional differences in opinions were clearly seen when it came to these ratings.


16

The majority had either excellent views of the hydroelectricity sector (52% rating it an 8, 9 or 10 out of ten) or thought of them as good (28% rating it a 6 or 7 out of 10). Fewer, but still a majority, liked the natural gas sector (33% excellent and 34% good). Only 17% had a negative impression of hydro-electricity (11% said poor and 6% terrible) and 29% were negative about natural gas (23% said poor and 6% terrible).

Half of Canadians (51%) held positive impressions of the oil industry and only slightly fewer (47%) had negative views. The oil sands, however, were viewed as more negative than the oil industry in general, with half (49%) holding negative views (including 26% who had a very negative impression) and 44% positive impressions. Nuclear power was also more likely seen as poor (25%) or terrible (29%) than as excellent (15%) or good (22%), yielding a negative differential of 17 points. The most negatively viewed energy resources industry of those tested was coal. While only one in five (20%) thought this was a good energy source, fully seven in ten (71%) had negative opinions, with 40% rating it as a “terrible” source.

Shale gas was the least known industry of those tested, with one in five (22%) giving no opinion. Canadians were, however, more likely to have negative feelings about this industry (46%) than positive impressions (31%).

Base: All respondents (n=2,025)*Oil and Oil Sands were a split sample

**Natural Gas and Shale Gas were a split sample

Impressions of Canada’s Energy Resource Industry

8. As you may know, Canada produces energy resources from a variety of different sources and I’d like you tell me your impression of each of them. Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.

How would you rate your impression of …Means

7.3

6.6

5.7

5.2

4.8

4.9

4.0


17

Regionally, the following differences were seen in impressions of Canada’s various energy resources:

• Although hydroelectricity was generally viewed positively in all regions, respondents from Canada’s largest hydro power generating province, Quebec, held the most positive views.

• Similarly, Albertans held more positive views of many of the energy sources found in that area (natural gas, oil, the oil sands, shale gas and coal).

• Ontario, the most reliant on nuclear power, showed the most positive view of this energy resource.

• Quebecers held the most negative feelings towards oil, the oil sands, shale gas, and nuclear power.

The table below gives an overview of the means (out of 10) of each of the resources, by region.

Hydro Natural Gas Oil Oil Sands Shale Gas Nuclear Coal

Total 7.3 6.6 5.7 5.2 4.9 4.8 4.0

Atl 7.0 5.9 5.5 5.5 4.7 4.3 3.5

QC 8.0 6.2 5.3 3.9 3.4 4.0 3.6

ON 7.0 6.8 5.5 5.3 5.7 5.6 3.9

MN/SK 7.3 7.0 5.9 5.5 5.8 4.2 4.4

AB 7.1 7.0 6.9 6.8 5.8 4.8 4.8

BC 7.2 6.6 6.1 5.5 5.1 4.5 4.4


18

The Economy Survey respondents were asked to comment on the economies of Canada, the U.S. and China.

The majority of Canadians considered Canada’s economy to be either excellent (18%) or good (54%), while the rest felt it was either poor (23%) or terrible (5%). While slightly more than a quarter (27%) had no opinion about the Chinese economy, 30% rated it as excellent and 25% considered it , with only one in five saying it was not doing that well. Only 3% thought the U.S. economy was excellent and 13% regarded it as good; at the same time, fully eight in ten rated the U.S. economy as poor (45%) or terrible (34%).

Looking at some regional and demographic differences across groups, the following was noted about perceptions of the current state of the Canadian economy:

• Canadians in the Prairie provinces were more optimistic about the Canadian economy than those in other regions: in Alberta, 79% said the economy was either doing excellent or good, while 78% said the same in Manitoba/Saskatchewan.

• Men tended to rate the state of the Canadian economy higher than women with 76% rating it between 6 and 10, compared to 67% among women.

• As well, those in urban centers across the country, higher educated Canadians, and those with higher annual household income levels, were more likely to rate the Canadian economy as doing well.

State of Economies – Canada, U.S. and China

2/3/4. How would you rate the current state of the Canadian/U.S./Chinese economy? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.


Mean: 6.2

Mean: 6.8

Mean: 4.2


19

State of Canadian Economy (Demographics)

2. How would you rate the current state of the Canadian economy? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.

19%

22%

26%

17%

14%

18%

19%

16%

17%

15%

21%

18%

46%

57%

52%

55%

55%

49%

48%

56%

57%

52%

55%

54%

29%

20%

18%

22%

23%

25%

26%

22%

21%

25%

20%

23%

5%

3%

4%

7%

8%

5%

5%

3%

6%

3%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

BC

Alberta

Man/Sask

Ontario

Quebec

Atlantic

55+

35-54

18-34

Women

Men

Total

Excellent (8-10) Good (6-7) Poor (4-5) Terrible (1-3)

18%

21%

15%

18%

16%

17%

17%

18%

16%

19%

18%

60%

55%

56%

46%

50%

64%

62%

59%

50%

42%

54%

18%

20%

22%

31%

26%

18%

17%

19%

27%

28%

23%

4%

3%

5%

4%

7%

1%

4%

3%

5%

9%

5%

0% 50% 100%

Urban 500k

Urban 100k -…

Town 10k - 100k

Rural 5k - 10k

Rural <5000

100k+

80k-100k

60-80k

40-60k

<40k

Total


Gender

Age

Region

Income

Population


20

Demographic differences to note when looking at perceptions of the U.S. economy are as follows:

• Canadians between 18 and 34 were somewhat less pessimistic about the US economy compared to older Canadians (27% saying terrible, versus 37% for older Canadians).

• Regionally, British Columbians were the most pessimistic about the state of the U.S. economy (48% saying terrible) and Quebecers the most optimistic (34% saying terrible).

State of United States Economy (Demographics)

3. How would you rate the current state of the United States economy? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.


Gender

Age

Region

Income

Population


21

Among those giving an opinion about the state of the Chinese economy, opinions varied as follows across the country and across demographic groups:

• Men (36% saying “excellent”) were more likely than women (24% saying “excellent”) to feel that the Chinese economy is doing well.

• Quebecers (40%) tended to have the most optimistic view, followed by those in Alberta (32%) and Ontario (27%), while those from Atlantic Canada (21%), BC (23%) and Saskatchewan/Manitoba (24%) averaged lower ratings.

• Canadians living in centres with more than half a million residents rated the state of the Chinese economy as stronger (34% saying “excellent”) than did Canadians from smaller towns (between 25% and 31%).

State of Economy of China (Demographics)

4. How would you rate the current state of the economy of China? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.


Gender

Age

Region

Income

Population


22

Job Creation, Economic Growth and the Energy Sector When asked to name the industry they felt has the greatest potential for creating jobs and economic growth in Canada over the next five to ten years, a strong plurality of Canadians cited the natural resources sector.

On an aggregate level and combining first mention and second mention responses, more than four in ten Canadians (43%) identified a natural resource or energy-related sector for where the greatest opportunity exists. This includes the oil and gas industry (16%), natural resources industry (9%), the alternative energy industry (9%), mining industry (8%), environmental or green industries (5%) or the energy industry in general (2%).

When looking at the first mention of the one most important industry, slightly over one in ten identified either technology or high tech (12%). Others cited the health care/medical (6%), manufacturing (5%), or construction industries (4%). Combining first mention and second mention responses, one in five (20%) Canadians mentioned technology/high tech and 11% the health care industry.

19%

9%

2%

2%

2%

3%

4%

5%

5%

6%

6%

6%

11%

12%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Don’t know/Refused

Other

Trades/skill-based industries

Energy industry

Service industry

Environmental/green industries

Construction industry

Manufacturing industry

Mining industry

Healthcare/medical industry

Alternative energy industry

Natural resource industry

Oil and gas industry

Technology/hi-tech industry

Job Creation and Economic Growth5A. What industry do you see as the greatest opportunity for creating jobs and economic growth in Canada over the

next five to ten years?

5B. Are there any others?

45%

13%

1%

2%

1%

4%

5%

4%

6%

3%

4%

6%

9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

5A/5B. NET

19%

18%

3%

2%

4%

5%

7%

9%

8%

11%

9%

9%

16%

20%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Base: All respondents (n=2,025)Responses only shown if 2% or more in 5A

Total Natural Resource/Energy-related mentions: 33%

Total Natural Resource/Energy-related mentions: 19%

Net Total Natural Resource/Energy-related mentions: 43%


23

Regional differences of note were tied to the local economies, as follows:

• Technology and the high tech industry were disproportionately mentioned in Ontario (23%).

• Not surprisingly, those in Western Canada were more likely to have mentioned the oil and gas industry (49% in Alberta, 22% in BC and 20% in Saskatchewan/Manitoba), as did those in Atlantic Canada (21%). By comparison, it was only mentioned by 8% in both Quebec and Ontario.

• Natural resources (14%), forestry (11%) and tourism (9%) were more often mentioned in BC, manufacturing in Ontario (13%), renewable energy resources in Alberta (12%), and mining (19%) and agriculture (11%) in Saskatchewan/Manitoba.


Focus group participants recognized the importance of the energy sector to the Canadian economy and were well aware of the fact that energy resources make a significant contribution to the Canadian economy. At the same time, they tended to be quite conscious of the connection between energy and environment and the trade-offs that need to be considered.

The energy sector was widely recognized for two unique and positive characteristics:

• While other countries may ultimately face challenges due to energy shortages, Canadians may be protected from such challenges by having an abundance of domestic energy sources, although many felt Canadians are not realizing any sort of price discount benefit;

• International markets for our energy products present not only stable long-term demand, but potential for diversification and growth.


24

When asked about global markets for Canada’s natural resources, in particular oil and gas, most Canadians surveyed felt it was either very important (48%) or important (20%) to open up beyond current export to the U.S. and expand into new global markets such as Asia. Only three in ten found it either not very (15%) or not at all important (15%) to do so.

Respondent reaction was mixed when asked about the need for construction of infrastructure such as railways, ports and pipelines to bring resources to new markets. A small majority (55%) felt the benefits of exporting to new markets outweighed the environmental impacts of such infrastructure projects, while 36% felt that the environmental impacts were more important considerations than jobs and economic growth.

Opening New Global Markets

9. Currently, Canada exports almost all of its oil and gas exports to one country, the United States. How important do you think it is for the Canadian economy to open new global markets, such as Asia, for Canadian exports like oil and gas? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is

not at all important and 10 is very important.


10. For Canadian companies to sell to other global markets including those in Asia, infrastructure such as railways, port facilities and pipelines must be constructed. There are differing views on building this infrastructure.

Some say [READ STATEMENT). Others say [READ STATEMENT]: Which is closer to your point of view?


25

Some regional differences in opinions were found:

• While nationally, 48% rated the importance of opening new global markets for oil and gas exports as “very important”(8, 9 or 10 out of 10), in Alberta, 69% rated it as “very important.”

o Ratings were also relatively high in Atlantic Canada (49% indicating “very important” and 20% “important”) and Saskatchewan/Manitoba (44% indicating “very important”; 27% “important”)

• Quebecers were most likely of all Canadians to believe the environmental impact of building infrastructure to accommodate exports of oil and gas to global markets is too high (43%), while Albertans (64%) and those in Saskatchewan/Manitoba (61%) were the most likely to believe the economic benefits outweigh any environmental impacts.

o Younger Canadians (18-34) also expressed more concern for the environment (42%, compared to 34% among those older than 34).

o Women (41%) were much more likely than men (29%) to say that environmental impacts outweigh jobs and economic growth.

Importance of Opening New Global Markets (Demographics)

9. Currently, Canada exports almost all of its oil and gas exports to one country, the United States. How important do you think it is for the Canadian economy to open new global markets, such as Asia, for Canadian exports like oil and gas? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is

not at all important and 10 is very important.


