Canadian Rural Partnership
"Rural Canadians Speak Out"
Summary of Rural Dialogue Input
for the National Rural Workshop

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1 Rural Dialogue 1998 - Goals and Process

In the Speech from the Throne, September 1997, the Government of Canada made a 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."

Hearing the views of rural Canadians became the first step in ensuring that action taken by the federal government in response to this commitment is relevant to rural needs and concerns.

As part of the Canadian Rural Partnership initiative, from May to the end of July 1998, rural Canadians were invited to voice their concerns and to provide their input to the Government of Canada through a series of facilitated workshops and individual workbook submissions. The objectives of this phase of the Rural Dialogue were to:

• Develop a common understanding of the key challenges and priorities of rural Canadians;
• Understand what rural Canadians expect of the federal government in supporting the sustainable development of rural Canada; and,
• Identify better ways for the Government of Canada to respond to the needs of rural Canadians.

The preliminary findings from the Rural Dialogue are summarized in this paper which will serve as a resource document for the National Rural Workshop to be held October 2-4, 1998. As these preliminary findings are in summary format, subtle differences between regions are not necessarily reflected, though they have been captured in the technical report. Wherever possible, comments which may be unique to specific regions are provided in the text or noted in quotes from respondents. However, it is recognized that rural Canada is comprised of many diverse regions and communities, whose needs, challenges and opportunities differ significantly. For example, respondents living in northern communities have concerns that are intensified by the remoteness of their location, those living in single industry communities are more vulnerable to the fate of one sector, while those living adjacent to large urban centres face different challenges related directly to their urban proximity. More often than not, however, respondents shared many similarities of views with other rural areas across the country.

The summary paper essentially follows the questions asked in the workbook:

Section 2 - key strengths of the community

Section 3 - challenges faced by individuals, families and communities

Section 4 - ways to overcome the challenges and who should be involved

Section 5 - the role of the federal government

Section 6 - an overview of preliminary guiding principles for shaping rural policy

Section 7 - ways to continue the dialogue.

1.2 Profile of Participants

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. The majority of the workbooks were sent by regular mail, and others responded by e-mail or fax. An additional 855 individuals participated in 33 facilitated workshops organized by the Rural Secretariat and held across the country. In total, therefore, close to 7,000 people have participated in the Rural Dialogue to date. A regional summary of participation is shown in Annex 1 at the back of this document.

Responses have come from a cross-section of rural Canadians: men and women, Anglophones and Francophones, Aboriginal peoples, young and older Canadians, and persons with disabilities. They included: parents and care-givers, those engaged in volunteer work, those engaged in farming, fishing, logging and other resource sectors, entrepreneurs and service providers, representatives of local community development organizations and municipalities, employed and unemployed individuals. The close to 7,000 rural Canadians who participated have contributed a wealth of material which will be of significant practical value for government and other rural stakeholders in addressing the needs of rural and remote communities.

2. "WE ARE RURAL" (And Proud Of It!)

"What are the key strengths of your community as you look to the future?"

Rural Canadians articulated a clear attachment to their communities, although many are faced with significant economic and social challenges. They know where the "city" is, and have for the most part, chosen to remain rural. Some respondents noted the natural beauty that is theirs, and which would be lacking in an urban context.

Across the country, however, the main reasons for this attachment to rural Canada focussed on the inherent characteristics of the people themselves: family values; strong work ethic; the human resources represented by an educated/trained population (in some communities), wisdom of the aging and the energy/creativity of the youth; cultural diversity; and, an "independent", "self-reliant", "creative" or "entrepreneurial" spirit.

The second most frequently mentioned strength of rural life was closely linked - a strong sense of community. Theirs is a community which works together when faced with adversity, and expects to face a changing future in solidarity with each other. Generations have lived there before, and this accumulated wisdom and the associated heritage and cultural resources are anticipated to serve today's residents well into the future.

The inherent value of the natural resource base, was widely recognized by respondents. Particularly in Newfoundland, BC and the Yukon, people frequently mentioned natural resources as a strength of their community. Many noted that rural areas and communities are the primary sources of food, fuel and fibre that support all Canadians.

Other key community strengths, though less frequently mentioned, included: quality of life ("safe" communities, clean environment); in some communities, locally accessible facilities and services (schools, recreation areas, medical) ; agriculture; tourism or potential for tourism development; location (close proximity to markets, larger centres, transportation routes); a strong volunteer base; and, a diversified local economy led by small business.

