National Justice Survey, 2021 - Final Report

Prepared for the Department of Justice Canada

Supplier:

Ekos Research Associates Inc.

Contract Number:

19040-200081/001/CY

Contract Value:

$147,462.92

Award Date:

December 18, 2020

Delivery Date:

July, 2021

Registration Number:

POR 089-20

For more information on this report, please contact the Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada at rsd.drs@justice.gc.ca

This public opinion research report presents the results of an online survey and qualitative interviews conducted by Ekos Research Associates Inc. on behalf of the Department of Justice Canada. The research study was conducted with 3,211 Canadians in February and March 2021.

Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre Sondage national sur la justice, 2021.

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from the Department of Justice Canada. For more information on this report, please contact the Department of Justice Canada at: rsd-drs@justice.gc.ca or at:

Research and Statistics Division

Department of Justice Canada

East Memorial Building

284 Wellington Street

Ottawa ON K1A 0H8

Catalogue Number:

J4-93/2021E-PDF

International Standard Book Number (ISBN):

978-0-660-39960-7

Related publications (registration number: POR 089-20):

Catalogue Number:

J4-93/2021F-PDF

ISBN:

978-0-660-39961-4

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, 2021

Table of Contents

• List of Tables
• List of Charts
• Executive Summary
  1. Background and Objectives
  2. Methodology
  3. Key Findings
  4. Note to Readers
  5. Contract Value
  6. Political Neutrality Certification
• Detailed Findings
  1. The Criminal Justice System
  2. The Family Justice System
  3. Alcohol-Impaired Driving
  4. Drug-Impaired Driving
  5. Police Traffic Stops
  6. The Sex Trade
  7. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
• Appendices
  1. Methodological Details
  2. Survey Questionnaire
  3. Interview Recruitment and Guide

List of Tables

• Table 1: Involvement in the Criminal Justice System (Multiple Mentions)
• Table 1b: Involvement in the Criminal Justice System (Allocated to One Group)
• Table 2: Involvement in the Family Justice System (Multiple Mentions)
• Table 2b: Involvement in the Family Justice System (Allocated to One Group)
• Table 3: Reasons for Exceptions
• Table 4: Source of Awareness of Goal 16
• Table 5: Demographic Table

List of Charts

• Chart 1: Awareness of Roles in the Criminal Justice System
• Chart 2: Pre-pandemic Confidence in the Criminal Justice System
• Chart 3: Confidence in the Criminal Justice System During the Pandemic
• Chart 4: Knowledge of the Family Justice System
• Chart 5: Pre-pandemic Confidence in the Family Justice System
• Chart 6: Confidence in the Family Justice System during the Pandemic
• Chart 7: Involvement with the Family Justice System
• Chart 8: Accessing the Family Justice System
• Chart 9: Source of Information about the Family Justice System
• Chart 10: Comfort using technology to access the Family Justice System
• Chart 11: Awareness of Mandatory Alcohol Screening
• Chart 12: Impact of MAS on Decision to Drink and Drive
• Chart 13: Concern for Dangers of Alcohol-Impaired Driving
• Chart 14: Concerns About Being Charged with Alcohol-Impaired Driving
• Chart 15: Types of Concerns about Alcohol-Impaired Driving
• Chart 16: Incidence of Driving Within 2 Hours of Drinking Alcohol
• Chart 17: Frequency of Driving after Consuming Alcohol
• Chart 18: Reason for Driving after Consuming Alcohol
• Chart 19: Awareness of Legislative Changes
• Chart 20: Concerns about Drug-Impaired Driving
• Chart 21: Concerns about Cannabis-Impaired Driving
• Chart 22: Incidence of Driving After Using Cannabis
• Chart 23: Frequency of Driving After Using Cannabis
• Chart 24: Reasons for Driving After Using Cannabis
• Chart 25: Incidence of Driving After Alcohol Combined with Cannabis
• Chart 26: Incidence of Police Stops in Last 5 Years
• Chart 27: Reason for Most Recent Stop
• Chart 28: Outcome of Most Recent Stop
• Chart 29: Legality of the Sex Trade
• Chart 30: Views on Legality of the Sex Trade
• Chart 31: Exceptions to Sex Trade Legality
• Chart 32: Awareness of UN Sustainable Development Goals
• Chart 33: Sustainable Development Goal 16
• Chart 34: Important Aspect of Sustainable Development Goal 16

1. Executive Summary

A. Background and Objectives

The Department of Justice supports the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Canada through administering federal law, developing policies, and providing legal support to government departments and agencies. To inform policy development, public engagement and communications, and to support its mandate, the Department periodically commissions the National Justice Survey, which seeks to understand Canadians’ perceptions, understanding, and priorities on justice-related issues.

The current research gathers Canadians’ views, attitudes and opinions on several distinct topics related to the justice system, including: the state of the criminal justice system, the family justice system, impaired driving, the sex trade, access to justice, and Sustainable Development Goal 16. The 2021 National Justice Survey included a large, national survey with Canadians and follow up interviews with a subset of respondents.

B. Methodology

Survey

The final survey sample included 3,211 Canadians, 18 years of age and older. The survey sample was randomly selected from the Probit panel, which is assembled using a random digit dial (RDD) process for sampling from a blended land-line cell-phone frame, so provides good coverage of Canadians with telephone access. Twenty-nine percent were collected by trained, bilingual interviewers, while the majority were collected through online self-administration. This randomly recruited probability sample carries with it a margin of error of ±1.7%. The margin of error for most sub-groups is between 2.6% and 7.0%.

In order to assess perceptions of the impact of Criminal Code changes on Indigenous and racialized groups^[1], an oversample of each of these groups was needed for the analysis. A total of 305 surveys were completed with Indigenous people, carrying a margin of error of 5.7% at a .95 confidence interval (i.e., 19 times out of 20). Where sample size is sufficient for analysis, data for First Nations, Inuit, and Métis are presented separately. In order to isolate results for Black Canadians, and those of East and Southeast Asian descent, efforts were made to include a minimum number of completed cases with members of each of these communities, respectively, carrying a margin of error of 6.2% to 8.2% at a .95 confidence interval (i.e., 19 times out of 20).

The time to complete the survey averaged 17 minutes online and 25 minutes by telephone, and data were collected between February 1 and March 5, 2021 by telephone, in both languages, following extensive testing online. The rate of participation for the survey overall was 21% (24% online and 14% by telephone, where more efforts were made to find respondents in key target groups). Details on the rate of participation can be found in Appendix A, and the questionnaire is provided in Appendix B.

Results were weighted to population proportions for region, age, gender, education, Indigenous identity, and ethnocultural group. Chi-square tests were used to compare subgroups or a population of interest to the remaining sample (e.g., Ontario vs. the rest of Canada; 65 years old and over vs. the rest of Canada; women vs. men). Because of the random nature of the sampling, along with weighting along key dimensions, the results can be reasonably extrapolated to the broader population of Canadians 18 years of age or older. Characteristics of the sample can be found in Appendix A.

Interviews

Survey respondents who indicated they had experienced a traffic stop by police since December 2018 were asked about willingness to participate in a follow-up interview, conducted by phone, to further discuss the nature of this stop and their experiences at the time. Interview participants were selected based on survey responses, with a focus on the four target segments from the survey sample (Black, South/West Asian, East/Southeast Asian or Indigenous). All current or previous employees of the Government of Canada, or anyone who had participated in an interview or focus groups for Government of Canada public opinion research in the previous six months were excluded from participating.

A total of 27 interviews were conducted between March 9 and 24, 2021, each lasting 20 to 30 minutes, including six conducted in French. Specifically, interviews were conducted with seven participants self-identifying as Black, seven as Indigenous, five as White; four as East/Southeast Asian and four as South/West Asian. Participants were asked to describe their experiences with police traffic stops and general impressions of trends in this area. The recruitment script and interview guide can be found in Appendix C. Interview participants were provided with a $50 honorarium for their time.

Results of the interviews are described in shaded text, along with anonymized, illustrative quotes. It should be noted that the results of the interviews are qualitative in nature. These results should not be used to estimate numeric proportions or number of individuals in the population who hold a particular opinion as they are not generalizable. That is, results should not be assumed to be representative of the experiences of the wider population of Canada. These data are included to illustrate some experiences and perspectives. For this reason, terms such as "a few," "some" and "most" are used to broadly indicate views, rather than using specific percentages.

C. Key Findings

Awareness of Roles and Confidence in the Criminal Justice System

Most Canadians (86%) were at least moderately aware of the role of the police in the criminal justice system, while 77% were at least moderately aware of the role of the courts. Awareness of the role of corrections was relatively low, with fewer Canadians saying they were aware (26%) of the role of corrections than not aware (33%).

Before the pandemic, about one-quarter of Canadians were confident that the criminal justice system was accessible (27%) or fair (23%) to all people. Canadians’ confidence levels were lower about one year following the declaration of a pandemic in March 2020, with fewer Canadians reporting confidence that the criminal justice system was accessible (22%) or fair (20%) to all people.

Family Justice System

Few Canadians (19%) were knowledgeable of the family justice system. Prior to the pandemic, 24% of Canadians were confident that the family justice system was accessible to all people. As with perceptions of the criminal justice system, confidence in accessibility since the start of the pandemic was lower, with 18% of Canadians confident that the family justice system was accessible to all people.

The family justice system was accessed by 7% of Canadians in the past two years. Nearly one-third (31%) of respondents thought it was easy to access the system prior to the pandemic. At the time of the survey, nearly one year into the pandemic, only 16% said it was easy to access the system.

Alcohol-Impaired Driving

Following a brief description, 30% of Canadians said they were aware that mandatory alcohol screening (MAS) was introduced in December of 2018. The minority, 39%, said that MAS has had a moderate to major impact on their decision whether or not to drive after consuming alcohol.

The majority of Canadians (62%) were concerned about the dangers on the road from individuals driving while impaired by alcohol. In the past two years, 26% responded that they had driven within two hours of consuming alcohol; among them, 63% indicated that it was because they did not believe that they were impaired. About one-quarter (24%) of respondents said they were at least moderately concerned about being charged personally with an alcohol-impaired driving offence. Most often, this was because of the concern of killing or injuring someone else in an accident, being killed or injured, or having a permanent criminal record.

Drug Impaired Driving

About one-quarter of Canadians were aware of the introduction of approved roadside drug screening equipment (25%), or of prohibited limits of THC in the blood within two hours of driving (24%). Although 57% of Canadians were concerned about the dangers on the road from individuals driving while impaired by drugs, nine per cent fewer were concerned about the dangers of others driving while impaired by cannabis specifically. In the previous two years, 8% of Canadians had driven within two hours of using cannabis at least once. Half said they did not feel impaired. Among those who had driven after using cannabis, 17% had driven within two hours of consuming both cannabis and alcohol.

Police Traffic Stops

Twenty-two per cent of Canadians had been stopped by the police at least once in the past two years; 59% were stopped for a minor driving infraction while the other 41% were stopped at a roadside checkpoint. Forty per cent of those stopped were given a ticket.

Most of the qualitative interview participants were stopped by police for traffic violations, and some were aware of why they were being stopped even before speaking to police. Most interview participants indicated that the traffic stop was fairly "routine" and did not perceive they were being targeted in any way by being stopped by the police. For those few who were pulled over at a roadside check stop, they perceived that all vehicles were being pulled over in an equal manner and did not feel targeted for any reason. Overall, there were few instances of perceived profiling on traffic stops since December 2018, either through experience or discussions with friends or family. However, a few Indigenous participants said that they were pulled over for no apparent infraction, a few South/West Asian participants perceived differential treatment, and many Black participants said they were conscious of a personal risk during traffic stops. All participants had observed news coverage of police interactions, in terms of aggressive behaviour of police officers towards racialized groups. This was particularly notable in news coverage of events taking place in the United States, according to participants, although participants perceived that this occurs in Canada with Indigenous peoples and Black Canadians.

Sex Trade

Half of Canadians correctly identified that profiting off of the sale of someone’s sexual services was illegal. The minority (41%) knew it was illegal to purchase sexual services. About one-quarter knew it was illegal to advertise sexual services (25%). About one-quarter (23%) of respondents incorrectly identified that it was illegal to sell sexual services (23%).

