Tips: Several groups suggest a plan. Decide which plan the speaker actually gives as their own.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Canada needs a national strategy that funds research and coordination, but leaves operations local.: This split of duties comes from the policy analysts. The speaker's own plan is about shared goals, data and stable funding.
• Canada needs a national strategy that shares aircraft and warnings, but allows local adaptation.: Pooled aircraft and warning systems are the supporters' ideas. Local adaptation comes from Dr. Patel's Australian example, not the speaker's plan.
• Canada needs a national strategy that funds controlled burns, but respects provincial land use.: Controlled burns are a supporters' example, and land-use planning comes from the analysts. The speaker never makes this split.

Correct Answer: The number of catastrophic fires went down.

Why this is correct: Dr. Patel says Australia reduced catastrophic fires after creating this framework. That result is what the supporters use her example to show.

Tips: Several results and figures are mentioned. Match each result to the source that reports it.

Why the other options are wrong:

• The total area burned each year went down.: The area burned comes from the Canadian figure of 18 million hectares. Dr. Patel's result is about catastrophic fires.
• Fires spreading across state borders went down.: Borders come up in the supporters' point that fires and smoke cross provinces. Dr. Patel does not report a drop in cross-border fires.
• Firefighting costs in later seasons went down.: Lower later costs come from the Statistics Canada data about prevention. That is a separate finding, not Dr. Patel's.

Correct Answer: Local crews know the terrain and escape routes better than Ottawa could.

Why this is correct: The neighbour says local crews already know the terrain and escape routes far better than any federal office in Ottawa could.

Tips: Listen for what the neighbour actually claims, not only who the neighbour is.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Local crews know how fires behave in each region better than Ottawa could.: Different fire behaviour in each region is the critics' point about Alberta and Vancouver Island. The neighbour talks about terrain and escape routes.
• Local crews can respond faster than Ottawa because decisions stay local.: Slower responses are the critics' general worry. The neighbour talks about what local crews know, not about speed.
• Local crews know the community better than any provincial office could.: The neighbour compares local crews with a federal office in Ottawa. A provincial office is never mentioned.

Correct Answer: Partly sharing it, yet sure the scale of the fires calls for a plan.

Why this is correct: The speaker says, to some extent, they share the concern about federal overreach. However, the scale of recent fires makes the speaker want a national strategy.

Tips: Compare how far the speaker agrees with the worry and what the speaker still wants afterwards.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Partly sharing it, yet sure the current patchwork is frankly outdated.: "Frankly, outdated" is how the supporters describe the patchwork. The speaker's own reason for a plan is the scale of recent fires.
• Largely sharing it, so wanting provinces to keep operational control.: The speaker shares the concern only to some extent. Leaving operational control to provinces is the analysts' plan, not the speaker's.
• Partly sharing it, yet sure that more emergency money would be enough.: Spending only on emergencies is what the analysts call too simplistic. The speaker wants shared goals and stable funding instead.

Correct Answer: Too simplistic, unless land use and climate adaptation are planned too.

Why this is correct: The analysts warn that throwing money at emergency response is too simplistic. They say land-use planning and climate adaptation must be addressed too.

Tips: Listen for what the analysts say is missing when money goes only to emergency response.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Too simplistic, unless provinces first invest more in prescribed burning.: The analysts cite data on prescribed burning and lower costs. But the things they say are missing are land-use planning and climate adaptation.
• Too simplistic, unless operational control stays with the provinces.: Operational control for provinces is part of the analysts' plan. It is not what they say emergency spending is missing.
• Too simplistic, unless early-warning systems are standardised nationally.: Standard early-warning systems are the supporters' idea. The analysts do not link them to emergency spending.

Correct Answer: Collecting fire data from every province into one shared system.

Why this is correct: The speaker wants the strategy to improve data sharing while respecting local expertise. A shared fire data system fits that plan.

Tips: Think about the speaker's own list of what the strategy should do, then test each task against it.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Planning the evacuation routes for towns in every province.: Escape routes are what local crews know best, as the Kelowna story shows. The speaker wants the plan to respect local expertise.
• Directing local fire crews in every province during each summer.: Directing local crews would push decisions upward, which critics fear. The speaker wants clear limits that respect local expertise.
• Paying for firefighting only in the years when fires are worst.: The speaker wants stable funding. Paying only in the worst years is the opposite of stable.