While recognizing the above as strengths for many rural communities, other respondents noted that many of these same characteristics are very real challenges for their communities. For example, access to and distance from services and markets is a major challenge to many rural communities; a "close-knit" community can also be a "closed-in" community, preventing the emergence of new ideas. Natural resources can be viewed as a strength, but not when a community's livelihood is overdependent on a single industry. Location near urban centres is seen to be an asset for markets and services, but a challenge when "preservation of rural character" is threatened by urban pressures.

Some regional differences also emerged. For example, tourism and tourism potential was noted as a strength by a larger proportion of respondents from Newfoundland, PEI, Quebec, Manitoba and British Columbia than in other regions. Agriculture was particularly noted as a strength by a higher proportion of respondents from Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

3. THE CHALLENGES

3.1 "What are the biggest challenges that you, your family and your community face as you look to the future?"

In spite of clearly identified preferences for rural living, the challenges or issues that confront rural communities and their residents are numerous and pervasive. In the responses the key challenges were not easily differentiated by "individual", "family" and "community" - a challenge facing one component of the community is often reflective of a challenge shared by the whole community. Consequently, no differentiation is made in the summary below.

Rural Canadians declared that their communities are facing major economic and employment challenges. Many respondents indicated that the root of the difficulties stems back to the lack of permanent or well-paying jobs. No jobs, no money, no incentive for the people to stay, especially youth, and consequently, people and capital leave and go to more urban areas.

Respondents noted that lack of jobs is the result of many factors:

• In some cases it was seen to be due to employment shrinkage in the primary resource sectors of agriculture, fishing, forestry and to a lesser degree, mining. Fewer traditional jobs in primary resource sectors is evident, and alternative employment from economic diversification has not occurred quickly enough to fill the void.
• Corporate downsizing and restructuring frequently means that rural areas, with fewer services and higher transport costs, lose out to more urban areas which are better equipped to service businesses.
• Downsizing and increased centralization within all levels of government have also left some rural communities vulnerable to the relocation of an educated workforce.
• Underemployment becomes a very real concern for the educated or newly retrained who face the prospect of low paying jobs for which they are overqualified, or which have disappeared since training was initiated.

Some family units and communities reported that their very economic survival is at stake because of the current and, for the foreseeable future, the continuing lack of suitable employment options. Consequently, respondents noted that sustainable, long-term economic development prospects are difficult to envision for many rural communities. These uncertain prospects are illustrated by reference to "out-migration" and a "lack of opportunities", particularly for youth, many of whom leave for post-secondary education and never return. The departure of young people from rural communities was a major concern across rural Canada. However, in many northern, remote and Aboriginal communities, young people represent a high proportion of the population and it is more the lack of opportunities for young people that is the major concern.

Regionally, out-migration of residents from rural communities was seen as less of a challenge by respondents in British Columbia and Ontario than other regions. Conversely, out-migration was the most frequently mentioned challenge by respondents in Newfoundland and Saskatchewan. Youth unemployment was mentioned proportionally less by respondents from Alberta and British Columbia than any other region of the country.

Partly as a consequence of out-migration, another area of frequently mentioned concern is the difficulty of maintaining or keeping adequate services and infrastructure. The two most frequently mentioned services and associated facilities which are becoming inaccessible or too costly are medical care (distance to hospitals, too few rural doctors), and access to quality education (rural schools, as well as post-secondary school facilities).

Access to health care was noted proportionally less by rural Canadians in Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Quebec than by respondents in other regions. Concerns with both education cost and distance were mentioned in the highest proportion from respondents in the Yukon and Northwest Territories. The cost of education was also mentioned frequently by respondents from Newfoundland. While infrastructure development and maintenance was not ranked as high nationally as some other challenges, of those who reported it, half were from Ontario.

While not always explicitly mentioned, there is the overarching related concern of "distance and time to anywhere". Transportation costs in rural areas increase the costs of almost all goods and services. This again was especially significant in remote locations. In addition, many respondents noted the need to improve communications for rural areas and particularly to provide access to the Internet

.

