|
Canadian Rural Partnership
Rural Solutions to Rural Concerns
National Rural Workshop
Final report
DISCLAIMER
Rural Solutions To Rural Concerns
National Rural Workshop
October 2-4, 1998
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
The National Rural Workshop was held from October 2nd to 4th, 1998 near Belleville, Ontario. The workshop
was one of various initiatives undertaken as part of the Rural Dialogue, a key component of the federal
government's Canadian Rural Partnership (CRP). The workshop brought together over 200 Canadians living
in rural and remote areas to discuss issues of importance to them and their communities. The event was
designed not only to learn more about the key issues facing rural Canadians, but also to identify concrete
actions that the federal government could potentially take to address these issues, including the development
of a federal rural policy.
The following areas were discussed during the Workshop:
- Ten key issues facing rural and remote communities. These issues were selected for discussion as
a result of analyzing all of the Dialogue input received from rural Canadians between May and
July 31, 1998.
- Guiding principles for the federal government to consider in the development and implementation
of policies and programs.
- Suggestions for federal government actions.
The discussions that took place under each of these areas are summarized below:
2. Key Issues
Partnerships
Workshop participants recognized the importance of partnerships at the rural level. However,
building partnerships, or sustaining those that already exist, is becoming more difficult due to the
increased pressures being placed on community resources. Some participants believed that
partnerships are being promoted as a means of dealing with government downloading, which is
adding to the pressure. The availability of local capacity to sustain partnerships is being questioned,
as the time and resources that rural Canadians can dedicate to their community are becoming
increasingly limited. Partnerships are also difficult to sustain because governments do not make long-term commitments to partnerships. All levels of government and rural communities should work
cooperatively to establish long-term objectives.
Rural citizens lack some of the skills necessary to build and manage partnerships. Although many
of the individuals involved in building partnerships at the local level are extremely committed,
workshop participants admitted that in many instances these individuals lack the expertise necessary
to maximize the benefits available through partnerships. Participants suggested that communities
would benefit from the acquisition of skills, or the leadership of a "champion" (organization or
individual) who would help to lead the partnership efforts.
Workshop participants would like the federal government to challenge rural communities to "move
forward" by providing the necessary information and knowledge to build partnerships and by playing
a leadership role in promoting partnerships. There is an opportunity for governments at all levels to
demonstrate their commitment to partnerships by engaging in more horizontal discussions and
activities.
Economic Diversification
Industry downsizing in single industry communities, particularly employment in the primary and
resource sectors, was identified as a key driving force behind the need for rural economic
diversification. The challenge is for rural communities to identify or create economic opportunities
to replace those that have been lost. Many workshop participants felt that unfortunately their
communities do not have the assets needed to generate new ideas and opportunities. They lack the
necessary processes, leadership and overall mindset required to diversify their economies. Other
obstacles they face include restrictive regulations and limited infrastructures.
Despite these obstacles, workshop participants were optimistic that there are opportunities for them
and their communities. In order to identify these, they recognized that communities need to develop
a new vision of what they want to become. Participants suggested that communities should explore
value added and secondary processing business opportunities, acquire new skills, encourage new
forms of business, explore partnerships and work collaboratively.
Workshop participants want to find long-term sustainable solutions to their economic challenges.
There is little support for initiatives that will lead to only short-term results. Participants suggested
that the federal government should facilitate the exchange of success stories between communities
and should coordinate efforts between the various players involved in economic development.
Beyond added skills, new ideas and partnerships, new business initiatives require access to capital.
Workshop participants felt that the government could provide start-up funding to new business
ventures and should work closely with financial institutions to ensure that there is more access to
financing.
Opportunities for Rural Youth
Workshop participants were concerned about the migration of rural youth to urban areas. They
believe that the most common reason for the migration is the perceived lack of educational and
employment opportunities for youth in their rural communities. Youth do not see a "future" for
themselves in rural Canada and young rural Canadians' general lack of optimism about the benefits
of remaining in a rural community is likely being reinforced by the lack of optimism often expressed
by their parents.
To support the retention of youth in, and their return to, rural communities, workshop participants felt
that it is important to explore and share opportunities with them - opportunities that could lead to a
viable future within the community. Youth also need to feel that they are an important part of the
community. This need can be addressed by responding to their educational, social and recreational
requirements and by giving them a voice in finding solutions to their concerns.
However, participants felt that by far the most important means to ensure that youth remain in rural
communities is to provide them with employment opportunities. This can be achieved through such
initiatives as attracting businesses to rural areas and providing support for young peoples' business
ideas. The federal government has a role to play by providing financial support and by working with
communities to identify employment strategies that will most benefit rural youth.
Lack of, and Access to, Financial Resources
Workshop participants believed that their access to financial resources is diminishing at a time when
there is a growing need for such access in order to support new business ventures that are vital to the
future of rural communities. Concerns about bank closures in rural communities are an important
factor contributing to this belief. Participants further stated that banks and other financial institutions
are generally reluctant to invest in rural initiatives due to the perceived potential risk, or because of
a lack of understanding of the potential opportunities that exist in rural communities. Participants
stated that the federal government should work with other levels of government, communities and
local institutions to communicate the types of financial support and opportunities available and to
create incentives for investing in rural initiatives. It should also provide leadership in ensuring access
to financial resources and in tailoring funding programs to respond to rural needs rather than simply
providing generic funding which may favour urban over rural initiatives. Programs should be
simplified by improving their overall flexibility and reducing the administrative burden associated
with their application. Participants also felt that they are well positioned to assist in making local
funding decisions and would like to play a greater role in this process.
Human Resource Leadership and Community Capacity Building
Workshop participants expressed a need to sustain and promote leadership within rural and remote
communities. Currently, there is a fear that leadership will be affected by a "burn out" factor since
many of the people that have a leadership role in rural communities are volunteers who have fulfilled
this role for a long time. A lack of succession planning, the unavailability of tools to develop
leadership skills and the increasing pressures placed on public representatives led many participants
to believe that rural communities will be without strong leadership in the future.
The federal government can play a role in supporting strong leadership by approaching community
development from the "bottom up", rather than the "top down." It can also act as a catalyst to help
attract new leaders, including Aboriginals and seniors. Leadership skills among these groups, and
within communities as a whole, can be supported by leadership development and mentoring
programs, which could also serve to build community self-confidence.
With respect to community capacity building, workshop participants believed that some erosion in
capacity has occurred due to government restructuring and the loss of existing alliances between
levels of government. The key to building community capacity is collaboration at the community
level. Collaboration should also occur among local organizations, the public and private sectors and
other intermediaries. Participants also raised the importance of sharing success stories, skills
development and job creation in strengthening community capacity.
Workshop participants felt that the most effective way that the federal government can assist in
community capacity building is through financial support, including maintaining transfer payments
to the provinces and providing a pool of funding to support community programming. The federal
government can also assist by promoting the value and importance of rural affairs in Canada.
Rural Infrastructure
Workshop participants believed that rural Canada's infrastructure has eroded as a result of
government downsizing and cut-backs and the decreasing size of the tax base in rural communities.
Erosion is of particular concern in relation to transportation and telecommunications, although there
was recognition of the value of the federal government's initiatives with respect to the Information
Highway. According to participants, decision-makers lack an understanding of the consequences of
this erosion on rural communities. This limited understanding may be driven by "city thinking,"
which results in government programs and policies not being adapted to rural realities.
The federal government can manage infrastructure issues by taking a long-term view when making
infrastructure-related decisions. It should ensure that any infrastructure program put in place is
comprehensive and will meet the needs of rural communities. Involvement from the grassroots level
should be sought to identify solutions. Workshop participants also suggested that the federal
government could establish a long-term infrastructure program designed specifically for rural
communities that is sustainable and that could be accessed by individual communities.
Access to Rural Health Care
Participants in the workshop felt that rural and remote communities do not have readily accessible
health care. People living in rural communities must increasingly travel long distances to receive
health care, especially in remote and northern communities. Participants were also concerned about
adequate health care for an ageing population.
There is a need to attract and retain health care professionals and to improve the infrastructure
required to deliver health care services. Participants also felt that a number of essential services
should be maintained in each community to guarantee a minimum standard of care. Alternative
means of delivering health care services should be explored, such as innovative use of technology and
the establishment of community health clinics and community support programs, in order to
determine how these approaches could assist in maintaining access to health care.
Many participants said that partnerships are needed between all levels of government in order to
develop a holistic approach to health care. The federal government should set national standards
regarding access to health care, and should fund studies undertaken in health care.
Access to Rural Education
Similar to the concerns about health care, workshop participants were concerned about the
unavailability of quality education for youth in their communities. There was also a concern over the
number of youth who are not completing their education, especially high school. Creative ideas need
to be pursued to keep these youth in school and address their needs. According to participants, there
is a need to attract qualified educators and ensure that the educational system provides a sufficient
level of options for students. There is also a need to ensure that communities retain their schools.
Otherwise, students must commute long distances to attend school or to gain access to the education
they seek.
Workshop participants felt making available the necessary financial resources would help maintain
or improve access to education. The development of a telecommunications infrastructure and
incentives to attract educators were also viewed as possible means of supporting education in rural
communities. Further, there was a desire to introduce educational programs that develop practical
skills and to more closely link what is taught in school to the needs of employers.
Overall, participants wanted to hold governments more accountable for their decisions related to
educational spending. The level of federal transfer payments should be standardized to ensure
consistency in educational standards and quality. As well, participants believed that the federal
government should help develop educational standards and should fund and conduct educational
studies.
Rural Telecommunications and Use of the Information Highway
Workshop participants felt that there is a lack of telecommunications services in rural and remote
communities. Many rural communities can only use "party line" telephone systems. Further, they
may not be able to access cellular or remote services. When telecommunications services are
available, they are often expensive. Television and radio reception is often limited in remote areas
due to the high costs involved in serving these populations. Although the Internet can offer increased
access to information and services, technological, financial and knowledge barriers limit its use in
rural communities.
According to participants, when responding to the telecommunications needs of rural residents,
infrastructure should be dealt with first: "Canadians need a telecommunications system that everyone
can access. It should incorporate a basic level of service at an affordable cost." Participants called
for the re-examination of the costs of the services provided.
Workshop participants felt that the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission
(CRTC) should play a lead role in ensuring fairness in the provision of telecommunications services
to all Canadians. They felt that the federal government should disseminate information about
technology to the public, fund access to telecommunications services that will result in access by all
Canadians, and be responsible for legislation, regulation and the standardization of technology.
Access to Information on Federal Government Programs and Services
Workshop participants generally found information on government programs and services difficult
to obtain and interpret. Access to information over the telephone was particularly frustrating for
participants who found that it was difficult to get a quick and consistent answer. When they did
receive the information, they often found it complicated. Awareness of government programs
generally occurs through word of mouth. For some, this means that they are learning about programs
"too late" to make effective use of them.
There was a desire by workshop participants to ensure that rural communities are learning about and
accessing government programs and services at the same level as their urban counterparts.
Information that is distributed needs to be understandable, concise, and timely. Simplifying how
information is delivered through harmonization among all levels of government would improve
access to government programs and services.
Participants suggested that the federal government play a leadership role in establishing a single point
of contact where communities could access all government services and programs. The determination
of this contact point should remain flexible and be based upon the needs and characteristics of each
community. Existing "tools" for providing access to information on government programs and
services, such as Reference Canada, and the Internet, should be used.
2. Guiding Principles
Based upon applicable input received on each of the above ten issues, a preliminary list was compiled
of twenty guiding principles that the federal government could use in the development and
implementation of policies and programs. Workshop participants identified most with eight of these
twenty principles, which have been grouped as follows for purposes of summarizing the discussions
that took place:
Capacity building - assist communities to help themselves and steer the process. People in rural communities are the most knowledgeable about the challenges their community faces and are therefore in the best position to direct its development.
Create the right conditions - role for the federal government. The federal government can create
an environment conducive to allowing communities to address their own issues. Its role is to be the
"catalyst and/or facilitator" for community development.
Recognize rural uniqueness - programs and services should be based on rural needs. A degree of
flexibility needs to be incorporated into federal government programs and services to ensure that they
are relevant to different communities.
No quick fixes - invest in long-term solutions. A long-term commitment by the federal government
is needed to fully support the processes that sustain the community over the long term.
Reaching common goals - working together in partnerships. Restructuring the "downloading" of
responsibility of governments at all levels has modified and complicated the dynamics among the
different partners which has had a negative impact on rural citizens. "Real" partnerships are critical
to the success of community development.
3. Suggestions for Federal Government Actions
Close to 20 concrete actions that the federal government could undertake to address rural concerns
were identified in response to the following question: "What one specific action should the federal
government take which will help your community?" The suggested actions include:
- develop a long-term vision for rural Canada
- apply a rural lens to program criteria and federal policy
- provide facilitators/mentors to help communities shape their own solutions
- develop a program to facilitate community knowledge and information sharing
- promote rural and remote aspects of Canada
- support the development and maintenance of rural infrastructure
- develop and implement tax incentives
- define a list of minimum standards to rural citizens
- provide funding
- settle land claims and treaty rights for Aboriginals, first Nations, the Métis Nation and the Inuit
- maintain a federal presence in rural communities
- revisit trade agreements
- create a federal rural department
- establish a national rural advisory committee
- increase the number of rural Members of Parliament
- establish additional programs for youth
- develop safe guidelines for waste disposal sites
- develop more partnership funding programs
- communicate actions.
