Status of Women Committee on April 23rd, 2013

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

The duty to consult—

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Madam Chair, I have a point of order. If we're talking about paternalism, it takes many forms. Asking me whom I talk to or don't talk to from my family is not part of what we're talking about in this committee.

[An hon. member]

I have a point of clarification, Madam Chair.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

I would ask witnesses to show me the same respect I am showing them.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

That's not a point of order.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I think it's important to clarify that it was not a paternalistic comment. The individual who has been referred to is a member of the Government of Manitoba who has sought the support of the federal government in this issue.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

Okay, we'll carry on with the minister.

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Listen, I want to be clear. I did not want to sound paternalistic. If I have offended the member, I sincerely apologize.

My point is simply that we have been exhorted by the Province of Manitoba and by others across Canada to give spouses on reserves the same rights that other Canadians enjoy. As you acknowledged in your introductory question, this has gone on, this gap, for 25 years. I wonder why we want to wait any more. You know better than I do that the inherent right to self-government is not the answer to filling the gap. Right now the constitutional provisions we have, as well as the Indian Act we have all inherited, make it impossible for first nations, unless they are under the land management system, to pass these laws. This is about trying to fill a gap in the most reasonable way and to give couples on reserves the same rights that you and I enjoy.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Minister, for us this is an issue that your government has chosen to play politics with. We believe that proper consultation with first nations needs to take place. We also believe that there need to be measures to remedy this situation. We need a national inquiry into missing and murdered aboriginal women. We need to address the shocking lack of housing that leads to tensions amongst families, the extreme poverty that exists in communities, the lack of education funding, and the list goes on. That's the kind of action we'd like to see from this government.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

Moving right along to the next questioner, we have Roxanne James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to both Minister Ambrose and Minister Valcourt for being here today and speaking on Bill S-2. I know that both of you feel very strongly about this particular piece of legislation, as I do.

This past weekend I spoke to my husband about this very bill. I spoke about the current situation facing aboriginal women on reserves and what this legislation will mean to every one of those women.

Minister Valcourt, I know that in your opening remarks, you talked about this day and age—and my husband said exactly the same thing. He looked at me as if I were speaking a foreign language. He could not believe that in this day and age, in Canada, aboriginal women on reserves do not have the same interest and access to matrimonial property as does every person in this room today. He was shocked. I have to be honest, and I apologize for getting emotional, but as a member of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, this is a priority. We have to pass this legislation

Minister Ambrose, I know that one of the things you said in your opening remarks is that you considered the most important aspect of this bill to be the access to emergency protection orders and temporary exclusive occupation orders. I agree with you on that. I think it's paramount. I think we need to protect women and we need to make it happen now—not in another year, not in another two years. We need to pass this legislation now.

I'll be honest with you, before I became a member of Parliament, before I read this bill, and before I understood the breadth of what this would mean to aboriginal women, I had no idea there was an issue of such inequality on reserves and this legislative gap. I was shocked. I think most Canadian listening to this committee today would be shocked and surprised to hear of this legislative gap. I think they're standing behind this government to make sure this legislation goes through.

Minister Ambrose, this question has to do with the protection of a violent spouse in one's own home, which is currently not extended to aboriginal women on reserves.

If someone were to break into one's home right now—hopefully not in my riding of Scarborough Centre or in any riding across this country—and became violent or abusive, the police would be called and that person would be removed. That's a given, and no one would question that.

When a spouse becomes violent and abusive, they should be the ones removed from the family home, not the victim of violence. Yet on reserves, the opposite is true today. I think Canadians need to understand that, and know this bill is going to protect those women. In cases where the need for protection is extended and where children are involved, having extended access to the family home is crucial.

Bill S-2, in addition to providing access to emergency protection orders, also allows the courts to take these factors into consideration and provide extended, exclusive occupation access to the family home. This is paramount. We need this legislation.

Minister Ambrose, could you speak in more detail to the need for emergency protection orders on reserves and the need for access to temporary exclusive occupation orders? I know you did in your opening remarks.

Thank you.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB]

Thank you for your comments.

I know I'm repeating myself, but emergency protection orders save lives. Anyone—any worker, front-line service provider at a shelter, or police officer—who works in any field related to violence against women will tell you that they are one of the most important tools for preventing family violence.

Of course, as you indicated, Canadian women have access to a number of legal protections right now that are not available to men and women living on reserve. As I said earlier, aboriginal women are three times more likely than other Canadian women to experience violent crime, including spousal violence.

The emergency protection orders that are provided in Bill S-2 are very important, because they extend these protections to women and children living on reserve.

Bill S-2 also gives first nations band councils the ability to create their own legislation—which I think is important, as Minister Valcourt said—related to matrimonial property rights and to enforce these orders on reserve. Should they not, then obviously the federal regulations would stand.

I wanted to go through a little bit of the process, because a lot of thought has gone into this. It has been 25 years. We've tried four times now to pass this legislation, and there has been a lot of consultation with first nations and with the Native Women's Association of Canada, as Minister Valcourt indicated.