With these and other challenges facing rural communities, some respondents acknowledged feelings of hopelessness that are difficult to overcome. While perhaps more prevalent in some remote communities, no rural areas seem untouched by social problems such as alcoholism and child/domestic abuse, and poor nutrition.

Despite the challenges, there was also a strong spirit of optimism among many rural Canadians and a willingness to look for solutions to help ensure the sustainability of their communities and way of life. Respondents overall expressed an anticipation that initiatives such as the Rural Dialogue could be a starting point for addressing some of the root causes of their problems.

3.2 "What is holding you and your community back from overcoming these challenges?"

Respondents from across the country focussed primarily on two broad areas of concern: the lack of and access to financial resources; and, government direction, priorities and program targeting.

Lack of and access to financial resources:

Respondents identified many reasons for lack of and access to money and why this is holding back both personal and community- related development. These include:

• lack of personal financial resources, related to the high cost of living, travel costs, and lack of employment and economic development
• reduced local access to finance due to bank branches closing loans policies of financial institutions not adapted to rural realities
• lack of seed money or venture capital for small business inability to attract new investment and small-scale industries
• "our savings are not invested in our community"
• small tax base means it is difficult for the community to recover costs on services and to maintain infrastructure.

In many cases rural Canadians made no clear distinction between levels of government - federal, provincial or local/municipal. Respondent concerns included:

• confusion amongst all levels of government regarding their specific responsibilities in light of decreased federal transfer payments and downloading of services to local government
• "red tape" in accessing and utilizing government programs
• lack of appreciation of specifically "rural" needs and concerns
• federal policies that support large-scale business and create a competitive disadvantage to small business
• incentives to globalize and create a single industry, instead of a diverse, local economy. Of all respondents who noted the lack of economic diversification as a problem, almost one-third were from British Columbia
• a tax system that does not reflect the higher costs of servicing, and in some ways living, in rural communities ("rural residents do not receive adequate services for the level of taxes paid")
• continued lack of incentive for long-term employment inherent in the Employment Insurance system
• consolidation in the agriculture industry was noted as a barrier by almost a quarter of the respondents in Alberta
• lack of continuity of government programs in support of transportation, sewer and water, and telecommunications infrastructure.

Forces internal to communities were also recognized as preventing some communities from moving forward. Examples include:

• poor community spirit fostered by a lack of self-esteem and lack of control over the community's destiny. This was noted by a proportionally higher number of respondents from Quebec than from other regions
• lack of effective community leadership to draw diverse community elements together
• a psychological paralysis that arises from economic or political uncertainty, accompanied by fear of change
• lack of skills/education to meet today's changing workforce requirements
• lack of personal time just to ensure personal and family economic survival, much less to participate in developing community-based alternatives for the future.

However, in terms of the frequency of mention, these forces appear to be secondary to concerns related to access to financial resources and the setting of government program direction.

4. OVERCOMING THE CHALLENGES

4.1 "What needs to be done?"

Rural Canadians most frequently identified "financial resources, incentives and access to capital" as a means to help them take advantage of development opportunities in rural communities. Comments about more progressive tax incentives were often mentioned - "develop a variable tax rate, a higher basic exemption for rural people based on population", or, "tax incentives for any investor putting capital into rural Saskatchewan", or, "make the Yukon a GST-free zone".

Another frequently mentioned way to overcome challenges related to some rural residents' experience of government as being "insensitive and unaware of rural issues". Some comments were particularly candid - "Federal people have no concept of rural life" - and others stressed the importance of governments' need to listen and respect the input offered by rural people.

Rural Canadians noted that governments (federal and provincial) can help by formulating policies and programs for economic development that take rural issues more directly into account. Better government policies and programs in support of natural resources and related commodities were mentioned most frequently by respondents from Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia.

More effective information and better communication about existing and new programs and services is seen as a need by respondents across Canada. A number of respondents noted that they only became aware of a particular program, or who to contact to discuss programs in greater detail, after submission deadlines had passed.

Rural Canadians are ready and want to take responsibility for "promoting" the strengths of their local communities and fostering an environment where new ideas are encouraged, resulting in more community-based action. Creative alternatives which lead to optimism, particularly among the youth, should be tested and developed. Individuals and groups recognized that leadership skills should be developed within a community so participation by all residents is encouraged.