Foreword
The Government of Canada is committed to supporting rural communities and rural Canadians. In the Speech
from the Throne, September, 1997, the government made a formal commitment to "explore innovative policies
and measures that give particular attention to increasing opportunity for Canadians in rural communities…[and
to]…adapt its programs to reflect the social and economic realities of rural Canada." The Canadian Rural
Partnership (CRP) was established in response to this commitment. The CRP is, first of all, about doing
business differently within the federal government. It is about coordinating federal efforts across departments
and agencies to support rural and remote communities. As well, innovative partnerships and networks are
being developed among the federal government, other levels of government, stakeholder organizations and
rural Canadians to take action in response to rural needs. Through the CRP and the individual programs and
services delivered by federal departments and agencies, the Government of Canada is acting on its commitment
to build stronger rural and remote communities.
The CRP is being designed and implemented by an Interdepartmental Working Group (IWG) composed of
representatives from 26 federal departments and agencies. Minister Vanclief, in his capacity as Minister
Coordinating Rural Affairs, and the Rural Secretariat, provide leadership and coordination for this cross-government approach. The CRP also has expression at the local level. There are Rural Teams in each province
and territory, made up of representatives from various federal departments and agencies. The Rural Teams
are evolving to include other key stakeholders, such as representatives from all levels of government.
A key element of the CRP is the Rural Dialogue. It is about engaging rural Canadians in a dialogue to better
understand local and regional issues and to identify the appropriate role for the federal government in
addressing key rural issues. It is also about engaging rural Canadians to take action in partnership with the
federal government. The Rural Dialogue has included a number of components to date:
1. Pre-Dialogue Focus Groups
In the Spring of 1998, the rural issues and the Rural Dialogue process were tested and validated by
focus groups held in five rural communities across the country. The feedback received from these
groups was instrumental in determining the format for the regional Rural Dialogue sessions and in
designing the Rural Dialogue Workbook.
2. Rural Dialogue Workbook Submissions and Regional Sessions
From May to July 31, 1998, rural Canadians were invited to voice their concerns and priorities and
to provide their input to the Government of Canada through a series of facilitated sessions and
individual Rural Dialogue Workbook submissions. The objectives of this phase of the Rural Dialogue
were to:
a) Develop a common understanding of the key challenges and priorities of rural Canadians;
b) Understand what rural Canadians expect of the federal government in supporting the
sustainable development of rural Canada; and
c) Identify better ways for the Government of Canada to respond to the needs of rural
Canadians.
Over 1,400 workbooks were completed. They were completed by individuals, by families, by friends,
by organizations, in locally initiated informal group settings and in locally organized workshops. As
a result, close to 6,000 people were involved in completing workbooks. An additional 855 individuals
participated in 33 facilitated workshops held across the country and organized by the Rural
Secretariat. In total, close to 7,000 people participated in this phase of the Rural Dialogue. The input
received was analyzed and summarized in a paper entitled "Rural Canadians Speak Out," which
served as a resource document for the National Rural Workshop.
3. National Rural Workshop
The National Rural Workshop took place from October 2 to 4, 1998, near Belleville, Ontario.
Participants at the workshop represented rural citizens, rural organizations as well as all levels of
government from across the country. During the workshop, a number of key issues identified by rural
Canadians were validated and discussed and a series of guiding principles were developed. The
outcomes of the National Rural Workshop, along with other input from the Rural Dialogue, are being
used to help set the direction of future federal government action, including the Federal Framework
for Action, announced on May 14, 1999.
Rural citizens have clearly indicated that they would like to continue the Rural Dialogue. They want
the federal government to continue to hear their views and to keep them informed of its initiatives and
activities in rural Canada. The Government of Canada has already begun this ongoing process
through various means, such as the Canadian Rural Information Service (1-888-757-8725), the
Canadian Rural Partnership web site (www.rural.gc.ca) and the Internet Rural Dialogue On-Line
Discussion Group. Additional ways of pursuing the Dialogue are being developed, including the rural
Newsletter "networking" activities in each province and territory organized by the Rural Teams, and
the National Rural Conference to be held April 28-30, 2000 in Magog-Orford, Quebec.
1. Introduction
This report presents the discussions that took place during the National Rural Workshop held October 2 - 4,
1998 near Belleville, Ontario. This material, combined with the input and information received from the close
to 7,000 rural citizens through Rural Dialogue Workbook submissions and facilitated sessions held across the
country, have provided direction for future federal government action, including the Federal Framework for
Action, announced on May 14, 1999.
1.1 Objectives
The objectives of the National Rural Workshop were to provide the opportunity for rural Canadians to:
- validate what was heard from the Rural Dialogue input to date;
- discuss solutions to the key challenges identified by rural Canadians;
- provide suggestions for concrete action and recommendations as to how the federal government and
other stakeholders can partner to assist rural community development; and
- provide input into the development of key guiding principles and elements which could form the basis of a federal rural policy
1.2 Participants
A total of 223 individuals from across the country participated in the National Rural Workshop. Our goal was
to achieve representation from a broad cross-section of rural Canadians. There were 145 rural citizens and 16
stakeholder groups present at the workshop, representing various parts of the country, sectors of the economy,
community organizations, age groups, cultures and "walks of life." In addition, 63 representatives from a
variety of federal departments and provincial and territorial ministries attended the workshop to act as
"observers" and listen to what rural Canadians had to say. The information presented in this report is based
on the comments, views and opinions expressed by the rural citizens and stakeholder groups who participated
in the workshop and do not necessarily represent the views of all rural Canadians.
1.3 What was Discussed
The first day of the workshop consisted of in-depth discussions around ten key issues which were identified
as a result of analyzing all of the Dialogue input received from May to the end of July, 1998. It is recognized
that rural Canada is comprised of many diverse regions and communities, whose needs, challenges and
opportunities differ significantly. More often than not, however, rural Canadians had many issues in common
and the priority assigned to these issues varied from region to region. The ten issues are:
- Lack of and access to financial resources;
- Opportunities for rural youth;
- Human resource leadership and capacity building;
- Rural infrastructure;
- Rural telecommunications and use of the information highway;
- Access to rural health care;
- Access to education;
- Access to information on government programs and services;
- Economic diversification; and
- Partnerships for community development.
The following five questions were used to guide the participants'discussion around each of the ten issues:
- Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your
community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?
- From the specific aspect(s) identified, which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest
impact on rural Canada?
- If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?
- How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed - and who needs to be involved?
(Which players: government departments/organizations, levels of government, non-governmental
organizations, community level, specific sectors?)
- Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions, and what
guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?
The input received from question five above was used to develop a preliminary grouping of guiding principles that the federal government could use in shaping a federal rural policy. These guiding principles were presented to participants on the second day of the workshop. They were asked to respond to the following two core questions:
- In yesterday's break-out sessions, we heard the following guiding principles for federal action
[preliminary list of 20 guiding principles]. Which three are the most important?
- What one specific action should the federal government take which will help your community?
At the conclusion of the workshop, participants were asked to complete the following sentence: "What is the one final message that you would like to leave with the federal government at the end of this workshop?"
1.4 Presentation of the report
This report presents the detailed findings from the National Rural Workshop and is organized as follows:
- Chapter 2 - Key Issues - summarizes the discussions that took place during the workshop around
each of the ten issues.
- Chapter 3 - Guiding Principles - presents the key guiding principles, identified by participants, for
the federal government to consider in developing the Federal Framework for Action.
- Chapter 4 - Suggestions for Federal Government Actions - outlines the federal government
actions that participants noted in response to the question "What one specific action should the
federal government take which will help your community?"
APPENDIX A - Workshop Approach
This appendix presents details about the workshop approach, including the selection and the profile of participants.
Key Issues
The following section summarizes the discussions that took place during the National Rural Workshop around each of the ten key issues facing rural and remote communities. It is important to note that this section addresses those points that were raised most frequently.
2.1 Partnerships for Community Development
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Lack of effective partnerships For many participants, effective partnerships seem to be limited by the self-interests of those in decision-making roles. Often these groups are unable to partner effectively because they are "pushing their own agenda." The effectiveness of some partnerships may be limited because they are organized along the lines of specific interest groups, rather than the interests of the whole community, making
broader consensus of goals difficult.
Limited experience working at the regional/local level According to many participants, the federal government should spend more time talking and listening to people and organizations at the grassroots level. One way to do this would be to make greater use of community boards. Rural participants felt that urban decision-makers do not understand their issues. They felt that governments have a narrow view of partnerships with communities, "you bring in $ and we'll contribute $". This is limiting the opportunities to work with the local
level.
Limited resources Workshop participants suggested that partnerships were being promoted as a way
of dealing with ongoing government downloading. Downloading has increased the
pressure on community resources. Governments should recognize that in some
instances the community cannot commit dollars and cents because of increased
demands on its resources; however, it can contribute non-monetarily by building
relationships.
Power imbalances Participants suggested that partnerships were sometimes difficult because they were not well balanced. Within some partnerships, the interests of some groups over-power the interests of others; people do not always want to share responsibilities, power and control. For instance, some community groups "may be more interested in protecting their 'turf' and worrying about jealousies" than in really working in partnership.
Conflict with new urban settlers Differences between the interests and visions of new urban settlers and those of long-time rural residents were identified as a source of conflict in many rural communities. This "clash" sometimes makes building and maintaining partnerships difficult.
Partnerships are often driven by volunteers Participants suggested that in some communities many of the existing partnerships are driven by volunteers. This is a positive aspect of partnership; however, many of the volunteers are limited by time and resources, so they cannot accomplish as
much through partnerships as might be possible.
Lack of knowledge and skills The existence of partnerships is limited in some communities because people do not possess the knowledge, skills and "know-how" to create them. This includes limited skills in the areas of negotiation, communications and research. There may
also be a limited knowledge of different government organizations (at all levels),
programs and funds that could help create a needed partnership, or support an
existing one. Participants also felt that communities lacked knowledge about the
programs that already exist and the potential partnerships that could be established
among various groups.
Government restructuring According to participants, government restructuring has changed the dynamics among key players. This makes it difficult to know where and how to create the
right partnership for each situation.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Require long-term vision Workshop participants suggested that rural communities were challenged to sustain partnerships because governments do not make long-term commitments to
partnerships. This includes programs and financial support for partnerships that
only exist for short periods of time. As a result, governments should focus on
providing longer-term support to initiatives that promote partnerships. Participants
suggested that additional funding is required to support partnerships and
community capacity building. The federal government, through the Rural
Secretariat or some similar entity (e.g., a Department of Rural Affairs) should
continue to play a role in supporting and building partnerships.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)? "
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed and who needs to be involved?"
Workshop participants discussed these two questions together.
Conduct an environmental scan Participants felt that there was a need to begin by identifying what partnerships already exist, what resources and programs are currently available, including funding, and who has the necessary skills to assist in maximizing community input.
By conducting this type of environmental scan in each community, a longer-term
vision could be created to establish and nurture partnerships.
Create the right environment Some participants suggested that partnerships needed to be nurtured in a neutral Each partner should be given the same information so that they are on equal
footing when direction is taken and decisions are made. This will allow the
establishment of trust among partners.
Coordinate efforts According to participants, coordinated long-term objectives need to be established between governments and rural communities. By doing this, common goals can be
identified. The community would then be able to focus on mutually advantageous
projects.
Commit to long-term funding Participants stressed the need for long-term funding from governments to support community development. Participants commented that it was difficult to plan for
the future, or achieve long-term objectives, if funding was uncertain. "Fiscal
flexibility" should be encouraged.
Identify a catalyst One break-out group suggested that a catalyst was needed with the right expertise and resources to develop partnerships. Due to a lack of resources in many
communities, the effort to establish and manage partnerships is often carried out
by volunteers on a part-time basis.
Engage in rural revitalization Some participants called for rural revitalization. The federal government should support such an initiative by encouraging community organizations to work
together.
Ensure accountability Participants wanted to ensure that those engaged in partnerships were accountable for their activities. This could involve introducing performance measures to
determine what outcomes result from those partnerships and initiatives that are
established. Accountability is also necessary when funding is involved. On the
other hand, some participants felt that the federal government placed too much
emphasis on performance measurement. These participants suggested that the
federal government used the need for performance measurement to limit funding.
As a result, participants felt that not enough funding was being distributed at the
community level.
Involve all levels of government Participants felt that all levels of government need to be involved in order for their suggestions to move forward. Government program administrators were
considered especially important to the process. Beyond governments, community
leaders within local organizations should also play a role.
Champions to lead partnership efforts Regardless of who is involved in stimulating an increased level of partnership, some participants suggested that a coordinator or "champion" would be necessary to help lead partnership efforts.
Create new approaches Participants suggested that new organizations could be created to support more effective partnerships. Examples included the establishment of a Ministry of Rural
Affairs to facilitate cooperation and provide seed capital for high-risk projects, or
the establishment of organizations that would support learning and the development
of expertise (e.g., a local centre of excellence).
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Challenge rural communities According to participants, the federal government should challenge rural communities to "move forward". They could do this by providing rural Canada
with the information and knowledge needed to build partnerships. It can also play
a leadership role in raising the level of excitement and interest in partnerships.
Demonstrate leadership Many rural participants want to see the federal government acting as a leader in promoting partnerships. It can do this by engaging in more horizontal discussions
across departments to connect federal initiatives and by creating priorities through
the establishment of a vision for rural partnerships. However, this does not mean
that rural participants want to see all partnerships imposed or led by the federal
government. Instead, partnerships should be established within each community
or region from the bottom up.
Showcase best practices Participants believe that the federal government could engage others in partnerships by highlighting activities that are good examples of coordinated
efforts. One example cited was Health Canada's Action Plan for Children.
2.2 Economic Diversification
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Industry downsizing Industry downsizing in single industry communities, particularly employment in the primary and resource sectors (e.g., fishing, agriculture, forestry, mining) was
identified as a key driving force behind the need for rural communities to diversify
their economies. This downsizing has resulted in high unemployment in many
rural areas. Participants suggested that many resource based industries have been
over-capitalized and, as a result, many rural communities are now in debt.
