Thank you very much.
Indeed, as you have heard from numerous organizations that have appeared before you already, there are various objections to the short title.
It's not to take issue with what Ms. Papp said, that practices that are harmful to women we may understand to be barbaric. I am not taking issue with that. I am not in a camp of being an apologist for violence—not at all. Let's not make any mistake about that. It's rather the pairing of “barbaric” and “cultural” that is the problem, because it seems to imply that the people who are perpetrating harmful practices and/or the victims of harmful practices are somehow relegated to some select cultural communities. As we know, that is a patent falsehood. We know that family violence, domestic violence, wife assault, and other forms of abuse are endemic across Canadian society. They affect newcomers, long-term residents, aboriginal Canadians, and citizens of many generations. They affect Canadians right across the social strata of this country.
That's the problem with the short title. It is suggesting that somehow there are only some communities that we need to be concerned about, rather than dedicating ourselves to eradicating violence everywhere.
The one thing I would particularly underscore in response to your invitation is that if there is any specific focus of where resources are needed for eradicating the harms and violence this bill seeks to achieve, it is in rural and remote communities, where women in particular have far less access to services and support, and yet research suggests that the need for such services and support is much greater because the incidence of at least reported violence is higher.
That's the objection. The bill in effect skews the problem, misrepresents the problem, and is deeply offensive in implying a degree of stigmatization and xenophobia that I really don't think this government should be standing behind.
Thank you.