An Act to amend the Criminal Code (coercive control of intimate partner)

Sponsor

Laurel Collins  NDP

Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)

Status

In committee (Senate), as of Dec. 5, 2024

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-332.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to create an offence of exercising coercive control of an intimate partner by engaging in a pattern of conduct that consists of any combination, or any repeated instances, of any of the following acts: using, attempting to use or threatening to use violence against certain persons, coercing or attempting to coerce the intimate partner to engage in sexual activity or engaging in other conduct that could reasonably be expected to cause the intimate partner to believe that their safety, or the safety of a person known to them, is threatened.
It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

June 12, 2024 Passed 3rd reading and adoption of Bill C-332, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (coercive control of intimate partner)

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

December 3rd, 2024 / 4:05 p.m.


See context

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC

Mr. Speaker, this morning I handed a letter to your office informing you of my resignation, effective in January.

After more than four years waiting, I now have a family doctor, and it is time to listen to his advice about putting my health first. This means these are likely my final remarks as the member of Parliament for Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke. I want to thank the Speaker and the House in advance for granting me some latitude today and, by doing so, perhaps saving me from having to write a book.

Let me start by thanking all those who have supported me over what has been nearly 14 years as a member of Parliament.

First and foremost, I want to thank the constituents of Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke for giving me the privilege of representing them here for four terms. It has been and continues to be an honour to work with the diverse communities that make up this riding, including six municipalities, four first nations and the large contingent of military families. In particular, I am thankful for the support I have received from the South Asian community, the Jewish community and, of course, the 2SLGBTQI+ community, both in my riding and from across the country.

Special thanks also go to my campaign teams in six elections and all the volunteers and donors and the many trade unionists who always came out to support me.

My biggest thanks, of course, goes to my husband, Teddy Pardede. When I first told him I was considering running for office, he said, “Okay, honey, you go do that,” but he has steadfastly stood by me as a public figure despite it turning out to require a little more than that from him and to be a little more complicated all round. He has supported me as a public figure for 20 of the 25 years we have been together.

Members know I am a crier, and I promised I would not cry completely through the speech, but I am going to get a few opportunities.

I have to confess that sometimes I am still a little astonished to actually be standing in the House. How did a queer kid from a farm in Nebraska, from a working-class family riven by domestic violence and child abuse, both shrouded in silence, become a member of Parliament? It was never part of my plan. I will always be grateful to Canada for providing me refuge more than 50 years ago, when it was still illegal for men to have sex with men in the United States, and for giving me so many opportunities to build a life here.

Who is to blame for me being a New Democrat MP? Well, it started with Tommy Douglas, who signed me up as a party member when he was my MP in Nanaimo more than 45 years ago; I had to sign the card before I got dessert. That resulted in my working with and for the party for over a decade, including a stint on Ed Broadbent's staff here in in Ottawa nearly 40 years ago.

After that time, I spent over a decade involved in human rights and international solidarity work. When I arrived back in Canada after a year of human rights work abroad and took up teaching again, I fell for an invitation from the new NDP leader, Jack Layton, to have lunch to discuss my human rights work. We did discuss human rights, but at the end of that lunch Jack said, “I'll bet you think there should be gay members of Parliament,” and of course, I agreed. Then he said, “Well, how do you think they get there if people like you will not run?” So I agreed, despite repeatedly having said no before and despite the many, myself included, who thought the path for a gay New Democrat running in the second-largest military riding in the country was more than a little uphill.

When I came to the House, it was after two losses, but more importantly, it was after more than 20 years teaching criminal justice, after serving as a municipal police board member and city councillor, and after working as an international human rights researcher in Indonesia, East Timor and Afghanistan, where I was often in the field alongside Canadian peacekeepers. I have tried to be true to who I am and to bring the expertise I acquired along the way to my work here in the House. As an out and proud member of the queer community, I hope I have demonstrated that diversity is one of our strengths as a nation and that more diverse Parliaments do indeed make better laws.