Lack of processes to develop new ideas A number of participants discussed a lack of processes within rural communities to generate, analyze and develop new opportunities. It was suggested that networking mechanisms are not used and that there is a lack of research and
development funds to generate new ideas. Participants also felt that many rural
communities were losing their intellectual capital (youth) which reduced their
ability to have fresh ideas.
Lack of leadership Participants felt that there was a lack of collective, knowledgeable leadership within many rural communities. Without this leadership, many communities are
not able to recognize and develop new opportunities.
Mind-set A number of the break-out groups discussed the mind-set in rural communities as not being focussed on economic diversification. Participants said that rural
mentalities have not followed economic and technological changes, and rural
communities are now having to catch up to their realities "everything except the
way we think". Some rural communities are not actively looking for new
innovation, but are more interested in imitating what has been done in the past.
Participants felt that this mind-set needs to change. The whole community needs
to be involved in the identification of opportunities. Solutions must be driven by
the community and based on collaboration between government, business and other
groups.
Restrictive regulations Zoning bylaws were identified by a few break-out groups as sometimes restricting the potential for business development. Government regulations in general were
cited as forcing industry out of some rural communities. Participants suggested
that some regulations may only apply to urban areas.
Limited infrastructure Participants felt that there was limited infrastructure to support business in many
rural communities. Transportation costs are high and there is often limited access
to schools, hospitals and cultural amenities. Having a strong infrastructure was
viewed by participants as necessary in order to attract and retain business in rural
areas.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Develop a new vision Break-out groups discussed the need for rural communities to identify their sustainable and non-sustainable resource base. They would then need to recognize
the need to diversify and want to do it. These communities need to develop a new
vision of what they want to become. It was suggested that community
consultations and round tables could be used to help develop this new vision.
Tourism Many participants identified tourism as a potential industry to support the
diversification of rural economies. While tourism is growing in many rural areas,
participants were concerned about the seasonal nature of tourism activities which
still left many people unemployed in the "off season".
Acquire new skills Participants felt that rural citizens need to become more adaptable and acquire new skills in order to be able to develop and benefit from new businesses and local
economies. They will need training in areas such as business development,
leadership and technology.
Encourage value added processing Communities with strong reliance on natural resource economies should be encouraged to develop value added and secondary processing activities in order to provide new and alternative opportunities.
Encourage new business There were discussions in all break-out groups on the need to make communities attractive, for example by providing financial incentives and skilled workers, in
order to encourage entrepreneurs and support the establishment of new businesses.
Infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, was also seen as a key element to
making communities attractive to new businesses.
Provide tax incentives Taxation and regulations were viewed by participants as barriers to businesses that are trying to compete. Participants felt strongly that there needs to be less red tape
and fewer regulations that inhibit the ability of rural businesses to compete globally.
Explore creative partnerships There was strong support among participants for building partnerships. It was suggested that there are many key resources within rural communities that could
potentially work together to develop new ideas. Participants felt that research was
needed to identify what type of diversification would be possible within the
realities of the community. This research could be done at the community level in
partnership with local industry.
Support community co-operatives Community co-operatives were identified as an existing model for the implementation of new business ideas that worked well in many communities.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Be proactive Participants suggested that communities need to take initiative and stop waiting for someone to do it for them. Hand-outs were not viewed as a long-term solution.
There is a need to start diversifying when things are strong, not only when the
economy is poor. Participants suggested that communities need to become more
proactive, flexible and quick to explore and support new ideas and establish new
businesses. This requires that rural communities and organizations be directly
involved in the process of analyzing, prioritizing and implementing ideas. One
break-out group suggested that permanent rural development corporations should
be implemented to analyze issues and identify potential solutions in rural areas.
Take inventory Many rural Canadians are not clear as to what economic bases already exist within their communities. Participants suggested that the development of a
comprehensive inventory of community economic bases is required as a first step.
Many rural people themselves do not understand their own local economy.
Share experiences and ideas The sharing of experience and ideas between regions and between provinces was seen by participants as a good way to learn "who is doing what" as well as to get
new ideas about the types of initiatives that work in other communities.
Support local business A number of groups discussed the need to recognize and build on community resources. Entrepreneurs could provide leadership and entrepreneurial training to
other members of the community. Participants felt that home-based businesses
should be encouraged, and technology should be used to help establish these
businesses. Better access to financial support from banks in the form of start-up
loans was also suggested. This type of support was not limited to new businesses.
Participants also felt that existing businesses need support to be able to grow.
Resolve land claims There was some concern that unresolved land claims negotiations were limiting people's confidence to invest in a number of rural areas.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed and who needs to be involved?"
Tailor solutions Participants felt that specific solutions needed to be developed for specific
communities. They did not think that one type of solution would be right for all
rural communities and the differences that exist across Canada need to be
recognized, "no broad brushed programs - community programs".
Implement a "rural tax" There was support for the development of a tax that would encourage and facilitate economic development in rural communities. Participants felt that this tax should
provide incentives to invest and buy locally.
Work together Coordination between all levels of government, non-governmental organizations
and rural/community players was seen as important in order to identify community-based solutions. Participants did not feel that there was a need for the involvement
of new players, just better coordination between those groups that already exist.
This includes a focus of government working with, not for, rural communities.
Focus on sustainable solutions Make-work projects and short-lived "mega" initiatives were not seen as the best approach to address economic diversification in rural communities. These were
viewed as only providing short-term solutions. Participants identified a need for
long-term sustainable solutions, including the protection and management of
natural resources. Seed money should also be targeted towards sustainable
objectives that lead to long-term employment for community residents.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Coordinate efforts Participants felt that the federal government should encourage and facilitate contacts between the various players involved in economic development. This
facilitation role could be expanded to include offering specialized expertise to help
communities define their needs, recognize opportunities, generate and prioritize
ideas and initiatives.
Participants want the government to provide tools and support, not command and
control.
Develop an exchange program Communities need to learn about innovative and creative ideas. Some participants suggested that communities could recognize opportunities through the help of a
"success story expert" who is brought in to live and work with the communities.
Participants suggested that this could operate as an exchange program between
communities. The federal government could provide support for this type of
program.
Be a financial partner New business ventures need initial/start-up funding which could be provided through a federal government program. Participants suggested that regions and
communities should have control over the development of the programs and the
funds that were available to deliver them. Program funding needs to be more
flexible, with the funding matched to the projects.
It was also suggested that the federal government work with financial institutions
to better support business development in rural communities by providing more
access to financing and capital.
Re-align taxation Tax incentives were viewed by a number of participants as a way to encourage
community investment. Taxation should encourage new and expanding businesses.
It was suggested that corporations could be given tax breaks if they create jobs and
re-invest their profits at the local level.
Reduce red tape and regulations Participants felt that the federal government needs to reduce the impact of red tape and regulations on the ability of organizations in rural communities to do business.
<
2.3 Opportunities for Rural Youth
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Outmigration A number of groups discussed the fact that many young people in rural areas are leaving in order to find jobs or go to school. The shrinking population of young people in many rural communities was identified as a key challenge.
Lack of opportunities Participants suggested that youth are leaving rural communities because they are facing a lack of local opportunities. A lack of job opportunities, a lack of facilities and a lack of local education institutions were mentioned most often during the
break-out sessions. The lack of public transportation in many rural communities
was also felt to limit the ability of young people to participate in activities, visit
friends and hold part-time jobs.
Quality and accessibility of education Many rural youth must leave their communities or travel for long periods of time in order to access post-secondary and sometimes even high school Participants felt that many of the rural schools do not offer the same basic choices
in courses that are available in urban schools. As a result, some participants
suggested that many rural students are not as well prepared for post-secondary
education as urban youth. Suggestions were put forward to encourage
entrepreneurship training within the education system and to make sure that the
courses being taught are relevant to the labour market realities within rural
communities.
Lack of a sense of belonging A number of break-out groups suggested that young people do not feel that they had a future within their rural communities. Youth are often not involved in
discussions related to issues that affect them and they often do not feel like they are
a part of the community. Participants felt that communities need to demonstrate
that they care about youth and are listening to them and addressing their needs.
Lack of awareness of opportunities While there are a number of challenges, participants also suggested that there is a general lack of knowledge of the types of opportunities that really exist for youth in rural areas. "We often don't know in our communities what our people are
doing two streets down." Part of this was attributed to a lack of role models within
the community for youth as well as a lack of direction from parents and educators.
Because of this, participants felt that youth develop an early perception that there
are limited opportunities in a rural milieu, which results in a lack of motivation and
self-esteem. Participants felt that youth need to be exposed to more opportunities
and become more open to different types of possibilities. This is difficult because
there is also a general lack of knowledge within communities as to how to address
issues related to youth.
High Expectations There was general consensus within the groups that adults have very high
expectations of young people. "There is a gap between our expectations [older
generations] and the reality that our youth are living."
Influence of parents and the family situation It was also suggested that many rural youth lack motivation as a result of parents who transfer their own lack of optimism to their children. Family break-down and the challenges that parents face in managing family and work were also identified
as having a significant impact on youth.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Identify community opportunities, successes and role models There was a general sense among participants that communities need to build on their successes and strengths. This needs to start with the identification of successes and opportunities that already exist within the community. Youth need to see that there are opportunities within their own communities. This includes
identifying potential local role models and successful entrepreneurs.
Develop economic confidence The development of local employment opportunities was viewed as a key mechanism to help address the issues confronting rural youth. Initiatives to attract
business to rural areas as well as provide support for young people's business ideas
were seen as important.
Make youth feel part of the community There was a strong message from participants that youth need to be involved in their communities and in decisions that affect them. Participants felt that youth need to be asked what they think and they must be part of identifying and
developing opportunities. Ensuring that young people can go to school in their
own communities and have access to recreation and social facilities were also
suggested as key ways of helping youth feel connected to their communities.
Increase education options Participants recognized the need to have an educated base from which to be able to develop opportunities and attract/develop employers. There is a need to explore
different flexibilities in relation to education. Home schooling, distance education
and increased use of technology (e.g., the Internet) were all identified as ways to
respond to the needs and focus of rural communities. Participants also suggested
that young people need to be better prepared to leave school, and it was suggested
that career planning and life skills courses be taught in all schools.
Target programs for youth There was concern expressed in some of the break-out groups that many youth did not qualify for government programs because most of these programs were targeted
to employment insurance (EI) recipients. Participants felt that it was also important
to have similar programs which are targeted to youth who are not EI eligible, but
require similar support and assistance.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Take stock Many break-out groups discussed the need to take stock of what is currently
happening in rural communities with regards to youth. There is a need to evaluate
what has already been done in order to find out what works and what does not.
This will help to identify success stories and local role models. New opportunities
will only be successful if they build on the realities of the community situations.
Build economic confidence A number of participants focused on the need to establish a community's competitiveness in order to be able to provide meaningful opportunities for parents and their children. Employed parents provide strong role models for their children.
A strong local economy also helps to support the development of additional
opportunities for youth.
Participants also suggested that loans should be provided to youth who want to start
their own businesses.
Encourage local education and work experience programs There was a strong desire among participants to have access to schools within the community so that young students would not need to travel great distances.
Participants also strongly supported co-operative and work experience programs
in the schools and suggested that business entrepreneurship training be offered as
part of the school curriculum. Participants also suggested that partnerships should
be developed with businesses in order to help young people learn and to see
opportunities.
Support parents and youth There was strong support among participants for encouraging parents to be involved in youth groups and activities within their communities. Upgrading
community facilities such as community centres and ice rinks was identified as a
means of helping to support youth. Participants also supported the idea of
establishing help groups for parents. A number of comments were made regarding
the importance of parents as role models.
Programs that are viewed as providing positive benefits for youth (e.g., 4H and
Junior Achievement awards) need to be strengthened and supported by
communities as well as government.
Create new departments Some break-out groups suggested that a new federal department and new provincial ministries should be developed to address rural issues. These entities
would be responsible for ensuring that rural concerns, including the concerns of
rural youth, would be considered and addressed by government.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed and who needs to be involved?"
Expand economic development opportunities There was strong sentiment in many break-out groups that economic development was needed in order to provide more opportunities for youth. Identifying potential opportunities to introduce secondary processing of products as well as establishing new and entrepreneurial businesses were cited. This includes the establishment of
incentives for the development of small businesses in rural communities, such as
enabling young people to access business loans.
Need a coordinator A number of break-out groups discussed the need for a coordinator or
"ombudsman" within rural communities. This person would work with the
community to identify its needs with regard to youth and act as a liaison between
the available programming initiatives and the needs of the community. This
position was viewed as a resource person to help communities match their needs
to the programs available, with a focus on tapping into the programs and the people
that are already in place.
Establish a youth council Participants felt strongly that youth need to come together and have a voice within their communities. Suggestions were put forward to establish a youth council,
made up of youth and members of the community, which would work together to
help youth develop their own solutions and initiatives. Pilot studies were identified
as a potential way of examining the needs of youth. Youth could then develop and
implement initiatives to address these identified needs. One group discussed the
need to develop a national youth strategy.
Develop mentorship programs Mentorship programs were identified as an important mechanism for exposing young people to various opportunities. "There are some pretty excellent programs
across the country in mentorship." Participants suggested that communities could
get together and propose to businesses that young people work at lower wages in
order to gain work experience. The involvement of schools in this type of activity
was seen as an option.
