Minority Views on the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act

3.  Introduction (continued)

3.  Introduction (continued)

3.3  Methodology (continued)

3.3.4 Participant Selection Criteria

All participants were recruited randomly by Créatec according to the following criteria:

3.3.5 Participant Incentive

As is standard qualitative research practice, each respondent received an incentive payment of $50 at the end of their session for their participation.

3.3.6 Discussion Guide

Participants in all 16 groups were queried along the lines of the client-approved discussion guide in English and French (see Appendix 1).

After the introduction and initial discussion about awareness of terrorist acts and anti-terrorism legislation, the following procedure was adopted in all 5 locations:

After discussing the last handout on investigative and preventive powers, the moderator explained and participants were queried about 2 mechanisms associated with these powers – the sunset clause and the annual reporting obligation to Parliament by the Attorney General and Solicitor General.  Sessions ended with discussions about the impact the legislation might have had on participants personally, or on their communities.

Note that any mention of real or perceived backlash or the legislation's impact on the Charter rights of Canadians was to be probed whenever it initially emerged during the discussions.

3.3.7 Moderating and Analysis

This project used a team approach with 4 moderators conducting groups in the 5 different locales, due to the large number of groups to be conducted within a short time frame.  The fact that all 4 moderators in this study reported similar findings and observations across all 3-target groups and across all 5 locations increases the validity of the findings.