The majority, 58%, agreed that receiving financial or material benefit from the sale of sexual services of others should be illegal. Fewer Canadians agreed that purchasing sexual services (39%) or selling sexual services (34%) should be illegal.

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

The majority of respondents (60%) who participated in the survey were not aware of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals that aim to address today's social, economic and environmental challenges, even after reading a description. Less than one-quarter (21%) had heard specifically of the Sustainable Development Goal 16 to promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies. Half said that all aspects of Goal 16 are equally important, although 18% saw access for all as most important. Effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels were seen as most important among 12%, while 8% pointed to promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies as most important.

D. Note to Readers

Detailed findings are presented in the sections that follow. Overall results are presented in the main portion of the narrative and are typically supported by graphic or tabular presentation of results. Bulleted text is also used to point out any statistically significant and meaningful differences between sub-groups of respondents. If differences are not noted in the report, it can be assumed that they are either not statistically significant^[2] in their variation from the overall result or that the difference was deemed to be too small to be noteworthy (e.g., less than 5% above or below the overall average) .

Results for the proportion of respondents in the sample who either said "don’t know" or did not provide a response may not be indicated in the graphic representation of the results in all cases, particularly where they are not sizable (e.g., 10% or less). These responses were, however, included in the calculations. Results may not total to 100% for this reason, and also due to rounding.

E. Contract Value

The contract value for the POR project is $147,462.92 (including HST).

Supplier Name:

Ekos Research Associates

PWGSC Contract Number:

19040-200081/001/CY

Contract Award Date:

December 18, 2020

To obtain more information on this study, please e-mail: rsd.drs@justice.gc.ca

F. Political Neutrality Certification

I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Ekos Research Associates Inc. that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.

Signed by Susan Galley (Vice President)

2. Detailed Findings

A. The Criminal Justice System

Awareness of the Criminal Justice System

Over eight in ten (86%) Canadians were at least moderately aware of the role of the police in the criminal justice system, with 46% more strongly aware. Over three in four (77%) were at least moderately aware of the role of the courts. Awareness of the role of corrections was relatively low, with more Canadians saying they were not aware (33%) of the role of corrections compared with those who were aware (26%).

Q1a-c. How would you describe your level of awareness when it comes to the role of the following areas in the Criminal Justice System?

Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not at all aware" and 5 being "very aware"

Base: n=3211

• Men were more likely than women to say they were aware of the role of police (51% of men, 41% of women), courts (39% of men, 32% of women), and corrections (30% of men, 23% of women).
• Younger Canadians, aged 18-34, were less likely to say they were aware in all three areas of the criminal justice system (18% not aware of role of police, 30% not aware of courts, and 40% not aware of corrections).
• Awareness increased with education. Nearly half (49%) of university or college educated respondents said they were aware of the role of the police, compared with 41% of those with high school or less education.
• Awareness also increased with income. Over half (51%) of those with a household income of $120,000 or higher said they were aware of the role of the police, compared with 44% of those with an income of less than $40,000.
• Those identifying as Métis were more likely to say they were aware of the role of the police (56%) compared with non-Indigenous respondents (45%). The same pattern held with respect to awareness of the role of courts (48% versus, 35%, respectively). Métis respondents were also more likely than non-Indigenous respondents to indicate awareness of the role of corrections (37% versus 25%, respectively).
• Both Black and East/Southeast Asian respondents were more likely than White respondents to say they were not aware of the role of police (20% and 22%, respectively, compared with 10% unaware among White respondents). This was also the case with regard to the courts (28% and 26% respectively compared with 19% unaware among White respondents). South/West Asian and East/Southeast Asian respondents were more likely than White respondents to say that they were not aware of the role of corrections (38% and 43% ,respectively, compared with 30% among White respondents).

Involvement in the Criminal Justice System

Over half of Canadians indicated they had not been involved in the criminal justice system. Among those who had, 20% mentioned they knew someone who was a victim or accused. About one in ten were a family member of an accused or convicted person (11%), testified as a witness in criminal court (11%), were a family member of a victim or survivor (10%), or were the victim or survivor of a non-violent crime (10%). Fewer identified that they had been charged or convicted of a crime (9%), worked in the criminal justice system or related field (7%), were the victim or survivor of a violent crime (6%), were a jury member in a criminal trial (5%), or volunteered in criminal justice or related fields (3%).

For the analysis in this report, the 46% of respondents indicating some involvement in the criminal justice system were allocated to one of five groups. Since multiple responses were possible (i.e., involvement in more than one capacity), respondents were allocated hierarchically into only one category in order to obtain mutually exclusive groups. The hierarchy used is as follows, forming a cascade whereby members of earlier groups on the list could no longer be assigned to subsequent groups in the list:

• If working or volunteering in criminal justice or a related area assigned as Group 1 - Working/Volunteer (even if also involved in other capacities) (10%)
• If not already assigned and a victim/survivor of a crime assigned to Group 2 – Victim/Survivor (11%)
• If not already assigned and arrested or charged with crime assigned to Group 3 Charged/Convicted of a crime (6%)
• If not already assigned and know someone who has been victim/survivor/charged accused of a crime assigned as Group 4 - Know Someone (13%)
• If not already assigned and have acted as jury/witness assigned as Group 5 Witness/Jury (4%)

Following is the distribution in the re-allocated, mutually exclusive groupings.

Pre-Pandemic Confidence in the Criminal Justice System

Looking back to before the pandemic, about one in four Canadians were confident that the criminal justice system was accessible to all people (27%) or fair to all people (23%). Notably, 43% said they were not confident that the criminal justice system was fair to all people.

Q2a-b. Thinking back to before the pandemic was declared in the middle of March 2020, how confident were you that the Canadian criminal justice system was...?

Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not confident at all" and 5 being "very confident"

Base: n=3211

• Men were more likely than women to believe that the criminal justice system was accessible (29% of men, 25% of women) and fair (29% of men, 18% of women) to all people.
• Compared with the rest of Canada, those in Quebec (27%) were more confident that the system was fair to all people. Those in the Prairies (35%) were most likely than respondents in the rest of Canada to say the system was accessible.
• Those with a high household income ($120,000 or higher) were more likely than those with lower income to say that the system was accessible (32%) and fair (28%).
• Those with no previous involvement in the criminal justice system (28%) were more likely than those involved in the criminal justice system to say they were confident the system is fair to all people.
• Those who identified as Black (28%), East/Southeast Asian (30%) or South/West Asian (32%), were more likely than those who identified as White (21%) to say they were confident the criminal justicw system was fair to all people.
• Métis respondents were more confident the system is fair to all people (30%) compared with non-Indigenous respondents (23%). The same pattern held for confidence the system is accessible to all (36% vs 27% among non-Indigenous respondents). First Nations respondents were more likely to say they were not confident that the system was accessible before the pandemic (44% said they were not compared with 35% among non-Indigenous respondents).

Confidence in the Criminal Justice System during the Pandemic

The National Justice Survey was conducted roughly one year into the pandemic. At the time of the survey, about one in five Canadians were confident that the criminal justice system was accessible (22%) or fair (20%). Nearly half (47%) of Canadians responded that they were not confident the criminal justice system was fair to all people. This suggests a slight decrease in confidence relative to perceptions of confidence pre-pandemic.

Q3a-b. Today, how confident are you that the Canadian criminal justice system is...?

Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not confident at all" and 5 being "very confident"

Base: n=3211

• Demographic differences mostly mirrored the results for pre-pandemic confidence.
• Men were more likely than women to believe that the criminal justice system was accessible (25% of men, 20% of women) and fair (26% of men, 15% of women) to all people.
• Compared with the rest of Canada, those in Quebec were more confident the system was accessible (28%) and fair (23%) to all people. Those in the Prairies were equally as likely as Quebec likely to say the system was accessible (28%).
• Those with a high household income ($120,000 or higher) (26%) were more likely than those in lower income (19% to 20%) categories to be confident that the system was fair.
• Those who have worked or volunteered in the system (26%), were also more likely to say the system is fair.
• Those who identified as Black (40%), East/Southeast Asian (3029%) or South/West Asian (295%) or were more likely than those who identified as White (198%) to say they were confident the system was fair to all people. Those who identified as Black (30%) were more likely than White (23%) respondents to say the system was accessible to all during the pandemic.
• First Nations (57%) respondents arewere most more likely than non-Indigenous people (46%) to say they arewere not confident the system was fair to all people during the pandemic (57% vs 46% among non-Indigenous people). Métis (32%) respondents were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents (22%) to say the system was accessible to all during the pandemic (32% vs 22% of non-Indigenous respondents).

B. The Family Justice System

Knowledge of the Family Justice System

Over half (51%) of Canadians rated their knowledge of the family justice system as low. Another 29% said they were moderately knowledgeable, while 19% were knowledgeable.

Q4. How would you rate your knowledge of the family justice system?

Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not at all knowledgeable" and 5 being "very knowledgeable"

Base: n=3211

• Men were more likely to say they were not knowledgeable (54% not knowledgeable) of the family justice system compared with women (48% not knowledgeable).
• Younger Canadians (aged 18-34) were more likely to indicate they were not knowledgeable (59%), particularly compared with those 35-44 (46%) or 45-54 (45%).
• Those with previous involvement in the family justice system especially those who have experienced or are experiencing separation or divorce (39%) were most likely to say they were knowledgeable; those not involved in the family justice system were least likely (10%).
• Those identifying as East/Southeast Asian were more likely to say they were not knowledgeable about the family justice system (61%) compared with White respondents (52%).
• Respondents who identified as Métis (27%) or First Nations (26%) were more likely than non-Indigenous people (18%) to indicate they were knowledgeable of the family justice system.

Pre-Pandemic confidence in the Family Justice System

Before the pandemic, about one-quarter (24%) of Canadians were confident that the family justice system was accessible to all people, and 15% were confident that the family justice system was fair to all people.

Q5a-b. Thinking back to before the pandemic was declared in the middle of March 2020, how confident were you that the family justice system in Canada was...?

Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not confident at all" and 5 being "very confident"

Base: n=3211

• Men (26%) were more likely than women (22%) to say the system was accessible to all people.
• Those in Quebec were more confident that the system was accessible (31%), and fair (19%), compared with the rest of Canada. Those in Alberta were least confident the family justice system was accessible (39% not confident) or fair (54% not confident) to all people.
• Canadians who indicated they had been involved in the family justice system because they had experienced or were experiencing separation or divorce, were more likely to say they were confident the system was fair to all people (19%) compared with those who were involved as family or friends (12%), provided support (11%), or were not involved (14%).
• First Nations respondents were less confident (45% not confident) than non-Indigenous respondents (31% not confident) that the system was accessible to all people. The same pattern held in terms of fairness to all, with 54% of First Nations respondents stating they were not confident compared with 42% of non-Indigenous respondents).
• Canadians who identified as South/West Asian (32%) were more likely to believe the system was accessible to all people compared with those who identified as White (23%). Likewise, those who identified as South/West Asian (25%) or Black (26%) were more likely to believe the system was fair to all people compared with those who identified as White (15%).
• Canadians who identified as Black (44%) or South/West Asian (31%) were more likely to believe the system was accessible to all people compared with those who identified as White (24%). Likewise, those who identified as South/West Asian (23%) or Black (22%) were more likely to believe the system was fair to all people compared with those who identified as White (14%).

Confidence in the Family Justice System during the Pandemic

Confidence in the accessibility of the family justice system was lower at the time of the survey than it was prior to the pandemic. At the time of the survey, 18% of Canadians were confident that the family justice system was accessible to all people. Only 14% were confident that the family justice system was fair to all people; 45% were not confident.

Q6a-b. Today, how confident are you that the family justice system in Canada is...?

Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not confident at all" and 5 being "very confident"

Base: n=3211

• Similar to perceptions of the family justice system before the pandemic, a larger proportion of men (21%) than women (17%) felt the system was accessible to all people at the time of the survey.
• Regionally, those in Alberta were more likely to say they were not confident the family justice system was accessible (54% not confident) or fair (56% not confident) to all people. Those in Quebec were most confident that the system was accessible (26%) or fair (21%).
• Canadians who indicated they had been involved in the family justice system as having experienced or experiencing separation or divorce were more likely to say they were not confident the system was fair to all people (51% not confident) compared with those who were not involved (40% not confident).
• First Nations respondents (61%) were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents (44%) to say they were not confident the family justice system was fair to all people. Similarly, First Nations people (52%) were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents (39%) to say the system was not accessible. Métis respondents, however, were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents to rate the system as accessible (27% versus 18%).
• South/West Asian respondents were more likely to believe the system was accessible (25%), and fair (28%) to all people compared with White respondents (18% accessible, 14% fair). Black respondents were also more likely than those who identified as White to say the system was accessible (29%), or fair (26%).

Involvement with the Family Justice System

Over half of Canadians had never been involved in the family justice system. One in five had been involved as a friend (23%) or family member (21%) of someone who had experienced or was experiencing separation or divorce or had provided personal support to someone who had gone through a separation or divorce (21%). Another 14% had been involved as a person who experienced or is experiencing separation or divorce with children involved. Fewer (6%) had experienced a separation or divorce without children involved.

For the analysis in this report, the 47% of respondents indicating some involvement in the family justice system were allocated to one of four groups. Since multiple responses were possible (i.e., involvement in more than one capacity), respondents were allocated hierarchically into only one category in order to obtain mutually exclusive groups. The hierarchy used is as follows, forming a cascade whereby members of earlier groups on the list could no longer be assigned to subsequent groups in the list:

• If a person with experience with separation of divorce with or without children under 18 assigned as Group 1 – Experienced (even if also involved in other capacities) (19%)
• If not already assigned and a family member or friend assigned to Group 2 – Family/Friend (25%)
• If not already assigned and is working or volunteering in the family justice system or related field assigned to Group 3 – Work/Volunteer (1%)
• If not already assigned and have provided personal support to someone experiencing the system assigned as Group 4 – Supported (3%)

Following is the distribution in the re-allocated, mutually exclusive groupings.

Few Canadians (7%) had been involved with the family justice system in Canada within the past two years.

Q7. Have you been involved with the family justice system in Canada within the past two years?

Base: n=3211

• Younger Canadians (aged 18-44) (11%) were more likely than those 55-64 (5%) or 65 and over (2%) to have been involved in the family justice system in the past two years.

Accessing the Family Justice System

Among those who were involved in the family justice system in the past two years, 31% indicated that the system was easy to access before the pandemic while 16% said the family justice system was easy to access at the time of the survey.

Q7b. Before the pandemic was declared in the middle of March 2020, how would you describe your ability to access the family justice system in Canada?

Base: n=208

Q7c. Today, how would you describe your ability to access the family justice system in Canada?

Base: n=208

• Canadians aged 35-44 (28%) were more likely than any other age group (for example, 6% of those 18-34)to say the system was easy to access at the time of the survey.
• Compared with the rest of Canada, those in Ontario (50%) were more likely to say the system was easy to access before the pandemic.
• Those with high school education (46%) were more likely than those with a university (29%) or college (12%) education to say the system was easy to access before the pandemic. At the time of the survey, those with a university education were more likely to say the system was difficult to access (46%).
• Those with a household income of $120,000 or higher (51%) were more likely to feel the system was easy to access before the pandemic.
• The system was described as easy to access before the pandemic more so for those living in urban communities (37%).

Source of Information about the Family Justice System

Government websites or publications were the main sources of information about the Canadian family justice system for 28% of Canadians. Fewer cited a legal professional (16%), family or friends (15%) or popular culture (such as television, movies, and magazines) (14%) as their main source of information. Social media was a main source for only 8% and other professionals were a source for only 6%.

Q8. What is your main source of information, that is, the source you would be most likely to use and access most often, about the Canadian family justice system?

Base: n=3211

• Younger Canadians, more likely to be involved in the family justice system, tended to search directly for sources. Those aged 18-34 were more likely to cite government websites or publications (34%) while those 65 and over were least likely (17%). Older Canadians, age 65 and over, were more likely than those in other age groups to know about the Canadian family justice system indirectly from popular culture (24%); those aged 18-34 were least likely (9%).
• Those with a university education (32%) were more likely than those with lower education (25%) to say government websites or publications were a main source.
• Canadians with higher household income ($120,000 or higher) (36%) were more likely cite government websites than those with a high school education (23%).
• Similarly, those in urban settings (30%) were more likely than rural residents (23%) to say government sources. Rural residents were more likely to say a legal professional (20%) was their main source of information when compared with urban residents (16%).
• First Nations respondents (14%) were more likely to indicate social media as a main source compared with non-Indigenous respondents (7%).
• Those identifying as East/Southeast Asian were more likely to point to social media (14%) compared with those who are White (5%). This was also the case among those identifying as South/West Asian, although to a lesser degree (12%).

Use of Technology in the Family Justice System

The majority of Canadians (59%) said they would feel comfortable looking for information and reading about the family justice system online. A similar proportion (54%) indicated they would feel comfortable completing forms online using fillable PDF forms. Fewer (44%) said they would be comfortable using video conferencing platforms for what would normally be in-person meetings, mediation or court sessions; 28% said they would not be comfortable in this scenario.

Q9a-c. How comfortable would you be accessing the family justice system in the following scenarios?

Base: n=3211

• Younger Canadians were more likely to be comfortable with all scenarios. This includes 67% to 70% of those 18-44 who were more likely to look for information online, compared with 44% of those aged 65 and over. Younger Canadians aged 18-34 (63%) or 35-44 (67%) were more likely to report being comfortable completing forms online compared with those aged 65 and over (37%). This contrast was also found in the reported comfort of using video conferencing where 53% of those 18-34 and 58% of those 35-44 were comfortable compared with 25% of those 65 and over.
• Comfort increased with education. Those with a university education were more likely to be comfortable looking for information online (73%), completing forms online (70%), or using videoconferencing platforms (59%) than those with high school education (47%, 42%, and 32%, respectively).
• Comfort increased with household income. Respondents with an income of at least $80,000 were more likely than those with lower income to be comfortable in all three areas.
• Canadians living in an urban community were more likely to report being comfortable looking for information online (61%) or completing forms online (57%) than those in a rural setting (55% and 45%, respectively).
• First Nations respondents were less likely to say they were comfortable looking for information online (48% were comfortable) than non-Indigenous respondents (60%). Métis respondents also reported less comfort looking for information online (50%) or completing forms online (43%) than non-Indigenous respondents (60% and 55%, respectively).
• Black respondents were less likely (54%) than White respondents (61%) to be comfortable looking for information online.

C. Alcohol-Impaired Driving

Awareness of Legislative Changes

Following a brief description of mandatory alcohol screening (MAS) laws, introduced in December 2018, 30% of respondents said they were aware or very aware of this legislative change, with another 22% indicating they were moderately aware. Close to half (47%) said they were not aware of it; with 36% of all respondents indicating no awareness at all.

Q10. How would you describe your level of awareness of this legislative change before today?

Base: n=3211

• Women were more likely than men to rate themselves as not aware (50% vs. 44%, respectively).
• Awareness increased with age. Those under 35 were most likely to say they were not aware (54%). Those 65 or older were least likely to say they were not aware (37%).
• Regionally, residents of Quebec (54%) were most likely to say they were not aware of this change, and residents of Alberta were least likely to say they were not aware (30%).
• Individuals with a university level of education (54%) were less likely to be aware compared with 45% of those with less education.
• Those with no previous involvement in the criminal justice system were more likely to say they were not aware (51%) than those involved, whereas the highest awareness was reported by those who reported working or volunteering in the criminal justice system (48%).
• Awareness was higher among those self-reporting as Métis (41%), compared with non-Indigenous people (29%).
• Those identifying as East/Southeast Asian were less likely (19%) to say they were aware than White respondents (30%).

Impact of Awareness of Legislative Changes on Decision to Drive After Consuming Alcohol

Respondents were asked if knowing that the police have the authority to demand a roadside breath sample without suspicion of alcohol use would have an impact on their decision to drive after consuming alcohol. Just over one in three (35%) said that it was not applicable to them since they do not have a license or they do not drive after consuming alcohol. Among the remaining 65%, 20% said it would have a major impact, and another 19% said it would have a moderate impact on any decision to drive after consuming alcohol.

Q11. Does knowing that the police have the authority to demand a roadside breath sample without suspicion that you have alcohol in your body impact your decision to drive after consuming alcohol?

Base: n=2150, excludes 34% who said they do not drink, do not drive or do not combine these, and 1% don’t know/no response

• A major impact was reported most often among those aged 65 or older (33%) and least often among those 35 to 44 (12%).
• Impact decreased with increasing household income. More than half (52%) of those with a household income of less than $40,000 reported that the legislation had an impact, compared with less than 35% of those with a household income of $80,000 or more.
• A major impact was more likely to be reported by Black (41%) and South/West Asian (35%) respondents than by White respondents (18%). East/Southeast Asian (33%) respondents were more likely than White (16%) respondents to report a moderate impact.

Concerns about the Dangers of Alcohol-Impaired Driving

Six in ten Canadians (62%) were concerned about the dangers on the road from individuals driving while impaired by alcohol, with 17% indicating they were concerned and 45% indicating they were very concerned. Another 24% were moderately concerned and only 14% were not very or not at all concerned.

Q12. How concerned are you about the dangers on the road from individuals driving while impaired by alcohol?

Base: n=3211

• Women (70%) were more likely to be concerned than men (53%).
• Concern increased with age. People under 35 were least likely to be concerned (48%). Those 65 years of age or older (81%) were most likely to be concerned.
• Residents of Quebec were most likely to be concerned (72%) relative to other parts of the country. Residents of Alberta were least likely to be concerned (49%).
• Those who have previously been arrested or charged were least likely to say they were concerned (23%) compared with others involved in the criminal justice system, and those not involved.
• Respondents identifying as South/West Asian (70%), or Black (84%) or East/Southeast Asian (75%) were more likely than White respondents (61%) to be concerned.

Respondents who drive and who also drink alcohol were asked about concern about being charged with an alcohol-impaired driving offence. While 75% said that they were not personally concerned, 7% said they were moderately concerned and 17% said they were concerned (4%), or very concerned (14%).

Q13. How concerned are you about being charged personally with an alcohol-impaired driving offence?

Base: n=2581, excludes those who do not drink and also those who do not drive

• Those 65 or older (25%) were the most likely to be concerned. Those between 45 and 54 were least likely to be concerned (11%).
• Residents of Quebec (31%) were the most likely to be concerned. Less than 10% of people living in Alberta or the Prairies were concerned.
• Concern decreased with education. It was highest among those with a high school level of education (21%) and lowest among those with a university level of education (12%).
• Those with no previous involvement in the criminal justice system were more likely to express concern (21%). Most likely to be unconcerned, among those involved in the criminal justice system, were individuals who had known someone who has been a victim or accused of a crime (83%) and those who have worked or volunteered in the system (81%).
• Those identifying as Black (47%), South/West Asian (37%), or East/Southeast Asian (29%) were more likely to be concerned, compared with those who identified as White (14%).

When asked about key concerns related to driving while impaired by alcohol, by far the main concern was killing or seriously injuring someone else in an accident, which was reported by 84% of Canadians. Half indicated a concern about being killed or seriously injuring themselves. Similarly, 46% were concerned about having a permanent record that would impact their ability to work or travel. Other reasons, reported less frequently included getting caught by police (17%), incurring higher insurance premiums (12%), being judged by family or peers (10%), or damage to property (9%). A small proportion of respondents (4%) said they did not have any concerns.