From 2011, I have been privileged to serve as the NDP spokesperson for queer rights. Fourteen years as the critic on one topic may be some kind of record, I am not sure, and we are still the only party to have such a position. I am proud to have successfully led initiatives in the House to add transgender rights to the Canadian Human Rights Act and the hate crimes section of the Criminal Code, to ban conversion therapy, to bring an end to the gay blood ban and to provide a path to safety in Canada for queer and trans refugees whose lives are at imminent risk. However, I want to stress that any progress on queer rights that has been made here has only been possible because of years of struggle at the grassroots level across the country by the queer community and the always unwavering support of my caucus, our leader and, I have to say, key MPs in other parties.

In the House, I have also served as the NDP public safety, defence and justice critic over the years. Again, I have been able to lead initiatives in the House that have led to the elimination of criminal records for the personal possession of drugs in this country and to expand access to community-based bail supervision, both to help make communities more safe and also more just.

Some things are still left undone. My initiative on coercive and controlling behaviour in intimate partner violence, now in the form of the member for Victoria's private member's bill, Bill C-332, remains stuck in the other place, despite having passed here unanimously last summer. I remain disappointed that my repeated attempts have failed to convince both Conservative and Liberal governments to remove self-harm from the military code of conduct as a disciplinary offence, an initiative that would signal an important change in attitude toward mental health in the military.

I have been privileged to be able to bring the whole of who I am to my work here in the House, despite increasing levels of harassment and threats for doing so. I am disappointed that we failed to pass my private member's bill to add the queer community to federal employment equity legislation so we can have a workforce that fairly represents the whole of the country we are. As a gay man who lost many friends in the first round of the AIDS epidemic, I remain perplexed by the government's failure to take the measures necessary to eliminate new cases of HIV in this country by 2030. All it would take is decriminalizing HIV non-disclosure and modest annual expenditures on community-based testing and treatment programs.

As an MP, I have also worked to provide strong service to my riding. I successfully secured better protections for southern resident killer whales, got federal funding for the initial cleanup of Esquimalt Harbour and delivered support for the local shipbuilding industry, as well as providing strong advocacy for individual constituents in their dealings with the federal government.

Let me stop to say how important the support is that I have received from my staff here in Ottawa and in my constituency office, most of whom, breaking the rule, are here in the gallery right now. They have been loyal and long-serving. Again, maybe I have set some records here; I have one staff person who has been with me from day one, and we refer to the other person in the office as the junior staff person because they have only been here 12 years. The same is true in my constituency office. None of what I have been able to accomplish would have been possible without their support.

I am especially proud to be part of this, my fourth, NDP caucus, which is particularly skilled and hard-working and which, under the leadership of Jagmeet Singh, has secured many important victories for ordinary working Canadians—

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Coercive control is another issue that has been discussed, meaning there is a need to educate people about it.

A bill is currently before Parliament to make coercive control a crime, Bill C‑332. It is often argued that the authorities have fewer tools to intervene when coercive control is not criminalized.

What do you think of the bill? What is your view on criminalizing coercive control?

November 4th, 2024 / 12:15 p.m.


See context

Co-responsible of Political Affairs, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale

Louise Riendeau

For Bill C‑332 to be applied optimally, it is absolutely necessary to train all the stakeholders who will have to apply it—police officers and prosecutors, among others—before it comes into force, so that they fully understand what it's all about and can assess situations very well.

These are the lessons we learned on a recent mission to Great Britain. Upstream training really is the secret.

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Thank you, Ms. Tremblay.

In any case, we'll have to follow up on the wearing of the electronic bracelet and see how the measure is deployed in the field, given the connection problems that exist in some regions.

Ms. Riendeau, this isn't your first appearance before this committee either. You've already spoken about the criminalization of coercive control and Bill C‑332. Have you had a chance to study it? I think the answer is yes, of course.

What's next? I don't think this bill is going to solve everything, so what would your recommendations be to complement it?