Gender

Age

Region

Income

Population


26

Economic Growth vs Environmental Impact (Demographics)10. For Canadian companies to sell to other global markets including those in Asia, infrastructure such as railways, port facilities and pipelines

must be constructed. There are differing views on building this infrastructure. Some say [READ STATEMENT). Others say [READ STATEMENT]:

Which is closer to your point of view?


Gender

Age

Region

Income

Population


27


Focus group participants generally believed that there should be a diversification of export markets. Participants were well aware that the United States is our largest export market for oil (although many would underestimate the proportion of exports that market constituted) and that relationship was highly valued, logical and desirable. Participants had a sense that the U.S. is a good and valued energy trading partner, and likely to continue to be so.

However, the sense from the groups was that it was not prudent to have “all the eggs in one basket” and therefore, it is advisable to expand oil and gas exports into additional markets.

Focus group participants were challenged by the fact that some energy exports may entail more environmental impact or risk than others. That being said, there was widespread appreciation for the wealth of Canada’s energy resources, with many expressing a desire for continued advancement towards cleaner energy such as renewables, as well as continued improvements or progress in non-renewable practices.

There was a sense that not all markets have as much focus on reducing fossil fuel consumption as may be desirable, which leads to conflicting feelings about Canadian exports. Some feared that profit motives may be tempting actions or policies that lead to some unintended adverse consequences. While some were openly enthusiastic about Canada’s economic opportunity in this sector, others had conflicting emotions about non-renewables.

Overall, there was a desire to continue to reap economic benefits, while working towards shifting Canada and the world away from non-renewables.

When asked about potential new markets, focus group participants most commonly recommended expanding into Asia, with China specifically mentioned most often as a desirable objective. However, this led some to identify both pros and cons of that approach even if they are generally inclined to recommend it. As well, the groups occurred not long after the U.S. President indicated he would be delaying decision on approval of the Keystone XL pipeline until after the 2012 Presidential election. Many participants voluntarily raised this issue as a factor that was influencing their understanding of or view on the notion of expanding markets for Canadian oil. On the particular issue, participants nearly unanimously regarded the U.S. government position as temporary and unlikely to have a significant impact on oil exports from Canada in the long-term. Some offered the suggestion that Canada expand its refining capacity in order to add more value to the exports, generating more revenue for the Canadian economy and providing cheaper fuel for the domestic market.


28

Awareness of Events Impacting the Country’s Energy Resources Slightly more than half of Canadians were aware of recent events impacting Canada’s energy resource industry.

While nationally, 55% claimed to have read, seen or heard such news, recollection was much higher in Alberta (68%) and the lowest in Quebec (48%). Men were more likely than women to have awareness of such events (63% vs. 47%). Awareness also increased with age, household income, and education.


Awareness of Events Impacting Canada’s Energy Resource Industry

6. Have you read, seen or heard anything about events impacting Canada’s energy resource industry?

Gender

Age

Region

Income

Population


29

Among those 55% who had seen, heard or read something (n=1,159), this tended to focus on pipeline-related news. One in five (21%) specifically cited news surrounding the Keystone pipeline in the U.S., 14% mentioned oil or the tar sands in general, and another 10% mentioned hearing of a pipeline controversy. As well, 7% mentioned awareness of the oil or tar sands causing a controversy of some kind.

Events Impacting Canada’s Energy Resource Industry7A. What specifically did you hear? 7B. Is there anything else? 7A/7B. NET

Base: Those who have read, seen or heard about events impacting Canada's energy resource industry (n=1,159)

Responses only shown if 2% or more in 7A


30

Government Action Related to the Energy Sector


Unique to the focus groups was the exploration of views about the Government of Canada’s involvement with the energy sector.

Participants identified the following broad roles that the Government of Canada could (and would be expected to) play:

• Participants saw the Government’s primary role as guarding against negative outcomes or undue environmental or public health impacts of energy sector activity. These relate to activities such as extracting, processing, using and transporting resources. Participants identified actions such as establishing and enforcing regulations and laws and providing oversight.

• Secondarily, the Government’s role is to collect appropriate revenues in exchange for the extraction and export of resources.

However, probing revealed a default expectation and appreciation for the Government of Canada making efforts to establish new trading partners. Many were able to offer up additional suggestions for things the Government should point out about the Canadian energy sector in order to convince others to “buy Canadian.”

Focus group participants suggested several specific roles for the federal government:

• Aid in diversifying export markets in order to reduce reliance on a single partner.

• Position Canada as a reliable, responsible energy trading partner.

• Stimulate R&D and consumer (adoption?) use of more environmentally friendly energy sources.

• Incent consumers to make better choices.

• Engage in public education about Canadian leadership in energy, particularly in our relative performance vis-à-vis limiting and/or reducing environmental impact.

• A few suggested positioning Canada as a global energy leader, in diversity and in technology.

• A few volunteered recommended the development of some sort of national strategy.


31

Conclusions

The economy remained the issue more Canadians feel should be the top priority for the Government of Canada. There was a sense that the economy is performing modestly well and is at least performing better than the economy of our largest trading partner, the United States. That being said, Canadians were inclined to feel China’s economy is outperforming both the American and Canadian economies.

Within the Canadian economy, there was widespread appreciation for the contribution made by the country’s natural resources in general and energy sector in particular. Natural resource-based industries were clearly among the sectors more commonly identified as having the greatest potential for generating economic growth and creating job opportunities into the future/in the years ahead. More specifically within the realm of natural resources, energy-related resources were among the most commonly identified: oil and gas, alternative energy, or the energy industry in general.

When asked about global markets for Canada’s natural resources, in particular oil and gas, most Canadians felt it was important to open up beyond current export to the U.S. and expand into new global markets such as Asia.

The qualitative discussions shed some light on this particular mindset, with participants holding the view that the United States is rightfully a major export market for our energy resources and the desire was to continue to maintain this relationship. However, the sense from the groups was that it was not prudent to have “all the eggs in one basket” and the current set of economic and political circumstances in the U.S. may make the time right to investigate the potential for expanding export markets for these products.

That being said, there was widespread recognition that there is no simple solution to expanding markets, given the challenge of transporting the product within Canada and beyond. Participants could easily identify opportunities for expanding energy export markets, but some appeared to not be considering the transportation challenges while developing that opinion. During the course of the discussions, all participants came to realize that exporting the products required overcoming transportation challenges. Further, there was both a perception of the need to develop infrastructure in order to fulfill the objective of expanding trade, and a corresponding desire for any environmental or safety concerns to be effectively addressed. .

In summary, Canadians demonstrated an appreciation for the value of the country’s natural resources in general, and energy resources in particular, and hope to continue to enjoy the economic benefits of these resources for the long-term. There was confidence that this will be the case and clear recognition that energy resources are among the sectors with the greatest potential for economic growth and job creation. Canadians indicated preferring a prudent approach of diversifying by expanding trading markets, while maintaining the valuable and welcome trading relationship with the United States.


32

Study Methodology

Quantitative Research Questionnaire Design

Harris/Decima worked with NRCan to design a questionnaire that fulfilled the research objectives. Once finalized by NRCan, translation was completed using our in-house translation department.

Sample Design and Selection

The sample was designed to complete interviews with a random, representative sample of 2,000 Canadians aged 18 and over. The telephone surveys were completed using random-digit-dialling based on the Canada Survey Sample, which is a proprietary selection engine specifically designed to generate a random sample of telephone numbers to be dialled. Every Canadian household with a telephone number had an equal chance of being selected for the study.

Once a household was contacted, one individual was selected to be interviewed using the “most recent birthday” method (which means that in households with more than one eligible respondent, the person with the most recent birthday in the household is selected as the one to be interviewed). This is a very effective method for ensuring that the selection of individuals within households is representative of the Canadian population in terms of age and gender.

The sample was stratified by region in order to permit statistically meaningful analysis in less populous regions of the country. The data are weighted in tabulation to replicate actual population distribution by region, gender and age, according to the most current Census data available.

Survey Administration

The survey was conducted in English and French from November 25 to December 7, 2011. The survey was conducted by telephone using Harris/Decima’s CATI technology in centralized data collection facilities, by trained and fully supervised interviewers.

Quality Controls

1. Fieldwork Quality & Procedures

The following quality control procedures and field methods were undertaken as specified below, by means of checking the data records produced (e.g., questionnaires, data files) and/or monitoring.

Standard field procedures that ensured consistent data collection included:

• CATI programming ensured valid and complete data was collected through a universal tool which did not allow room for interpretation or deviation from the survey instrument (all interviewees received the same survey);

• The CATI system also allowed us to track sample and implement fixed quotas;

• Once data was collected, the research team verified the consistency of responses; and


33

• Analysis was done to compare responses against normal data or between fieldworkers. Any outliers were flagged and reviewed to make sure the data was accurate.

Throughout the data collection, Harris/Decima used a “two-team” structure:

i. A team of supervisors who managed the project logistics, training, quotas and day-to-day issues;

ii. A quality control team composed of dedicated monitors who worked with the Field Manager to evaluate the interviewers and ensure high quality, accurate data collection.

Monitoring was carried out on an ongoing basis, throughout the field period. Monitoring involved listening to interviews at the time they were carried out, using appropriate equipment or listening to recordings of the interviews. Both interviewer and respondent were audible. Interviewers were aware that any interview could be monitored but did not know whether a specific interview was monitored. Since interviewing was bilingual (English and French), fluent staff carried out monitoring. Interviewers were centrally monitored by a trained team, which ensured consistency and accuracy in all work conducted at Harris/Decima. The dedicated supervisory monitoring staff continually evaluated the quality of interviewing conducted for all projects. As a part of our standard quality control evaluation, the following measures were undertaken on a continual daily basis:

• Audio monitoring of calls (introductions, booking of call-backs, completed interviews/recruits, refusals, terminations);

• Simultaneous visual monitoring of the interviewers’ work by viewing the CATI screen and responses entered while the audio monitoring of all calls was conducted;

• Regular evaluation of open-ended responses; and

• Feedback cycle with interviewers to evaluate their work and acquired feedback on the survey process.

As is standard for all our projects, Harris/Decima’s field management team monitored 5% of each interviewer's work, with 75% of the survey needing to be monitored to count towards the 5%. In addition to meeting this MRIA and Government of Canada standard, Harris/Decima also randomly monitored 10%-15% of the overall project work. We monitored newer interviewers at a higher level and dropped off towards the 5% for more experienced interviewers. The client was invited to monitor calls, either in our comfortable facilities or remotely using Harris/Decima’s dial-in system.

As described above, during the data collection period and once fieldwork was completed, our internal

processes included identifying cases where the interview length is unrealistically short, contradicted

established facts or presented patterns of response deserving attention. As a result, we were able to

determine whether a case needed be excluded from the final sample if necessary. All of these checks

were performed manually and cleaned out of the data in the back end of the project.

2. Coding Procedures

The coding department reviewed the open-ended responses and created a numeric code list of common responses. Once a sufficient percentage of responses were identified, a tentative code list was sent to the consulting team for review and approval. The rough frequencies obtained from this exercise were used to develop a code list. Once the code list was approved, it was used to re-enter responses into ‘hard-code’ values that were analyzed.


34

Once coding was completed, another coder reviewed the responses to ensure accurate and consistent work. Harris/Decima aimed for less than 10% of responses under an ‘other specify’ code category, and created codes for any mentions that added up to 1% or more of total responses. The resulting data file was exported to the statistical package to quantify the responses for statistical analysis.

3. Data Cleaning

Harris/Decima analysts have considerable experience in cleaning data files, conducting statistical routines, producing tabular output, and weighting data to provide an accurate measure of the population as a whole.