Q14. What would be your biggest concern(s) about driving while impaired by alcohol if you were to do so? (Respondents were able to select more than one response)

Base: n=3211

• Women were more likely than men to report that causing injury or death was their biggest concern (86% vs. 81%, respectively). Women were also more likely to report that personal injury or death was their biggest concern (54% compared with 46% among men). Men, on the other hand, were more likely than women to report that getting caught by the police was their biggest concern (20% vs. 15%, respectively).
• Those aged 35 to 44 were the most likely of all age groups to report that getting caught by the police was their biggest concern (21%).
• Residents of Quebec were the most likely to report having a permanent record as their biggest concern (52%). This was least likely in the Territories (35%). Residents of the Prairies, and in the Territories were the most likely to report that getting caught by the police was their biggest concern (24%).
• Concern about a permanent record increased with education. Individuals who are university-educated were most likely to report having a permanent record as their biggest concern (52%). Those with a high school level of education were least likely to say this (42%).
• Concern about a permanent record increased with income. Those reporting household incomes of $80,000 or above were most likely to report having a permanent record as their biggest concern (51%). Individuals reporting household incomes of less than $40,000 were least likely to report this (41%).
• Individuals who had previously been a victim of a crime were the most likely to indicate personal injury or death as their biggest concern (61%) compared with others involved in the system, as well as those not involved. Those previously arrested or accused of a crime were more likely to point to getting caught by police (26%) as their biggest concern compared with others involved in the criminal justice system and those not involved.
• Individuals identifying as Métis were less likely to report that causing injury or death was their biggest concern (78% compared with 85% among non-Indigenous respondents). First Nations respondents were less likely than non-Indigenous respondents to report having a permanent record as their biggest concern (34% vs. 47%, respectively).
• Individuals identifying as Black (70%), South/West Asian (80%), and East/Southeast Asian (77%) were less likely than White respondents (87%) to report that causing injury or death was their biggest concern.

Alcohol-Impaired Driving Behaviour

One in four respondents (26%) reported having driven within two hours of consuming (an unspecified amount of) alcohol at some point in the previous two years. It is worth noting that those who reported driving in the two hours after consuming alcohol were also more likely to be aware of recent changes in the legislation (38% were aware). They were also more likely to say this did not have an impact on their decision to drive after drinking (61%); most indicated this was because they limit their consumption (71%) if they expect to be driving. This same segment was less likely to be concerned about the dangers of alcohol-impaired driving. They were moderately more concerned than other respondents, however, about being charged, and indicated being caught by the police and having a permanent record as their primary concerns associated with drinking and driving.

Q15. In the past two years have you driven a motor vehicle within two hours of consuming alcohol?

Base: n=3211

• The incidence of driving after consuming alcohol was higher among men (33%) than women (20%).
• Consuming alcohol within two hours of driving peaked among those 35 to 44 (33%) and was reported less frequently (20% to 27%) by those in other age groups.
• Regionally, the incidence was highest among residents of Alberta (31%).
• People with a college or university level of education (31%) were more likely to drive within two hours of consuming alcohol compared with those with a high school education who were least likely (19%) to do so.
• The likelihood of driving within two hours of consuming alcohol increased with income. People with a household income of under $40,000 were the least likely (12%) and those with a household income of $120,000 or higher were the most likely (41%) to do so.
• The incidence of driving within two hours of consuming alcohol was lowest among those not involved in the system (23%). Among those involved in the criminal justice system, it was highest among those who had been arrested or charged with a crime (40%).
• The incidence of driving within two hours of consuming alcohol was lower among First Nations respondents (16%) compared with non-Indigenous respondents (27%).
• East/Southeast Asian (9%) respondents, Black (10%) respondents, and South/West Asian (16%) were considerably less likely than White (30%) respondents to report driving within two hours of consuming alcohol.

Among the 26% indicating alcohol consumption in the two hours before driving, 73% said it occurred a few times, and 8% said it occurred more often. Only 17% noted a single instance.

Q15b. In the past two years, how often would you say this has occurred?

Base: n=941 (those who reported consuming alcohol within two hours of driving)

• A higher frequency of driving after consuming alcohol was reported by men compared with women (11% of men reporting this to have occurred more than a few times vs. 3% of women).
• Residents of Ontario were more likely than then rest of the country to report that this occurred a few times (78%). This was least likely in the Atlantic provinces (61%).
• Residents of urban areas (75%) were more likely to say it occurred a few times, compared with only 66% in rural areas.
• Those who had previously been a victim of a crime (83%) were more likely than others involved in the system, and those not involved to report this occurring a few times.

Reason for Driving after Alcohol Consumption

Among the same 26% who reported drinking alcohol within two hours of driving, most said the reason was that they did not think they were impaired (63%). The remainder largely said they believed they were within the legal limit (29%). Only a very small percentage of respondents provided a different reason, including thinking they would not get caught, the need to get home, or to attend to an emergency.

Q15c. What was the reason for having driven within two hours of alcohol consumption?

Base: n=941 (those who reported consuming alcohol within two hours of driving)

• Regionally, Quebec respondents were more likely to feel they were within the legal limit (45%) and Ontario respondents were similarly more likely to indicate they did not think they were impaired (76%).

D. Drug-Impaired Driving

Awareness of Legislative Changes

Public awareness of legislative changes related to drug-impaired driving was similar to awareness of legislative changes related to alcohol-impaired driving, where 30% indicated awareness of the changes. Roughly one in four indicated awareness of new legislation on drug screening and prohibited THC levels (27% and 24%, respectively), with 30% and 26% saying they were moderately aware of these changes. Nearly half of respondents, however, were unaware of the changes.

Q18-19. How would you describe your level of awareness of these legislative changes before today? Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not at all aware" and 5 being "very aware"

Base: n=3211

• Awareness related to roadside screening was higher among men (31%) than women (23%). The same was true concerning prohibited limits of THC in the blood (28% vs. 20%, respectively).
• Awareness of introduction of roadside drug screening was highest among Ontario residents (31%), and lowest in the Territories (13%). Awareness of the introduction of prohibited limits of THC in the blood was also highest in Ontario (30%) and lowest in the Atlantic provinces (13%).
• Awareness of the introduction of roadside drug screening was highest among those with a college level of education (32%), and lowest among those with a high school level of education (23%). The college-educated were also more likely to be aware of the newly introduced THC limits (27%) compared with those with more (22%) education.
• Awareness of both measures increased with household income. Awareness of the new roadside testing was higher among those reporting the highest incomes (35%) and lowest among those reporting the least income (23%). Awareness of the new THC limits was also higher among those reporting the highest incomes (30%).
• Those under 35 were more likely than older Canadians to be aware of the newly introduced THC limits (29%); awareness was lowest among those aged 45 to 54 (18%).
• Those with no previous involvement in the criminal justice system were least likely to say they were aware of the introduction of approved roadside drug screening equipment (23%) or prohibited limits of THC in the blood (21%).
• Awareness of the roadside drug screening was higher among First Nations respondents (35% compared with non-Indigenous respondents (27%).
• Awareness of the new THC limits was higher among those identifying as East/Southeast Asian (32%) compared with White respondents (23%).

More than half (57%) or respondents were concerned or very concerned about the dangers of drug-impaired driving. Impairment from cannabis specifically was a concern to somewhat fewer, although still 48% of Canadians expressed concern. Another 30%, however, said they were not concerned. Thirteen per cent said they were concerned about being charged with a drug impaired driving offence, although 80% said that this was not a concern.

Q20a-c. How concerned are you about...? Rated on 5-point scale of 1 being "not at all concerned" and 5 being "very concerned"

Base: n=3211

• Women were more likely to be concerned about the dangers from individuals driving while impaired by drugs (61%) than men (52%). The same was true with respect to cannabis-impaired driving (51% vs. 45%, respectively). Men were more likely to be concerned about being charged with a drug-impaired driving offence (17%) compared with women (10%).
• Concern about the dangers from individuals driving while impaired by drugs increased with age. Individuals 65 or older were the most likely to be concerned (73%). Those under 34 were the least likely to be concerned (41%). The pattern was the same for cannabis-impaired driving.
• Residents of Quebec were the most likely to be concerned about the dangers from individuals driving while impaired by drugs (67%) and cannabis (61%). Residents of Alberta were the least likely to express these concerns (44% for drugs and 37% for cannabis). Residents of Quebec were also more likely to be concerned about being charged with a drug-impaired driving offence (19%). Residents of the Atlantic Provinces were least likely to express this concern (6%).
• Those who had been arrested or charged with a crime (30%) were least likely to be concerned about the dangers from individuals driving while impaired by drugs. This is compared with 15% of those who reported working or volunteering in the sector.
• Those identifying as Black (71%), East/Southeast Asian (74%) and South/West Asian (67%) were more likely to be concerned about the dangers from individuals driving while impaired by drugs than White respondents (55%). The same patterns held for cannabis-impaired driving. Those identifying as East/Southeast Asian (37%), Black (34%) or South/West Asian (31%) were also significantly more likely to be concerned about being charged compared with White respondents (8%).

When asked about key concerns related to driving while impaired by cannabis, a main concern for 70% of Canadians was killing or seriously injuring someone else in an accident. Having a permanent record or being killed or seriously injured themselves was the second most frequently reported concern, noted by 43% in each case. Other reasons, expressed by considerably fewer, were getting caught by police (17%), incurring higher insurance premiums (12%), being judged by family or peers (9%), or damage to property (9%). Only 9% said they did not have any concerns. Results were a very close reflection of the concerns expressed with alcohol-impaired driving.

Q22. What would be your biggest concern(s) about driving while impaired by cannabis if you were to do so? (Respondents were able to select more than one response)

Base: n=3211

• Women were more likely to point to personal injury or death as their biggest concern (46% compared with 40% among men). Men were more likely than women to say that getting caught was their biggest concern (22% vs. 13%, respectively).
• Concern with having a permanent record decreased with age. Nearly half of those under age 45 reported this as their biggest concern, compared with 34% of those 65 or older. Getting caught was more likely to be the main concern of those under 35 (27%) compared with older cohorts, particularly those 45 to 64 (13%) or 65 or older (10%). Damage to property was also more likely to be a main concern to those under 35 (12%).
• Getting caught was more likely to be the biggest concern among residents of the Territories (28%), and Prairies (23%).
• Those previously arrested or charged with a crime were the group most likely to be concerned about getting caught by police (29%), compared with others involved in the system and those not involved.
• Having a permanent record was more likely to be the biggest concern among East/Southeast Asian respondents (53%) compared with White respondents (44%).
• First Nations respondents (16%) were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents (8%) to cite damage to property as their biggest concern.

Cannabis Impaired Driving Behaviour

Eight per cent of Canadians reported having driven within two hours of using cannabis in the past two years. As with alcohol-impaired driving, those who reported this behaviour in the previous two years were also more likely to be aware of the legislative changes (42% regarding roadside screening and 34% regarding THC levels), and to report that they were not concerned about the dangers of driving following drug use (52% were unconcerned), particularly when it came to cannabis use (71% were unconcerned). They were, however, more likely to be concerned about being charged (29%) and to cite getting caught by police (37%) or having increased insurance (25%) as a primary concern when driving after consuming cannabis.

Q23. In the past two years have you driven a motor vehicle within two hours of using cannabis?

Base: n=3211

• The prevalence of driving after using cannabis was highest among those 35 to 44 (12%), and lowest among those 55 to 64 (5%) and 65 or older (3%).
• Residents of the Prairies (16%), as well as in the Territories (15%) were the most likely across the country to report driving after using cannabis.
• Those previously arrested or charged with a crime (23%) or those not involved in the system (5%) to have driven within two hours of cannabis consumption.

Among the 8% reporting this behaviour in the past two years, half did so a few times (50%), and another 31% did so often. It was a single event for 16%.

Q23b. In the past two years, how often would you say this has occurred?

Base: n=217 (reported driving within two hours of using cannabis)

As with alcohol-impaired driving, by far the most prevalent reason provided for driving after using cannabis within two hours of driving was that they did not think they were impaired (50%) or simply said they were not impaired (17%). Some described it as a necessity (10%), did not think they would get caught (7%) or provided another reason.

Q23c. What was the reason for having driven within two hours of cannabis consumption?

Base: n=217 (reported driving within two hours of using cannabis)

Combining Cannabis, Alcohol and Driving

Among the segment of respondents who indicated they had driven within two hours of using cannabis, 17% said they had driven following a combination of cannabis and alcohol use. This suggests that this occurs among 1% of Canadians over the age of 18, according to survey results.