Groups working cooperatively within, or among communities, were recognized to be a strength that requires nurturing. This involves the need to integrate and co-manage multiple rural initiatives, take more risks, and generate more pride within a community. Of those respondents who noted the need for better coexistence between farm and non-farm interests in local communities, half were from Ontario. It was noted that "rural areas should not be afraid of economic pluralism", if it keeps people in their communities; consequently, a number of different jobs throughout the year should be perceived as contributing to a sustainable community.

4.2 "What organizations, levels of government, or others should be involved in working to overcome these challenges?"

All levels of government are clearly seen as important and are being called upon by respondents to play a significant role in overcoming the challenges faced by rural Canadians. About one half of survey respondents called for both federal and provincial or territorial governments to be involved in this process, and almost 40 percent mentioned municipal or local governments. Regional (within a province) governments were mentioned less frequently.

The business community (eg. Chambers of Commerce, private companies), community organizations (eg. service clubs, churches, non-profit organizations) and specifically local community (economic) development associations/corporations were also identified as key players. Many respondents indicated that "all" should be involved without specifying who. Other specific mentions included school boards, agricultural commodity groups, financial institutions and health boards. These were all mentioned less frequently than governments, but are valued for their local knowledge.

4.3 "How should these entities be involved?"

Most frequently mentioned comments related to the desire to see "programs coordinated in a collaborative/partnering manner", "support for, and/or increase in, services", and, "obtain input from local/community-based individuals".

Respondents indicated frequently that governments should seek to improve inter-departmental and inter-sectoral coordination and communication to minimize duplication and confusion of roles, and to reduce the bureaucracy and perceived government inefficiency.

The call for increased support for services relates closely to the increasing cost of, and decreasing accessibility to, particular services including health care, education and public transportation due to government restructuring, downloading of responsibility, and reduced transfer payments.

Rural Canadians said that the government should partner with local communities and organizations to make use of local knowledge, decision-making and management capabilities. Participants emphasized that it is important for community-based groups to be involved in setting the agenda and providing input to government. Grassroots involvement by relevant stakeholders and rural citizens was identified as being important to ensure appropriate sustainable community and economic development.

Less frequently mentioned suggestions for involvement of all parties include a general call for better communication, to "manage and approve funding", more specifically, to "provide incentives for new/small businesses", to "disseminate information and provide technical support", and to provide "more effective management of existing programs".

5. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT - EXPECTATIONS OF RURAL CANADIANS

This Section summarizes respondent comments related to the specific roles that the federal government can play (Section 5.1). It also summarizes some suggestions to enhance the support for rural communities (Section 5.2).

5.1 Its Role: What It Should Do

"What role do you see specifically for the federal government in working with you to overcome these challenges?"

The most frequently mentioned role for the federal government was to "provide access to financial resources and incentives". This includes:

• tax equality for individuals (in relation to services provided in rural areas)
• tax incentives for businesses
• adjusting banking institution loans policy to better account for rural investment risk and opportunities
• provision of seed money or venture capital for small business
• direct project funding in support of local employment and economic development
• new initiatives such as "tax credits for volunteers".

The next most frequently mentioned role was to involve rural communities in decision making. Suggestions included:

• "to ensure that a local community representative is involved in program design and management"
• "to act directly/partner with the rural community." - gaining a sense of local control over financial resources is very important for rural communities.
• a management approach encouraging local and cooperative decision-making in program implementation is reported to be critical for realizing sustainable development.
• decisions about terminating programs and services in the rural sector are felt to be made in "central Canada" without consulting with, or understanding rural community needs

Respondents also expect the federal government to be a "facilitator", providing leadership and direction to ensure that access to resources and application of standards is equitable across the country.

Another frequently mentioned suggestion is for the federal government to demonstrate its political will and commitment to rural Canada, and wherever possible, "promote rural". Many rural communities feel "used" by urbanites and politicians, believing that these centres of power care only about what benefits them, particularly as election time approaches. In this respect, rural Canadians believe that the federal government can assist by helping urban Canada to understand and recognize the contribution that rural and remote areas make to the well-being of the country.

It is important to note that there were fewer direct references to "employment/job creation" as a role for the federal government than might have been anticipated based on answers to previous questions in this paper. However, this is consistent with a widely held view, noted particularly in Saskatchewan and Alberta, that the private sector is able to create long-term jobs, providing the government does its job in nurturing a policy environment that supports job creation. Such an environment would include for example: "new business support services", "policies and programs for economic development", "promoting economic diversification", and "reduce taxes".

