Tips: Ask yourself what all the parts of the report have in common, not what one group says.

Why the other options are wrong:

• farmers near Pickering were treated fairly by the government.: The farmers' feeling of being left in limbo is one part of the report. The whole report is about building the airport on farmland.
• high-speed rail could replace flights to Montreal.: High-speed rail is one alternative the speaker suggests near the close. It is not the topic of the whole report.
• Toronto Pearson should be closed and replaced.: Pearson is said to be running out of room. Nobody suggests closing it.

Correct Answer: Canada's airports were not keeping up with demand.

Why this is correct: Supporters of expansion argued that Canada's aviation infrastructure was falling behind. The Transport Canada data showed passenger numbers growing every year and recovering after the pandemic.

Tips: Notice which side of the debate presents the figures, and what claim they are placed next to.

Why the other options are wrong:

• jobs would move to the United States without a new airport.: Jobs moving to Buffalo and Detroit is the business groups' claim. It is not what the passenger figures were used to show.
• air travel had not recovered after the pandemic.: The data showed that passenger traffic was recovering after the pandemic.
• the airport would create about 15,000 direct jobs.: The 15,000 jobs figure is a separate estimate from the business groups, not the Transport Canada data.

Correct Answer: Ontario was losing farmland to cities very fast.

Why this is correct: The farm federation warned that Ontario was losing farmland at an alarming rate. It was about 175 acres per day to urban development.

Tips: Listen for the group named in the question, then note what that group says.

Why the other options are wrong:

• topsoil cannot be moved and used again elsewhere.: The report says topsoil can be moved and reused. The problem is that stockpiling can harm it.
• farmland, once paved over, is gone for good.: Farmland being gone permanently is what the food security experts at the University of Guelph said.
• the airport would add to Canada's carbon emissions.: Carbon emissions are the environmental groups' concern, not the farm federation's.

Correct Answer: left them unable to plan or invest in their land.

Why this is correct: Many farmers felt the decades-long land reserve had left them in limbo. They were unable to sell, develop, or fully invest in their properties.

Tips: Listen for the group named in the question, then note how that group describes its situation.

Why the other options are wrong:

• pushed them to sell their land to developers.: The farmers said they were unable to sell. Nobody pushed them to sell to developers.
• left much of their land unused for decades.: Land left fallow for decades is a point made by the business groups. The farmers' complaint is that they were stuck in limbo.
• cut them off from local food programmes.: Local food programmes are mentioned by the farm advocates. The farmers do not say they were cut off from them.

Correct Answer: critical, since other options were available.

Why this is correct: The speaker accepts that more capacity was needed. But the speaker calls destroying irreplaceable farmland shortsighted. That is a critical attitude.

Tips: Listen to the speaker's choice of words and decide whether they sound positive, negative or neutral.

Why the other options are wrong:

• regretful, since farmers had waited so long.: The farmers' long wait is part of the report. But the speaker's own comment is about the farmland, not about the farmers' wait.
• supportive, since the region needed more capacity.: The speaker does accept that the region needed more capacity. But the speaker calls building on the farmland shortsighted.
• worried, since new flights would add emissions.: Emissions are the environmental groups' concern. The speaker's comment is about losing farmland, not emissions.

Correct Answer: Hamilton should grow before the farmland is used.

Why this is correct: The speaker says policymakers should have exhausted every other option before using prime farmland. Smaller regional airports like Hamilton are one of those options.

Tips: Work out the speaker's own view, then apply it to the situation in the question.

Why the other options are wrong:

• the farmland could then hold a smaller airport.: The speaker wants other options used before any prime farmland. A smaller airport on the farmland would still destroy it.
• high-speed rail was no longer worth studying.: The speaker suggests both rail and smaller airports. Nothing suggests that one makes the other unnecessary.
• the Pickering land should be sold for new housing.: The speaker wants to keep the farmland for food. Selling it for housing goes against that.