The following were the basic steps taken when cleaning data files:

• Ensuring that all coded questions had updated codes and multiple mentions did not have duplicate codes;

• Creating all new variables as a result of CATI programming;

• Confirming that all relevant variables were included in the data file;

• Carrying out a final frequency check (for out-of-range values) and created recodes where necessary;

• Verifying that variable names and question numbers matched the final version of the questionnaire; and

• Creating and verifying new variable creations (against source variables) as outlined in the analysis plan and performing a spell check on all variables.

It is also noteworthy that because the CATI software controlled the questionnaire flow and data entry, data was quite clean from the outset.

4. Pre-test

The objectives of the pre-test were to evaluate the clarity of the questions, and to ensure they were appropriately sequenced and yielded the required information. This is standard procedure for all Harris/Decima surveys, and proved to be a valuable tool to ensure that the survey was properly constructed and fully tested before going to field.

Every attempt was made to simulate the procedures that were used in the main survey, including the method of contact, the field and quality control procedures, and the data verification tasks. Harris/Decima’s project team and the field supervisor listened to the pre-test interviews, and the Project Authority was also able to attend remotely via teleconference. Monitoring of the pre-test was done discretely.

Following the pre-test, we conducted a verbal de-briefing with the Project Authority and made revisions to the questionnaire based on the pre-test results. We provided the changes made in track changes into the questionnaire document for NRCan to approve before commencement of the fieldwork.

Pre-testing of the questionnaire was conducted according to the Government of Canada Standards:

• The socio-demographic characteristics of the targeted participants were approved by NRCan before interviewing began.

• Provisions were made for NRCan to monitor pre-tests as described above.


35

• Ten pre-test sessions were completed in both official languages for a total of 20 completed surveys.

• Pre-test completions were not included in the final dataset, since changes were made to the questionnaire based on the pre-test.

• As mentioned above, the pre-test was documented and provided to NRCan before the questionnaire was finalized.

Sample Disposition

A total of 37,964 telephone numbers were dialled for this study, from which a total of 2,0451 households agreed to participate in the study. The overall response rate is 7.04%. The final disposition of all contacts is presented in the following table, in accordance with the reporting standards established by the Market Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA).

Please note: MRIA does not have a standard Incidence calculation.

1 20 pre-test completions were removed from the final dataset. Therefore, reporting is based on 2,025 completed

interviews


36

A (1-14) Total Attempted 37964

1 Not in service 688

2 Fax 871

3 Invalid #/Wrong# 5069

B (4-14) Total Eligible 31336

4 Busy 878

5 Answering machine 11504

6 No answer 7462

7 Language barrier 386

8 Ill/Incapable 85

9 Eligible not available/Callback 1090

C (10-14) Total Asked 9931

10 Household/Company Refusal 3296

11 Respondent Refusal 4347

12 Qualified Termination 82

D (13-14) Co-operative Contact 2206

13 Not Qualified 161

14 Completed Interview 2045

REFUSAL RATE 77.79

(10+11+12) / C

RESPONSE RATE 7.04

D (13-14) / B (4-14)

INCIDENCE 92.96

[(14+12) / (13+14+12)]*100

[(CI+QualTM)/(NQ+CI+QualTM)]*100

Non-response bias

The calculated response rate of this survey was 7%, which is expected for a telephone survey of this type with a comparable field length of less than two weeks, where a response rate of between 5% and 10% is typical. In order to maximize the response rate while undertaking the study within the constraints of field time, sample size and budget, the following steps were taken:

• Up to eight callbacks were made to each listing before it was retired; however, most (84%) answered on the first call attempt;

• Callback scheduling was varied to maximize the possibility of finding someone at home; and

• Flexible callbacks and appointments were offered to respondents so they could respond to the survey at their most convenient time. Daytime interviewing was scheduled to pick up any appointments that were made for daytime hours.

Response rates for telephone surveys in Canada and elsewhere have been steadily declining for many years and the trend appears to be continuing. Research has thus far indicated that response rates are a poor indicator of survey quality, yet there remains a valid concern that the universe of individuals


37

ultimately providing responses has an increasing chance of being different from those who are not included in the final dataset. Fundamentally, once a household’s phone number is drawn into the sample frame, there are only three ways that the number ends up as a non-response:

• The phone number is not attempted at a time when the potential respondent is available;

• The survey sample is completed before the phone number needs to be attempted or re-attempted; or

• The respondent chooses not to answer or participate.

By implementing the callback measures described above, the risk of failing to provide a viable opportunity for an interview is mitigated.

However, the concern remains that the high proportion of households that are ultimately non-participants in a study may be different from the survey sample in a way that influences the results of the survey.

In order to investigate whether non-response bias may be having an impact on the results, two forms of tests have been applied:

1. Comparing Sample Profile to Universe Profile. Using Statistics Canada data from the 2006 Census as the factual description of the universe being sampled, the demographic characteristics of the weighted final sample were examined in order to identify any differences and where any may exist, examine whether these had a statistically significant impact on the findings.

2. Comparison of Early and Late Responders. Using the information on the specific call attempt which resulted in the completed interview, an analysis was undertaken to investigate whether those who responded on the first attempt differed from those who responded only after at least one callback attempt. The callback strategy is specifically implemented to mitigate the risk that non-response is caused by an insufficient sampling attempt. This is built upon the logical hypothesis that those who require multiple attempts in order to be a respondent may be different from those who respond immediately and therefore may be at least somewhat similar to non-responders. At the very least, it is clear that if multiple attempts had not been made to contact these households, the respondent would have been considered a non-responder. Therefore, an analysis was undertaken to identify any differences and where any may exist, examine whether these had a statistically significant impact on the findings.

Comparing Sample Profile to Universe Profile

The profile of the final sample (both weighted and unweighted) of Canadians was compared to the available population data. As is typically found with telephone surveys in Canada, the final sample over-represents those with higher levels of education. By under-representing lower education levels, some statistically significant differences were found between the education groups on two elements of the survey: First, as is typically expected, a difference was found on awareness (“Have you read, seen or heard anything about events impacting Canada’s energy resource industry”). Secondly, impressions of some of the natural resources tested were more positive among lower educated Canadians, therefore on the aggregate perhaps deflating the positive ratings somewhat. That being said, the overall impressions and analysis of the data would not have changed if the sample would have more closely mirrored the universe in terms of education levels


38

Moreover, when looking at other key questions (for example “How important do you think it is for the Canadian economy to open new global markets, such as Asia, for Canadian exports like oil and gas?”), no differences were found.

Therefore, weighting the results on education levels (in addition to the existing weighting for province, age and gender) setting quotas in order to boost the number of completions among lower educated Canadians would not have changed the overall survey results or the study conclusions.

Comparison of Early and Late Responders

A comparison of “early” and “late” responders to the survey was undertaken. Early responders are those who completed the survey upon first contact; late responders required two or more callbacks In order to secure their participation. For this survey, a comparison of these two groups across demographic variables reveals that early responders were somewhat more likely than later responders to be male, live in B.C. and to be older (55+). Attitudinally, while there are some statistically significant differences between the groups, the differences are fairly small and would not have an impact on the overall analysis. As a result, it would not appear that being a late responder and by theoretical extension, a non-responder, does not imply holding a contrasting set of opinions and may therefore not be considered a threat to the validity of the findings.

Non-Response Bias Data

The following table presents a profile of the final weighted and unweighted sample and how it compares to the Canadian population (18 years and over) on measured regional and demographic characteristics, based on the most recent (2006) census figures.


39

Characteristics Sample Size (unweighted)

Unweighted Sample

%1

Weighted Sample

%1

2006 Census

%

Type of responder (unweighted)

Early %2 (n=1,694)

Late %2 (n=331)

Province

British Columbia 210 10 13 13 12 5

Alberta 200 10 10 10 10 8

Saskatchewan 101 5 3 3 5 3

Manitoba 113 6 4 4 6 4

Ontario 701 35 38 38 34 39

Quebec 500 25 26 24 24 28

Newfoundland and Labrador

46 2 2 2 2 3

Nova Scotia 70 4 2 3 3 5

New Brunswick 71 4 3 3 4 3

Prince Edward Island

13 1 1 <1 1 1

Gender

Male 909 45 483 48 46 42

Female 1,116 55 523 52 55 58

Age group4

18-34 years 236 12 283 28 12 13

35-54 years 732 38 403 40 37 42

55 years plus 960 50 323 32 51 45

Education level4

No certificate, diploma or degree

132 7 65 20 6 8

High school certificate or equivalent

449 22 235 25 22 24

Apprenticeship or trades certificate or diploma

204 10 105 12 10 9

College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma

496 25 255 19 24 27

University certificate, diploma or degree

720 36 375 25 37 32

Household income4

Under $20,000 170 10 9 76 10 10

$20,000 to under $40,000

317 18 17 186 18 19

$40,000 to under 605 35 35 366 35 35


40

$80,000

$80,000 and over 634 37 39 396 37 36

1 Among those providing valid responses.

2 Early responders = those answering the survey on first contact.

Late responders = answered after two or more callbacks.

3 Imputed 18-24 as 70% of 15-24.

4 Excludes dk/na responses.

5 Census reports % among those 20+ years of age. The survey reports % all respondents 18+.

6 Based on all economic families, 2006 Census.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that, despite finding some differences of statistical significance, non-response to this survey has not affected the final weighted sample to the extent that difference conclusions would have been drawn from this study.

Completion Results A total of 2,025 individuals completed the survey after the pre-test. The approximate margin of error for a sample of this size is plus or minus 2.18 percent at the 95% confidence level. The average survey duration was 11 minutes. Margins of error will be greater for sub samples, as presented in the table below.

Region Unweighted Sample Margin of Error*

Atlantic Canada 200 +/-6.93%

Quebec 500 +/-4.38%

Ontario 701 +/-3.70%

Manitoba/Saskatchewan 214 +/-6.7%

Alberta 200 +/-6.93%

British Columbia/North 210 +/-6.76%

Total Canada 2,025 +/-2.18% *at the 95% confidence level.


41

Qualitative Research Harris/Decima conducted focus groups in seven locations across the country, with two groups held in each location. In each city, one session was held with participants with low to moderate household incomes and the other session was held with participants in higher household incomes. These groups were determined by combining household income and household size.

The following table outlines the distribution of the groups in terms of location, language and target audience:

City Language Low/Middle

HHI High HHI TOTAL

London English 1 1 2

Toronto English 1 1 2

Calgary English 1 1 2

North and West Vancouver English 1 1 2

Prince George English 1 1 2

Halifax English 1 1 2

Quebec City French 1 1 2

Total -- 7 7 14

The focus groups were standard groups, two hours in length, with between eight (8) and ten (10) participants each. Wherever possible, remote online viewing of the groups was facilitated. All sessions were videotaped and audio taped. Simultaneous translation for the sessions in French was made available.

Sessions began at 5:30pm and 7:30pm each evening, and participants were given an honorarium of $75 in appreciation for their time.

MRIA standards were adhered to for recruitment and conduct of focus groups.

Research Instruments

Harris/Decima designed the recruitment screeners and focus group moderation guides for this study in close consultation with the client project authority. Harris/Decima drew upon its extensive research experience to design instruments that elicit the information required to fulfill the research objectives of the study. All instruments have been drafted in English and translated into French, after being finalized and approved by the client.

The “recruitment screener” was the tool used during the process of contacting and recruiting potential participants. It was essentially a short questionnaire, which helped the recruiter explain the concept and purpose of the focus group. The screener included questions that ensured that individuals recruited met the pre-established criteria for their target audience: one group with low to middle income and one group with higher income individuals in each city. Harris/Decima took the appropriate measures to ensure that participants were unaware of the focus group topic.

Harris/Decima designed the “moderation guide”, which was the tool used by the moderator to ensure that the full range of research issues were covered in the time allowed. We incorporated our experience from conducting previous focus groups on the topic to tailor the screener and moderation guide.