Q24. Have you driven a motor vehicle within two hours of using cannabis in combination with alcohol?

Base: n=239^[3] (reported driving within two hours of using cannabis)

• The incidence peaked among the college-educated (24%), and was lower among those with a university-level (17%).

E. Police Traffic Stops

One in three Canadians 18 or older (34%) had been stopped by the police while driving at least once in the past five years. Of these, 22% were stopped within the past two years, while 12% were stopped two to five years ago. Sixty-six per cent had not been stopped by police within the last five years.

Q24a. In the past five years, have you been stopped by police while driving, for any reason? This could include stops for minor driving issues, or random sobriety stops. Q24b. Was the most recent stop within the last two years? Base: n=3211

• Men were more likely than women to have been stopped in the last two years (28% vs. 16%, respectively).
• The likelihood of experiencing a traffic stop decreased with age. While over one-quarter of those younger than 55 years of age had experienced a stop, this was the case for only 13% of people aged 65 or older.
• Regionally, residents of Alberta were the most likely to have had a stop in the last two years (28%).
• The incidence of being stopped increased with income. Those reporting household incomes of $120,000 or higher were the most likely to have been stopped in the last two years (30%). Those reporting incomes under $40,000 were the least likely to have been stopped (12%).
• The incidence of being stopped in the last two years was lowest among those not involved with the criminal justice system (18%). Those previously arrested or charged with a crime (32%) were the most likely of those involved in the justice system to have been stopped by the police in that time.
• First Nations respondents (30%) were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents (21%) to have been stopped in the last two years.
• White respondents (23%) were more likely than South/West Asian (15%), Black (13%) and East/Southeast Asian (9%) respondents to have been stopped by police in the previous two years.

Of those who had experienced a traffic stop by police within the previous five years, the majority were stopped for a minor infraction (59%). Fewer (41%) were stopped in a roadside checkpoint. Four per cent identified multiple reasons for stops. Those indicating that the reason was unclear (about 1%) were specifically asked in a subsequent question if they were stopped for impaired driving, either from alcohol or cannabis. Only a few indicated this to be the case.

Q24c. What was the reason given by the police for this most recent stop? The police... (Respondents were able to select more than one response)

Base: n=1131 (those who were stopped in previous 5 years)

• Drivers in Alberta (69%) and Quebec (79%) were the most likely across the country to report minor infractions.
• Roadside checkpoints were more prevalent in British Columbia and Ontario (54%) than elsewhere in Canada.

Forty per cent of respondents who experienced a stop in the previous five years said they received a ticket, and 14% were given a written or verbal warning. Respondents, who reported a minor driving infraction, were more likely to have received a ticket (64%) or a warning (22%). One in three of those who experienced a stop in the previous five years said that there was no outcome (34%), although this proportion was higher (66%) among those who went through a roadside checkpoint. Among those reporting a roadside checkpoint, 8% received a ticket, 4% received a verbal warning, and 3% were asked to provide a breath sample. Among those indicating another outcome (10%), almost all respondents described a specific infraction, with speeding at the top of the list, and a few described a verbal warning.

Q24f. What was the outcome of the most recent stop? (Respondents were able to select more than one response)

Base: n=1131 (those who were stopped in previous 5 years)

• Women were more likely than men to report receiving a ticket (46% vs. 36%).
• The likelihood of receiving a ticket peaked between the ages of 35 and 54, which was the outcome reported by about half of the respondents in this age category. Those younger and older were less likely to have received a ticket.
• Residents of Quebec (59%) and Alberta (52%) were the most likely to report receiving a ticket. This was least likely among residents of British Columbia (26%).
• Rural residents (43%) were more likely than urban residents (31%) to report no outcome (or none of these outcomes), as were those living in British Columbia (44%) or Ontario (41%) compared with others across the country.
• East/Southeast Asian (60%) were more likely than White (40%) respondents to have received a ticket.

Interview Results

Survey respondents who indicated they had experienced a traffic stop by police since December 2018 were asked about willingness to participate in a follow-up interview, conducted by phone, to further discuss the nature of this stop and their experiences at the time. Interview participants were selected based on survey responses, with a focus on the four target segments from the survey sample (Black, South/West Asian, East or Southeast Asian or Indigenous). All current or previous employees of the Government of Canada, or anyone who had participated in an interview or focus groups for Government of Canada public opinion research in the previous six months were excluded from participating.

A total of 27 interviews were conducted, each lasting 20 to 30 minutes. Specifically, interviews were conducted with seven participants self-identifying as Black, seven as Indigenous (four Métis and three First Nation), five as White; four as East/Southeast Asian and four as South/West Asian. Six interviews were conducted in French, and the balance were conducted in English. Participants were asked to describe their experiences with police traffic stops and general impressions of trends in this area. The recruitment script and interview guide can be found in Appendix C. Interview participants were provided with a $50 honorarium for their time. The following is a high-level summary of results from the 27 follow-up interviews. Interviews were conducted to examine police traffic stops experienced since December 2018, along with general perceptions of experiences and news coverage related to these issues. Results are segmented by ethnocultural group and Indigenous identity.

Detailed Perspectives

Reason for Traffic Stop

Most participants were stopped by police for traffic violations, and some were aware of why they were being stopped even before speaking to police. These participants acknowledged they were speeding or committing some other traffic violation such as not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign. A few were pulled over for having expired license plates or were pulled over in error as the license plate number was misread by the police officer.

Most participants were told the reason for the traffic stop by the police officer in the initial stages of the interaction after being pulled over. Two participants felt that they were pulled over for no particular reason, with a reason for the traffic stop not clearly given by the police officer, or that the officer was looking for a reason to pull the individual over.

Some participants were pulled over at a roadside check stop. These participants thought that all vehicles were being pulled over in an equal manner and did not feel targeted for any reason. A few were immediately aware that they were approaching a roadside check stop, while a few others were initially unaware of what was occurring.

Description of Process

Most participants indicated that the traffic stop was fairly "routine" and did not perceive they were being targeted in any way by being stopped by the police. Many said that the interaction with police was neutral or respectful.

Some felt that the police officer was being more discourteous than necessary, with an abrupt or accusing tone to begin the interaction at the vehicle window. A few described interactions with police officers during the traffic stop that contained language or phrases that were perceived as racial targeting and resulted in a negative perception of police officers. One participant, who identified as Chinese, said that a police officer said her husband "must be stupid" for telling her to place her fallen license plate in the back window; she perceived that the comment was racialized. One Black participant said that he speaks very calmly and respectfully during interactions with police officers so that he "doesn’t get shot." However, these participants said that the stop took place without incident, in terms of an escalation of the situation, overall.

A few said that the officer went back to the police vehicle for what felt like an excessive amount of time—15 to 20 minutes—with the license and registration before returning to their vehicle.

Testing during roadside check stops

Of those who were pulled over at a roadside check stop, one said that the task of blowing into a breathalyzer felt "intrusive" but not personal. The process of the roadside check stops was considered by participants to be efficient and cordial. Participants said that there was a brief interaction with a police officer, that the officer explained that roadside check stops were taking place and, in most cases, the participant was told they can proceed from the stop, without having to give a breath sample.

General perceptions and concerns

Many participants said that they talk about occurrences of police traffic stops generally with friends or family. Some, particularly Black participants, indicated that they discuss the perceived personal risk during police traffic stops and the caution they take as a result (such as keeping hands in plain sight). Some Indigenous participants spoke of a perception of racial targeting by police, experienced personally or by friends or family. These participants expressed resentment about a confrontational tone used by police or an abuse of authority by police. A few South and West Asian participants said they have had conversations in their community about differential treatment based on ethnicity, less positive interactions or fear of police officers. East Asian and White participants described conversations with friends and family about concerns over improper treatment of Black or Indigenous drivers by police during traffic stops.

Many participants indicated that they have discussions with friends and family about the need for better officer training on treatment of citizens and racial bias.

However, some participants also said that they do not often talk about police traffic stops with friends or family; only when they feel they were unfairly given a traffic ticket.

A few participants said they were pulled over more often by police officers when they were younger; in part because they drove flashier cars, were out later, or, admittedly, drove faster. A few, particularly Black participants, said that they felt targeted by police during their younger years. These experiences included traffic stops but also walking down the street.

Perceptions of news coverage

Most participants had heard about police traffic stops on the news. Some said that they had heard about racial targeting by police during traffic stops on the news or about treating Black or Indigenous people aggressively. A few believed that this happens more in the United States than in Canada, and a few felt that occurrences are more public now due to the prevalence of smart phone cameras and social media. In fact, one Indigenous participant stated that one First Nations community is posting information about traffic stops to raise awareness of the perceived racial bias disproportionally targeting Indigenous peoples.

A few mentioned seeing information on the news concerning traffic stops, in terms of the accuracy of cannabis impairment testing, traffic stops related to COVID-19 related restrictions, or the December 2018 legislation that "police can stop anyone to breathalyze them without cause".

F. The Sex Trade

Awareness of Legislative Approach to the Sex Trade

Survey respondents were asked about their awareness of Canada’s legislative approach to the sex trade. Currently in Canada, it is illegal to profit from the sale of the sexual services of another person, to purchase sexual services, or to advertise sexual services. Most Canadians (86%) knew that profiting off the sale of someone’s sexual services is illegal. Over three-quarters (77%) knew it is illegal to purchase sexual services, while 61% knew it is illegal to advertise sexual services. Canada’s criminal law views those who sell their own sexual services as victims who need support and assistance to exit the sex trade, and therefore the sale of sexual services is not criminalized in most scenarios. The survey found 59% of Canadians incorrectly thought that selling sexual services is illegal. Very few, 3%, believed none of the listed aspects of the sex trade are illegal.

Q26. As you may know, some aspects of the sex trade are illegal in Canada. To the best of your knowledge, which of the following are illegal in Canada? (Respondents were able to select more than one response)

Base: n=3211

• Women were more likely to incorrectly identify selling sexual services (63%) as illegal compared with men (56%). Women (63%) were also more likely than men (59%) to correctly say advertising sexual services was illegal.
• Older Canadians (65 and over) were more likely to incorrectly believe selling sexual services was illegal (66%); those under age 34 were least likely (54%).
• Residents of Quebec were more likely to believe selling sexual services was illegal (70%); those in Ontario (53%) were least likely.
• The awareness that selling sexual services is legal increased with education. Those with a high school education had a propensity to say selling sexual services was illegal (65%), compared with those with a university education (47%).
• Rural residents were more likely to identify advertising sexual services (69%) or selling sexual services (70%) as illegal compared with those in urban areas (60% and 57%, respectively).
• Those who had not been involved in the criminal justice system (62%) were more likely to incorrectly identify selling sexual services as illegal; those who reported working or volunteering in the system (48%) or who were involved as a victim or survivor (54%) were least likely.
• Black (63%), and South/West Asian (68%) respondents were less likely than White respondents (80%) to indicate that purchasing sexual services was illegal. Black (75%), South/West Asian (75%) and East/Southeast Asian (79%) respondents were also less likely to indicate that profiting off the sale of someone’s sexual services was illegal, compared with White respondents (89%). This pattern was also the case for advertising sexual services among those identifying as Black (53% compared with 62% among White respondents).

Views on Legality of Sex Trade

More than half (58%) of Canadians agreed that receiving a financial or other material benefit from the sale of the sexual services of others should be illegal; 25% disagreed. Forty-six per cent agreed that advertising the sale of others’ sexual services should be illegal. Fewer agreed that communicating in any place for the purpose of purchasing sexual services (40%) or purchasing sexual services (39%) should be illegal. Thirty-four per cent agreed that selling sexual services should be illegal; a higher proportion (44%) disagreed.

Q27a-e. Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements...?

