Status of Women Committee on Nov. 20th, 2023

[Martine Jeanson]

Yes, the perpetrators always know where we are. What they want is to get close to us, but we never know when they are going to arrive. If the Bill S‑205 is passed, we would hear an alarm warning us to leave and hide, and telling us that the police are on their way. We could go to a neighbour's, for example. If we were at work when the perpetrator shows up, we could stay in the office. We wouldn't go out alone on the street.

So the bracelet gives us a warning. The women who were murdered didn't see their perpetrator arrive. When the attempt was made on me, I didn't see him coming. He came in the back door. Once the perpetrator is there, it's too late. We need to have enough time to leave and hide.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

That's because they have tactics. They have ways of tracking you down and finding you.

[Martine Jeanson]

That's right.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

I have one final brief question, Madam Chair, but I don't want to take any of Ms. Roberts' time away from her.

Ms. Jeanson, I'd like to congratulate you because you have nonetheless found a way to speak with men and spend time with them. You are kind-hearted. It also takes education and communication skills, as Ms. Larouche said a little earlier. You are tremendously brave.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you so much.

I'll pass it over to Anna.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Chair, I'd like to move my motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

This is a notice of motion. It will be very simple.

Go ahead.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

I move:

That, pursuant to the order of reference from the House dated Thursday, November 9, 2023, the committee invite the Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Youth, to appear for no fewer than two hours regarding the Supplementary Estimates (B) 2023-24, and that this meeting take place as soon as possible, and no later than Thursday, December 7, 2023.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

The motion is on the floor. Are there any questions or comments?

Sonia, we spoke earlier. I just want to ask if it is one hour of the minister and one hour of officials.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Yes, I want one hour for the minister and one hour of officials.

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

It's moved. She just moved her motion, which she is allowed to do. It's on the minister. We had already spoken about this.

Okay. We'd be having the minister for the estimates on December 7. Is it agreed?

(Motion agreed to)

Fantastic.

With the time remaining you have 35 seconds left.

Go ahead—

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Chair, I just want to clarify that it's one hour.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

It's one hour for the minister and one hour for officials. We'll break it into that. It's two hours in total.

Anna, you have 35 seconds left.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to ask a question of Martine.

Thank you very much. You're very brave to come here, and I respect you for that.

This is my question. Do you think it would be advantageous to help people going through this violence with their partners if they were notified if the partner was, say, within a mile radius of the individual?

[Martine Jeanson]

I didn't quite understand your question. There were a few outages in my headset.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

That's okay. I'm just thinking of a way to acknowledge.... For example, if the criminal's wearing a bracelet, would it not be advantageous that you be notified if he is within, say, a certain radius of where you are located?

[Martine Jeanson]

That's how it would work. The bracelet triggers an alarm as soon as the person is within, let's say, a kilometre from the victim. The victim gets a warning and the police get one too. They know when they hear an alarm that he's inside the perimeter. A police officer will track him down.

At the same time, it gives us evidence for the courtroom. When I go to court with a victim, we never have any evidence. The victim says that the individual was there, but there is no evidence, because the victim didn't have time to activate her cell phone because she had to get away. So the bracelet provides evidence for the courtroom. The police can come and testify that the victim was followed to her place of work, for example. That gives us the evidence needed to incriminate the perpetrator and prevent a murder.

I personally would have liked to be able to go and hide. If the detection perimeter is set at one kilometre, then when the alarm goes off, the victim has time to go to a neighbour for help.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Excellent. Thank you so much.

We'll now move it over to Anita.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much.

Before I start my questions, I just want to say to you that by taking the terrible experiences you have had.... Most people would not go forward publicly and retraumatize themselves by talking about it again and again in order to help other people. The fact that you're doing this to help others not to have the same kinds of horrible experiences says a lot about your characters, and I just want to commend you for doing that.

I do want to ask a follow-up question.

Ms. Tremblay, you said something that got me thinking because one of my questions....

Mr. Viater, thank you for being back before this committee. I'll let you answer more on the legal side of things, but on the personal side of things, I would ask Ms. Tremblay and Ms. Jeanson.

The current Criminal Code does include a lot of protections for victims. It does include a lot of this, and, of course, Keira's law—I was here when our committee did that—even strengthened that. Obviously though, in your experiences, that hasn't been enough. There has been a failing in the existing system.

You said something, Ms. Tremblay. You said that it's not just about keeping safe, and that one of the things that, for instance, a bracelet could do is allow you in court to prove if somebody broke their conditions, because it's very hard to actually find evidence of that. I wonder if the two of you could talk shortly about what this bill does that is missing in the current laws.