42

Recruitment

For all groups, we have ensured a good mix of respondents in terms of age, gender, education, children under 18 in household and employment situation.

MRIA standards were adhered to for recruitment and conduct of focus groups, including the following:

• All respondents met usage/trial/ownership standards including type of brand, frequency of use/trial or other time limits specified for the study and demographic specifications for the study, including marital status, age, sex, income, occupation, and household composition, etc.

• No respondents (nor anyone in their immediate families or households) worked in an occupation that had anything to do with the topic area (whether wholesale, retail, sales, service or consultant) nor in advertising, marketing, marketing research, public relations or the media (radio, television, newspaper, film/video production, etc.) nor did Respondents themselves ever have worked in such occupations.

• No respondent was recruited who had attended, in the past two years, a focus group discussion or in-depth interview on the same general topic as defined by the moderator.

• No respondents were recruited who know each other for the same study, unless they were in different groups or interviews that were scheduled separately.

• No respondent was recruited who had attended a group discussion or in-depth interview within the past six months.

• No respondent was recruited who had attended five or more focus groups or in-depth interviews in the past five years.

• At least one third of the Respondents recruited for each group/study had never attended a group discussion or in-depth interview before.

The recruitment process employed random sampling methodology, but was supplemented by respondents previously recruited as potential focus group respondents, which we utilized our weekly omnibus survey for on an ongoing basis, particularly to develop sample of potential respondents in difficult to reach audiences.

Further, all participants were screened during the recruitment process to confirm that they:

• Had a sufficient command of English (or French for the Quebec City groups) to fully participate in the focus group sessions;

• They or their family were not employed in any of the following:

o Market Research or Marketing o Public Relations or Media (TV, Print) o Advertising and communications o A political party o A government department or agency, whether federal or provincial


43

Appendix A: Survey Questionnaires

English Good afternoon/evening. My name is _______________ and I am calling from Harris/Decima, a public opinion research company. We are conducting a study on behalf of the Government of Canada to find out what people think about issues facing Canada today. Please be assured that we are not selling or soliciting anything. Your participation in this survey is voluntary, confidential and your responses will remain anonymous. This survey is registered with the national survey registration system.

We choose telephone numbers at random and then select one person from each household to be interviewed. To do this, we would like to speak to the person in your household, 18 years of age or older, who has had the most recent birthday. Would that be you?

1A. Thinking of the issues facing Canada today, which one would you say the Government of Canada should focus on most? [CAPTURE FIRST MENTION]

[NO PRE-CODED LIST - INTERVIEWER NOTE: TOP ANSWER MUST BE RECORDED FIRST. ALL OTHER RESPONSES WILL BE RECORDED ON THE NEXT SCREEN]

99 – [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/Refused [SKIP TO Q2]

1B. Are there any others? [MULTIPLE MENTIONS] [IF NECESSARY: Thinking of the issues facing Canada today, which one would you say the Government of Canada should focus on most?]

99 – [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/Refused

[ROTATE Q2 AND Q3]

2. How would you rate the current state of the Canadian economy? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.


3. How would you rate the current state of the United States economy? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.


4. How would you rate the current state of the economy of China? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.


5A. What industry do you see as the greatest opportunity for creating jobs and economic growth in Canada over the next five to ten years? [CAPTURE FIRST MENTION]


44

[NO PRE-CODED LIST - INTERVIEWER NOTE: TOP ANSWER MUST BE RECORDED FIRST. ALL OTHER RESPONSES WILL BE RECORDED ON THE NEXT SCREEN] 99 – [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/Refused [SKIP TO Q6] 5B. Are there any others? [MULTIPLE MENTIONS] [IF NECESSARY: What industry do you see as the greatest opportunity for creating jobs and economic growth in Canada over the next five to ten years?] 99 – [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/Refused 6. Have you read, seen or heard anything about events impacting Canada’s energy resource industry?

• Yes

• No

• [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/Refused

[IF YES CONTINUE - OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q.8]

7A. What specifically did you hear? [CAPTURE FIRST MENTION] [NO PRE-CODED LIST - INTERVIEWER

NOTE: TOP ANSWER MUST BE RECORDED FIRST. ALL OTHER RESPONSES WILL BE RECORDED ON THE

NEXT SCREEN]

99 – [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/Refused [SKIP TO Q8]

7B. Is there anything else? [MULTIPLE MENTIONS] [IF NECESSARY: What specifically did you hear?]

99 – [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/Refused 8. As you may know, Canada produces energy resources from a variety of different sources and I’d like you tell me your impression of each of them. Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.

How would you rate your impression of [INSERT ITEM-RANDOMIZE]? [IF NEEDED: As you may know, Canada produces energy resources from a variety of different sources and I’d like you tell me your impression of each of them. Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is terrible and 10 is excellent.]

• A. Natural gas/Shale gas [SPLIT SAMPLE]

• B. Coal

• C. Nuclear

• D. Oil sands/Oil [SPLIT SAMPLE]

• E. Hydroelectricity

9. Currently, Canada exports almost all of its oil and gas exports to one country, the United States. How important do you think it is for the Canadian economy to open new global markets, such as Asia, for Canadian exports like oil and gas? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is not at all important and 10 is very important.



45

10. For Canadian companies to sell to other global markets including those in Asia, infrastructure such as railways, port facilities and pipelines must be constructed. There are differing views on building this infrastructure.

Some say [READ STATEMENT). Others say [READ STATEMENT]:

ROTATE STATEMENTS:

-it is important to expand ports, roads, pipelines and rail infrastructure in order to export Canadian energy to markets like those in Asia, because it will help create jobs and economic growth in Canada -- even if there is some impact on the environment.

-the environmental impact of building ports, roads, pipelines, and rail infrastructure is too high and that the possibility of an accident means that it should not be developed even if it means lost jobs and economic growth.

Which is closer to your point of view?


DEMOGRAPHICS

And now a few final questions for demographic purposes.

11. Gender [DO NOT ASK: record based on interviewer observation]

12. In what year were you born? (RECORD YEAR - XXXX) 9999 – DO NOT READ: Don’t know/Refused

13. Which of the following diplomas or degrees have you completed?

(READ LIST)

- None - High School diploma or equivalent - Registered Apprenticeship or other trades certificate or diploma - College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma - University degree, certificate or diploma - (DO NOT READ) Refused

14. Which of the following categories best describes your current employment status? Are you [READ

LIST – ACCEPT ONE ANSWER ONLY] - Working full-time, that is, 35 or more hours per week - Working part-time, that is, less than 35 hours per week - Self-employed - Unemployed, but looking for work - A student attending school full-time


46

- Retired - Not in the workforce [FULL-TIME HOMEMAKER, UNEMPLOYED, NOT LOOKING FOR WORK]) - DO NOT READ] [IF VOLUNTEERED: Other -- DO NOTSPECIFY] - [DO NOT READ] Refused

15. Which of the following categories best describes your total household income? That is, the total income of all persons in your household combined, before taxes [READ LIST]?

- Under $20,000 - $20,000 to just under $40,000 - $40,000 to just under $60,000 - $60,000 to just under $80,000 - $80,000 to just under $100,000 - $100,000 to just under $150,000 - $150,000 and above - (DO NOT READ) Refused

16. What is the primary heating fuel used in your home? READ LIST IF NECESSARY – ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE

- Electricity - Natural gas - Propane - Wood - Oil - Boiler/water/hot water - Other (SPECIFY) - [DO NOT READ] Don’t know/no answer

17. How would you describe the community you live in?

Rural area of 5,000 people or less 1

Rural area of 5,000 to 10,000 people 2

Town or City of 10,000 to 100,000 people 3

Urban centre of 100,000 to 500,000 people 4

Urban centre of 500,000 or more people 5

[DO NOT READ] Don’t know / No answer 9

Those are all the questions I have for you. Thank you very much for your co-operation and for your time. Have a great day!


47

French Bonjour/Bonsoir. Je m’appelle _______________ et je vous téléphone de Harris/Décima, une firme de recherche sur l’opinion publique. Nous effectuons une étude pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada afin de savoir ce que les gens pensent de certains enjeux auxquels le Canada fait face actuellement. Soyez assuré(e) que nous n’avons rien à vendre et que nous ne solliciterons rien de votre part. Votre participation est volontaire et nous respecterons la confidentialité et l’anonymat de vos réponses. Ce sondage est enregistré dans le système national d'enregistrement des sondages.

Nous sélectionnons des numéros de téléphone au hasard, puis nous interrogeons une personne par ménage. Pour ce sondage, nous aimerions parler à la personne de votre ménage, âgée de 18 ans ou plus, qui a été la dernière à célébrer son anniversaire. Est-ce vous?

1A. En songeant aux enjeux auxquels le Canada doit faire face à l’heure actuelle, sur lequel de ces enjeux le gouvernement du Canada devrait-il le plus axer ses efforts, selon vous? [NOTEZ LA PREMIÈRE RÉPONSE]

[PAS DE LISTE PRÉCODÉE – NOTE À L’INTERVIEWEUR : IL FAUT D’ABORD NOTER LA PREMIÈRE RÉPONSE. TOUTES LES AUTRES RÉPONSES DEVRONT ÊTRE NOTÉES À L’ÉCRAN SUIVANT]

99 – [NE LISEZ PAS] Ne sait pas/Refuse [PASSEZ À Q2]

1B. Y en a-t-il d’autres? [RÉPONSES MULTIPLES] [AU BESOIN : En songeant aux enjeux auxquels le Canada doit faire face à l’heure actuelle, sur lequel de ces enjeux le gouvernement du Canada devrait-il le plus axer ses efforts, selon vous?]

99 – [NE LISEZ PAS] Ne sait pas/Refuse

[ROTATE Q.2 AND Q3]

2. Comment évaluez-vous l’état actuel de l’économie canadienne? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie terrible et 10, excellent.


3. Comment évaluez-vous l’état actuel de l’économie américaine? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie terrible et 10, excellent.


4. Comment évaluez-vous l’état actuel de l’économie chinoise? Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie terrible et 10, excellent.


5A. Selon vous, quelle industrie présente le plus grand potentiel pour la création d’emplois et la croissance économique au Canada au cours des cinq à dix prochaines années? [NOTEZ LA PREMIÈRE RÉPONSE]

[PAS DE LISTE PRÉCODÉE – NOTE À L’INTERVIEWEUR : IL FAUT D’ABORD NOTER LA PREMIÈRE RÉPONSE. TOUTES LES AUTRES RÉPONSES DEVRONT ÊTRE NOTÉES À L’ÉCRAN SUIVANT]



48

5B. Y en a-t-il d’autres? [RÉPONSES MULTIPLES] [AU BESOIN : Selon vous, quelle industrie présente le plus grand potentiel pour la création d’emplois et la croissance économique au Canada au cours des cinq à dix prochaines années?]


6. Avez-vous lu, vu ou entendu quoi que ce soit à propos d’événements qui ont un impact sur l’industrie des ressources énergétiques du Canada?

• Oui

• Non

• [NE LISEZ PAS] Ne sait pas/Refuse

[SI OUI, CONTINUEZ – SINON, PASSEZ À Q.8]

7A. Qu’avez-vous entendu exactement? [NOTEZ LA PREMIÈRE RÉPONSE] [PAS DE LISTE PRÉCODÉE – NOTE À L’INTERVIEWEUR : IL FAUT D’ABORD NOTER LA PREMIÈRE RÉPONSE. TOUTES LES AUTRES RÉPONSES DEVRONT ÊTRE NOTÉES À L’ÉCRAN SUIVANT]


7B. Y a-t-il autre chose? [RÉPONSES MULTIPLES] [AU BESOIN : Qu’avez-vous entendu exactement?]


