[Description]Research and Statistics Division
Department of Justice Canada
Data collection by Ipsos Reid
Contract #: 19040-110024/001/CY
Contract Date: March
4, 2011
This survey included questions about public attitudes concerning criminal legal aid and about public confidence in the youth and adult criminal justice systems. The majority of questions addressed public support for criminal legal aid. The results of this part of the survey will support policy development in legal aid. The public confidence questions support annual tracking of Canadians’ confidence in the adult criminal and youth justice systems and have been used to meet accountability requirements.
Ipsos-Reid was contracted to collect the data. A total of 11 questions were included on a telephone omnibus survey. The telephone omnibus survey was administered in two waves to a nationwide sample of 1,508 Canadian adults. Interviews took place between March 8 and 10, 2011 (the first 1,000 people) and again between March 22 and 24, 2011 (the final 508 people). The sample obtained is a probability sample generated through random digit dialing, household selection, and the birthday method (identifying and interviewing the member of the household who had most recently celebrated their birthday). For a discussion about response rates, see Appendix A.
The table below indicates the unweighted geographical distribution of the sample, with the associated margins of error (calculated at a 95% confidence interval).
Weighting was applied to the sample to ensure that the final data reflects the adult population of Canada by region, age and gender according to the 2006 Census.
| Sample | Population 1 | Sample Size | Margin of Error (19 times out of 20) |
|---|---|---|---|
| British Columbia | 4,510,858 | 181 | ±7.3 |
| Alberta | 3,724,832 | 150 | ±8.0 |
| Manitoba/Saskatchewan | 2,274,383 | 98 | ±9.9 |
| Ontario | 13,167,894 | 600 | ±4.0 |
| Quebec | 7,886,108 | 375 | ±5.1 |
| Atlantic Provinces | 2,344,207 | 98 | ±9.9 |
| Territories | 110,675 | 6 | N/A |
| Total | 34,018,957 | 1,508 | ±2.2 % |
1 Statistics Canada, 2010, accessed March 23, 2011 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100628/t100628a2-eng.htm
The results presented below represent weighted data only.
| Demographics | N (%) |
|---|---|
| Gender | N = 1,508 |
| Men | 730 (48.4) |
| Women | 778 (51.6) |
| Age | N = 1,503 |
| 18-24 | 136 (9.0) |
| 25-34 | 285 (18.9) |
| 35-44 | 232 (15.5) |
| 45-54 | 361 (24.0) |
| 55 and older | 489 (32.5) |
| Employment Status | N = 1,494 |
| Working full-time | 641 (42.9) |
| Working part-time | 179 (12.0) |
| Self-employed | 132 (8.8) |
| Retired | 292 (19.6) |
| Other[1] | 250 (16.7) |
| Education Level | N = 1,500 |
| Grade School or Some high school | 206 (13.7) |
| Completed high school | 484 (32.3) |
| Some college/university | 195 (13.0) |
| Completed Community or Trade School/ Community College | 297 (19.8) |
| Completed university degree or Post-graduate degree | 318 (21.2) |
| Household income | N = 1,368 |
| Under $20,000 | 165 (12.1) |
| $20,000 to just under $40,000 | 269 (19.6) |
| $40,000 to just under $60,000 | 288 (21.1) |
| $60,000 to just under $80,000 | 191 (13.9) |
| $80,000 to just under $100,000 | 143 (10.5) |
| $100,000 and above | 312 (22.8) |
| Language of Interview | N = 1,508 |
| English | 1,172 (77.7) |
| French | 336 (22.3) |
| Marital Status | N = 1,499 |
| Single or never married | 338 (22.6) |
| Married / Common-law or living with a partner | 911 (60.7) |
| Separated or divorced/ Widowed | 250 (16.7) |
| Urban/ Rural Dwelling | N = 1,508 |
| Urban | 1,238 (82.1) |
| Rural | 270 (17.9) |
| Born in Canada | N = 1,503 |
| Yes | 1,297 (86.3) |
| No | 206 (13.7) |
Respondents were asked two questions related to public confidence in the criminal justice system and the results follow.
Respondents were asked to rate their confidence in the adult criminal justice system based on a 10 point scale with 1 representing low confidence and 10 representing high confidence. Levels of confidence were then regrouped so that low confidence included responses from 1-3, moderate confidence included responses from 4-7 and high confidence included responses from 8-10. See figure 1 below.
Figure 1. Public confidence levels in the adult criminal justice system 2011.
Respondents were asked to rate their confidence in the youth criminal justice system based on a 10 point scale with 1 representing low confidence and 10 representing high confidence. Levels of confidence were then regrouped so that low confidence included responses from 1-3, moderate confidence included responses from 4-7 and high confidence included responses from 8-10. See figure 2 below.
Figure 2. Public confidence levels in the youth criminal justice system 2011.
A total of 12 questions were asked about public support for legal aid and the results from these questions follow.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Very aware and 4 representing Not at all aware, respondents were asked to rate how aware they were of the legal aid program in their province. See figure 3 below.
Figure 3. The extent to which respondents were aware of the legal aid program in their province.
Respondents were asked about how they had learned about legal aid. The top 10 responses to this question were analyzed. See figure 4 below.