Coordinate efforts Making the best use of existing community groups, organizations and levels of
government was viewed as important. Participants want to be sure that there is
coordination among these various entities and that local resources (e.g., the RCMP)
are used.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Provide financial support Assistance for students to gain a post secondary education was viewed by participants as an important role for the federal government. Participants also suggested that the federal government provide financial support for programs
dealing with youth, such as 4H, youth employment programs, youth centres,
entrepreneurship programs etc.
Act as a catalyst Participants recognized that the impetus for developing and implementing
initiatives in relation to youth must come from within the communities themselves.
They suggested that the federal government could provide resources (people) to act
as coordinators and facilitators to help "jump start" the process and bring members
of the community together to plan. The cost of this type of
co-ordination/facilitation was seen as a barrier.
Communicate The federal government was viewed as being in a key position to provide publicity
and communication to encourage the development of employment strategies for
youth. Participants also felt that the federal government should better communicate
the programs and activities that are already in place for rural youth.
Recognize the value of rural communities Participants would like to see the federal government promote the value of rural communities to the rest of Canada. This was viewed as helping develop a new
perception for youth that rural areas have a great deal to offer.
Respect uniqueness There was strong support among participants for making sure that the needs of
different rural communities be respected as part of the development of any actions
or initiatives in relation to rural youth.
2.4 Lack of, and Access to, Financial Resources
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Lack of knowledge/information on how to access funds In many cases participants felt that people in rural Canada are not aware of the financial resources and funding/support programs that are available to them, "a few people know how to access the money, the rest are left scratching their heads".
Part of this lack of awareness was attributed to the closing of bank branches in
many rural communities. This has resulted in reduced services and fewer possible
sources of financial information for local residents.
Isolation from decision makers Similarly, it was felt that rural communities were isolated from the staff and decision makers who developed and implemented financing programs and
initiatives. Participants suggested that this has resulted in a lack of enthusiasm for
rural projects, a concentration of efforts in urban areas, a mismatch of the timing
of funds and the time taken to implement projects, and reduced accessibility to
program staff and the funding they provide.
Banks focus on large business Participants believed that banks focus on profit levels and the needs of large businesses and not on the needs of rural communities. A number of break-out groups discussed the perception that banks are not interested in providing access
to financial resources for small businesses and start-up ventures, which are a
common starting point in rural economies.
Young people are at a disadvantage While asset financing is often available, it is very difficult to secure a loan for working capital. This is felt to have an impact on young people, many of whom do not have enough capital to obtain the financial assistance required to start their
own businesses or assume ownership/responsibility for family owned businesses.
Reluctance to invest in rural initiatives Workshop participants felt that banks and other sources of financing are generally reluctant to invest in rural areas due to the current decline in many of the traditional
sectors (e.g., mining, forestry and fishing). Participants also perceived a reluctance
to invest in risky projects such as seasonal businesses and farm operations. It was
suggested that this reluctance is based on a lack of understanding by banks and
other financial institutions of the opportunities present in rural Canada. As a result,
participants felt that the federal government needs to provide incentives to offset
the higher potential risk of rural ventures.
Lack of understanding of community needs and opportunities Participants also thought that various government financing programs do not reflect the rural situation, which is largely based on both small and seasonal businesses. There is a lack of understanding which has resulted in a lack of support for rural entrepreneurs and small businesses. Participants also felt that there is
limited stability in the availability of public financial support programs.
Administrative challenges Other key barriers to accessing financing through public programs identified by participants included bureaucratic and administrative issues such as multiple forms, a lack of flexibility in eligibility criteria and a lack of user friendly processes.
Because public programs are often managed through local community development
groups, another level of bureaucracy often emerges. This further complicates the
process.
The costs associated with administering public programs such as GST/PST, the Net
Income Stabilization Act (NISA), Employment Insurance, seasonal hiring and
Workers Compensation were identified as reducing the amount of financial
resources available to invest in business activities.
First Nations have special issues First Nations, Métis Nation and the Inuit have special issues with accessing public financing programs. It was noted that their inability to go beyond the federal jurisdiction to seek financing prevents them from accessing provincial/territorial
funds.
Reduced transfer payments Participants recognized that reduced transfer payments from the federal government had an impact on the level of resources available at the community level and in support of rural initiatives and activities.
Environmental compliance studies Certain sources of financing require that an environmental compliance study be conducted as part of the process of securing financial assistance. This requirement was viewed as very costly by some of the workshop participants.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Awareness of financial programs Participants felt that rural residents need to be more aware of the programs and opportunities available to access financing.
Investment and re-investment Participants identified a need to make banks responsible for investing money back into local communities by supporting micro loans and lending at the community
level. There was an identified need to generate interest in investing in rural
businesses. It was suggested that a tax investment credit could be developed to
encourage people to invest in local rural businesses.
Increased flexibility Regulations and programming requirements were felt to be inflexible and not
responsive to the rural situation. Participants identified a need to introduce
flexibility to reduce barriers to financing without increasing the amount of
administration. Flexible eligibility criteria were identified as a key requirement.
Reducing the amount of "red tape" and the complexity of many of the programs is
also desired.
Alternatives to banks Some participants felt that other mechanisms to access financing outside of the
banking system are required. The focus of any alternatives should be on the
provision of needed community support, not the generation of profits.
Investment opportunities for First Nations A need to develop specific investment opportunities and vehicles for First Nation communities was identified in order to address the lack of access to financial resources. There is concern that this is a growing problem due the increase in the number of First Nations communities.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Form partnerships A number of the break-out groups discussed the need to form partnerships within
the federal government and between governments and other stakeholders in order
to address these issues. Participants noted that there is a need to align federal and
provincial policies and combine the efforts of various organizations and levels of
government in order to reduce competition. Sharing the funding of projects among
different organizations and levels of government was also suggested.
Communicate Discussions in various break-out groups suggested that local public sector staff and resources within the post offices and the rural community libraries could be used
as vehicles to communicate information about the various financial support
opportunities and programs that are available to rural residents.
Push/devolve spending to regional/local levels There was a strong sense among participants that decisions to allocate resources in support of financing in rural communities should be made at the local level. There is a need to make sure that local program staff have the flexibility to make funding decisions based on local needs. In this respect it was also suggested that
funds be used holistically and allocated to a region, rather than to specific
programs.
Support the development of local investors Participants identified a need for alternative sources and models of financing.
Farm credit, credit unions and other non-banking alternatives were suggested.
Participants also suggested that a mechanism be developed so that rural citizens can
invest in their own communities (e.g., through RRSPs). The establishment of an
equity fund in support of rural communities was suggested as a way to provide
financial support to small and entrepreneurial rural businesses.
Increase flexibility A number of suggestions emerged in relation to increased flexibility for the
eligibility criteria of financing programs in order to better meet the needs of rural
citizens. Reducing the regulatory and paperwork burden on businesses was also
identified as a component of enhancing access to financial resources.
Some participants suggested that the tax laws should be aligned to encourage the
support of rural businesses.
Evaluate programs Participants felt that programs and services providing financing to rural citizens
should be evaluated to assess their effectiveness. This includes conducting
customer service evaluations to ensure that the programs are accountable to the
people they are intended to support. It was also suggested that individuals and
organizations which access financial resources through publicly funded programs
must be accountable for the use of these resources.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed and who needs to be involved?"
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Workshop participants discussed these two questions together.
Coordination of effort There was strong desire for coordination of the efforts among the various levels of government and other existing players. It was suggested that this coordination
include the combining of program funds among various levels of government.
Avoid duplication Provincial and Territorial governments were viewed by participants as playing a
role in implementing various types of initiatives related to access to financial
resources. Participants noted, however, that the provinces and territories should be
careful to avoid duplication with federal initiatives.
Mechanisms to invest a in the local rural economy Participants suggested that an effort to develop financial instruments and regulatory framework to invest in the local rural economy should be pursued.
Communicate existing programs A number of the break-out groups noted that people want to be informed of the types of support and opportunities available. It was suggested that written
guidelines about the various funding programs available within communities could
be used as a reference when seeking financing options. Communicating
opportunities to the grass-roots levels within communities was identified as critical.
Leadership role for the federal government The general sense among participants was that the federal government must take a leadership role in ensuring access to financial resources in rural Canada.
Participants wanted the federal government to listen, assess and act in response to
the particular needs of rural communities. It was suggested that the federal
government could invest directly in rural communities through programs and also
work to bring investors to rural communities.
Access to financial resources in support of rural businesses was identified as a key
area of focus. Participants also noted that the federal government has a role to play
in ensuring that rural communities have access to financial institutions (including
access to ATMs) through the regulation of this sector.
Build on local needs and ideas Local governments and community associations were identified by participants as a source of ideas and needs which should form the basis of program development
decisions. However, participants noted that while local initiatives are needed, they
require federal support. In addition, participants felt that there is a need to make
sure that federal programs have local guidance so that they are relevant to the
situations of rural communities.
2.5 Human Resource Leadership and Community Capacity Building
"Does this issue exist in your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Lack of leadership succession Lack of leadership succession planning in rural communities was raised as a concern by many participants. Participants felt that there is no infrastructure or resources in place to ensure the development of leadership skills. The lack of
leadership succession planning was felt to be linked to the "transient" nature of
rural communities and the lack of leadership development and engagement of
youth. Leadership is important because it sets the community's vision, goals and
direction. It sets the tone, motivates and inspires people and channels the
community's energy in a focussed way.
Leadership "burn out" Leadership "burn out" was repeatedly mentioned by participants. There are not enough leaders to share the responsibilities. As a result, existing leaders, many of
whom are volunteers, are involved in too many activities. It was also perceived
that existing leaders no longer want to volunteer their time and energy. They have
become discouraged because their work is not leading to results and they can no
longer endure close public scrutiny. This is felt to be discouraging others who
might otherwise become involved.
Coping with cultural diversity and change Cultural diversity and change are issues that participants felt rural communities need to address. Rural areas are not necessarily open to new ideas from outside the
community, or willing to accept cultural diversity and change. It was suggested,
for example, that many women in rural communities have the potential to become
community leaders. However, women are often not actively involved in the
community because historically women have not been considered for leadership
roles. It was suggested that programs need to be developed to break down these
types of cultural barriers.
Bottom-up approach for the development of communities Participants felt that governments have traditionally taken a top-down approach in decision-making and have not supported the empowerment of local communities. As a result, government programs and structures have not been
adapted to the reality of rural situations. It was also perceived that governments
have not taken a coherent approach to their support of rural communities. The level
of funding provided by governments to support rural communities has only resulted
in short-term community development.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Leadership development Leadership development was identified as a key issue that needs to be addressed in rural communities to help overcome the challenges of leadership "burn out". It
was perceived that there is a lack of self-esteem in rural communities because
people do not have the self-confidence or the skills required to lead. As a result,
leadership support tools are needed to develop, coach and sustain the emergence
of new leaders so that the responsibilities can be shared, and not confined to a small
group of volunteers.
Capacity building by the community Rural communities must be engaged in the process of community development. Community engagement should involve the community's active participation in
identifying community needs and in the design and implementation of community
development initiatives. Participants felt that this will ensure that programs are
linked to rural realities.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Introduce leadership development programs The introduction of leadership development programs was identified as the key way to resolve the problem of leadership in rural communities. Mentoring programs to encourage untapped resources such as the elderly and youth were suggested by
many participants. Developing volunteer resource centres to facilitate, encourage
and support leadership development was also suggested, as well as training
programs for staff and elected officials of municipalities. Strategic planning and
business planning were identified as areas that leadership development programs
should include.
Encourage collaboration at the community level Key to building community capacity is collaboration at the community level. Together, localorganizations such as Community Futures and the Chamber of Commerce can more effectively and efficiently build community capacity.
Collaboration among organizations can create the dynamics for successful
brainstorming and creative problem solving. Participants felt that collaboration
among business and industry is also important for building community capacity.
These players have a key role in shaping the economic development activities of
rural communities. Participants raised the importance of sharing success stories
and best practices both within the community and with other rural communities.
Develop Aboriginal, First Nations, Métis Nation and Inuit leadership Participants in one break-out group said that special attention is needed in order to develop Aboriginal (First Nations, Métis Nation and Inuit) leadership. In order to build and sustain the capacity of Aboriginal (First Nations, Métis Nation and Inuit) communities, future leaders must be trained and mentored. It was suggested
that Aboriginal role models are important to the successful development of new
leaders.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed and who needs to be involved?"
Build community capacity through information, skills upgrading and job creation Information, skills and job creation are three key elements that participants felt are at the root of building community capacity. Governments must provide access to the information required to support capacity building and leadership, including communication of government programs and services and changes and developments in public policy. Some participants suggested that the federal
government should implement a training program for citizens in rural
communities on how to deal with government departments and institutions. The
primary objective of this program should be to help ordinary citizens participate
in the federal government policy development and decision-making process.
Job creation to attract and retain people in rural communities is also needed for
community development. This includes a need to support self-employment
assistance and sustainable development programs. Providing skills, such as
literacy and computer skills, was the third element raised by participants. Skills
upgrading can empower people and may help communities identify new and
emerging leaders.
Partnerships among governments It was felt that the restructuring of governments in health, social services and education has resulted in the disappearance of natural alliances between
governments. New relationships must include all levels of government (i.e.,
federal, provincial and municipal) in order to align common initiatives.
Participants stressed that the provinces must be involved in the development of a
federal rural policy. In addition, federal departments and provincial ministries
should review regulations and adapt them to the context and reality of rural
communities.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Federal financial support Most participants identified a need for federal financial support. Emphasis was placed on federal support of existing programs that work - "don't reinvent the
wheel" and maintaining transfer payments to the provinces and territories.
Participants felt that the most effective way that the federal government can assist
rural communities is by providing a pool of funding that can be used by
communities to develop and implement a framework for community programming
which would allow local leaders to better help their communities.