8. Comme vous le savez peut-être, le Canada produit de l’énergie à partir de diverses sources, et j’aimerais savoir quelle impression vous avez à l’égard de chacune. Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie terrible et 10, excellente.

Comment évaluez-vous votre impression à l’égard [INSERT ITEM-RANDOMIZE]? [AU BESOIN : Comme vous le savez peut-être, le Canada produit de l’énergie à partir de diverses sources, et j’aimerais savoir quelle impression vous avez à l’égard de chacune. Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie terrible et 10, excellente.]

• A. Du gaz naturel/Du gaz de schiste [SPLIT SAMPLE]

• B. Du charbon

• C. Du nucléaire

• D. Des sables bitumineux/Du pétrole [SPLIT SAMPLE]

• E. De l’hydroélectricité

9. À l’heure actuelle, la quasi-totalité des exportations canadiennes de pétrole et de gaz sont destinées à un même pays, les États-Unis. Selon vous, dans quelle mesure est-il important pour l’économie canadienne d’ouvrir de nouveaux marchés mondiaux, par exemple en Asie, pour les exportations de pétrole et de gaz du pays. Veuillez répondre sur une échelle de 1 à 10, où 1 signifie pas du tout important et 10, très important.



49

10. Pour que les entreprises canadiennes puissent vendre à d’autres marchés mondiaux, dont ceux de l’Asie, il faut bâtir des infrastructures comme des installations ferroviaires et portuaires ainsi que des pipelines. Les points de vue divergent sur la construction de ces infrastructures.

Certains disent [LISEZ L’ÉNONCÉ). D’autres disent [LISEZ L’ÉNONCÉ] :

ROTATE STATEMENTS:

-qu’il est important de construire davantage de ports, de routes, de pipelines et d’infrastructures ferroviaires afin d’exporter l’énergie canadienne dans des marchés comme ceux de l’Asie, car cela stimulera la création d’emplois et la croissance économique du Canada – même s’il y a un certain impact sur l’environnement.

- que l’impact environnemental de la construction de ports, de routes, de pipelines et d’infrastructures ferroviaires est trop grand et que la possibilité qu’un accident survienne signifie qu’on ne devrait pas les construire, même si cela devait se traduire par des emplois perdus et une croissance économique moindre.

Quel point de vue se rapproche le plus du vôtre?


QUESTIONS DÉMOGRAPHIQUES

Et voici enfin quelques questions à des fins démographiques.

11. Sexe [NE DEMANDEZ PAS : notez en fonction de vos observations]

12. Quelle est votre année de naissance?

(NOTEZ L’ANNÉE - XXXX)


13. Lesquels des diplômes ou grades suivants avez-vous obtenus?

(LISEZ LA LISTE)

- Aucun

- Diplôme d’études secondaires ou l’équivalent

- Apprentissage enregistré ou diplôme ou certificat d’une école de métiers

- Diplôme d’études collégiales (p. ex., CEGEP), ou certificat ou diplôme non universitaire

- Grade, certificat ou diplôme universitaire

- (NE LISEZ PAS) Refuse


50

14. Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux votre situation d’emploi actuelle? Êtes-vous…? [LISEZ LA LISTE – ACCEPTEZ UNE RÉPONSE SEULEMENT]

- Travailleur(euse) à temps plein, 35 heures ou plus par semaine

- Travailleur(euse) à temps partiel, moins de 35 heures par semaine

- Travailleur(euse) autonome

- Sans emploi, mais en recherche d’emploi

- Étudiant(e) à temps plein

- Retraité(e)

- Pas sur le marché du travail [PERSONNE À LA MAISON À TEMPS PLEIN, SANS EMPLOI ET PAS EN RECHERCHE D’EMPLOI]

- [NE LISEZ PAS] [SI RÉPONSE SPONTANÉE : Autre – NE PRÉCISEZ PAS]

- [NE LISEZ PAS] Refuse

15. Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux le revenu total de votre ménage, c’est-à-dire le total des revenus avant impôts de toutes les personnes habitant sous votre toit [LISEZ LA LISTE]?

- Moins de 20 000 $

- De 20 000 $ à moins de 40 000 $

- De 40 000 $ à moins de 60 000 $

- De 60 000 $ à moins de 80 000 $

- De 80 000 $ à moins de 100 000 $

- De 100 000 $ à moins de 150 000 $

- 150 000 $ et plus

- (NE LISEZ PAS) Refuse

16. Quelle est la principale source de chauffage utilisée dans votre domicile?

LISEZ LA LISTE AU BESOIN – ACCEPTEZ UNE RÉPONSE

- Électricité

- Gaz naturel

- Propane

- Bois

- Pétrole

- Chaudière/Eau/Eau chaude

- Autre (VEUILLEZ PRÉCISER)


51

- [NE LISEZ PAS] Ne sait pas/Pas de réponse

17. Comment décrivez-vous la collectivité dans laquelle vous habitez?

Une région rurale de 5 000 habitants ou moins 1

Une région rurale de 5 000 à 10 000 habitants 2

Une ville ou une municipalité de 10 000 à 100 000 habitants 3

Une agglomération urbaine de 100 000 à 500 000 habitants 4

Une agglomération urbaine de 500 000 habitants ou plus 5

[NE LISEZ PAS] Ne sait pas/Pas de réponse 9

Je n'ai plus d'autres questions pour vous. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration et du temps que vous nous avez accordé. Bonne journée!


52

Appendix B: Recruitment Screeners

English Questionnaire #______________ Date of Last Group_____________ # of previous groups___________

London Tuesday, November 29, 2011 Group 1: Low/Middle HHI @ 5:30 pm $75 Group 2: High HHI @ 7:30 pm $ 75 Toronto Wednesday, November 30, 2011 Group 3: Low/Middle HHI @ 5:30 pm $ 75 Group 4: High HHI @ 7:30 pm $ 75 Calgary Wednesday, November 30, 2011 Group 5: Low/Middle HHI @ 5:30 pm $ 75 Group 6: High HHI @ 7:30 pm $ 75 Vancouver Thursday, December 1, 2011 Group 7: Low/Middle HHI @ 5:30 pm $ 75 Group 8: High HHI @ 7:30 pm $ 75 Prince George Saturday, December 3, 2011 Group 9: Low/Middle HHI @ 10:00 am $ 75 Group 10: High HHI @ 12:00 pm $ 75 Halifax Monday, December 5, 2011 Group 11: Low/Middle HHI @ 5:30 pm $ 75 Group 12: High HHI @ 7:30 pm $ 75

Recruit: 12 for 8 to 10 show per group Honorarium: $75 Study#: 91370 Definitions: Low/Middle income: If single HH income is <$75K or if multiple HH income is <$100K High income: If single HH income is $75K+ or if multiple HH income is $100K+

Respondent’s name: Respondent’s phone #: (home) Respondent’s phone #: (work) Respondent’s fax #: sent? or Respondent’s e-mail : sent? Sample source (circle): eVox random client referral

Interviewer:

Date: Validated: Quality Central: On List: On Quotas:


53

Hello, my name is . I'm calling from Harris/Decima, a national public opinion research firm. On behalf of the Government of Canada, we’re organizing a series of discussion groups to explore various issues. EXPLAIN FOCUS GROUPS. About nine people like you will be taking part, all of them randomly recruited just like you. For their time, participants will receive an honorarium of $75. But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix and variety of people. May I ask you a few questions? Yes CONTINUE No ASK IF ANYONE ELSE IN THE HOUSEHOLD MIGHT BE INTERESTED IF NOT THANK AND TERMINATE Participation is voluntary. We are interested in hearing your opinions, no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view. The format is a “round table” discussion lead by a research professional.

READ TO ALL: “This call may be monitored or audio taped for quality control and evaluation purposes.” ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION IF NEEDED:

• to ensure that I (the interviewer) am reading the questions correctly and collecting your answers accurately;

• to assess my (the interviewer) work for performance evaluation;

• to ensure that the questionnaire is accurate/correct (i.e. evaluation of CATI programming and methodology – we’re asking the right questions to meet our clients’ research requirements – kind of like pre-testing).

• If the call is audio taped, it is only for the purposes of playback to the interviewer for a performance evaluation immediately after the interview is conducted or it can be used by the Project Manager/client to evaluate the questionnaire if they were unavailable at the time of the interview – all audio tapes are destroyed after the evaluation.

S1) Do you or any member of your household work in or has retired from:

YES NO

Market Research or Marketing 1 2

Public Relations or Media (TV, Print) 1 2

Advertising and communications 1 2

An employee of a political party 1 2

An employee of a government department or agency, whether federal or provincial

1 2

IF “YES” TO ANY OF THE ABOVE, THANK AND TERMINATE S2) Are you a Canadian citizen at least 20 years old who normally resides in the [XX] area? Yes 1 CONTINUE No 2 THANK AND TERMINATE


54

S3) How long have you lived in [CITY]? TERMINATE IF LESS THAN 2 YEARS S4) Are you the head or co-head of your household? Yes 1 CONTINUE No 2 THANK AND TERMINATE S5) Have you ever attended a consumer group discussion, an interview or survey which was arranged in advance and for which you received a sum of money? Yes 1 MAX. ⅓ PER GROUP No 2 GO TO Q1 S6) How long ago was it? TERMINATE IF IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS S7) How many consumer discussion groups have you attended in the past 5 years? TERMINATE IF MORE THAN 4 DISCUSSION GROUPS ASK ALL Q1) Could you please tell me what age category you fall in to? Are you... Under 20 0 THANK AND TERMINATE 20-24 years 1 25-34 years 2 35-44 years 3 45-54 years 4 55-64 years 5 65+ years 6 Refuse 9 THANK AND TERMINATE Q2) Do you currently have children under the age of 18 living in the house with you? [RECRUIT MIX] Yes 1 No 2 Q3) How many people above the age of 18 are there in your household? One 1 More than one 2 Q4) Could you please tell me what is the last level of education that you have completed? Some high school only 1 Completed high school 2 Some College/University 3 Completed College/University 4 RF/DK 9

ENSURE GOOD MIX PER GROUP



55

Q5) What is your current employment status? Working full-time 1 Working part-time 2 Self-employed 3 Retired 4 Currently not working 5 SKIP TO Q7 – MAX 3 PER GROUP Student 6 SKIP TO Q7 – MAX 3 PER GROUP Other 7 DK/RF 99 Q6) [IF EMPLOYED/RETIRED] What is/was your current/past occupation? __________________________ (PLEASE SPECIFY) Q7a) [IF Q3=1 ASK] Was your household’s income for 2010 greater or less than 75 thousand dollars? $75K or greater 1 Qualifies for group 2 UNLESS EMPLOYMENT STATUS = STUDENT Less than $75K 2 Qualifies for group 1 Refused 9 THANK AND TERMINATE Q7b) [IF Q3=2 ASK] Was your household’s income for 2010 greater or less than 100 thousand dollars? $100K or greater 1 Qualifies for group 2 UNLESS EMPLOYMENT STATUS = STUDENT Less than $100K 2 Qualifies for group 1 Refused 9 THANK AND TERMINATE Q7c) [IF Q7A OR Q7B =2 ASK] And would that be: Under $20,000 Between $20,000 and $34,999 Between $35,000 and $44,999 Between $45,000 and $59,999 Between $60,000 and $74,999 [IF Q5b=2] Between $75,000 and $99,999 Q8) DO NOT ASK – NOTE GENDER Male 1 Female 2 Q9) If you won a million dollars what would be the first two things you would do with the money? (MUST HAVE TWO RESPONSES TO ACCEPT. TERMINATE IF FLIPPANT, COMBATIVE OR EXHIBITS DIFFICULTY IN RESPONDING) TERMINATE IF RESPONDENT OFFERS ANY REASON SUCH AS SIGHT OR HEARING PROBLEM, A WRITTEN OR VERBAL LANGUAGE PROBLEM, A CONCERN WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY OR IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN.