When it comes to emergency protection orders, any spouse or common-law partner, whether or not they are a member of a first nation, will be able to make an application to a judge or a justice of the peace for an emergency protection order. That's incredibly important, as you said. The person seeking protection will not need to be occupying the family home at the time they make the application, which is also important.

A peace officer or any other person will be able to make the application on behalf of the person seeking protection—which is also very important and, of course, with their consent. They can also make the application without the person's consent, if they have permission from the judge or the justice of the peace. Again, those of you who are involved in issues around preventing violence against women know why this is also very important.

The application will be able to be made ex parte, which means that it is a proceeding that involves only the person seeking protection and does not involve representation or notification of the other spouse or common-law partner. Again, this is very important for a women who's going through issues around domestic violence.

If the designated judge is satisfied that family violence has occurred and that the victim is at risk and in need of protection, he or she will be able to make an order excluding the other spouse or common-law partner from the family home for up to 90 days as well as indicating other measures that the designated judge considers necessary for the immediate protection of the victim or of the property that is at risk of damage.

Again, this is what all of us are used to dealing with when it comes to domestic violence in every other part of the country, but on reserve this is not the case today.

In making the order, the designated judge will be required to consider the broader details and circumstances surrounding the family violence, including, for example, the history and nature of the violence and the best interests of any children.

A peace officer will be able to serve a copy of the order on any person who is specified in the order. A person will be bound by the order as soon as they receive notice of it. The peace officer will also let the applicant know that the order has been served on the spouse or common-law partner. The contents of the order may, for example, direct the peace officer to remove the spouse or common-law partner from the family home.

Emergency protection orders are often the initial procedures in a relationship breakup, which would be followed by application for exclusive occupation and valuation.

One of the greatest hardships for women fleeing a violent family situation is that they often leave with only the belongings on their backs, often going to a shelter and ending up without long-term housing.

Bill S-2 will ensure that women seeking protection from a violent spouse will not be revictimized by needing to run, often to the nearest town or miles away.

Obviously, you know how I feel about emergency protection orders. Every day that goes by without passing this bill, these women have less protection.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

Now we'll move to Madam Sgro for seven minutes.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Madam Bennett is replacing me on the committee today.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Thank you very much.

In 2006 Minister Prentice, I think appreciating the complexity of this issue, appointed Wendy Grant-John to do the study. In her report she proposed that there would need to be stand-alone federal legislation, but in her final report she actually said:

The viability and effectiveness of any legislative framework will also depend on necessary financial resources being made available for implementation of non-legislative measures.... Without these kinds of supports from the federal government, matrimonial real property protections will simply not be accessible to the vast majority of First Nation people.

I think, as my colleague has said—and we on this side agree—the legal gaps need to be filled but without doing what the ministerial representative recommended. I remember when that report was tabled there was a huge caution from all across this country not to cherry-pick from her report. You had to do all of it, not just one bit.

So my first question is that seeing as it seems that Wendy Grant-John has, unfortunately, not been able to speak freely, will you allow her to appear before this committee?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Well, I—

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

On a point of order, I don't think the opposition member can ask a witness on whether they're going to allow someone to appear before our committee. That's a decision of the committee.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

The member should understand the issue. Perhaps I didn't explain myself properly.

Wendy Grant-John cannot speak publicly without the minister's permission. Will she have the minister's permission to come before this committee?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Let me be very candid: I'm not aware of the status of Madam Wendy Grant-John. I don't have the privilege of knowing the lady, but this is something I could look into.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

That's great.

In 2006, the department commissioned the Johnston report to look at shelter funding methodology on reserve. It was to bring on-reserve shelters up to par with other shelters in Canada. Unfortunately, according to a report commissioned by the Alberta Council of Women's Shelters, it determined that the six on-reserve shelters in Alberta were underfunded by approximately $2.2 million in 2010-11.

I need a commitment from the minister: Can you get the shelters on reserve at least up to par?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

I did not prepare to discuss shelters today. I prepared to discuss this bill.

I can take note of your question and get back to you, Madame Bennett.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

As you know, the reason we have withheld support for this bill is that native women across the country are feeling that it will not solve the problem on its own. We actually need to see the full suite of initiatives in order to give support.

Minister, you used the words "not afforded the same rights”, but what we're hearing from native women across Canada is that they can't afford to access the rights that would be present in this legislation.

It means that if you kick this to a provincial system and there's not the capacity within first nations to do alternative dispute resolution—there's no capacity to keep women on the reserve where they prefer to be and, again, build the capacity first nation by first nation—they will not be able to access the provincial courts. They won't have access to ensure there is the expertise to deal with unique legal and cultural issues regarding first nations.

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Let me answer you in three ways.

First, as you know, there will be a centre of excellence, created in order to do just that, to deal with the capacity and give—

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

When will that be?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

This will be when the act receives royal assent.

After it receives royal assent, we will establish this centre of excellence to do—