Then I'd ask Mr. Viater to be a little more specific about how it complements Keira's law and even Bill S-12, which is before the Senate now.

I'll start with Ms. Tremblay.

[Diane Tremblay]

There are a lot of gaps at the moment. We aren't protected and Senator Boisvenu said so several times. We agree, and so does Ms. Jeanson. We are not the only women in this situation. We need protection. We are faced with an abuser and it's a matter of life or death. That's where we stand now.

Bill S‑205 will provide women with a tool that can keep them safe, as Ms. Jeanson said, before the assailant gets to the house.

I remember one occasion, among others, when I thought after three weeks that things had calmed down, when my abuser broke down my door. I jumped over the railing, ran down the street and climbed a fence. He caught up to me, forced me to the ground and put a knife to my throat. I shouted "fire" as loud as I could, because someone told me that when you shout "help" nobody will come. So I shouted "fire" and my neighbour came to my rescue with some others and surrounded him. But listen to this: he called me from the police car because they had forgotten to take away his cell phone. It was March 26, 2007. He called me when there was a police officer in the house with me, to tell me to drop my complaints. I won't tell you what he called me. He told me that I'd better watch out for what would happen to me if I didn't drop the charges. The policewoman who was there took some action afterwards. I'm saying this just to point out that he was in the police car when he called me and broke his conditions.

I can't tell you just how important the electronic bracelet will be once the bill is adopted. We have our reasons for requesting that there be no amendments to the bill. We are here before you to tell you what actually happens. We are the ones who really know. We want to be protected and we want to protect our children.

My abuser attacked my parents. I didn't see my parents for three years. I didn't see my sons for three years. I had taken my children and left them with their father. I'm telling you this because it was a very difficult time for me, and I'm only alive because of my neighbours. Because I jumped over the handrail and was able to run away. He followed me, caught me and threw me to the ground. I had a knife at my throat and I fought as hard as I could.

I can tell you that I'm very pleased to be here with you today, with Ms. Jeanson and Senator Boisvenu, to testify about all this.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We are so grateful that you survived that.

I know I have only a minute left, so it's very short.

Mr. Viater, if I don't have time, you can respond in writing. Is that okay? Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Jeanson.

[Martine Jeanson]

I too would like to talk about therapy. As I said earlier, I work with violent men that we have been able to help. People have to know the difference between a narcissistic pervert and a violent man. Violent men have often experienced violence; they have no resources and don't know how to manage the violence. So we work with them and give them some tools. These men cry over it because they would never have done any harm if they had had the resources. So yes, it is possible to change these men.

Alongside therapy, we prepare reports for the court. We can tell a judge that a particular person will never change because he's a dangerous narcissistic pervert. A violent man is something else.

What I'm saying is that therapy can change and eliminate many forms of behaviour. They go hand-in-hand. We need to help men and stop spending so much effort on therapy for women. Men are the problem, not us women. If we get to the bottom of the problem and pay more attention to education in schools, as someone pointed out, spousal violence could decrease. There is so much of it now because there are no resources for men. Therapy and bracelets may make them think, and they are the only tools we have at the moment to reduce the violence and increase safety for women.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Philip, we'll go to you now. Go for it.

[Philip Viater]

Thank you.

My comments mostly deal with the new 810 section, otherwise known as the peace bond provisions, because what Senator Boisvenu has done is very clever. He's created a two-tiered 810 system, in a way. We already have an 810 system, but that 810 system is somewhat limited. For example, they could give up to 12 months, and it's not really geared toward intimate partner violence.

In Senator Boisvenu's bill, he has a separate system where, first, it goes before a provincial court judge. In the current 810 system, it actually goes before a justice. It could be a criminal court judge, but it could also be a justice of the peace. In addition, he's lengthened the restraining order provisions to now be two years, and perhaps even three years if there's a previous record. In the old version, when it doesn't deal with intimate partner violence, that doesn't exist. He's also increased, if you breach, the penalty to up to two years, whereas in the old one it's one year.

It's a really good two-tiered system that recognizes intimate partner violence. Even the fact that it's here gives more publicity to the fact that this is an epidemic and it has to be taken seriously. It goes hand in hand with Keira's law, both federally and provincially. As judges hopefully get and implement that training, they'll be in a better position to know what the conditions are that we should impose, including that treatment program for domestic violence and including even the ankle monitoring.