ENSURE 50-50 SPLIT



56

Invitation As I mentioned earlier, the group discussion will take place the evening of, DATE @ TIME for 2 hours and participants will receive $75 for their time. Would you be willing to attend? Yes 1 CONTINUE No 2 THANK AND TERMINATE

See front page

Privacy Questions Now I have a few questions that relate to privacy, your personal information and the research process. We will need your consent on a few issues that enable us to conduct our research. As I run through these questions, please feel free to ask me any questions you would like clarified. P1) First, we will be providing the hosting facility and session moderator with a list of respondents’ names and profiles (screener responses) so that they can sign you into the group. Do we have your permission to do this? I assure you it will be kept strictly confidential. Yes 1 GO TO P2 No 2 READ RESPONDENT INFO BELOW Unfortunately we need to provide the facility hosting the session and the moderator with the names and background of the people attending the focus group because only the individuals invited are allowed in the session and the facility and moderator must have this information for verification purposes. Please be assured that this information will be kept strictly confidential. GO TO P1A

P1a) Now that I’ve explained this, do I have your permission to provide your name and profile to the facility? Yes 1 GO TO P2 No 2 THANK & TERMINATE P2) An audio and/or video tape of the group session will be produced for research purposes. The tapes will be used only by the research professional to assist in preparing a report on the research findings and will be destroyed once the report is completed. Do you agree to be audio and/or video taped for research purposes only? Yes 1 THANK & GO TO P3 No 2 READ RESPONDENT INFO BELOW Unfortunately it is necessary for the research process for us to audio/video tape the session as the researcher needs this material to complete the report. I assure you it is kept strictly confidential and it will be destroyed as when the research is complete. GO TO P2A P2a) Now that I’ve explained this, do I have your permission for audio/video taping?


57

Yes 1 THANK & GO TO P3 No 2 THANK AND TERMINATE P3) Each month FocusSearch submits the names of individuals that have participated in our focus groups to the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association Qualitative Central system (www.mria-arim.ca). Qualitative Central serves as a centralized database to review participation in qualitative research and focus groups. You will not be contacted for any reason whatsoever as a result of being on this list. Do we have your permission to submit your name and phone number to MRIA’s Qualitative Central system? Yes 1 THANK & GO TO INVITATION No 2 GO TO P3A P3a) Unfortunately, to participate in this focus group we must have your permission to add your name to the Qualitative Central system as it is the only way for us to ensure the integrity of the research process and track participation in qualitative research. The system is maintained by the industry body, the Professional Marketing Research Society, and is solely used to track your participation in qualitative research (such as focus groups). You will not be contacted for any reason whatsoever as a result of being on this list. Now that I've explained this do I have your permission to add your name to our qualitative central list? Yes 1 THANK & GO TO INVITATION No 2 THANK & TERMINATE AS REQUIRED, ADDITIONAL INFO FOR THE INTERVIEWER: Please be assured that this information is kept confidential and is strictly accessed and used by professional market research firm to review participation and prevent “professional respondents” from attending sessions. Research firms participating in MRIA’s Qualitative Central require your consent to be eligible to participate in the focus group - the system helps ensure the integrity of the research process. AS REQUIRED, NOTE ABOUT MRIA: The Marketing Research and Intelligence Association is a non-profit organization for marketing research professionals engaged in marketing, advertising, social, and political research. The Society's mission is to be the leader in promoting excellence in the practice of marketing and social research and in the value of market information. Invitation: Do you have a pen handy so that I can give you the address where the group will be held? It will be held at: (ADD ADDRESSES)


58

London Academica Group Inc. 131 Wharncliffe Road South London ON, N6J 2K4 Entry Instructions to Building: Enter from back door from parking lot. On the second floor. Directions: Wellington Rd. North, off the 401 Left (West) on Commissioners Right (North) on Wharncliffe Rd. Left on Byron Ave. Major intersection: Southwest corner of Wharncliffe Road and Byron Avenue, just south of Springbank Drive and the Horton Street extension. Parking: Attached parking.

Toronto Head Quarters – Uptown 5075 Yonge Street, Suite 600 Toronto, ON, M2N 6C6 Entry Instructions to Building: Take the elevator to the 6th floor. Directions: Located on Yonge Street, just north of Sheppard Avenue on the east side of the street, only a few minutes from the 401 highway. Parking: Street and attached parking.

Calgary Qualitative Coordination 707 10th Ave SW, Suite 120 Calgary AB, T2R 0B3 Entry Instructions to Building: Off 10th Avenue, outside entrance (not through main building). Directions: S.W. Corner 10th Avenue and 6th Street S.W. Parking: Street and attached parking.

Vancouver Ipsos Reid 1285 West Pender Street, Vancouver BC, V6E 4B1 Entry instructions to building: Enter from front entrance on Pender St. There will be a door person to let in respondents/clients as the elevators lock off after 5pm Directions from North Vancouver: Take the Lion's Gate Bridge into Vancouver. Turn right onto Pender St and the office is 3 blocks down, on the north side. T there is an RBC attached to the building. Parking: Parking is available at the Coal Harbour Community Centre. The parkade can be accessed from Jervis, just north of Hastings. We are a block and a half up the street from it. While there is street parking, meters only accept up to 2 hours so we encourage respondents to use the parkade instead, so there is no disruption during the groups of having them go out to pay the meters again.


59

Prince George Esther’s Inn 1151 Commercial Crescent Prince George, BC, V2M 6W6 Directions: Centrally located off of Central ST (Hwy 97) on the 10th Avenue & Commercial Crescent. Parking: Available at the inn.

Halifax Market Quest Research Group Inc 45 Alderney Drive, 19th floor, Halifax NS B2Y 2N6 Entry Instructions to Building: Enter through the main door of building take elevator to the 18th floor then access the 19th from the 18th floor. Directions: Located in Queen Sqaure building. Parking: Street and attached parking.

Quebec City

We ask that you arrive fifteen minutes early to be sure you find parking, locate the facility and have time to check-in with the hosts. The hosts may be checking respondents’ identification prior to the group, so please be sure to bring some personal identification with you (for example, a driver’s license). If you require glasses for reading make sure you bring them with you as well. As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us. If for some reason you are unable to attend, please call us so that we may get someone to replace you. You can reach us at 1-800-363-4229 x5068 at our office. Please ask for Carol Smith. Someone will call you the day before to remind you about the discussion. So that we can call you to remind you about the focus group or contact you should there be any changes, Can you please confirm your name and contact information for me? [READ INFO WE HAVE AND CHANGE AS NECESSARY.] First name Last Name Email Day time phone number Night time phone number If the respondent refuses to give his/her first or last name or phone number please assure them that this information will be kept strictly confidential in accordance with the privacy law and that it is used strictly to contact them to confirm their attendance and to inform them of any changes to the focus group. If they still refuse THANK & TERMINATE.


60

French Questionnaire n°______________ Date du dernier groupe_________________

Nombre de groupes antérieurs __________

Québec

Le mardi 6 décembre 2011

Groupe 13 : Ménages à revenu bas/moyen @ 17 h 30 75 $

Groupe 14 : Ménages à revenu élevé @ 19 h 30 75 $

Recrutez : 12 personnes par groupe pour que 8 à 10 d’entre elles se présentent

Prime : 75 $

Étude n° : 91370

Définitions :

Revenu bas/moyen :

Si un seul adulte dans le ménage : revenu <75 000 $. Si plusieurs adultes dans le ménage : revenu <100 000 $

Revenu élevé :

Si un seul adulte dans le ménage : revenu supérieur ou égal à 75 000 $. Si plusieurs adultes dans le ménage : revenu supérieur ou égal à 100 000 $

Nom du répondant :

N° de téléphone du répondant : (maison)

N° de téléphone du répondant : (travail)

N° de télécopieur du répondant : envoyé? ou

Courriel du répondant : envoyé?

Source de l’échantillon (encerclez) : eVox aléatoire client référence

Intervieweur :

Date :

Validé :

Fichiers centraux :

Listes :

Quotas :

Bonjour, je m’appelle et je vous téléphone de Harris/Décima, une firme nationale de recherche sur l’opinion publique. Nous organisons des groupes de discussion pour le compte du gouvernement du Canada afin d’examiner divers enjeux.


61

EXPLIQUEZ CE QUE SONT LES GROUPES DE DISCUSSION. Environ neuf personnes qui auront tout comme vous été choisies au hasard prendront part à la discussion. Les participants recevront une prime de 75 $ en guise de remerciement pour le temps qu’ils nous auront accordé. Toutefois, avant de vous inviter à vous joindre à nous, j’aimerais vous poser quelques questions pour m’assurer que le groupe sera composé d’une bonne diversité de personnes. Puis-je vous poser quelques questions?

Oui CONTINUEZ

Non DEMANDEZ SI UNE AUTRE PERSONNE DU MÉNAGE POURRAIT ÊTRE INTÉRESSÉE

SI NON, REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ

Votre participation est volontaire. Nous désirons connaître votre opinion et nous ne tenterons pas de vous vendre quoi que ce soit ni de vous faire changer d’avis. La discussion se déroulera sous forme de table ronde et sera animée par un professionnel de la recherche.

LISEZ À TOUS : « Cet appel peut être écouté ou enregistré à des fins d’évaluation et de contrôle de la qualité. »

CLARIFICATIONS SUPPLÉMENTAIRES AU BESOIN :

• Pour s’assurer que je lise les questions correctement et que je recueille vos réponses avec précision;

• Pour évaluer mon rendement;

• Pour vérifier que le questionnaire est exact/correct (c.-à-d. évaluation de la programmation ITAO et de la méthodologie – s’assurer que nous posons les bonnes questions pour répondre aux exigences de nos clients en matière de recherche – comme un prétest);

• Si l’appel est enregistré, l’enregistrement sert uniquement à évaluer le travail de l’intervieweur et est écouté immédiatement après la fin de l’entrevue. S’ils étaient absents au moment de l’entrevue, le client et le gestionnaire de projet pourraient également écouter l’enregistrement. Tous les enregistrements sont détruits après l’évaluation.

S1) Est-ce que vous, ou un membre de votre ménage, travaillez ou avez déjà travaillé dans l’une des organisations ou l’un des domaines suivants :

OUI NON

Recherche marketing ou marketing 1 2

Relations publiques ou médias (télévision, presse écrite)

1 2

Publicité et communications 1 2

Un parti politique comme employé(e) 1 2

Un ministère ou un organisme gouvernemental, que ce soit au fédéral ou au provincial

1 2


62

SI OUI À L’UNE DE CES OPTIONS, REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ

S2) Êtes-vous un(e)citoyen(ne) canadien(ne), âgé(e) d’au moins 20 ans, qui réside habituellement dans la région de [XX]?

Oui 1 CONTINUEZ

Non 2 REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ

S3) Depuis combien de temps habitez-vous à [VILLE]?

TERMINEZ SI MOINS DE 2 ANS

S4) Êtes-vous le chef ou l’un des chefs de votre ménage?

Oui 1 CONTINUEZ


S5) Avez-vous déjà participé à un groupe de discussion de consommateurs, à une entrevue ou à un sondage pour lequel ou laquelle vous avez été recruté(e) à l’avance et vous avez reçu une somme d’argent?

Oui 1 MAX. ⅓ PAR GROUPE

Non 2 PASSEZ À Q1

S6) Il y a combien de temps de cela?

TERMINEZ SI AU COURS DES 6 DERNIERS MOIS

S7) À combien de groupes de discussion de consommateurs avez-vous participé au cours des 5 dernières années?