Base: n=3211

• Women were more likely than men to agree that all aspects should be illegal, including receiving financial benefit from the sale of sexual services of others (64% of women, 52% of men), advertising the sale of others’ sexual services (55% of women, 37% of men), communicating the purchase of sexual services (49% of women, 32% of men), purchasing sexual services (48% of women, 30% of men), or selling sexual services (42% of women, 27% of men).
• The propensity to agree that aspects should be illegal increased with age, including receiving financial benefit from the sale of sexual services of others (71% of those 65 and over, 50% of those under age 35), advertising the sale of others’ sexual services (62% of those 65 and over, 39% of those under age 35), communicating the purchase of sexual services (57% of those 65 and over, 34% of those under age 35), purchasing sexual services (53% of those 65 and over, 33% of those under age 35), or selling sexual services (49% of those 65 and over, 26% of those under age 35).
• Agreement decreased with education. Those with a high school education were more likely to agree advertising the sale of others’ sexual services should be illegal (50%) compared with those with a university education (40%), along with communicating for the purpose of purchasing sexual services (48% of high school, 31% of university educated), and purchasing sexual services (45% of high school, 31% of university). Those with a high school education tended to agree that selling sexual services should be illegal (41%) compared with those with university education (25%).
• Agreement with some aspects decreased with income. Those with household incomes under $40,000 were more likely to agree communicating for the purpose of purchasing sexual services should be illegal (47%) compared with an income of $120,000 or higher (36%). Canadians with household incomes under $40,000 were more likely to agree selling sexual services should be illegal (38%) compared with those with an income of $120,000 or higher (29%).
• Rural residents were more likely to agree with most aspects, including advertising the sale of others’ sexual services (50% of rural, 45% of urban), purchasing sexual services (44% of rural, 37% of urban), or selling sexual services (42% of rural, 32% of urban).
• Regionally, respondents in Quebec tended to agree with most statements. Those in Quebec were most likely to agree that purchasing sexual services should be illegal (45%); those in British Columbia (31%) or Alberta (32%) were least likely. Those in Quebec were more likely to agree communicating in any place for the purpose of purchasing sexual services should be illegal (47%); those in British Columbia (34%), Alberta (35%) or the Territories (31%) were least likely. Those in Quebec were more likely to agree that advertising for the sale of others’ sexual services (54%) should be illegal; those in British Columbia (38%) or Alberta (39%) were least likely.
• Those who indicated having been involved in the criminal justice system as a victim or survivor, or who had been arrested or charged were more likely to disagree that any aspect of the sex trade should be illegal.
• First Nations respondents (44%) were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents (34%) to agree that selling sexual services should be illegal.
• Southeast/East and South/West Asian (47% each) and Black (48%) respondents, were more likely than those who identified as White (35%) to agree that purchasing sexual services should be illegal. This pattern was also reflected with regard to communicating for the purposes of purchasing sexual services and for selling sexual services, with White respondents less likely than Black, South/West Asian, or East/Southeast Asian respondents to agree these aspects should be illegal.

Exceptions to Sex Trade Provisions

Thirty-five per cent of Canadians believed there should be exceptions to the provisions governing some of aspects of the sex trade. Another 44% felt there should be no exceptions.

Q32. Should there be any exceptions to any of these?

Base: n=3211

• Men (39%) were more likely than women (30%) to say they believe there should be exceptions.
• Belief that there should be exceptions decreased with age. Younger Canadians (18-34) (47%) were more likely to say there should be exceptions, particularly compared with those 65 and over (19%).
• Support for exceptions increased with education. Those with university education (42%) were more likely than those with high school education (28%) to say there should be exceptions.
• Support increased with income. Respondents with household income of $120,000 or higher (40%) were more likely to indicate there should be exceptions.
• Those in Alberta (41%) were more likely than those in other regions to say there should be no exceptions.
• Those with previous involvement in the criminal justice system as victims or survivors (47%) were most likely to agree there should be some exceptions; those not involved in the criminal justice system were least likely (32%).
• First Nations respondents (56%) were more likely than non-Indigenous respondents (44%) to say there should not be any exceptions.
• Black (58%), East/Southeast Asian (59%) and South/West Asian (60%) respondents were more likely than White respondents (39%) to say there should not be any exceptions.

Among Canadians who believed there should be exceptions, similar proportions indicated there should be a legal age limit required (17%), the sex trade should generally be a legal or regulated business (15%), there should be punishment for those profiting or exploiting commercial sellers of sexual services (14%), or that if both parties are consenting there should be no repercussions (11%).

G. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

Awareness of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

The final series of questions, about the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, were asked of online survey respondents only. After reading a description, 60% of respondents who participated in the survey online indicated they were not aware of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Another 12% were aware, while 26% were moderately aware.

Q33. How would you describe your level of awareness about the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals?

Base: n=2348

• Men (14%) were more likely than women (9%) to say they were aware.
• Awareness increased with education. Those with a university education (15%) were more likely than those with a high school education (9%) to say they were aware.
• Awareness increased with income. Respondents earning $120,000 or higher (15%) were more likely to say they were aware compared with those earning under $40,000 (8%).
• Regionally, those in Alberta (16%) were the most likely to indicate they were aware of the goals.
• Those who reported working or volunteering in the criminal justice system (16%) were more likely than those not involved (10%) to say they were aware.
• Black respondents (31%) were more likely than White respondents (10%) to say they were aware of the goals. East/Southeast Asian respondents were most likely to say they were not aware (86% compared with 61% among White respondents).

Sustainable Development Goal 16

Just over one in five (21%) respondents who participated online indicated that they had heard about Sustainable Development Goal 16: to promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies. The majority (71%), however, had not heard of Goal 16.

Q34. Have you heard anything about Sustainable Development Goal 16: to promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies?

Base: n=2348

• Results follow a similar pattern to those aware of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
• Awareness increased with education. Canadians with a university education (30%) were more likely than those with a high school education (14%) to say they have heard about Goal 16.
• Awareness increased with income. Those with a household income of $120,000 or higher (25%) were more likely to say they were aware than those with incomes under $40,000 (17%).
• Regionally, those in Alberta (28%) were more likely to indicate they were aware of the goal. Those in Quebec (17%) were least likely to declare awareness.
• Those who said they work or volunteer in the criminal justice system (35%) were more likely than those not involved (19%) to say they were aware of Goal 16.
• Those identifying as First Nations (38%) were more likely than non-Indigenous (20%) respondents to say they were aware of Goal 16.
• Black respondents (45%) were more likely than White respondents (18%) to say they were aware of the goal.

About one in five said they had heard about Sustainable Development Goal 16 from traditional or other media (23%), the United Nations (22%), civil society organizations (20%), or friends and family (20%). Fewer had heard about the goal through work (15%) or school (12%). Only 9% cited the Internet generally and 7% cited social media.

• Black respondents (56%) were much more likely than White respondents to identify the United Nations (18%), as well as schools (36% versus 12% among White respondents).

Important Aspects of Sustainable Development Goal 16

Half of Canadians indicated that all aspects of Sustainable Development Goal 16 were equally important. Eighteen per cent said that providing access to justice for all was most important. Another 12% believed that building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels was most important. Fewer (8%) thought that promoting peaceful and inclusive societies was most important.

Q35. Which part of Sustainable Development Goals 16 is most important to you as a Canadian?

Base: n=2348

• Women were more likely than men to say that all parts (56% vs. 43%, respectively) were equally important. Men were more likely than women to say that providing access to justice for all (21% vs. 16%, respectively) was most important.
• The propensity to say that all aspects were equally important increased with age. Canadians aged 55-64 (54%) or 65 and older (59%) were more likely than those aged 18-34 (36%) to indicate that all parts were equally important. Those 18-34 were more likely to say promoting peaceful and inclusive societies (14%) or building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels (19%) were most important compared with those 65 and over (5% and 8%, respectively).
• Those in Quebec were more likely than those in other regions to say all were equally important (58%) while those in Alberta were more likely to say that none of these were important (15%).
• Those with a university education (19%) were more likely than those with a high school education (8%) to designate building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels as most important.
• Those who identified as East/Southeast Asian (21%) were more likely than White respondents (12%) to indicate that building effective accountable and inclusive institutions was most important.

3. Appendices

A. Methodological Details

Survey

The survey was developed cooperatively between the Ekos Research team and the Project Authority. The average time it took respondents to complete the survey was 17 minutes online and 25 minutes by telephone. The survey was pre-tested with 39 respondents (29 in English, 10 in French), including 25 collected online and 14 by telephone. Since no significant changes were made as the result of survey pre-testing, these cases were retained in the final sample.

Respondents to the online survey were 18 years of age and older and were randomly selected, with an oversample in the four target groups. The sample included all provinces and territories, and the survey was administered in English and French, as well as with an accessible link for those using a mobile phone or screen reading technology. The survey sample was pulled from an Ekos’ Probit panel, which is assembled using a random digit dial process for sampling from a blended land-line cell-phone frame, providing good coverage of Canadians with telephone access. All households/individuals in the Probit panel are contacted by telephone and the nature of the panel is explained in greater detail (as are Ekos’ privacy policies) and demographic information is collected. At this time, the online/off-line as well as landline/cell phone status is ascertained to determine the method of completing surveys (i.e., online, telephone, or mail). This variable of "type of telephone service" (cell phone only, landline only or both) collected at the time of screening is used to determine cell phone only sample.

A total of 3,211 surveys were completed between February 1 and March 5, 2021. The associated margin of error is up to plus or minus 1.7%, at a .95 confidence interval (i.e., 19 times out of 20).

Survey data collection adhered to the Government of Canada standard for public opinion research as well as all applicable industry standards. Ekos informed respondents of their rights under the Privacy Act and the Access to Information Act and ensured that those rights were protected throughout the research process. This included: informing respondents of the purpose of the research; identifying both the sponsoring department and the research supplier; informing respondents that their participation in the study is voluntary, and that the information provided would be administered according to the requirements of the Privacy Act.

Once the survey data were collected, the database was reviewed for data quality. Coding was also completed. The questions asking respondents about any previous involvement in the criminal or family justice systems were coded in a hierarchical manner when multiple responses were given, with respondents coded into one category which was highest on the list. The hierarchy for the criminal justice system was, from highest to lowest: work/volunteer, victim/survivor, arrested/charged, know someone, witness/jury. For the family justice system the hierarchy was: (personal) experience, family or friend, supported. Survey results were weighted to match key population characteristics (i.e., age, gender, education, region, Indigenous identity and ethnocultural group) using official population statistics from Statistics Canada (2016 Census). Combined with the sample selection process defined above, this ensures that the study sample is reasonably representative of the general population of Canada aged 18 years and older.

Data tables were created for each survey to isolate results for major subgroups to be used in the analysis (e.g., results for each age segment, gender, and region).

Response Rates and Non-Response Bias

The response rate for the survey was 21% (23.5% in the sample collected online and 13.5% in the sample collected by telephone), using a formula developed by the Marketing Research Intelligence Agency in conjunction with the Government of Canada. A total of 9,821 invitations were sent by email, of which 41 were returned as undeliverable, for a resulting valid sample of 9,780. A total of 2,333 interviews were completed, resulting in a response rate of 23.5%. A total of 8,976 telephone numbers were attempted for recruitment. Of these, 1,952 telephone numbers were invalid, resulting in a remaining valid sample of 7,024. Of these, 32 were found to be out of scope (under 18) while 878 cases were completed, for a resulting response rate of 12.5%. Of the 878 cases, 314 (36%) were reached on a cell phone and 564 (64%) on a landline.

A comparison of the unweighted sample with 2016 Census figures from Statistics Canada suggests that there are similar sources of systematic sample bias in the survey, following patterns typically found in most general public surveys. The survey sample was more educated than the general population, with 43% reporting university degrees, compared with 23% in the 2016 Census of population. There was also an under representation of those under 35 (16% compared with 27% in the 2016 Census of population. As previously described, each sample was weighted by region, age, gender, education, Indigenous identity, and ethnocultural group.

Interviews

Survey respondents who indicated they had experienced a traffic stop by police since December 2018 were asked about willingness to participate in a follow-up interview, conducted by phone, to further discuss the nature of this stop and their experiences at the time. Interview participants were selected based on survey responses, with a focus on the four target segments from the survey sample (Black, South/West Asian, East/Southeast Asian or Indigenous). All current or previous employees of the Government of Canada, or anyone who had participated in an interview or focus groups for Government of Canada public opinion research in the previous six months were excluded from participating.