Promotion of rural communities There was a general desire for the promotion of rural communities by the federal government. It was perceived that there is a lack of recognition of the value and importance of rural affairs in Canada.
Participants felt that federal promotion can help attract leaders and develop rural
communities. It was suggested that a national campaign promoting rural
communities could encourage business, industry and urban citizens to consider
living and working in rural areas. It was felt that federal recognition is important
to the development and growth of rural communities.
Participants in one break-out group also suggested that the federal government
should raise public sector awareness about rural affairs through rural sensitivity
training and programs on rural issues. "The recognition of rural affairs and
communities is the foundation for the development of confidence that leads to local
development".
2.6 Rural Infrastructure
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Fewer resources are being spent on rural infrastructure Federal and provincial government cutbacks have had a negative impact on rural communities. Tax dollars are not going back to infrastructure. The smaller tax base in rural areas (due to the smaller population) is resulting in fewer dollars being dedicated to infrastructure maintenance.
According to participants, a lack of funding for infrastructure has had many
negative impacts on rural communities, including; hazardous road conditions, poor
telecommunications infrastructure, and high transportation costs. Costs are often
downloaded to the communities. These are often costs that communities cannot
afford.
Lack of awareness and understanding of rural issues Participants also felt that there is a lack of awareness, understanding, and sensitivity to rural issues on the part of governments. This perception led participants to suggest that governments do not realize that the infrastructure in rural communities is much more affected by budget cuts than urban centres and
that the centralization of activities is viewed as insensitive to rural needs.
Policies and programs not adapted to rural realities Participants felt that government policies and programs are not adapted to regional and rural realities. Governments are not organized to handle a more personalized approach to deal with rural affairs. Examples provided by workshop participants included inefficient transportation policies; inconsistent forestry stumpage rates;
and rail line abandonment. There was the perception by participants that "city
thinking" is imposed on rural Canadians.
Lack of communication between governments A number of break-out groups discussed a lack of communication between federal government departments and within various levels of government. This was described as creating duplication of effort, competition among departments, as well
as conflicting jurisdiction problems. There is a need to ensure that the
infrastructure needs of rural communities are met through a coordinated effort,
regardless of which department or level of government is responsible.
Competition between communities At the local level, participants mentioned that there is a lack of cohesion and cooperation. This creates rivalry and barriers between communities, including
competition for resources in support of infrastructure, such as recreational facilities
and schools.
Need to consider impacts of decisions The federal government needs to take a long-term view in terms of the impacts of its infrastructure decisions. Participants suggested that there are insufficient
resources and no accountability in making major infrastructure decisions. There
was the sense that there is a lack of planning, forward thinking and understanding
on the part of the federal government in making decisions related to rural
infrastructure.
Lack of "rural voices" Because there are fewer rural than urban citizens, there are fewer voices to represent the infrastructure needs of rural areas. People are having to leave rural
communities to work, and those individuals who move from urban centres to rural
communities often do not become involved in the community. Participants
suggested that a representative body of rural people should be established to
address rural issues, including infrastructure, in order to have the greatest influence
on the federal government.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Repair infrastructure Existing rural infrastructure needs repair. A priority needs to be placed on ensuring
that tax dollars go into infrastructure projects/programs. Poor telecommunications
infrastructure was identified as an area requiring immediate attention.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Establish a long-term rural infrastructure program The establishment of a long-term rural infrastructure program and the extension of current programs based on a vision for rural Canada was viewed as a starting point. One break-out group suggested that this could be accomplished by creating
a representative body of constituents comprised of people at the grassroots level or
an independent advisory board such as a regional fairness committee. Participants
felt that it was also important to have equal representation from all provinces in the
design of this type of program.
Re-investment in infrastructure A variety of priorities exist in relation to rural infrastructure. Harmonization of fuel taxes, food inspection, right to farm guidelines, transportation and pollution/environment policies were mentioned in one of the break-out groups.
Other areas of immediate concern include making sure tax dollars go toward
infrastructure, changing road tolls, more equitable distribution of gas taxes for road
development, and having a day in Parliament devoted solely to rural issues.
Maintain a continuous dialogue Participants felt that a continuous dialogue needs to take place in order to enhance the awareness of rural needs, including those related to infrastructure. Issues
should be prioritized and any decisions/programs/policies need to be viewed
through a rural perspective. Exchanging and sharing ideas amongst communities
would help facilitate this.
Support technological initiatives One break-out group strongly supported the continuation of Industry Canada's Internet initiatives. They were also very supportive of establishing the infrastructure necessary to support non-traditional forms of work that could enable
rural people to work from their communities. Suggestions included undertaking
pilot projects and leveraging partnerships. The cost of this should be a federal
responsibility shared across Canada or in partnership with contributions from all
provinces.
Need for cohesive action Participants wanted to ensure that governments do not create barriers between communities. Rather, participants were in favour of ensuring coordinated action
among small communities to work together to maintain and improve the current
infrastructure. They also mentioned that it would be important for the federal
government to have more direct links with local communities. One break-out
group supported the establishment of basic minimum infrastructure standards for
rural Canada, followed by the provision of resources to achieve this basic standard.
Create incentives At a local level, one break-out group suggested creating a fund to support the
acquisition of new houses by young families to facilitate their retention in rural
areas. Another suggestion was to announce a community revitalization funding
program for rural (not urban) communities. In addition, participants wanted to
develop a taxation policy that would support rural infrastructure investments.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed - and who needs to be involved?"
Include all stakeholders All levels of government, citizens, communities, public and private organizations should be involved. Participants indicated that it would be very important for the
local communities to be the focal point in this process.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Comprehensive, sensitive infrastructure program Participants felt that the federal government should ensure that any infrastructure program put in place is comprehensive and sensitive to rural needs. It is important for the federal government to be sensitive to the realities of rural and
remote situations, and develop infrastructure programs that will meet the needs of
rural and remote communities. The federal government should promote equity in
access to infrastructure programs for rural, remote and urban communities.
Maintain a federal presence There was a desire to keep decision-making in relation to infrastructure at the community level, while at the same time maintaining a federal presence in rural
communities to help identify and communicate local infrastructure needs. One
break-out group suggested returning the decision-making authority and budgets to
local communities so that needs can be addressed locally.
Apply the Think Rural Report Participants suggested that the federal government apply the following recommendation in its Think Rural Report: "To correct historical deficiencies of infrastructure, a minimum of 50% of expenditures associated with any future
federal infrastructure program should be injected into rural Canada".
Create a long-term infrastructure program Participants suggested that the federal government create a long-term federal infrastructure program (a national rural infrastructure program) that is sustainable
and can be accessed by individual municipalities.
Support Bills C430 and C304 Participants would also like to see governments support Bill C430 which gives communities a chance to plan and Bill C304 regarding property rights and leasing.
2.7 Access to Rural Health Care
Access to rural health care and education were explored in the same break-out groups. Overlap may therefore exist when issues have been raised in relation to both topics. However, the discussions related to rural health care and education have been reported separately, to the extent possible.
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Lack of access to health care In many cases, participants felt that rural communities do not have readily accessible health care. It was felt that this is particularly the case in remote and northern communities. Lower populations bases in rural communities are leading
to a reduced tax base and, in turn, to the availability of resources. Participants
explained that in order to access health care, long distances are traveled and
transportation and accommodation costs are incurred, which creates stress on
families. Some participants perceived that the closure of health care facilities is
also having an impact on rural communities' economy and employment. Doctors
are not "on site" in many rural communities and many residents do not have their
own doctors.
Need incentives to attract medical doctors Incentives to attract and retain doctors in rural communities was identified as important to health care access. It was felt that there is a migration of doctors from
rural to urban communities and a lack of interest on the part of urban doctors to
offer services in rural Canada. It was suggested that more effective programs,
improved working conditions (i.e., shorter work hours) and financial incentives
(e.g., debt relief) are needed to attract qualified doctors to rural communities.
These types of incentives could help to retain doctors for longer periods of time and
in turn increase the availability of doctors in rural communities. However, in one
group, participants felt that doctors should be willing to service rural communities
without incentives.
Limited health care for the elderly There was concern among participants that rural communities do not have sufficient resources to provide adequate health care to the elderly. It was felt that more resources are required to address the needs of an aging population in rural
communities.
Government "downloading" of responsibility The growing "down-loading" of responsibility for health care services was identified as an issue that needs to be addressed because of its negative impacts on communities. Participants perceived that the federal government is moving away from its fundamental role of providing universal health care. In addition, the
level of transfer payments to provinces and territories is not provided in a
standardized manner. As a result, provincial and territorial governments are
reducing available health care resources.
Need better services for Francophones In one break-out group, participants perceived that there is inequality between the level of services provided to the Francophone and Anglophone communities. "The
inequality is double for minority groups in rural areas." They said that rural
communities lack the availability of bilingual professionals.
Greater voice for Aboriginals, First Nations, the Métis Nation and Inuit peoples In two break-out groups, participants felt that Aboriginal, First Nations, Métis Nation and Inuit communities need leadership to voice their opinions. In one session, it was felt that federal departments other than Indian Affairs and Northern Development should be voicing the needs of Aboriginals, First Nations, Métis Nation and Inuit peoples. They perceived that racism against Aboriginal, First Nations, Métis Nation and Inuit communities still exists and needs
to be addressed. For example, a low representation of Aboriginals exists at the
professional and management levels, including medical doctors.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Improve access to health care It was felt that there is a need to explore alternative ways of delivering health care in order to improve access. This includes the development of telecommunications infrastructures in rural communities. It was perceived that governments need to
demonstrate leadership in exploring health care alternatives.
Attract qualified doctors Although alternative ways of delivering health care was raised, participants also felt that attracting qualified doctors is important particularly because of the aging
population.
Review transfer payments to provinces/territories During the discussions, participants said it is important to review the allocation of payments to the provinces and territories in order to ensure universal health care and prevent the continuing decline in health care standards. Participants in one break-out group suggested that funding should be provided directly to
communities so that decisions about the allocation of resources can be made from
the bottom up.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Provide essential health care services It was felt that it is important to provide rural communities with essential services such as: basic nursing stations, home care, 1-800 numbers, paramedics and the designation of individuals for mandatory CPR training.
Innovative use of technology and telecommunications infrastructure to improve access to health care Many participants said the use of innovative technology could assist in providing rural communities with better access to health care. It was suggested that a telecommunications infrastructure is needed to use more advanced technologies in rural communities (e.g., Internet, satellites, teleconference). It was also suggested that rural communities need to work with governments to lower rural communities' resistance to change and explore alternative service delivery, such as diagnosis by doctors in other locations via satellite.
Explore additional sources of health care Some participants re-emphasized that incentives should be offered to attract medical resources, such as fee-for-service. Others discussed addressing shortages
in the availability of doctors through a greater presence of midwives or
paramedics. It was also suggested that specialized health care services and training
pertaining to rural communities could help to address this problem (e.g.,
preventative medicine). Additional suggestions include: access to referral centres
for health care emergencies; technology upgrades in hospitals and health care
centres; establishment of community health clinics and community support
programs.
Develop health care at the community level Developing health care at the community level was felt to be important. Participants in one reak-out group felt that governments should provide financial
and human resources to communities initiating actions to improve community
health care. This could be a means to ensure that resources are being used in an
appropriate manner.
Share experience During the discussions, participants felt that provinces and territories should work
together to learn and share successful approaches to health care.
Provide tax credits Participants in one break-out group felt that residents in rural communities should
receive some form of tax relief for commuting or accompanying other individuals
to other communities to access health care. Some participants felt that northern
allowances should be re-instated.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed and who needs to be involved?"
Partnerships among governments Many participants said partnerships are needed between governments at all levels (i.e., federal, provincial and municipal) in order to develop a holistic approach to
health care and to align the various health care initiatives undertaken by the
provinces.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Establish national health care strategies and standards In many cases, participants said it is important to have officially defined national standards set by the federal government regarding access to health services. This includes standards for: emergency services; access to doctors and nurses and access to medical tests. Some participants said it is important that rural
communities be involved in defining these types of standards. Other participants
felt that the federal government should have responsibility for the maintenance of
standards, including monitoring and evaluation. Participants in one session also
suggested that the federal government should play a role in developing and
supporting a pluralistic model of health care.
Undertake studies in health care needs Participants suggested that the federal government should fund studies undertaken in health care. Ideas for studies included: examining the social values of having hospitals in rural communities and conducting impact studies prior to introducing
changes in services. Some participants also felt that the federal government should
fund pilot projects and rural community researchers. Studies of this nature could
be used to share best practices between provinces.
2.8 Access to Rural Education
Access to rural education and health care were explored in the same break-out groups. Overlap may therefore exist when issues have been raised in relation to both topics. However, the discussions related to rural education and health care have been reported separately, to the extent possible.
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Better access to education Many participants perceived that there were inequities in access to education, including differences in educational standards and in the number of educational
institutions available. Some felt that there are large differences in the availability
of schools, particularly in Ontario, where rural schools are being targeted for
closure as a result of educational reforms. Participants said that the closure of
schools in rural communities means children must commute long distances. This
is having an impact on children's' safety and is imposing additional financial
burdens on families.
Some participants perceived that the closure of institutions such as schools is also
having an impact on rural communities' economy and employment. Many
participants felt that access to education after grade 12 is limited in rural
communities. They explained that youth must leave the community to pursue post-secondary education. Many of these youth do not return to rural communities to
work. Furthermore, upon post-secondary graduation, youth are faced with high
student loan debts.
