Tips: Ask yourself what question the whole report keeps coming back to.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Whether restaurants should follow Health Canada's advice on vegetables and grains.: Health Canada's advice is one reason supporters give. It is not the question the report is about.
• Whether small rural restaurants can afford to redesign their menus and train staff.: This is the owners' worry about the rule. It is one side of the debate, not the whole subject.
• Whether more Canadians are eating less meat for health or environmental reasons.: The survey about eating less meat is one piece of evidence. The report does not ask whether this is true.

Correct Answer: national advice to eat more vegetables, legumes and whole grains.

Why this is correct: Supporters say Health Canada has promoted eating more vegetables, legumes and whole grains. Plant-based options fit well with that national nutrition advice.

Tips: Keep each reason linked to the group that presents it.

Why the other options are wrong:

• a national survey showing most Canadians now eat less meat.: The survey found about 32% of Canadians are trying to eat less meat. That is not most Canadians.
• a national study showing plant meals cost restaurants less.: Lower costs come from one expert talking about the pandemic. Supporters do not link menus to a cost study.
• national advice to cut back on meat for environmental reasons.: Environmental reasons come from the survey, where people explain why they eat less meat. That is not national advice.

Correct Answer: To show that diners without a real meat-free choice can feel left out.

Why this is correct: The neighbour's only meat-free choice was plain fries, and she felt overlooked. The speaker uses this to show the inclusion point supporters make.

Tips: When the speaker tells a personal story, ask which argument it helps.

Why the other options are wrong:

• To show that small diners in rural areas cannot afford new dishes.: The diner in the story was small, but cost is the owners' worry. The story is about how the neighbour felt.
• To show that many diners now try to eat less meat for their health.: Eating less meat for health comes from the survey. The story is about feeling left out, not health.
• To show that simple dishes like fries cost restaurants very little.: Plain fries were the problem in the story, not a cheap solution. Low costs come from the expert, not this story.

Correct Answer: Understanding, and still set on keeping the rule.

Why this is correct: The speaker says not all restaurants work under the same conditions. But the speaker still wants the rule, with some flexibility.

Tips: Listen for how the speaker reacts to the other side, not only what the speaker wants.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Dismissive, since most diners now want less meat anyway.: The speaker is not dismissive. The speaker accepts that restaurants work under different conditions.
• Persuaded, and ready to leave the choice to the market.: Leaving it to the market is the owners' own idea. The speaker still thinks the rule should exist.
• Sympathetic, and ready to drop the rule for small places.: The speaker still wants every restaurant to offer one option. The answer to small places is a small step, not dropping the rule.

Correct Answer: Restaurants that added plant-based items in the pandemic spent less than expected.

Why this is correct: The expert says many restaurants added plant-based items during the pandemic. They found the costs were lower than expected, which answers the owners' cost worry.

Tips: Notice who each piece of evidence comes from and what it shows.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Restaurants that added plant-based items in the pandemic spent more than expected.: The expert says the costs were lower than expected, not higher.
• Restaurants in rural Ontario and the Prairies lack the budget for new menus.: This is the owners' worry about small rural restaurants. The expert does not say this.
• Restaurants can already make a bean chilli or stir-fry from what they keep.: The chilli and stir-fry are examples from people describing a simple rule. They are not the expert's finding.

Correct Answer: It should still offer one simple dish that suits its kitchen.

Why this is correct: The speaker wants every restaurant to offer at least one plant-based option, with flexibility. A small step like one simple dish avoids an unfair burden.

Tips: Think about what the speaker wants, then apply it to the new situation.

Why the other options are wrong:

• It should wait until its customers ask for plant-based food.: Waiting for customers is the owners' market argument. The speaker still wants the rule for every restaurant.
• It should add several plant-based dishes to show it cares.: The speaker asks for at least one option and calls it a small step. Several dishes would add the burden the speaker wants to avoid.
• It should train its staff before adding any plant-based dish.: Training staff is part of the owners' cost worry. The speaker does not set training as a first step.