TERMINEZ SI PLUS DE 4 GROUPES DE DISCUSSION

POSEZ À TOUS

Q1) Pouvez-vous me dire à quel groupe d’âge vous appartenez? Avez-vous...?

Moins de 20 ans 0 REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ

20 à 24 ans 1

25 à 34 ans 2

35 à 44 ans 3

45 à 54 ans 4

OBTENEZ UNE BONNE DIVERSITÉ DANS CHAQUE GROUPE


63

55 à 64 ans 5

65 ans ou plus 6

Refuse 9 REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ

Q2) Y a-t-il actuellement des enfants de moins de 18 ans qui vivent sous votre toit? [BONNE DIVERSITÉ]

Oui 1

Non 2

Q3) Combien y a-t-il de personnes de plus de 18 ans dans votre ménage?

Une 1

Plus d’une 2

Q4) Pourriez-vous me dire quel est le plus haut niveau de scolarité que vous avez atteint?

Études secondaires non terminées 1 Études secondaires terminées 2

Études collégiales/universitaires non terminées 3

Études collégiales/universitaires terminées 4 Refuse/Ne sait pas 9

Q5) Quelle est votre situation d’emploi actuelle?

Travailleur(euse) à temps plein 1

Travailleur(euse) à temps partiel 2

Travailleur(euse) autonome 3

Retraité(e) 4

Actuellement sans emploi 5 PASSEZ À Q7 – MAX. 3 PAR GROUPE

Étudiant(e) 6 PASSEZ À Q7 – MAX. 3 PAR GROUPE

Autre 7

Ne sait pas/Refuse 99

Q6) [SI EMPLOYÉ(E)/RETRAITÉ(E)] Quelle est votre occupation actuelle/Quelle était votre ancienne occupation? __________________________ (VEUILLEZ PRÉCISER)

BONNE DIVERSITÉ DANS CHAQUE GROUPE


64

Q7a) [SI Q3=1, POSEZ] Le revenu de votre ménage a-t-il été supérieur ou inférieur à 75 000 $ en 2010?

75 000 $ ou plus 1 Admissible au groupe 2 SAUF SI SITUATION D’EMPLOI = ÉTUDIANT(E)

Moins de 75 000 $ 2 Admissible au groupe 1


Q7b) [SI Q3=2, POSEZ] Le revenu de votre ménage a-t-il été supérieur ou inférieur à 100 000 $ en 2010?

100 000 $ ou plus 1 Admissible au groupe 2 SAUF SI SITUATION D’EMPLOI = ÉTUDIANT(E)

Moins de 100 000 $ 2 Admissible au groupe 1


Q7c) [SI Q7A OU Q7B =2, POSEZ] Et a-t-il été…?

Inférieur à 20 000 $

De 20 000 $ à 34 999 $

De 35 000 $ à 44 999 $

De 45 000 $ à 59 999 $

De 60 000 $ à 74 999 $

[SI Q5b=2] De 75 000 $ à 99 999 $

Q8) NE POSEZ PAS – INDIQUEZ LE SEXE

Homme 1

Femme 2

Q9) Si vous gagniez un million de dollars, quelles sont les deux premières choses que vous feriez avec cet argent? (DOIT FOURNIR DEUX RÉPONSES POUR ÊTRE ACCEPTÉ. TERMINEZ SI RÉPOND DE FAÇON DÉSINVOLTE OU BELLIQUEUSE OU A DE LA DIFFICULTÉ À RÉPONDRE)

NOTE : TERMINEZ SI LE RÉPONDANT DONNE UNE RAISON COMME UN PROBLÈME DE LA VUE, DE L’OUÏE, D’ALPHABÉTISME, UN PROBLÈME DE COMMUNICATION ÉCRITE OU ORALE, UNE PRÉOCCUPATION QUANT À SA CAPACITÉ DE BIEN COMMUNIQUER OU SI VOUS AVEZ UN DOUTE.

Invitation

RÉPARTITION 50-50

BONNE DIVERSITÉ DANS CHAQUE GROUPE


65

Comme je l’ai mentionné plus tôt, le groupe de discussion aura lieu en soirée le Jour Date Mois @ Heure et durera 2 heures. Les participants recevront une prime de 75 $ en guise de remerciement pour leur temps. Accepteriez-vous d’y participer?

Oui 1 CONTINUEZ


Reportez-vous à la première page

Enjeux relatifs à la confidentialité

J’aurais maintenant quelques questions à vous poser à propos de la confidentialité, de vos renseignements personnels et du déroulement de la recherche. Nous devrons obtenir votre permission par rapport à certains sujets pour pouvoir effectuer notre recherche. Lorsque je vous poserai ces questions, n’hésitez pas à me demander de les clarifier si vous en ressentez le besoin.

P1) Tout d’abord, nous fournirons une liste des noms et des profils (réponses au questionnaire) des participants aux hôtes et au modérateur, afin qu’ils puissent vous inscrire. Acceptez-vous que nous leur transmettions ces renseignements? Je peux vous assurer que ceux-ci demeureront strictement confidentiels.

Oui 1 PASSEZ À P2

Non 2 LISEZ L’INFORMATION SUIVANTE AU RÉPONDANT

Nous devons donner votre nom et votre profil aux hôtes et au modérateur, puisque seuls les gens qui sont invités à participer peuvent prendre part à la séance. Les hôtes et le modérateur ont besoin de ces renseignements à des fins de vérification uniquement. Soyez assuré(e) que ces renseignements demeureront strictement confidentiels. PASSEZ À P1A

P1a) Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous transmettions votre nom et votre profil aux hôtes et au modérateur?

Oui 1 PASSEZ À P2


P2) Il y aura un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance et celui-ci servira uniquement à des fins de recherche. L’enregistrement sera uniquement utilisé par un professionnel de la recherche pour préparer le rapport sur les résultats de la recherche. L’enregistrement sera détruit lorsque le rapport sera terminé.

Acceptez-vous qu’un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance soit effectué uniquement à des fins de recherche?


66

Oui 1 REMERCIEZ ET PASSEZ À P3

Non 2 LISEZ L’INFORMATION SUIVANTE AU RÉPONDANT

Malheureusement, nous devons faire un enregistrement audiovisuel de la séance puisque le professionnel de la recherche en a besoin pour rédiger son rapport. Je peux vous assurer que l’enregistrement demeurera strictement confidentiel et qu’il sera détruit dès que le rapport sera terminé. PASSEZ À P2A

P2a) Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous fassions un enregistrement audiovisuel?

Oui 1 REMERCIEZ ET PASSEZ À P3


P3) Chaque mois, nous soumettons le nom des personnes qui ont participé à nos séances au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l’Association de la recherche et de l’intelligence marketing (www.mria-arim.ca). Le Registre central de recherche qualitative est une base de données centrale qui vérifie la participation aux entrevues de recherches qualitatives. Personne ne communiquera avec vous parce que votre nom se trouve sur cette liste.

Nous permettez-vous de soumettre votre nom et votre numéro de téléphone au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l’ARIM?

Oui 1 REMERCIEZ ET PASSEZ À L’INVITATION

Non 2 PASSEZ À P3A

P3a) Malheureusement, pour que vous puissiez participer à ce groupe de discussion, nous devons avoir votre permission pour ajouter votre nom au Registre central de recherche qualitative puisqu’il s’agit du seul moyen qui nous permet d’assurer l’intégrité du processus de recherche et de faire le suivi de la participation aux recherches qualitatives. Le système est tenu à jour par l’Association de la recherche et de l’intelligence marketing et il est uniquement utilisé pour faire le suivi de votre participation aux recherches qualitatives (comme les groupes de discussion). Personne ne communiquera avec vous parce que votre nom se trouve sur cette liste.

Maintenant que je vous ai expliqué cela, acceptez-vous que nous ajoutions votre nom au Registre central de recherche qualitative?

AU BESOIN, RENSEIGNEMENTS SUPPLÉMENTAIRES POUR L’INTERVIEWEUR :

Soyez assuré(e) que cette information demeurera confidentielle et seules les firmes de recherche marketing professionnelles pourront y accéder et l’utiliser pour vérifier la participation et empêcher les « répondants professionnels » de participer aux séances. Les firmes de recherche qui participent au Registre central de recherche qualitative de l’ARIM ont besoin de votre autorisation avant que vous ne soyez admissible à participer au groupe. Cette procédure contribue à assurer l’intégrité du processus de recherche.


67

AU BESOIN, NOTE À PROPOS DE L’ARIM :

L’Association de la recherche et de l’intelligence marketing est un organisme à but non lucratif qui regroupe des professionnels de la recherche marketing impliqués dans le marketing, la publicité, les recherches sociales et politiques. La mission de l’Association est d’être le leader dans la promotion de l’excellence dans la pratique du marketing et des recherches sociales ainsi que dans la valeur de l’information sur les marchés.

Invitation :

Avez-vous un crayon à portée de la main pour prendre en note l’adresse de l’endroit où aura lieu le groupe de discussion. Il aura lieu à : (AJOUTEZ LES ADRESSES)

Hotel Ambassadeur

2300, Chemin Sainte-Foy

Québec, Québec, Canada

G1V 1S5

Nous vous demandons d’arriver quinze minutes avant l’heure prévue pour vous permettre de stationner votre voiture, de trouver l’endroit et de vous présenter. Il est possible qu’on vous demande de vous identifier avant la tenue de la séance. Par conséquent, assurez-vous d’avoir une pièce d’identité (par exemple, un permis de conduire) sur vous. De plus, si vous avez besoin de lunettes pour lire, veuillez les apporter.

Comme nous n’invitons qu’un petit nombre de personnes, votre participation est très importante pour nous. Si, pour une raison ou une autre vous ne pouvez pas vous présenter, veuillez nous en aviser pour que nous puissions vous remplacer. Vous pouvez nous joindre au 1 800 363-4229, poste 5068. Demandez à parler à Louise Tremblay. Quelqu’un communiquera avec vous la veille du groupe de discussion pour confirmer votre présence.

Afin que nous puissions vous appeler pour confirmer votre présence ou pour vous informer si des changements survenaient, pourriez-vous me confirmer votre nom et vos coordonnées? [LISEZ LES COORDONNÉES QUE NOUS AVONS ET MODIFIEZ-LES AU BESOIN.]

Prénom

Nom de famille

Courriel

Nº de téléphone le jour

Nº de téléphone le soir

Si le répondant refuse de donner son prénom, son nom ou son numéro de téléphone, dites-lui que ces renseignements demeureront strictement confidentiels en vertu de la loi sur le respect de la vie privée et que ceux-ci seront uniquement utilisés pour le contacter afin de confirmer sa présence et pour l’informer de tout changement concernant le groupe de discussion. S’il refuse toujours, REMERCIEZ ET TERMINEZ.


68

Appendix C: Discussion Guides

English INTRODUCTION (5 Minutes)

WARM UP: General Context (20 Minutes)

• I’d like to start with a fairly broad question. So, thinking of the issues facing Canada today, which one would you say the Government of Canada (that is the federal government) should focus on most? FLIP CHART – PROBE - ENSURE PARTICIPANTS FOCUS ON FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ISSUES

o What makes you say that? Why do you feel this is THE MOST IMPORTANT issue?

CANADA’S ENERGY PRODUCTION (45 Minutes)

• I want to focus in on Canada’s energy sector.

o (PAPER AND PEN) I’d like to begin by having you do a simple paper and pen exercise. Please write down the word or words that come to mind when I say the term “Canada’s energy sector.”

� REVIEW EACH ANSWER: Why that word? Regardless of what you each wrote down, do others agree with that choice of word, too?

o (WORD ASSOCIATION) Using the handout I’m providing, circle the 3 words that most closely fit your impression of “Canada’s energy sector.” And please underline a word that is the opposite of your impression.