Need for more educational and francophone resources More educational resources, including teachers, educational institutions and Francophone resources technology were identified as needed in rural communities. Participants in one session perceived that there is inequality between the level of services provided to the Francophone and Anglophone communities. They said that rural communities
lack bilingual professionals, educational materials, software programs and schools.
Broader educational curriculum It was felt by participants that the educational system does not provide rural youth with a sufficient level of options. Participants perceived that there is too much emphasis placed on academics and not enough on trades. They also felt that the
educational system lacked the availability of options to pursue studies in
agriculture, fishing and forestry. Participants in one break-out group were
concerned that some rural youth may be "falling through the cracks" because they
are not completing their high school education. They suggested that more school
curriculum options might encourage these youth. On the other hand, participants
in the same group perceived that youth today still believe that they can find a good
paying job without continuing their education. Some participants suggested that
the educational system needs to form a stronger relationship with employers in
order to train people for jobs in demand.
Unequal federal transfer payments The growing "down-loading" of responsibility for educational services was identified as an issue that needs to be addressed because of its negative impacts on communities. Participants perceived that the level of federal transfer payments to
provinces is not provided in a standardized manner across Canada. As a result,
provincial governments are cutting back on services, including the clawback of the
Child Tax Credit. Participants felt it is important to review the allocation of
payments to the provinces in order to ensure consistency in education standards and
quality. Participants in one break-out group suggested that funding should be
provided directly to communities so that decisions about the allocation of resources
for education can be made from the bottom up.
Greater voice for Aboriginals In two break-out groups, participants felt that Aboriginal communities need leadership to voice their opinions. In one group, it was felt that federal
departments other than Indian Affairs and Northern Development should be
voicing the needs of Aboriginals. They perceived that racism against Aboriginal
communities still exists and needs to be addressed. For example, a low
representation of Aboriginals exists at the professional and management levels.
Participants in one session felt that the educational approach for Aboriginals was
not very effective. For example, it was perceived that children in some Aboriginal
communities only attend school up to the eighth grade.
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Improve access to education Improved access to education was identified as a key priority in rural communities. Participants felt that there is a need to increase the level of financing available as
well as to explore alternative ways of delivering education. The development of
a telecommunications infrastructure and incentives to attract highly qualified and
experienced teachers were suggested as ways to improve access to education in
rural communities. It was perceived that governments need to demonstrate
leadership in exploring education alternatives.
Stronger accountability The need for a stronger sense of accountability for the allocation of resources was discussed. In some sessions, it was felt that education is becoming too political.
Participants in one group felt that educational representatives should be listening
to the needs of employers and should be more accountable to provide training that
matches the needs of employers. It was suggested that schools should receive
financial incentives for placing youths in jobs. This would create a greater sense
of accountability for implementing programs that provide results.
Participants in two groups felt that the provinces and the municipalities also need
to be more accountable. For example, they perceived that some provinces are
spending millions of dollars to build new schools, however, the "bricks and mortar"
are not translating into better educational services. It was also perceived that many
school boards were not accountable for school closures and differences in wages
earned by educational staff.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Improve access to education It was suggested that distance education and lower tuition fees are options that could help to improve access to education for rural Canadians.
Innovative use of technology/telecommunications infrastructure Many participants said the use of innovative technology could assist in providing rural communities with better access to education. It was suggested that a telecommunications infrastructure is needed to use more advanced technologies in rural communities (e.g., Internet, satellites, teleconference). Technology could
be used to offer distance education such as post-secondary education via satellite,
teleconference or the Internet.
Focus on the development of practical skills During the discussions, participants felt that it is important to introduce educational programs that provide the opportunity for people in rural communities to develop practical skills. This should include life skills, apprenticeship and trades programs. Participants in one group also said that Human Resources Development Canada should play a role in promoting trades.
Provide tax credits In two break-out groups, participants felt that residents in rural communities should
receive some form of tax relief. Some participants felt that rural families should
be provided with educational tax credits that they can use to compensate for their
higher living and educational costs (e.g., transportation costs, accommodations,
cost of moving to other communities for post-secondary education).
Develop approaches to education at the community level Developing educational programs at the community level was felt to be important. Participants in one group felt that the provincial governments should provide financial and human resources to communities initiating actions to improve
the access to quality education in the communities. This could be a means to
ensure that resources are being used in an appropriate manner.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed and who needs to be involved?"
Partnerships among governments More partnerships between governments at all levels (i.e., federal, provincial and municipal) was raised as important in order to develop a holistic approach to
education and to align the various educational initiatives undertaken by the
provinces.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Establish national educational strategies and standards Many participants said it is important to develop educational standards, and that the federal government should play a role in developing them. This could involve monitoring and evaluating the maintenance of national standards.
Undertake educational studies Participants said the federal government should fund and conduct educational studies. Ideas for studies included: a review of the student loan program; a review
of the quality of education in rural and urban areas; and impact studies on the
introduction of or changes in services. Some participants also felt that the federal
government should fund pilot projects and rural community researchers. Studies
of this nature could be used to share best practices between provinces.
2.9 Rural Telecommunications and Use of the Information Highway
"Does this issue exist within your community/region - if so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Lack of service Rural telecommunications is a significant issue within participants' communities.
Their main frustration relates to the lack of service provided to rural communities.
Due to a lack of infrastructure, telecommunications companies either do not serve
or underserve rural areas, resulting in insufficient telecommunications services to
meet the needs of rural residents. The quality of service provided by
telecommunications companies to rural areas is often poor, particularly in relation
to maintenance and repairs. It was also mentioned that some companies do not
provide cellular or wireless services beyond urban centres. There was also a great
deal of concern expressed in the break-out groups about party lines. Many
participants felt that party lines have had a negative impact on the development of
business in rural areas. Participants also suggested that there is a lack of minimum
standards in the telecommunications industry.
One break-out group also discussed a lack of French communications (other than
Radio Canada) available to their communities. This limits the information flow to
and from rural Francophone communities.
Lack of access to the Internet Because there is often limited or non-existent access to telephone lines in rural
communities, there is a limited capacity for rural people to communicate. In
addition, the federal government is closing a number of rural office locations under
the rationale that government information is available over the Internet.
However, participants clearly indicated that not all communities can access the
Internet. Some participants felt that Canada Post should provide these Internet
services as some communities only have one computer to share amongst all people
Difficulty encouraging businesses to locate in rural areas Participants felt that it is very difficult to encourage businesses to locate in rural areas if modern communications technology is not available. Deregulation of the telecommunications industry has caused a shift in focus to urban areas and away from rural areas. Participants felt that there needs to be an investment made in
telecommunications research and investment which can support the needs of rural
Canada.
High costs of telecommunications services The high costs o f telephone and TV channels in remote regions are cause for concern for many participants. Participants mentioned that the privatization of telephone companies increases rates. High telephone rates have a negative impact
on rural businesses and increase Internet costs. Long distance charges are not the
same everywhere across the country, which creates a sense of inequity.
Fear of technology Participants felt that rural communities were also challenged because rural citizens
have a fear of new technology and often lack the knowledge of how to use different
telecommunications tools. One break-out group offered the example of the federal
Community Access Programs as a useful approach to help communicate and
educate rural citizens about the different tools. However these programs are not
well known, there is little incentive to use them, and they are not always accessible
due to the hours of operation and location. Participants felt that there was little
available to them in terms of skilled resources and financial support to teach people
in rural communities how to use the Internet. Literacy was also identified as a
barrier to using the Internet, particularly for rural seniors and youth who may not
have advanced reading or computer skills.
No universal treatment Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) regulations were identified as a problem in some areas. Participants said that
everyone pays for services, but not everyone can access the telecommunications
systems. Participants in one break-out group felt that they were universally treated
as taxpayers, but not universally treated when it comes to receiving services from
the federal government.
Concern about medical services There was also a concern about the role of telecommunications in the delivery of health care in rural communities. Participants said that there is an inferior 911
service in most rural areas. Telecommunications inadequacies also limit the types
of services that can be provided to rural communities (such as medical
conferencing).
"From the specific aspect(s) identified - which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Access to services is the main priority There was general agreement among participants that access to services needs to be the main priority. Infrastructure should be dealt with first, so that rural
Canadians can have access to the rest of the world, including available
telecommunications services. "Canadians need a telecommunications system that
everyone can access. It should incorporate a basic level of service at an affordable
cost." This basic level of service must be flexible enough to adapt to all locations
in Canada. One break-out group was also concerned about the lack of access to
technology for tourists and business travelers visiting rural locations. This group
felt that marketing and access to the information highway for travelers was
necessary.
Subsidize costs of services Participants felt that the cost of services needs to be re-examined. In their view, the CRTC needs to play a role to ensure fairness. Without regulation, rural areas
will always pay more because the industry is driven by profits and costs. Small
communities still need to be subsidized.
Cannot ignore future needsParticipants suggested that while the current situation needs improvement, future needs and capabilities should also be examined. For instance, even though
accessing the Internet is a priority, other issues such as the speed of information
transfer should not be ignored.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Consultation with the CRTC Participants agreed that the CRTC needs to be consult with rural citizens in order to examine the issues relating to privatization and deregulation of
telecommunications services and the impacts in rural Canada. The CRTC needs
to be in touch with communities to ensure they hear the concerns of people in rural
areas. The CRTC should mandate an expected level of service quality, minimum
standards, as well as a dependable infrastructure of private telephone lines to homes
and businesses. Participants felt that the basic cost of such services should be the
same price for all. In other words, there should be universal service by companies
to rural communities.
Improved access to technology Participants felt that access to technology would be an important next step as it would allow some people to stay at home to do their jobs. This would result in cost
savings for individuals and would keep more money in the community.
Participants felt that this should not be a top-down approach, but rather, a
bottom-up process with community participation in decision-making. They also
felt that there needs to be a timeframe and commitment to improving
telecommunications services in rural Canada (i.e. 1999).
Canada Post presence Participants felt that it was important for Canada Post to maintain a presence in rural communities. If the post office disappears, a larger gap will be created
between rural and urban citizens.
Demonstrate value of telecommunications The value of telecommunications to rural businesses and stakeholders must be demonstrated. Better marketing of telecommunications services is needed to
promote the various benefits to all stakeholders. Participants suggested that it
would be important to educate fuel companies, banks, and grocery stores.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed - and who needs to be involved?"
All stakeholders should be included Participants were in agreement that a consortium of players needed to be involved in implementing the suggestions. These include Chambers of Commerce,
community organizations, volunteer associations, private industry, municipal,
provincial, and federal governments (including staff from the Community Access
Program), other interest groups, the CRTC, private telephone companies and the
telecommunications industry at large (cable, wireless, satellite).
Other specific groups to be included are educational organizations, universities
(R&D), tourism organizations, financial institutions, libraries, health care network,
and the aboriginal governments.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Legislation and regulation Participants felt that the federal government should be responsible for legislation and standardization of technology. This would include ensuring that security and
privacy issues are addressed with respect to services. It should also ensure that the
basic telecommunications infrastructures are in place in all communities (i.e.
telephone lines, television channels).
Presence in communities One break-out group felt that it was important for the federal government to maintain a presence in every community. They suggested the Post Office as being
a good example. Internet access in every Post Office was discussed as a potential
solution to the telecommunications issues mentioned above.
Research and marketing Participants said that the federal government could also help in disseminating information about technology to the public. The government could also help small
businesses market themselves on the Internet (i.e. free web site). Research and
development activities were also identified as important to further the knowledge
of rural communities.
Support The federal government should also provide support in terms of funding and access
to telecommunications services. The federal government should not be identifying
the solutions to the problems but should be there to coordinate and facilitate
communities in finding their own solutions. Financial resources, support in
obtaining Internet access, and the provision of training and development to rural
communities were identified as potential different roles for the federal government.
The federal government should also engage the support of provincial and municipal
governments in order to create a partnership in addressing the needs of rural
communities.
Community Access Program Participants suggested that the Community Access Program needs to be enhanced. The Program was identified as deficient in that it does not provide sustainability or
training. People need more than just access to services.
2.10 Access to Information on Federal Government Programs and Services
"Does this issue exist within your community/region? If so, why? What is its root cause in your community/region? Specifically, what is it about this issue that needs to be addressed?"
Telecommunications barriers Many rural communities do not have access to the advanced telecommunication networks that are readily available to their urban counterparts. Many people still
do not have access to touch tone phone lines and must use party lines (which means
that answering machines and fax machines cannot be used). In addition, many
communities do not have access to an Internet provider.
Telephone access to the federal government is difficult All groups who discussed the issue of access said that they found obtaining information from the federal government over the phone difficult. The waiting time to get through to an agent on a 1-800 line is often lengthy and when they finally do get through to a person, they often cannot help and have to
refer them to another person. Consequently, rural participants were left not only
with the impression that government employees were not qualified to help them,
but were also not interested in helping them.
Slower delivery of mail and packages Another key issue cited by many participants was the longer time required to receive material being mailed to a rural address or rural post office box.
Consequently, it may take longer for material to be delivered to a rural destination
than to an urban one. The material that does arrive late is therefore of less use.
Further, participants stated that rural communities are dependent on Canada Post
for the delivery of all mail and packages. This means that when a mail strike
occurs, their access to a key communication vehicle is cut off.
Language barriers It was suggested that access to federal government services and programs is limited
due to the complexity of language used in material. Some participants found the
information difficult to interpret. The language spoken by the individual is also
important. For example, it may be difficult for some rural/remote native Canadians
to access information and programs because their first language is neither English
nor French.
Administrative burden Similar to the language issue, if the person or business (especially small business)
that is trying to access the federal government program cannot understand the
administration required, they may not pursue the program.