Note that a respondent may have learned about legal aid through more than one mean.
Figure 4. Distribution of the top ten means by which respondents learned about legal aid.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Very important and 4 representing Not at all important, respondents were asked to rate the importance of public spending in the areas of education, health care, police services and legal aid services for low income people. Due to small percentages, responses of Not very important and Not at all important were grouped together in the analysis. See figure 5 below.
Figure 5. The degree to which respondents believed public spending to be important in various areas.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Strongly agree and 4 representing Strongly disagree, respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agreed with the statement that the laws and Justice System in Canadian Society were essentially fair. See figure 6 below.
Figure 6. The extent to which respondents agreed that the laws and justice system in Canadian society are fair.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Strongly agree and 4 representing Strongly disagree, respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agreed with the statement “Knowing that legal assistance exists for low income people makes me feel more confident in the fairness of Canada's justice system”. See figure 7 below.
Figure 7. The extent to which respondents agreed that legal assistance leads to more confidence in the fairness of Canada’s justice system.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Very important and 4 representing Not at all important, respondents were asked to rate the importance of a person having a lawyer to defend them in court when he or she has been charged with a crime and have to appear in court. Due to small percentages, responses of Not very important and Not at all important were grouped together in the analysis. See figure 8 below.
Figure 8. The degree to which respondents believed legal representation is important.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Strongly agree and 4 representing Strongly disagree, respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agreed with the statement that a lawyer should be provided to a person who cannot afford one but is charged with a crime and has to appear before the courts. Due to small percentages, responses of Somewhat disagree and Strongly disagree were grouped together in the analysis. See figure 9 below.
Figure 9. The extent to which respondents agreed that a lawyer should be provided to people who cannot afford one.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Very important and 4 representing Not at all important, respondents were asked to rate the importance of legal aid programs in maintaining the fairness of the Canadian criminal justice system. Due to small percentages, responses of Not very important and Not at all important were grouped together in the analysis. See figure 10 below.
Figure 10. The degree to which respondents believed legal aid programming was important in maintaining fairness in the criminal justice system.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Strongly agree and 4 representing Strongly disagree, respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agreed with the statement “The government should spend the resources necessary to provide low income people with legal representation if they are charged with a crime”. See figure 11 below.
Figure 11. The extent to which respondents agreed that the government should spend the necessary resources to provide legal representation to people with low incomes.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Strongly agree and 4 representing Strongly disagree, respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agreed with the statement “Having a lawyer represent you is just part of what makes a fair trial fair”. Illustrated below are the results. Due to small percentages, responses of Somewhat disagree and Strongly disagree were grouped together in the analysis. See figure 12 below.
Figure 12. The extent to which respondents agreed that legal representation is just a part of what makes a fair trial fair.
Based on a 4 point scale with 1 representing Strongly Agree and 4 representing Strongly Disagree, respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agreed with the statement “Having a lawyer represent you is essential to having a fair trial”. Due to small percentages, responses of Somewhat disagree and Strongly disagree were grouped together in the analysis. See figure 13 below.
Figure 13. The extent to which respondents agreed that legal representation is essential to having a fair trial.
Respondents were asked whether they had ever been involved in the criminal justice system as a witness, as the victim of a crime, after being accused of a crime, as the member of a jury, and/or by working in the justice system. The results are illustrated below. See figure 14 below.
Thirty six percent of Canadians report that they have been involved in the criminal justice system. Note that respondents may have been involved in the criminal justice system in more than one way.
Figure 14. Distribution of the ways in which respondents have been involved in the criminal justice system.
A response rate or level must be calculated for probability and attempted census surveys, while a participation rate or level must be calculated for non-probability surveys. The calculation for response rate for telephone surveys must be done as recommended by the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA) which is an organization that provides standardized practices for all its member organizations to ensure consistent reporting industry-wide. The same formula used to calculate response rate for telephone surveys should be used to calculate the participation rate for telephone surveys.
Calculation of response / participation rates following data collection begins with Total Telephone Numbers Attempted less any Invalid numbers (i.e., not in service, fax/modem, business/non-residential). From this figure the following phone numbers are categorized:
Unresolved (U)
In-scope - non-responding (IS)
In-scope - Responding units (R)
Response Rate is then calculated as follows: R/(U+IS+R)
Refer to Table A for the telephone response rates.
| Total Numbers Attempted | 54,586 |
|---|---|
| Invalid (NIS, fax/modem, business/non-res.) | 24,281 |
| Unresolved (U) (Busy, no answer, answering machine) | 15,484 |
| In-scope - non-responding (IS) | 13,106 |
| Language problem | 470 |
| Illness, incapable, deaf | 127 |
| Household refusal | 9,746 |
| Respondent refusal | 374 |
| Qualified respondent break-off | 2,389 |
| In-scope - Responding units (R) | 1,717 |
| Over quota | 61 |
| No one 18+ | 148 |
| Completed interviews | 1,508 |
| Response Rate = R/(U+IS+R) | 6% |
[1] Other includes Unemployed, but looking for employment, Student, Not in the workforce/ A full-time homemaker, Social assistance, and Disability
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[