Understanding Actions
Civic Compass sorts the ways you can help into five categories. Here's what each one means, how we decide an action is worth your time, and - for the questions people actually ask - why a single step is rarely as small as it feels.
The five categories
Actions that reach the people who write laws and set foreign policy - your MP, a minister, a Senate or House committee. You add your voice to the record they answer to.
Looks like: Emailing your MP · signing a House of Commons e-petition · a written submission to a committee.
Actions that use money as a signal. Where you spend, divest, or refuse to spend carries into boardrooms and markets in a way opinions don't.
Looks like: Redirecting your spending · a divestment request · choosing an ethical supplier.
Actions that connect you to other people. Change rarely happens alone, so this points you to the groups and organizers already doing the work - and where to plug in.
Looks like: Joining a local chapter · attending an event or rally · volunteering a skill.
Actions that shape what people know and talk about. Sharing verified information and raising visibility move an issue up the public agenda.
Looks like: Sharing a verified source · writing to local media · raising awareness in your circle.
Actions that deliver help directly. When people need aid now, this connects you to vetted organizations doing relief work on the ground.
Looks like: Donating to vetted relief · supporting refugee resettlement · funding frontline aid.
How we choose
Not every gesture belongs on the list. Before an action reaches you, we weigh it against five questions - the same ones you can use to judge any action yourself.
Every action must be completable by a Canadian resident. No petitions for the wrong country, no phone numbers that ring in another time zone, no dead ends.
We favour actions with a documented mechanism - a petition that triggers a government response, a group with a track record, a fund that reports where the money goes.
Every claim on an action traces to an original source, such as a government record, a court filing or established reporting. If we can't confirm it, it never ends up on a card.
Each action has a review date tied to what could change it: a court hearing, a bill's next stage, a new report. When the news moves, the action is updated or retired.
We note roughly what an action asks of you - two minutes, an afternoon, an ongoing commitment - so you can match your energy to the moment without guessing.
These tests check whether an action can work. They don't promise you'll agree with what it's working toward, or the type of impact it will have. Some actions will fit your points of view and comfort level better than others. Choose actions that you feel fit you best.
Frequently Asked Questions
The honest answers to the questions people ask most - starting with the one everybody wonders about a single email.
An MP can formally submit a written question to the government. The government normally has to answer within 45 days, on the record, and if it doesn’t, the question is automatically sent to a House committee. Here’s why that matters.
Say constituents in one riding keep emailing their MP about Canada’s military aid to Ukraine. Canada has pledged armoured vehicles, but outside government, nobody knows how many have actually arrived. Enough people raise it that the MP decides to act and files a written question: how many of the promised vehicles have been delivered, and when will the rest arrive?
It creates a public record. The government’s answer is documented, dated and on the record. It now exists as a citable fact.
It turns a vague grievance into a hard benchmark. Suppose the minister answers that 68% of the promised vehicles have been delivered. (That number is made up for this example.) Once it’s on paper, it becomes a yardstick. Next month, anyone can ask, “You said 68%. Where are we now?” A slippery topic becomes a measurable one.
It hands ammunition to the people whose job is applying pressure. Journalists can write “Government admits a third of pledged vehicles still undelivered.” Opposition MPs can raise it in Question Period. Advocacy groups like the Ukrainian Canadian Congress can campaign on the specific number.
It raises the political cost of doing nothing. A minister can ignore a vague complaint. It’s much harder to ignore a commitment made in writing to Parliament, because breaking it becomes a story: a broken promise, a Question Period attack. The answer itself becomes a leash.