Insufficient advertising or promotion Participants usually learn about federal government programs through word of mouth. Sometimes they feel that they are finding out about opportunities "too late" which may limit their ability to use the program if resources have already
been allocated. There needs to be more advertising to alert people on how to
access the services and programs they need. The federal government could
promote a 1-800 number, use local radio stations or newspapers. Information
could also be included with tax forms.
No recognition of differing needs between urban and rural Participant s felt that federal government services and programs were aimed to urban rather than rural communities. In some cases, eligibility requirements are too rigid and do not respond to the needs of rural communities. There is a need for equitable delivery, but also to clearly understand the needs of rural
communities so that programs are relevant.
Distance creates barriers to access In order to access the services and programs that they require, some participants said that they had to go to the "city". For some, this means travelling long
distances. In some communities, the loss of a local post office has added to the
need to travel to access federal government services.
Level of information Although participants want access to as much information as possible, they want
this information to be relevant, concise, yet not too general. They also want to see
reduced inequity between those who know about programs and services and gain
access to them, and those who do not.
"From the specific aspects identified, which do you feel needs attention first to have the greatest impact on rural Canada?"
Better understanding of programs and services Participants felt that more effort is needed to make federal government programs programs understandable to rural Canadians. This could be accomplished by simplifying forms and information materials, and by providing access to people or resources who could help answer their questions.
Information on programs and services Better information for rural Canadians about the federal government programs programs and services available to them was deemed to be a priority for many. Increased information would translate into increased access because people would
know about the program or services they could pursue.
Better training in customer service According to many participants, federal government representatives need to be better trained so that they can more adequately respond to inquiries.
"If you were in charge of resolving this issue, what would you do (next)?"
Harmonize delivery Simplifying the information and delivery processes, especially through harmonization among levels of government, would make access to government
programs and services easier. Such an approach would reduce waste and be more
efficient, and simpler. If harmonization were to occur, governments should use its
existing infrastructure and not create new layers.
Introduce a "one-stop-shop" for information The groups expressed a strong desire for a single point of contact where they could access a wide range of government in formation and services. In many cases cases prominent common community locations such as the library, school, post
office, chamber of commerce or church were suggested as a possible point of
contact. The selection of the best point should remain flexible, based on the
community it is meant to serve. It was even suggested that an "information desk"
be created in communities or regions which would provide access to the Internet
and bilingual information on programs and services. Regardless of the exact nature
of the office, a human element within it was very important to rural participants.
Serve business information needs Businesses have particular needs that are different from those of the individual individual citizens. Therefore, the federal government should ensure an access point for business information, such as through a business information service
centre.
Provide a "neutral" local level information officer It would be useful to assign a person, or a network of people within a community the responsibility for answering people's questions and them in their efforts to access federal government programs and services. This person could play the role
of information officer, ombudsman, or community development officer, and would
be trained to provide support and would know how to direct people to resources.
When selecting the right person(s), rural people should be considered.
Recognize differences For many participants, a "one size fits all" approach to programs and services does
not work. There is a need to recognize the intrinsic differences between urban and
rural communities and be flexible in responding to their different needs.
Ensure information is available through various means Although increasing emphasis is being placed on electronic data, many rural communities still need paper copies of information because they do not have access to the Internet. In addition, the Internet is making information available free of charge, while in some cases those requesting paper copies of documents are
required to pay for these documents, causing inequity in access to information.
Overall, participants believed that federal government information on programs
should be free.
There was some suggestion that information should be accessible from a number
of sources in order to ensure that it is widely available.
Address jurisdictional issues Participants recognized that different levels of government, and even some organizations, might be responsible for similar areas. It will therefore take time to
sort out how information and access to programs and services offered by the
various jurisdictions could be provided in a streamlined manner.
Programs should be sustainable Some consistency and sustainability is necessary in order for people to become familiar with federal government programs available and to make greatest use of
them. Funding should be provided under a 3 to 5 year model.
"How would you implement the suggestions that have been discussed, and who needs to be involved?"
Engage in community consultation Consultations should be undertaken in rural communities to determine local level needs and identify what programs and services exist to respond to these needs. All
federal government services should undergo this process. The Rural Secretariat and
the Federation of Canadian Municipalities were cited as possible facilitators in this
process. Not only could they help facilitate, but they could also support
networking opportunities among rural communities.
Reduce bureaucracy To support the suggestions made above, participants felt that the levels of
bureaucracy and management should be decreased and that staff within
governments need to be allowed to take more risks and make decisions locally.
Promote different sources of information Participants cited some examples of "tools " available to help them access information. These included the Directory of Programs and Services, Reference
Canada (the Federal government's 1-800 service) and InfoCan. Participants
suggested that the federal government should use these existing resources, as well
as electronic means (i.e., the Internet) to support the delivery of information to rural
communities.
"Is there a particular role for the federal government in implementing these suggestions and what guidelines would you set for the federal government's involvement?"
Need for federal government leadership and facilitation The federal government should play a leaderships role in bringing together other levels of government to support the establishment and funding of an information bureau that would serve as a single point for accessing information on government
programs and services. Participants felt that the federal government should play
the role of facilitator and bring parties, including the provincial government,
together to engage in community consultations. Actions need to be taken between
various levels of government and pertinent organizations. This approach would
help to harmonize the delivery of government services and programs to rural
communities.
Universality of programs In its approach to offering programs and services to the community, the federal government should ensure that it is equally responding to the "voices" of all
communities, not just those that are the "loudest."
Train personnel Those delivering federal government programs and services should receive training
so that they are more knowledgeable and better equipped to help rural residents
access programs and services. These trained personnel could then share their
knowledge with rural community members (e.g., knowledge on how to write
proposals and requests for funding)
Federal government actions should not be political Rural participants want to ensure that the decisions made to offer federal federal government services or programs to rural communities are based on real needs rather than those that might be politically desirable.
3. Guiding Principles
A guiding principle is a criterion that the federal government should consider in the development and implementation of policies and programs.
The discussions at the National Rural Workshop around the ten key issues resulted in an initial grouping of twenty guiding principles, listed in Exhibit 1, below. While all of the guiding principles discussed throughout the workshop are important, some were not specifically included in this list of twenty key principles. However, their overall intent has been incorporated into the development of guiding principle groupings discussed at the end of this chapter.
Exhibit 1
| Key Guiding Principles
|
|
1. Flexibility in the delivery of programs at the local level
|
| 2. Communities must be empowered to shape their own solutions
|
| 3. Government must listen to rural communities so that they know how to work with them
|
| 4. Government programs should incorporate accountability frameworks
|
| 5. Need to balance social, economic and cultural development
|
| 6. Need to exploit the capabilities and leadership that are already in the communities
|
| 7. Need to focus on capacity building in communities
|
| 8. Lets do the things we are doing now well before we take on new initiatives
|
| 9. Focus on sustainable long term initiatives, not short term make work programs
|
| 10. Collaborative partnerships should be pursued
|
| 11. Multi-jurisdictional programs should be harmonized
|
| 12. Rural communities need to drive the criteria for programs
|
| 13. Learn from other's successes
|
| 14. Recognized that development takes time, funding should not be based on a government fiscal
cycle
|
| 15. Need to have solutions that are comprehensive in nature - long term vision
|
|
16a) Communities should be the content expert; and
16b) The government should provide expertise on the process |
17. Needs to be a basic level of service which is available to all Canadians on an equitable basis
|
| 18. Promote rural communities to the rest of Canada, they play a valuable role
|
| 19. Government should act as a catalyst/facilitator
|
| 20. Create an environment that encourages community development
|
With the twenty initial guiding principles as a base, workshop participants were asked to identify the three they considered were most important to them and their communities. In some cases participants suggested modifications to the wording to better reflect the meaning of the principle. Additional guiding principles were also suggested. Exhibit 2 summarizes these suggestions on the following page.
Exhibit 2
| General Comments
· "Rural" needs to be defined and further categories included such as "remote" and "isolated
communities
· Add a principle dealing with the accountability of the federal government and of rural communities
· Principles need to be further defined in terms of "how" they will be actioned |
| Comments on Combining Similar Principles
· Combine principles # 9 and #15
· #2 and #19 are similar
· #9 and #14 are similar - suggestion to reword to "adopt a long term focus"
· Combine #2, 12, 7 20 and 6 under "empower rural communities"
· Combine #2, 6 and 7 |
| Comments Regarding Specific Guiding Principles
· Principle #1 - flexibility is too general. Flexibility should include delivery and administration of
programs. It also means looking at new options, not just re-jigging the old ones
· Principle #3 - need to add reference to recognizing existing treaties with First Nations People
· Principle #4 - add "and evaluation" after accountability
· Principle #5 - should include environmental considerations
· Principle #6 - need to change the word "exploit" to "utilize or nurture"
· Principle #11 - change to "inter-jurisdictional" and "intra-jurisdictional"
· Principle #13 - change to "learn and act on other's success and mistakes/failures"
· Principle #16 - government does not always have the expertise - should provide "resources"
(money, people)
· Principle #19 - need to clarify "catalyst" |
These suggestions have been incorporated, where possible, into the final set of proposed guiding principle groupings discussed later in this chapter. While every principle is important, the majority of participants from the various break-out sessions identified most with eight of the twenty guiding principles. The eight principles in order of their popularity with participants are listed below:
1. Focus on sustainable long term initiatives, not short-term make work programs (principle #9).
2. Flexibility in the delivery of programs at the local level (principle #1).
3. Needs to be a basic level of service which is available to all Canadians on an equitable basis
(principle #17).
4. Communities must be empowered to shape their own solutions (principle #2).
5. Recognize that development takes time, funding should not be based on a government fiscal cycle
(principle #14).
6. Governments must listen to rural communities so that they know how to work with them (principle #3).
7. Need to have solutions that are comprehensive in nature - long term vision (principle #15).
8. Rural communities need to drive the criteria for programs (principle #12).
The guiding principles listed in Exhibit 1 have been grouped, based on similarities, for purposes of summarizing the discussions that took place. The groupings and the associated guiding principles are displayed in Exhibit 3.
Exhibit 3
| Major Groupings of Guiding Principles
|
Guiding Principles**
|
| Capacity building - assist communities help themselves and steer the
process |
# 2,6, 7, 8*** and 16a* |
| Create the right conditions - role for the federal government |
# 3***, 5***, 16b*, 17, 18, 19 and 20 |
| Recognize rural uniqueness - programs and services should be based on rural needs |
#1, 3***, 4, 5***, 8*** and 12 |
| No quick fixes - invest in long-term solutions |
#9, 14 and 15 |
| Reaching common goals - working together in partnerships |
#10, 11 and 13 |
* guiding principle #16 has been divided into two portions to differentiate between the role of the federal
government and the role of the community
** denotes the number of the guiding principle from Exhibit 1 on page 47
*** indicates that the guiding principle has been assigned to more than one grouping
The key messages made by workshop participants in relation to each of these groupings are described below:
3.1Capacity building - assist communities help themselves and steer the process
The main message in this grouping of principles is that people in rural communities need to be in charge of their community's development. They are the most knowledgeable about the challenges that the community faces and the types of programs, information and services needed to address these challenges. In every community there are existing capabilities and structures that should be used and expanded upon to further develop these communities. People in the community are most familiar with what works and does not work in their community.
Participants felt that the federal government needs to play a role in assisting rural communities overcome some of the challenges/barriers they face, such as a lack of leadership skills, resistance to change, and limited people and financial resources. However, the government also has to understand that the realities in a rural community are different than in an urban centre where accountability is much more segmented and there is more anonymity. Rural communities need to build their own capacity, starting with their existing resources. They should be making their own decisions in relation to the introduction of new initiatives. The government can help them reach this goal by addressing the resource issues and helping them build the right skills within the community.
3.2 Create the right conditions - role for the federal government
The main role participants identified for the federal government is to help create the right conditions for rural communities to address their own issues. This starts with the government recognizing that many rural communities are lacking basic levels of service, which introduces many challenges and inequalities from the start. In addition, one of the key messages is that the government must listen to and understand what rural citizens are saying. This will ultimately guide the government on how to work with communities in a manner that facilitates or assists (not dictates) the process for designing and implementing solutions.
National Rural Workshop participants indicated that the federal government's role in rural community development should be that of a "catalyst and/or facilitator". Participants recognized that many communities are not self-sustaining and require the assistance of the federal government. However, they also reiterated that the government's role should be limited to assisting communities to develop their own solutions and strategies. The focus of government needs to be balanced among social, economic, environmental and cultural development. The government should not be dictating or imposing urban solutions onto rural Canada. The government should offer their expertise (where it exists) and work with these rural communities to specifically address the rural challenges by "empowering" the communities.
These principles, in conjunction with promoting the value of rural communities to the rest of Canada, will provide rural communities with the environment for positive community development. Promoting the importance of rural Canada will introduce a higher level of urgency to respond to the needs of these communities.
3.3 Recognize rural uniqueness - programs and services should be based on rural
needs
Participants felt that programs and services must be designed to address specific needs in communities with different requirements. In other words, a degree of flexibility needs to be incorporated into programs and services to ensure that they are relevant to different communities. This requires that the federal government listen to rural communities and recognize the diversity of needs. This does not mean that completely new programs and services are necessarily needed, but existing programs and services may need to be revised to be more relevant.
Participants felt that rural communities need to have input into the design and criteria of programs to ensure that their needs will be met. The knowledge with respect to each community exists at the community level. The individuals who deal with the issues and challenges on a daily basis are the ones that will understand what will work and what won't. Therefore, rural communities need to be involved in the development of the criteria, i.e. "drive the criteria for programs", and the government needs to provide opportunities to make this happen.