A total of 27 interviews were conducted between March 9 and 24, 2021, each lasting 20 to 30 minutes, including six conducted in French. Specifically, interviews were conducted with seven participants self-identifying as Black, seven as Indigenous, five as White; four as East/Southeast Asian and four as South/West Asian. Participants were asked to describe their experiences with police traffic stops and general impressions of trends in this area. The recruitment script and interview guide can be found in Appendix C. Interview participants were provided with a $50 honorarium for their time.

Results of the interviews are described in shaded text, along with anonymized, illustrative quotes. It should be noted that the results of the interviews are qualitative in nature. These results should not be used to estimate numeric proportions or number of individuals in the population who hold a particular opinion as they are not generalizable. That is, results should not be assumed to be representative of the experiences of the wider population of Canada. These data are included to illustrate some experiences and perspectives. For this reason, terms such as "a few," "some" and "most" are used to broadly indicate views, rather than using specific percentages.

B. Survey Questionnaire

Introduction

Thank you for your interest in taking this survey. The Government of Canada has hired Ekos Research to conduct a public opinion survey on behalf of the Department of Justice Canada. Si vous préférez répondre au sondage en français, veuillez cliquer sur français. The government is interested to know your views on a variety of topics related to the law and justice system. This survey is one way for the Department of Justice Canada to hear back from Canadians. Your participation is voluntary and completely confidential. Your answers will remain anonymous. Any information you provide will be administered in accordance with the Privacy Act, the Access to Information Act, and other applicable privacy laws. The survey will take about 20 minutes to complete. A few reminders before beginning... On each screen, after selecting your answer, click on the "Continue" button at the bottom of the screen to move forward in the survey. If you leave the survey before completing it, you can return to the survey URL later, and you will be returned to the page where you left off. Your answers up to that point in the survey will be saved. If you have any questions about how to complete the survey, please call Probit at 866.211.8881 or send an email to online@probit.ca. Thank you in advance for your participation.

QAGEX

In what year were you born?

• Year : 77
• Prefer not to answer: 9999

QAGEY

Hesitant, QAGEX

In which of the following age categories do you belong?

• Less than 18 years old: 1
• 18 to 24: 2
• 25 to 34: 3
• 35 to 44: 4
• 45 to 54: 5
• 55 to 64: 6
• 65 or older: 7
• Prefer not to answer: 9

QGENDER

What is your gender?

• Male: 1
• Female: 2
• Another gender: 3
• Prefer not to answer: 99

PREQ1

PART 1 – Public Confidence in the Criminal Justice System (5 questions)

How would you describe your level of awareness when it comes to the role of the following areas in the Criminal Justice System? Q1: [interviewer:]On a scale from 1 Not at all aware, to 5 very aware

Q1A

Police

• Not at all aware 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately aware 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very aware 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q1B

Courts

• Not at all aware 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately aware 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very aware 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q1C

Corrections

• Not at all aware 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately aware 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very aware 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

PREQ2

Thinking back to before the pandemic was declared in the middle of March 2020, how confident were you that the Canadian criminal justice system was... Q2: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all confident, and 5 is very confident

Q2A

fair to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q2B

accessible to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

PREQ3

Today, how confident are you that the Canadian criminal justice system is... Q3: [interviewer:]Using the same scale

Q3A

fair to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q3B

accessible to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

PREQ4

Part 2 – Confidence in the family justice system

Now, turning to the family justice system. The family justice system in Canada extends beyond the courts and includes family justice services such as parent education sessions, supervised access, and family dispute resolution services. Issues such as divorce, parenting (custody and access), child and spousal support, as well as division of property are all handled by the family justice system.

Q4

How would you rate your knowledge of the family justice system? Q4: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all knowledgeable, and 5 is very knowledgeable

• Not at all knowledgeable: 1
• Slightly knowledgeable: 2
• Moderately knowledgeable: 3
• Knowledgeable: 4
• Very knowledgeable: 5
• Don't know/No response: 99

PREQ5

Thinking back to before the pandemic was declared in the middle of March 2020, how confident were you that the family justice system in Canada was... Q5: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all confident, and 5 is very confident

Q5A

fair to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q5B

accessible to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

PREQ6

Today, how confident are you that the family justice system in Canada is... Q6: [interviewer:]Using the same scale

Q6A

fair to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q6B

accessible to all people

• Not confident at all 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately confident 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very confident 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q7

Have you been involved with the family justice system in Canada within the past two years?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q7B

Yes, Q7

Before the pandemic was declared in the middle of March 2020, how would you describe your ability to access the family justice system in Canada? Q7: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is very easy to access and 5 is very difficult to access, with 3 being neutral

• 1 Very easy to access: 1
• 2: 2
• 3 Neither easy nor difficult: 3
• 4: 4
• 5 Very difficult to access: 5
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q7C

Yes, Q7

Today, how would you describe your ability to access the family justice system in Canada? Q7: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is very easy to access and 5 is very difficult to access, with 3 being neutral

• 1 Very easy to access: 1
• 2: 2
• 3 Neither easy nor difficult: 3
• 4: 4
• 5 Very difficult to access: 5
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q8

What is your main source of information, that is, the source you would be most likely to use and access most often, about the Canadian family justice system?

Choose one

• Family or friends: 1
• Popular culture (television/movies/radio/magazine): 2
• Government websites or publications: 3
• Legal professional: 4
• Other professional (mediator, mental health professional, parent information): 5
• Social media: 6
• Other (please specify): 77
• Don't know/No response: 99

PREQ9

How comfortable would you be accessing the family justice system in the following scenarios? Q9: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all comfortable and 5 is very comfortable

Q9A

Looking for information and reading about the family justice system online

• Not at all comfortable 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately comfortable 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very comfortable 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q9B

Completing forms online using fillable PDF forms

• Not at all comfortable 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately comfortable 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very comfortable 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q9C

Using video conferencing platforms (e.g., Zoom, MS Teams, Google Meet, etc.) for what would normally be in-person meetings, mediation, or court sessions

• Not at all comfortable 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately comfortable 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very comfortable 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

PREQ10

Part 3 – Impaired Driving

Changes were made to Criminal Code impaired driving provisions in 2018. One of these changes introduced Mandatory Alcohol Screening or MAS in Canada. MAS gives police the authority to demand a breath test without having any suspicion that the driver has consumed alcohol. Previously, police needed to have a reasonable suspicion that a driver had alcohol in their body before demanding that they provide a roadside breath test.

These changes came into effect on December 18, 2018.

Q10

Part 3a Alcohol-Impaired Driving

How would you describe your level of awareness of this legislative changes before today? Q10: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all aware, and 5 is very aware

• 1 Not at all aware: 1
• 2: 2
• 3 Moderately aware: 3
• 4: 4
• 5 Very aware: 5
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q11

Does knowing that the police have the authority to demand a roadside breath sample without suspicion that you have alcohol in your body impact your decision to drive after consuming alcohol? Q11: [interviewer:]Would you say: read list

• Yes, it has a moderate impact: 1
• Yes, it has a major impact: 2
• No, it does not have an impact: 3
• Not applicable (I don't drink/I don't drive/have a licence): 98
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q11B

Yes or No, Q11

Please explain why you think this.

• Specify : 77
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q12

How concerned are you about the dangers on the road from individuals driving while impaired by alcohol? Q12: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all concerned and 5 is very concerned

• 1 Not at all concerned: 1
• 2: 2
• 3 Moderately concerned: 3
• 4: 4
• 5 Very concerned: 5
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q13

How concerned are you about being charged personally with an alcohol-impaired driving offence?

• 1 Not at all concerned: 1
• 2: 2
• 3 Moderately concerned: 3
• 4: 4
• 5 Very concerned: 5
• Not applicable (I don't drink/I don't drive/have a licence): 98
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q14 [1,3]

What would be your biggest concern(s) about driving while impaired by alcohol if you were to do so?

(Select up to 3 responses) Q14: [interviewer:]Read list and ask for a yes/no for each one, read 1 at a time. If more than 3, go back over the list of those selected to accept only 3

• Getting caught by police: 1
• Having a permanent criminal record, possibly affecting employment or international travel: 2
• Being killed or seriously injuring myself in an accident: 3
• Killing or seriously injuring someone else in an accident: 4
• Family or peer judgment: 5
• Damage to property: 6
• Having significantly increased insurance premiums: 7
• Other (Please specify) : 77
• No concerns: 98
• Don't know/ No response: 99

PREQ15

We need your honest responses to these questions. Remember, your responses are completely confidential and no answers will be linked with identities.

Q15

In the past two years have you driven a motor vehicle within two hours of consuming alcohol?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q15B

Yes, Q15

In the past two years, how often would you say this has occurred? Q15B: [interviewer:](Read list)

• Once: 1
• A few times: 2
• More often: 3
• Do not have a valid driver's license: 98
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q15C

Yes, Q15

What was the reason for having driven within 2 hours of alcohol consumption?

• I didn't think I was impaired: 1
• I didn't think I would get caught: 2
• I felt peer pressure to drive: 3
• Other (please specify): 77
• Don't know/No response: 99

PREQ18

Part 3b Drug Impaired Driving

Changes were made to Criminal Code drug impaired driving provisions in 2018. The changes permit law enforcement to use approved drug screening equipment to detect the presence of several drugs in the oral fluid of drivers, including any or all of THC from cannabis, cocaine and methamphetamine. During a roadside stop, police can demand an oral fluid sample if they suspect you have drugs in your body.

The legislative changes also enacted new offences for having prohibited levels of THC (the main psychoactive compound in cannabis) in the blood within two hours of driving. There are two prohibited limits for THC on its own: (1) having more than 2 nanograms (ng) of THC per millilitre (mL) of blood (but less than 5ng THC/mL) is a less serious offence and (2) having 5ng of THC/mL of blood is a more serious offence. It is also an offence to have 2.5 ng of THC/ml of blood combined with 50 mg of alcohol per 100 mL blood.

How would you describe your level of awareness of these legislative changes before today?

Q18

Introduction of approved roadside drug screening equipment Q18: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all aware, and 5 is very aware

• Not at all aware 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately aware 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very aware 5: 5
• Don't know/ No response: 99

Q19

Introduction of prohibited limits for THC in the blood within two hours of driving Q18: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all aware, and 5 is very aware

• Not at all aware 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately aware 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very aware 5: 5
• Don't know/ No response: 99

PREQ20

How concerned are you about... Q20: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all concerned, and 5 is very concerned

Q20A

the dangers on the road from individuals driving while impaired by drugs

• Not at all concerned 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately concerned 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very concerned 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q20B

the dangers on the road from cannabis-impaired driving specifically

• Not at all concerned 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately concerned 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very concerned 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q20C

being charged personally with a drug impaired driving offence

• Not at all concerned 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Moderately concerned 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Very concerned 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q22 [1,3]

What would be your biggest concern(s) about driving while impaired by cannabis if you were to do so?

(Select up to 3 responses) Q22: [interviewer:]Read list and ask for a yes/no for each one. Read them 1 at a time. If more than 3, go back over the list of those selected to accept only 3

• Getting caught by police: 1
• Having a permanent criminal record, possibly affecting employment or international travel: 2
• Being killed or seriously injuring myself in an accident: 3
• Killing or seriously injuring someone else in an accident: 4
• Family or peer judgment: 5
• Damage to property: 6
• Having significantly increased insurance premiums: 7
• Other (Please specify) : 77
• No concerns: 98
• Don't know/ No response: 99

PREQ23

We need your honest responses to these questions. Remember, your responses are completely confidential and no answers will be linked with identities.