Louise Riendeau Co-responsible of Political Affairs, Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting us today to speak on this serious issue.

Our association represents 46 help centres and shelters for women who are victims of domestic violence. These shelters are situated all over Quebec. Since the beginning of the year, there have been 20 femicides in Quebec, 12 of which were committed by an intimate partner.

Domestic violence, also known as coercive control, is a social problem linked to relationships of inequality that have long existed between men and women. It is this type of domineering relationship, which some men fundamentally subscribe to, that leads to domestic violence and, ultimately, femicide. Fortunately, there are solutions to combat violence against women. Here are a few.

One is training. In Canada, as elsewhere, women are most likely to be murdered at the hands of a current or former partner. Contrary to popular belief, intimate partner femicides are among the most predictable murders. Also contrary to popular belief is the fact that femicides are not necessarily preceded by physical violence. However, coercive control is systematically present and is at the heart of violence. Surveillance through technology, harassment, isolation, jealousy and threats, among others, which are all manifestations of coercive control and continue beyond a breakup, are red-flag precursors to femicide.

A good risk assessment ensures that a safety net is in place before femicide occurs. It is therefore essential that workers from legal, health and social services, who are often on the frontline dealing with abused women and children, be trained and equipped to properly recognize and assess the risks. To do so, governments must provide the necessary financial resources for training to be offered to all these stakeholders. It would also be useful for the government to take stock of the tools and practices that exist to assess the risks associated with domestic violence and to determine best practices in this area.

Another solution would be to criminalize coercive control. Better protection for women and children would require the passage of Bill C‑332, which criminalizes coercive control. It would send a strong message to victims that more subtle but equally devastating forms of violence and control are now recognized by the justice system. This would have the effect of speeding up training on assessing the risk of spousal homicide for anyone working with female victims of domestic violence. If the bill is passed, police will be able to document coercive control and prosecutors will be able to take it into account throughout the prosecution. We urge the Senate and the government to pass Bill C‑332.

I'll now turn it over to my colleague.

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

That is something we should keep in mind and consider in our report on femicides.

If I recall correctly, the CAVAC Network was one of the contributors to the Quebec report that examines supports for victims of sexual and domestic violence, “Rebâtir la confiance”. The report was produced by the National Assembly, and the criminalization of coercive control is one of its recommendations. However, knowing that this is not the responsibility of the Quebec National Assembly, Quebec members are asking the federal government to take action.

We are currently studying Bill C‑332, which paves the way for making coercive control a crime. Why is it important to pass the bill?

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

That's interesting. Right now, there's a lot of talk about training police forces. In fact, I'm meeting with an officer from the Granby city police force soon to talk about this; he wants to let me know that an annual conference I went to last year was also attended by police forces, as well as representatives of community groups and the Quebec legal system. They're all interested in Bill C-332. They were talking about how important it is for the bill to pass and the importance of criminalizing coercive control. These stakeholders represented a cross-section of society.

You mentioned something interesting.

I'm now going to turn to Ms. Mercer or Witness 1. Both—

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I thanked the witnesses for taking part in this important additional meeting as part of our study on coercive control.

I would reiterate that the idea for the study came from a request by Quebec government MNAs who tabled the rebuilding trust report and who met with experts in various social and legal spheres. That report led to the adoption of major recommendations in Quebec, such as special courts and electronic bracelets. However, one element does not fall under Quebec jurisdiction and that's the criminalization of coercive control.

Ms. Heslop, here is my question.

In your opening remarks, you mentioned a bill. Were you referring to Bill C-332, which is currently being studied by the Senate and which seeks to criminalize coercive control?

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses for being with us today for this additional meeting as part of our study on coercive control.

Ms. Heslop, in your opening remarks, you spoke about a bill. Were you referring to Bill C-332, on the criminalization of coercive control?

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Thank you.

I just want to thank all the witnesses, appreciating this is very difficult testimony for all of you to share.

I want to start off with Ms. Thomson.

Congratulations. I first want to mention about getting Bill C-332 amended to include animal abuse.