Underlying these programs, policies and actions, participants want the government to establish accountability frameworks so that the success or failures of these initiatives in rural communities can be monitored and modified (if necessary). The participants also indicated that it was important for accountability frameworks to be present at the local level, not just at the federal level. It is crucial that programs, policies and actions are assessed at all of government levels to ensure that issues can be addressed at every level of implementation.
3.4 No quick fixes - invest in long-term solutions
The key message within this grouping is that solutions to rural community challenges need time to develop and cannot be addressed with a "quick fix" program. A long-term commitment by the federal government is needed to fully support the processes that sustain the community over the long-term. These are not issues that can be fixed by "throwing" money at it then walking away. There needs to be continuous funding that enables the communities to fully implement their strategies, not just portions of them. One of the issues identified was that the government works on a "fiscal cycle" which does not provide the community with enough time or reassurance that funding will be there during the next fiscal calendar.
Participants also felt that the long-term solutions need to be comprehensive in nature, so that they work in conjunction with other programs or policies to provide a coordinated strategy to address the needs of the community. Introducing one program to address one issue will not address the many challenges rural areas face. The solutions have to be introduced in a coordinated manner that works in conjunction with other programs and policies to really address the issues. In particular, the programs, policies and services need to incorporate a balance of social, economic, environmental and cultural considerations that are unique for each community.
3.5 Reaching common goals - working together in partnerships
Participants indicated that the restructuring and "downloading" of responsibility of governments at all levels has modified and complicated the dynamics among the different partners which has had a negative impact on rural citizens. Partnerships, "in the real sense" , are felt to be critical to the success of community development. These include all levels of government, private industry and community and grassroots organizations. Partnerships should be formed in a more coordinated and cooperative way that encourages sharing of other's successes and failures. Partnerships can be voluntary, however the roles and responsibilities should be defined at the beginning of the partnership so that all players know what is expected of each other. The workshop participants stipulated that in a time when resources are declining, the only route to follow is to work together with other partners to attain mutual goals.
4. Suggestions for Federal Government Actions
One of the key objectives of the National Rural Workshop was to identify concrete actions that rural citizens feel the federal government needs to undertake to address rural concerns. At the end of the workshop participants were asked to respond to the following question: "What one specific action should the federal government take which will help your community?" A number of the actions suggested by participants relate directly to the issues discussed in chapter 2 and the guiding principles summarized in chapter 3, while others are more general. The following paragraphs summarize these actions:
"The federal government, through/with the Prime Minister, must align/harmonize all its programs with a compelling, long-lasting vision which will be supported by all canadian in every community across this country. Please make this vision visible and real to everyone" |
Develop a long-term vision for rural Canada. A number of
participants felt that the federal government needs to develop
and communicate a long-term vision for rural Canada in order
to demonstrate its commitment to rural Canadians and to
articulate the direction of the government in addressing rural
issues and concerns. Participants also recommended that the
federal government establish long-term development projects
as part of this vision. In particular, there was mention of a
need for the government to establish long-term projects to support the rebuilding of communities affected
by the fisheries downturn. The desire was for the development of sound sustainable initiatives, not
"make-work"projects.
"One thing to remember. Remember me! I am a Canadian. I live in rural Canada. I have the same dreams, aspirations and responsibilities as any other Canadian. When you govern, be sensitive to rural Canadians as you are sensitive to other minorities. Let me pursue my dreams and aspirations in spite of my geographic location."
|
Apply a rural lens to program criteria and federal policy.
Participants strongly supported the notion that the federal
government examine not only future programs and policies
but also all existing programs and activities from a rural
perspective. In this context, it was suggested that the
availability of and access to federal programs by rural
citizens needs to be considered. It was also suggested
that there needs to be an examination of the cohesive and
combined impacts of federal and provincial policies on rural
Canada. It was suggested that a national rural committee could be established to undertake this
examination/assessment. This activity would also need to include a rationalization of any identified
competing mandates of federal departments in relation to rural communities.
"Our current [town] council has no experience in economic development and they require professional or government assistance to sit down and discuss this issue…..A facilitator from the federal government in partnership with the province and regional development corporation must form a team to meet with our community as soon as possible".
|
Provide facilitators/mentors to help communities shape their own solutions. Virtually every break-out group
identified a need for the government to provide support in the
form of a person within the community. The objective of this
initiative would be to provide information tools and expertise
to help communities. It was also felt that this physical
presence would enable greater sharing of information
between the federal government and rural citizens. This
person is envisioned as working with rural groups to inform
governments of the needs in rural communities. This person
would inform residents of government programs in order to identify how best to access and use what is
available. This initiative was also perceived as providing support to help develop the skills of local people,
including local leaders, economic development representatives and entrepreneurs.
Develop a program to facilitate community knowledge and information sharing. This action includes
two key concepts. First, it was suggested that rural communities need to establish an inventory of the
strengths and needs within their community. This activity would also include the identification of successes
and failures within the community. Second, it was suggested that there is a need to facilitate knowledge and
information sharing between communities. The actual delivery of this program would include a variety of
stakeholders from different levels of government and from the communities themselves.
"Implement a national campaign that promotes rural communities and the technologies that are there which enable you live and work in rural communities. E.g., 10 minutes to the cottage, 10 seconds to Tokyo."
|
Promote rural and remote aspects of Canada.
There was a strong desire for the federal government to develop
various programs and activities which would serve to promote
awareness of the contribution of rural Canada and the role of
rural Canada as a valued and dynamic part of the country.
Marketing programs and rural/urban exchange programs
for youth were suggested as actions that the federal
government should initiate. Rural information kiosks were identified as a potential means of communicating
this information to Canadians.
Support the development and maintenance of rural infrastructure. Participants indicated that action was
required to ensure that rural communities have the necessary infrastructure to support and sustain development.
Roads, wharfs, railways and communication systems were all identified as key components needing attention.
Participants felt that the federal government should take action to ensure that priorities for infrastructure
activities are identified to address the needs of rural communities.
Develop and implement tax incentives. Participants identified a variety of tax incentives that they felt were
required to address rural concerns. Four types of tax incentives were proposed as suggestions for pursuit by
the federal government:
• Tax relief for rural citizens, recognizing that different communities need different levels of relief.
• Tax incentives for businesses, to encourage the establishment of businesses in rural settings.
• Tax incentives for supporting community development, to encourage the private sector and members of
the general public to become engaged in and support community development initiatives.
• Tax relief for the cost of living for students living away from home, to support the further education of
rural youth.
Define a list of minimum standards that apply to rural citizens. A number of participants suggested that
the federal government should define basic levels of services and standards that should be available to rural
citizens in each community.
Provide funding. Participants suggested that the federal government provide funding in support of various
initiatives and activities. Some of these suggestions were based on a need for new funding, while others were
based on more of a change to how existing funding is managed. Specific suggestions are outlined below:
New funding or a reallocation of funding is required to:
• Support Housing. Participants suggested that funding should be provided to support the purchase of
homes in rural and remote areas as a means of encouraging people to remain in rural Canada. It was also
suggested that moving costs from urban to rural settings could be funded.
• Provide seed capital/venture capital to encourage the development of projects and businesses in small
towns (e.g., for farmers to start small processing plants, support entrepreneurs etc.). It was suggested that
this capital could be repayable.
• Fund pilot projects to try innovative solutions. Participants suggested that while there were a number of
good ideas to support community development, these were often limited by a lack of resources. It was
suggested that funding be available to support innovative pilot projects in communities.
The following suggestions were put forward to better align funding processes with the needs of rural
communities:
• Introduce block funding to communities. Let the communities manage an envelope of funding that would
be spent on local priorities.
• Create regionally appointed boards that would make decisions regarding regional development priorities
and funding.
Settle land claims and treaty rights for Aboriginals, First Nations, the Métis Nation and the Inuit. A
number of participants indicated that the on-going negotiations with the federal government to settle land
claims and treaty rights were impeding the ability of communities to focus on development.
Maintain a federal presence in rural communities. Participants suggested that the delivery of federal
programs and services should be coordinated through one "outlet" in small rural communities, with the
delivery point being determined locally. The post office was identified as a potential focal point for the
provision of government information.
Re-visit trade agreements. Some participants suggested that the trade agreements with the United States and
the European Union should be reviewed to assess their impact on rural Canadian citizens and communities.
Participants identified the following specific concerns as requiring action by the federal government:
• Preferential shelf space is being provided for imported products from the US when local seasonal
products are available. There is a need to make sure that local producers are supported.
• Grain and livestock prices are suffering. This in turn takes up additional government funding in the
form of subsidies. There is a need to ensure that Canadian producers receive fair prices for their
products.
• Fishing agreements: the focus of the fisheries program should be on the principle that in-shore
Canadian fisheries will be given prime access to fishing stocks. Concern was raised that European
fishers are contributing to the demise of the Canadian fishing industry.
"Concretely identify the development of rural regions as a priority by creating a creating of federal department with this as its only mission"
|
Create a federal rural department. The concept of a federal
rural department emerged from the discussions of a small number
of break-out groups. It was suggested that this department would
be dedicated to the rural sector but have delegates in other federal
departments.
Establish a national rural advisory committee. It was suggested that a national advisory committee be
established to contribute to the development of a comprehensive rural strategy and to provide on-going input
to the federal government in relation to rural affairs. Some participants envisioned this type of initiative as a
rural group in each province that would provide input to the political level of the federal government.
Increase the number of rural Members of Parliament. Some participants felt that as a result of the
population base in rural Canada being less than urban areas, there was a lack of voices at the political level to
raise the concerns of rural Canadians.
Establish additional programs for youth. Three types of actions were recommended in relation to youth.
First, it was suggested that the federal government focus on developing opportunities for rural youth to receive
a valuable education within their communities. Second, some type of community action program for youth
was suggested as a means of engaging young people in their communities and contributing to the identification
and implementation of solutions to the specific challenges confronting rural youth. Third, it was suggested
that efforts are required to establish programs such as apprenticeship programs that assist youth attain jobs.
Develop safe guidelines for waste disposal sites. Some participants were concerned that rural Canada was
suffering as a result of unsafe practices related to waste disposal. The impact of waste disposal practices on
rural communities must be considered and guidelines are needed to minimize the impact of these decisions on
rural Canadians and rural communities.
Develop more partnership funding programs. Some participants viewed these types of programs as a
positive way to share limited resources and to encourage buy-in, support and dedication from various
organizations and partners.
Communicate actions. Finally, a number of participants strongly supported follow-up and reporting by the
federal government with respect to specific actions and activities initiated in response to rural input.
Appendix A
Workshop Approach
1. Participants
Participant invitation
The National Rural Workshop was designed as a distinct phase within the overall Rural Dialogue activities. Three
different groups of participants were invited to take part in the workshop. These three groups were:
1. A sample of rural Canadians from across the country who had submitted a Dialogue workbook or participated
in a regional Dialogue workshop.
2. Representatives of federal departments and provincial ministries providing programs and services that have an
impact on rural Canadians and rural communities.
3. Delegates from organizations that represent rural Canadians and rural communities (stakeholders).
A total of 224 individuals participated in the workshop. The distribution of participants is illustrated in the
diagram, below.
An invitation letter and registration form were sent to participants if they had indicated an interest in the workshop
when they were initially contacted by telephone. Pre-workshop material, including the discussion paper entitled
"Rural Canadians Speak Out", (prepared for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, September 1998) was distributed
to participants in order to help prepare for the workshop. This discussion paper presented the findings and
information that had been heard to date throughout the Dialogue activities and formed the basis for further
discussion at the National Rural Workshop.
A variety of rural citizens representing different parts of the country, demographics and sectors of the economy
participated in the workshop. The following tables illustrate the diversity of rural participants.
The map on the following page identifies the communities represented at the National Rural Workshop.
National Rural Workshop - Rural Citizen Participants
| AGE |
NF |
PE |
NS |
NB |
PQ |
ON |
MB |
SK |
AB |
BC |
YT |
NT |
|
| Under
19 |
|
2 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19-24 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 25-34 |
1 |
|
2 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 35-54 |
5 |
4 |
8 |
4 |
5 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
6 |
5 |
6 |
3 |
|
| 55-64 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
|
4 |
|
1 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
|
| 65+ |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
| Female |
5 |
5 |
11 |
4 |
6 |
8 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
2 |
|
| Male |
5 |
6 |
7 |
4 |
7 |
9 |
13 |
5 |
9 |
9 |
6 |
2 |
|
| French |
|
3 |
2 |
4 |
13 |
3 |
5 |
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
| English |
10 |
8 |
16 |
4 |
|
14 |
12 |
10 |
12 |
14 |
9 |
4 |
|
| TOTAL* |
10 |
11 |
18 |
8 |
13 |
17 |
17 |
11 |
12 |
15 |
9 |
4 |
145 |
*Please note - this total represents the total number of rural participants from each province/territory. Specific information related to the
age of some participants is not available.
| SECTOR |
NF |
PE |
NS |
NB |
PQ |
ON |
MB |
SK |
AB |
BC |
YT |
NT |
Total |
| Agriculture |
|
|
1 |
|
2 |
2 |
|
3 |
5 |
1 |
|
|
14 |
| Forestry |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
2 |
| Fishing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
|
3 |
| Mining |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
| Tourism |
1 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
6 |
| Economic
Development |
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
22 |
| Service |
|
|
3 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
12 |
| Community
Development |
|
3 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
2 |
1 |
4 |
|
20 |
| Small
Business |
1 |
|
2 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
9 |
| Homemaker |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
2 |
| Volunteer |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
| Community
Services |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
9 |
| Aboriginal |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
2 |
|
1 |
1 |
|
|
5 |
| Education |
3 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
12 |
| Other |
|
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
|
|
3 |
1 |
2 |
14 |
Please note that some people identified with multiple categories and information was not available for some participants.
| 