Q23

In the past two years have you driven a motor vehicle within two hours of using cannabis?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q23B

Yes, Q23

In the past two years, how often would you say this has occurred? Q23B: [interviewer:](Read list)

• Once: 1
• A few times: 2
• More often: 3
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q23C

Yes, Q23

What was the reason for having driven within two hours of cannabis consumption? Q23C: [interviewer:](Do not read

• I didn't think I was impaired: 1
• I didn't think I would get caught: 2
• I felt peer pressure to drive: 3
• Other (please specify): 77
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q24

Not No, Q23

Have you driven a motor vehicle within two hours of using cannabis in combination with alcohol?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q24A

In the past five years, have you been stopped by police while driving, for any reason? This could include stops for minor driving issues, or random sobriety stops.

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q24B

Yes, Q24A

Was the most recent stop within the last two years?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q24C [1,6]

Yes, Q24A

What was the reason given by the police for this most recent stop? The police... Q24C: [interviewer:](Read list)

Select all that apply

• Were conducting a roadside checkpoint (e.g. random licence check, sobriety check/RIDE program): 1
• Stopped me for a minor driving infraction (e.g., speeding, broken tail light, illegal turn, etc.): 2
• Stopped me for some other reason – specify: 77
• The reason for the stop wasn't clear :3
• Don't know/No response: 99

PREQ24D

Other reason, Unclear, Q24C

Were you stopped by police and investigated for:

Q24D

Other reason, Unclear, Q24C

Alcohol-impaired driving?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q24E

Other reason, Unclear, Q24C

Drug-impaired driving

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q24F [1,10]

Yes, Q24A

What was the outcome of the most recent stop?

Select all that apply Q24F: [interviewer:](Read list)

• I was given a ticket (specify type of infraction) : 1
• I was given a written or verbal warning (specify type of warning) : 2
• I was asked to provide a breath sample at the roadside: 3
• I was asked to give a sample of saliva at the roadside: 4
• I was asked to perform some physical tests at the roadside: 5
• I was arrested/charged with an offence (specify type of charge) : 7
• I received assistance (specify type of assistance) : 8
• Other (specify): 77
• None of these/no outcome: 98
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q26 [1,7]

Part 4 – Sex trade

As you may know, some aspects of the sex trade are illegal in Canada. To the best of your knowledge, which of the following are illegal in Canada?

Select all that apply

• Purchasing sexual services: 1
• Selling sexual services: 2
• Advertising sexual services: 3
• Profiting off of the sale of someone's sexual services: 4
• All of the above: 5
• None of the above: 98
• Don't know/No response: 99

PREQ27

Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: Q27: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is strongly disagree, 5 is strongly agree and 3 is neither

Q27A

Purchasing sexual services should be illegal

• Strongly disagree 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Neither 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Strongly agree 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q27B

Communicating in any place for the purpose of purchasing sexual services, should be illegal

• Strongly disagree 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Neither 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Strongly agree 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q27C

Selling sexual services should be illegal

• Strongly disagree 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Neither 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Strongly agree 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q27D

Advertising the sale of others' sexual services, including in print media, on websites or in locations that offer sexual services for sale, such as erotic massage parlours or strip clubs, should be illegal

• Strongly disagree 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Neither 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Strongly agree 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q27E

Receiving a financial or other material benefit from the sale of sexual services of others, including from participation in business activities involving the sex trade, should be illegal

• Strongly disagree 1: 1
• 2: 2
• Neither 3: 3
• 4: 4
• Strongly agree 5: 5
• Don't know / No response: 99

Q32

Should there be any exceptions to any of these?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q32A

Yes, Q32 Please explain.

• Specify : 77
• Don't know/No response: 99

PREQ33

Part 5 – Access to Justice. Online only

In September 2015, Canada and all United Nations Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (the 2030 Agenda). As part of the 2030 Agenda there are 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that aim to address today's social, economic and environmental challenges. These goals recognize that ending poverty must go hand in hand with strategies that improve health and education, reduce inequality and spur economic growth—all while tackling climate change and working to protect and preserve the environment.

Q33

Online only

How would you describe your level of awareness about the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals? Q33: [interviewer:]On a scale where 1 is not at all aware and 5 is very aware

• 1 Not at all aware: 1
• 2: 2
• 3 Moderately aware: 3
• 4: 4
• 5 Very aware: 5
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q34

Online only

Have you heard anything about Sustainable Development Goal 16: to promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Don't know/No response: 99

Q34A [1,7]

Yes, Q34. Online only

From where did you hear about Sustainable Development Goals 16: to promote just, peaceful and inclusive societies?

Select all that apply Q34A: [interviewer:]Read list

• United Nations: 1
• Civil society organizations: 2
• Work: 3
• School (secondary school, college, university classes, clubs, talks, etc): 4
• Friends/ family/ colleagues: 5
• Other – please specify: 77
• Don't know/No response: 99

PREQ35

Online only

Sustainable Development Goal 16 has three elements 1) promoting peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development 2) providing access to justice for all and 3) building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.

Q35

Online only

Which part of Sustainable Development Goals 16 is most important to you as a Canadian?

Please select one. Q35: [interviewer:]Read list of top 3 again

• Promoting peaceful and inclusive societies: 1
• Providing access to justice for all: 2
• Building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels: 3
• All equally important: 4
• None of these: 98
• Don't know/No response: 99

DEMIN

The following questions will be used for statistical purposes only. All responses are strictly confidential.

Q36 [1,11]

Have you ever been involved in the criminal justice system?

Select all that apply. Q36: [interviewer:]Read list and accept yes/no for each one. Read 1 at a time

• Testifying as a witness in criminal court: 1
• Jury member chosen to participate in a criminal trial: 2
• As the victim/survivor of a non-violent crime: 3
• As the victim/survivor of a violent crime: 4
• After being charged/convicted of a crime: 5
• As a family member of a victim/survivor: 6
• As a family member of an accused/convicted person: 7
• Know someone as victim/accused: 8
• By working in the criminal justice system/Working in a related field: 9
• Volunteering in the criminal justice or related area: 10
• Other (please specify) : 77
• I have not been involved in the criminal justice system before: 98
• Prefer not to answer: 99

Q37 [1,8]

Have you ever been involved in the family justice system in any of the following ways?

Select all that apply. Q37: [interviewer:]Read list and accept yes/no for each one. Read 1 at a time

• As a person who experienced/ is experiencing separation or divorce without a child/children (18 or under) involved: 1
• As a person who experienced/ is experiencing separation or divorce with children (18 or under) involved: 2
• As a family member of someone who experienced/ is experiencing separation or divorce: 3
• As a friend of someone who experienced/ is experiencing separation or divorce: 4
• I work or volunteer in the family justice system: 5
• I have provided personal support to someone going through separation or divorce: 6
• None of the above: 98
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QEDUC

What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed to date? QINC: [interviewer:](Read list)

• Grade 8 or less: 1
• Some high school: 2
• High School diploma or equivalent: 3
• Registered Apprenticeship or other trades certificate or diploma: 4
• Some post-secondary (not completed): 5
• College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma: 6
• University certificate or diploma below bachelor's level: 7
• Bachelor's degree: 8
• Post graduate degree above bachelor's level: 9
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QINC

Which of the following categories best describes your total household income? That is, the total income of all persons in your household, before taxes?

• Under $20,000: 1
• $20,000 to just under $40,000: 2
• $40,000 to just under $60,000: 3
• $60,000 to just under $80,000: 4
• $80,000 to just under $100,000: 5
• $100,000 to just under $120,000: 6
• $120,000 to just under $150,000: 7
• $150,000 and above: 8
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QBORN

Were you born in Canada?

• Yes: 1
• No: 2
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QINDIG

Do you identify as: QINDIG: [interviewer:](Read list)

• First Nations (North American Indian): 1
• Inuit: 2
• Métis: 3
• None of the above: 98
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QETHN [1,2]

Not Indigenous, QINDIG

People living in Canada come from many different ethno-cultural backgrounds or countries. Do you consider yourself to be:

Select up to two answers. QETHN: [interviewer:]Read list

• Arab: 7
• Latin American: 12
• White: 16
• Black: 17
• Southeast Asian (e.g. Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, Thai): 18
• West Asian (e.g., Iranian, Afghan): 20
• South Asian (e.g. East Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan): 19
• Filipino: 21
• Chinese: 22
• Japanese: 23
• Korean: 24
• Other (Please specify): 77
• None of these: 98
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QEMP

Which of the following categories best describes your current employment status? Are you...? QEMP: [interviewer:](Read list)

• Working full-time, that is, 35 or more hours per week: 1
• Working part-time, that is, less than 35 hours per week: 2
• Self-employed: 3
• Unemployed, but looking for work: 4
• A student attending school full-time: 5
• Retired: 6
• Not in the workforce (disability, full-time homemaker, unemployed, not looking for work): 7
• Other: 77
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QTYPE

In what type of community do you live? QTYPE: [interviewer:](Read list)

• Urban (town, city, suburb): 1
• Rural (small or sparsely populated community, with fewer than 5,000 or so residents): 2
• Remote (at least 2 hours drive from an urban centre and lacks reliable transportation links): 3
• On reserve: 4
• None of the above: 98
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QFSA

What are the first three characters of your postal code?

• Please specify : 77
• Prefer not to answer: 99

QPROV

Hesitant, QFSA

In which province or territory do you live?

• Alberta: 1
• British Columbia: 2
• Manitoba: 3
• New Brunswick: 4
• Newfoundland & Labrador: 5
• Northwest Territories: 6
• Nova Scotia: 7
• Nunavut: 8
• Ontario: 9
• Prince Edward Island: 10
• Quebec: 11
• Saskatchewan: 12
• Yukon: 13
• Prefer not to answer: 99

THNK

Thank you, those are all the questions we have for you today.

THNK2

Screened out

Thank you for your time. We appreciate your interest in the study. If you have any questions about the study feel free to contact us in the future toll-free at 1-800-388-2873 or by email at online@probit.ca.

C. Interview Recruitment and Guide

The Department of Justice has commissioned Ekos Research to conduct public opinion research on Canadians’ views on a number of justice-related topics. This research will inform ongoing and future policy development, communications, and public engagement on justice-related issues.

As part of this study, Ekos is conducting a number of one-on-one interviews with Canadians, talking specifically about experiences with and perceptions related to traffic stops by the police. You recently completed our National Justice Survey and indicated your willingness to be contacted for a follow up interview. In this interview, we will ask some follow-up questions about a traffic stop that you reported in the survey, as well as some general questions about your perceptions of traffic stops.

The interview is expected to last about 20 minutes. Participation is voluntary and your confidentiality will be respected. No information that might directly or indirectly reveal your identity will be released or published without your specific consent to the disclosure. The interview will, however, be recorded to allow the interviewer to prepare summary notes from the interview. The recording will be destroyed once the project has been completed.

Police Traffic Stops – Personal Experience

You indicated in the survey that you had been stopped by the police while driving in the last few years. Can you describe your experience(s) with police traffic stop(s) since December 2018?

1. How long ago was the most recent stop?
2. Why did you initially think you were being stopped?
   • Was it your impression that it was for a minor traffic violation, or was it a random sobriety stops?
   • Did you have the impression that the stop was in any way connected with personal characteristics like race, age or gender?

What was the reason that the police gave for stopping you (if different from your perception of why you were stopped)?

What happened during the stop? What was the process like? [probe: did you feel you were treated differently? In what way?]

Were you asked to provide a breath or oral fluid sample, or perform roadside sobriety tests (e.g., were you asked to walk and turn)?

1. Did the police explain why they were asking you to do these tests [probe: was it a mandatory screening or did they indicate they suspected you were impaired)?

What was the outcome of the stop?

Police Traffic Stops – Community

Do you ever talk about occurrences of police traffic stops generally with friends (from the same or other racialized group?) or family? What are those conversations usually like? (probe for themes, types of stops, concerns)

Have any of your friends (from the same or other racialized group?) or family described their own experiences with police traffic stops since December 2018 that they have told you about?

1. What were their experiences like? Were any stops related to alcohol or drug impaired driving?

Do you hear much on the news about police traffic stops? What kinds of things do you hear? What type of news media to you typically go to for information?

1. If not described, is there ever any mention of racial profiling / increased likelihood of being stopped among members of racialized communities?
2. What are your own views on this? Do you feel that this is the case?

Conclusion

Do you have any other thoughts you would like to share?

Thank you for your participation