Close to 10 percent of respondents mentioned "maintenance or return of rural post offices" as one specific role for the federal government. Many communities report that, for them, the post office is a significant link to the outside world; it is sorely missed when the service consolidates and moves to larger centres. Thus, as a federal government presence, they wonder about its role for the future, with some seeing it as a possible "information centre" for government programs. Concerns related to the diminishing presence or services of rural post offices were noted by proportionally higher numbers of respondents from New Brunswick and Quebec than from other regions.

Many respondents also expect the federal role to include some of the following:

• equitable provision of health care and education/training services. Compared to other regions, the need for skills training/education was mentioned by a higher proportion of Newfoundland and Ontario respondents
• information dissemination and technical support including information technology, particularly Internet
• maintenance of existing social programs such as Employment Insurance, the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security;
• minimizing the impacts of service downloading to provincial and municipal governments
• settling outstanding First Nations land claims. This was most frequently mentioned by respondents in the Yukon, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia.

Rural Canadians identified specific policies and programs which they would like the federal government to continue, to modify, or to consider new directions. Although too many to include in this summary report, what follows are some examples, based on direct quotes from respondents:

5.2 Support to Rural Communities - How to Go About It

"How can federal programs and services better support your community's needs (eg. are there changes needed in the design, delivery, awareness, or accessibility)?"

Rural Canadians are clear that the way in which federal programs and services are designed, delivered and made accessible to local communities, can and should be improved.

Support to rural communities, in many ways, revolves around the question of how to improve "access to information on government programs and services". There is a visibility and communications problem for the federal government, in that many respondents stated they never hear about specifically federal programs, or are unaware of the government's intentions for support to rural communities, short or long-term. They noted that the recent realities of government downsizing and centralization of services has shifted the burden of cost and gaining access to information to rural residents. This is a problem for some who are elderly, disabled or have limited access to means of transportation.

Reinforcing this theme of accessibility is the call by respondents for program criteria that are more flexible and for eligibility requirements that are more relevant to rural individuals and communities. Streamlining the requirements for accessing programs is necessary, including minimizing the regulation and tax paperwork which makes it difficult for rural businesses to participate. Minimizing "red tape" is called for as an objective in all government-funded programs.

Delivery of programs and services should become more effective. Some respondents suggested a "single window" concept where information on all government programs and services - federal or otherwise - be accessible in one location. They noted that people behind the counter must be rural and be able to interpret and apply the information to the specific context in question. Existing barriers preventing better communication between governments and departments within governments, were identified as requiring elimination. A number of respondents mentioned specifically their frustration with voice mail, and the removal of some 1-800 numbers which formerly offered grant or loan application information. Other 1-800 numbers result in the caller being put on-hold for lengthy intervals before a "real person" responds.

Rural and remote communities are very diverse, and local control of, and input to, the development process is considered by respondents to be essential for ensuring program relevance. One size does not fit all. The importance of practical matters such as timing of program delivery, recognizing the scheduling limitations around the rural seasonal lifecycle, is important, and goes a long way to building respect for program managers. There is an underlying principle noted by respondents which suggests that if local people are going to be given the authority to design and implement programs, they also need to be given the financial resources and training to carry through with their responsibilities.

Respondents asked the federal government to also be supportive in the following ways:

• sort out the responsibilities and renew funding for health care, education and public transportation services
• support skills training for jobs that are directly relevant to rural communities
• review existing laws and regulations to remove time and resource-consuming barriers to establishment of new projects and small business
• ensure that longer term planning, programming and coordinating is accomplished among governments and with communities in support of sustainable economic development and natural resource protection
• renew commitments to government programs in support of transportation and telecommunications infrastructure to ensure the flow of goods and services to and from rural communities.

Overall, explicitly or by inference, respondents continually reemphasized that the federal government must increase its listening skills to truly hear what rural communities are saying. Rural areas must be seen through the lens of the rural eye, not the urban. Otherwise, rural Canadians' sense of geographic, political and economic isolation only rings louder, when in fact they want to become active partners in developing their communities in support of the country as a whole.

6. GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND ELEMENTS FOR SHAPING RURAL POLICY

This section identifies some preliminary guiding principles which rural Canadians have identified or inferred in their responses to the Rural Dialogue. These will be further explored in discussion at the National Rural Workshop in October 1998.

• Recognize rural strengths and core values, and build upon them. Encourage the development of community and regional strategic plans to optimize the "comparative advantages" of specific communities, and to minimize undesirable "competition" among communities in the same region.

• One size does not fit all ... rural communities are unique in terms of their strengths and opportunities for development. Incorporate increased flexibility into program design, eligibility criteria, implementation and monitoring.

• Foster, promote and utilize community-based program design, planning, implementation and monitoring to ensure accessibility and to achieve local management of the development process.

• Continue to investigate the possibilities for multi-partnering initiatives involving the federal government. Through partnerships, collaboration and on-going dialogue among all Canadians, the country will be stronger.

• Promote rural human resource development. Examine ways to promote human resource development in rural areas to stem the out-flow of human capital.

• Promote the development of leadership skills and community capacity building to enable communities to work cooperatively for local community development.

• Support policies and programs which promote a job- creating environment and provide the tools for achieving meaningful employment. Steady jobs, and jobs appropriately linked to education and training backgrounds, help improve self-esteem and stabilize rural communities.

• Promote reinvestment of capital in rural communities. Examine financial institution lending policies, and partner with such institutions to encourage locally-based, capital reinvestment.

• Ensure tax structures better reflect rural realities and support rural economic diversification, northern living and transportation expenses.

• Integrate and coordinate the resources of multiple government departments in support of the rural sector.

• Ensure that any new policy/program would take into account economic, social and environmental impacts on rural areas.

• Promote rural Canada in urban centres to ensure better appreciation of the role that rural communities play.

Further discussion of these principles and elements could guide future policy and program planning in Canada.

7. CONTINUING THE DIALOGUE

"What is the best way for the federal government to continue to hear the views of rural people on an ongoing basis (e.g. meetings, surveys, polls, newsletters, advisory groups, the Internet, etc.)?"What is the best way for the federal government to continue to hear the views of rural people on an ongoing basis (e.g. meetings, surveys, polls, newsletters, advisory groups, the Internet, etc.)?"

Overall, respondents were positive about their participation in the Rural Dialogue survey questionnaire whether through a workshop or by a workbook response, and indicated a willingness to continue the dialogue. In fact, the most frequently mentioned suggestions for the federal government to continue to hear the views of rural people are meetings and surveys. Accompanying these suggested mechanisms, however, were frequent qualifying comments about the need for "tangible feedback". Talking without "action" leads to frustration and cynicism.

Ironically, meetings and surveys also made the top of list of the least preferred means of communication. Regarding meetings, comments such as, "there is never enough advance notice", "the ideas of the quiet are never heard", and "they speak to us condescendingly" give rise to this sense. "Town Hall-style" meetings were often cited as the best model for achieving local input and encouraging dialogue.

Other less frequently mentioned means of communication included polls, newsletters, advisory groups, Internet and community media. References to Internet were also heavily qualified by the realization that this cannot be the only means of communication with rural communities because of severely limited access in many places.

Where respondents indicated a clearly preferred means of communication, advisory groups were most frequently mentioned. Selection of members of such committees must not be politically appointed, but be representative of the socio-cultural, business, non- profit and other organizational interests of a community or region. It was also noted that membership should be long-term, if possible, to provide the continuity necessary for effective sustainable development planning and management.

Overall, a sense of "listen to us, and act!" infused many of the concluding comments of rural Canadians. Regardless of the communication method used, respondents want their comments to be taken seriously, for the betterment of their communities and for the country as a whole. The Rural Dialogue questionnaire was frequently noted as an important first step in that direction.

ANNEX 1
Rural Dialogue Response Profile by Region

1. The "Corvée d'idées", was a similar consultation process initiated by the province of Quebec in early 1998. Findings from the "Corvée d'idées" have been included in the Rural Dialogue analysis technical report.
   
2. Information from recent consultations in the NWT on similar themes was compiled as a separate study and has been incorporated as a single workbook response.
   
3. Two additional workshops were held in the Yukon in late July. The input is included with the "other workshops" that form part of the workbook responses.
   

[ Français | Contact Us | Help | Search | Canada Site ] [ Home | News Releases | Key Rural Initiatives | Site Map | Publications ]