• When I say “sources of energy” what does that mean to you?

DEFINITION OF “ENERGY SOURCE”: Just so we are all thinking of the same thing, I’d like us all to consider “energy source” to mean any substance that supplies heat or power. That includes, all of the fuels and other forms of energy that we use.

• From what you know, what are the major sources of energy in Canada?

• Is Canada an energy exporter? What types of energy do we export?

• How much benefit do individual Canadians get from our energy exports? How do we benefit?

• How confident are you that the international markets we sell energy to will continue to demand energy from us into the future? Why/why not?

o Does this matter to you? Is this an important thing for the country?

o Have you read, seen or heard anything about events impacting Canada’s energy resource industry?

� IF NECESSARY: What about news stories related to exporting oil to the U.S.?


69

• HEADLINE EXERCISE – I AM GOING TO HAND YOU A SHEET WITH SOME RECENT HEADLINES FROM NEWS STORIES ABOUT CANADA’S ENERGY SECTOR

o I would like you to take a look and circle the one that stands out for you the most – MODERATOR: why does this stand out for you? Positive or negative? Discuss. Probe for:

� Have you seen these headlines before?

� Is there anything surprising here? Or, have you heard/seen this before – these headlines aren’t telling you anything you didn’t already know?

o Taken together, what is the story about Canada’s energy sector that you take away from these headlines? How do you feel about that?

o Where do you see this story going? How do you expect it to play out?

o How would you like to see it play out?

GOVERNMENT ACTION RELATED TO THE ENERGY SECTOR (45 Minutes)

• Have you seen, heard of or read anything in particular that the Government of Canada is doing (or considering) with respect to Canada’s energy sector?

• What countries are the ones that we export our oil and gas to? Which ones are our biggest “customers?”

o If you could actually choose, which countries would you most prefer were buying Canada’s oil and gas exports?

• IF NECESSARY: Currently, Canada exports almost all of its oil and gas exports to one country, the United States. When you hear that, what are your thoughts?

• Do you think Canada should look to open new global markets, such as Asia, for Canadian exports like oil and gas?

o What benefits, if any, do you think there will be for Canada if we sell to other global markets?

o What concerns, if any, do you have if Canada exports oil and gas to Asian markets?

• For Canadian companies to sell to other global markets including those in Asia, infrastructure such as railway, port facilities and pipelines must be constructed. What are your thoughts on this?

o Is building pipelines and/or port facilities something new for Canada or something that has been done for a while already to transport energy in this country? If it’s new, what is new about it?

o What benefits, if any, do you think there will be for Canada if we construct railways, port facilities and pipelines?

o What concerns, if any, do you have if Canada constructs railways, port facilities and pipelines?

� FOR BOTH BENEFITS AND CONCERNS, PROMPT AS NECESSARY: What about the impact on local communities?


70

• PROMPT EACH AS NECESSARY: What about thinking specifically of: local residents, landowners, Aboriginals, others?

o Have you observed any problems – environmental or otherwise – with the existing set of pipelines, ports and/or railways that we use for transporting energy in Canada?

• What can the Government of Canada do to lessen any negative impacts or concerns Canadians may have?

• What kinds of measures have you heard about that have been taken to reduce the environmental risks associated with the new pipelines being talked about?

o Environmental assessments

o Rapid response teams

o Shut-off valves

o Double-walled pipes,

o Double-hulled ships

• When you hear that measures like this would be put in place, how does that affect your thinking about the new pipelines being talked about?

• Is there anything that we have missed? Anything else we haven’t talked about that is important to consider with respect to Canada’s energy sector?

CONCLUSION [5 Minutes]

• We have covered a lot of topics today and really appreciate you taking the time and energy to come down here and give your opinion. Your input is very important and insightful!

o To conclude, I wanted to ask you whether you have any last thoughts that you want to give the Government of Canada.

French

INTRODUCTION (5 minutes)

ENTRÉE EN MATIÈRE : Contexte général (20 minutes)

• Pour commencer, j’aimerais vous poser une question assez générale. Alors, en songeant aux enjeux auxquels le Canada est confronté à l’heure actuelle, sur quel enjeu le gouvernement du Canada (c’est-à-dire le gouvernement fédéral) devrait-il le plus axer ses efforts, selon vous? INSCRIVEZ AU TABLEAU – SONDEZ – ASSUREZ-VOUS QUE LES PARTICIPANTS SE CONCENTRENT SUR LES ENJEUX QUI RELÈVENT DU GOUVERNEMENT FÉDÉRAL

o Pourquoi dites-vous cela? Pourquoi avez-vous l’impression que c’est l’enjeu LE PLUS IMPORTANT?


71

LA PRODUCTION D’ÉNERGIE DU CANADA (45 minutes)

• J’aimerais axer la discussion sur le secteur de l’énergie du Canada.

o (PAPIER ET CRAYON) Je vous demanderai tout d’abord de prendre un papier et un crayon pour effectuer un exercice simple. Veuillez écrire le mot ou les mots qui vous viennent à l’esprit lorsque je dis « secteur de l’énergie du Canada ».

� DISCUTEZ DE CHAQUE RÉPONSE : Pourquoi avez-vous choisi ce mot-là? Peu importe ce que vous avez écrit, y en a-t-il d’autres parmi vous qui sont d’accord avec ce choix de mot?

o (ASSOCIATION DE MOTS) Je vais vous distribuer une feuille et vous demander d’encercler les trois mots qui décrivent le mieux l’impression que vous avez du « secteur de l’énergie du Canada ». Veuillez ensuite souligner un mot qui est à l’opposé de l’impression que vous en avez.

• Lorsque je dis « sources d’énergie », qu’est-ce que cela signifie pour vous?

DÉFINITION DE « SOURCE D’ÉNERGIE » : Afin que nous soyons sur la même longueur d’onde, je vous demanderais de considérer que « source d’énergie » désigne toute substance qui fournit de la chaleur ou de l’énergie. Cela comprend tous les carburants et toutes les autres formes d’énergie que nous utilisons.

• À votre connaissance, quelles sont les principales sources d’énergie du Canada?

• Le Canada est-il un exportateur d’énergie? Quels types d’énergie exportons-nous?

• Dans quelle mesure les Canadiens bénéficient-ils individuellement de nos exportations d’énergie? Comment en bénéficions-nous?

• Dans quelle mesure êtes-vous persuadé(e) que les marchés internationaux à qui nous vendons de l’énergie continueront de s’approvisionner ici à l’avenir? Pourquoi/Pourquoi pas?

o Est-ce important pour vous? Est-ce quelque chose d’important pour le pays?

o Avez-vous lu, vu ou entendu quoi que ce soit à propos d’événements qui ont un impact sur l’industrie des ressources énergétiques du Canada?

� AU BESOIN : Qu’en est-il de reportages au sujet des exportations de pétrole aux États-Unis?

• EXERCICE SUR LES GRANDS TITRES – JE VAIS VOUS DISTRIBUER UNE FEUILLE OÙ VOUS RETROUVEREZ DES GRANDS TITRES DE REPORTAGES RÉCENTS SUR LE SECTEUR DE L’ÉNERGIE DU CANADA

o Auriez-vous l’amabilité de les examiner et d’encercler celui qui se démarque le plus pour vous – MODÉRATEUR : Pourquoi trouvez-vous qu’il se démarque des autres? Est-ce positif ou négatif? Discutez. Sondez :

� Aviez-vous déjà vu ces grands titres auparavant?


72

� Y a-t-il quoi que ce soit de surprenant ici? Ou encore aviez-vous déjà entendu/vu cela – ou s’il n’y a rien dans ces grands titres que vous ne saviez déjà?

o Si vous les prenez comme un tout, qu’est-ce que ces grands titres racontent au sujet du secteur de l’énergie du Canada à votre avis? Comment vous sentez-vous par rapport à cela?

o Qu’arrivera-t-il dans cette histoire selon vous? Qu’est-ce qui va se passer à votre avis?

o Qu’est-ce que vous aimeriez qui arrive?

MESURES DU GOUVERNEMENT POUR LE SECTEUR DE L’ÉNERGIE (45 minutes)

• Avez-vous vu, entendu ou lu quoi que ce soit à propos de quelque chose en particulier que le gouvernement du Canada fait (ou songe à faire) relativement au secteur de l’énergie du Canada?

• Quels sont les pays où nous exportons notre pétrole et notre gaz? Qui sont nos plus gros « clients »?

o Si vous aviez le choix, vers quels pays préféreriez-vous que se fassent les exportations de pétrole et de gaz du Canada?

• AU BESOIN : À l’heure actuelle, le Canada exporte presque tout son pétrole et son gaz vers un seul pays, les États-Unis. Que pensez-vous lorsque vous entendez cela?

• Pensez-vous que le Canada devrait chercher à ouvrir de nouveaux marchés mondiaux, par exemple en Asie, pour les exportations canadiennes, par exemple le pétrole et le gaz?

o Le cas échéant, quels bénéfice pensez-vous que le Canada retirera en vendant à d’autres marchés mondiaux?

o Le cas échéant, quelles inquiétudes aurez-vous si le Canada exportait du gaz et du pétrole dans les marchés de l’Asie?

• Pour que les entreprises canadiennes puissent vendre à d’autres marchés mondiaux, dont ceux de l’Asie, il faut bâtir des infrastructures comme des installations ferroviaires et portuaires ainsi que des pipelines. Qu’en pensez-vous?

o La construction de pipelines et/ou d’installations portuaires est-elle quelque chose de nouveau pour le Canada ou quelque chose que nous faisons depuis un certain temps déjà pour le transport d’énergie au pays? Si c’est nouveau, qu’est-ce qu’il y a de nouveau là-dedans?

o Le cas échéant, quels bénéfices pensez-vous que le Canada retirera de la construction de chemins de fer, d’installations portuaires et de pipelines?

o Le cas échéant, quelles inquiétudes aurez-vous si le Canada construit des chemins de fer, des installations portuaires et des pipelines?

� POUR LES BÉNÉFICES ET LES INQUIÉTUDES, SONDEZ AU BESOIN : Qu’en est-il de l’impact sur les collectivités locales?

• SONDEZ POUR CHACUN AU BESOIN : Et si vous pensez tout particulièrement : aux résidents locaux, aux propriétaires fonciers, aux autochtones, à d’autres personnes?


73

o Avez-vous remarqué des problèmes – environnementaux ou autres – dans les infrastructures existantes de pipelines, de ports ou de chemins de fer utilisées pour le transport d’énergie au Canada?

• Que peut faire le gouvernement du Canada pour réduire les impacts négatifs ou les inquiétudes que les Canadiens pourraient avoir?

• De quelles mesures prises pour réduire les risques environnementaux associés aux nouveaux pipelines dont il est question avez-vous déjà entendu parler?

o Évaluations environnementales

o Équipes d’intervention rapide

o Soupapes d’arrêt

o Tuyaux à double paroi

o Navires à double coque

• Lorsque vous entendez dire que de telles mesures seraient mises en place, quel effet cela a-t-il sur votre opinion à l’égard des nouveaux pipelines dont il est question?

• Avons-nous omis de parler de quoi que ce soit? Y a-t-il quoi que ce soit dont nous n’avons pas parlé, mais qu’il serait important de considérer relativement au secteur de l’énergie du Canada?

CONCLUSION [5 minutes]

• Nous avons couvert de nombreux sujets ce soir et nous vous sommes très reconnaissants du temps et de l’énergie que vous avez consacrés à la discussion. Vos commentaires sont très importants et très enrichissants pour nous!

o En conclusion, j’aimerais vous demander si vous avez d’autres commentaires à formuler au gouvernement du Canada.


74

Appendix D: Data Tables

Data tables are provided under separate cover

Documents

Natural Resources Canada Poll