This is a big issue. It's true that a lot of people who have pets consider them to be like family members. They don't want to leave them because they're their main form of support, especially in abusive situations. They can talk to their pet and they won't say anything. It's their only form of support.

Do you agree that it's necessary for shelters, regarding the pets of people fleeing violence, to allow the pets into shelters?

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Yes, thank you, Ms. Dhillon.

In closing, I am going to talk about an aspect that has not been discussed as much by the committee.

I thought of this study a long time ago. Finally, Bill C‑332 has made its way through the legislative process, and it is currently being studied in the Senate. Very little has been said about it here, but many articles on this bill were published last week in Quebec. The bill seeks to criminalize coercive conduct.

Have you had a chance to read the bill briefly, or have you heard about it? If so, do you have any recommendations for improving it? I see our study mainly as complementary work. There is a bill, but could we do something else while we wait for the bill to be passed and for coercive behaviour to be criminalized?

Jeanne Sarson Co-Founder, Persons Against Non-State Torture

I'll follow Linda.

Furthering our brief recommendation, promoting a victim-centred approach relating to children means creating the social-legal environment wherein children can speak of the impact that non-state torturers' coercive control manipulations have on them, on other children and against animals. Their safety is always threatened, creating never-ending vulnerability as described in Bill C-332.

Our brief introduced Carrie, whose father forced her to drown her pet kitten and threatened to drown her if she told of his torture trafficking.

Carrie is not alone. Alex's father took her to see baby rabbits. Hugging one, her father then took the rabbit and broke its neck. His message was clear. Alex said she knew never to tell that he was torture trafficking her. Alex was six years old.

The knowledge is that these perpetrators inflict coercive control within and outside of their home. Children's victimization can include the harming of animals. Non-state torturers' coercive control of their children includes intentionally inflicting no-win victimization ordeals in and out of their home.

Hope described how her father used to blackmail her by forcing her to allow him to orally rape her so her siblings would be fed. She wondered what choice she had.

Carrie described being forced to smear Margaret, another little girl, with perpetrators' body fluids so she would not have to consume their body fluids, saying that there was no way she could win. The decision left her feeling like she had harmed Margaret. She felt so guilty, ashamed, humiliated and terrified.

To end the epidemic of intimate partner violence against women, red flag indicators will be preventive interventions available to children if the torturer's m.o. of coercive behaviours is understood as involving their exertion of absolute domination, power and control in and out of their home; inflicting torture, terror, horror and dehumanization on their children and other children; and the harming of animals. As well, it is the possible involvement of organized criminal torture, trafficking and formal networks.

To Linda's recommendation I add support for Bill C-332 and the criminalization of non-state torture to expose the perpetrators' criminality.

Thank you.

Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Once again, thank you to the witnesses.

Now that I've had the opportunity to speak to each witness, I'm going to ask a question that's for everyone.

In recent months, I took part in a meeting that focused on violence against women. This meeting was organized by women's groups. Representatives from community groups, elected municipal officials, municipal police forces and the Sûreté du Québec, as well as representatives from the office of the Quebec Minister of Public Security took part. As you can see, everyone has to get involved.

I'd like to talk about the issue of coercive control, specifically. At the meeting, I heard a lot about Bill C‑332. This federal bill opened the door to including coercive control. Of course, all the parties have spoken out on this one, with some reservations.

Are you aware of this bill?

What improvements would you make to the next bill that will deal with the criminalization of coercive control?

Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC

Thank you.

I have another question. We just passed the third reading in the House of Commons of Bill C-332, which is now on its way to the Senate. Once this bill is passed, it will make coercive and controlling behaviour a criminal offence.

As the new national director of public prosecutions, what actions will you be taking to prepare the prosecution service to handle these new cases?

Criminal CodePrivate Members' Business

June 12th, 2024 / 3:30 p.m.


See context

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Conservative Chris d'Entremont

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at third reading stage of Bill C-332 under Private Member's Business.