Justice Committee on Feb. 15th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Thank you very much. I said you could have a few extra seconds and it was great.

We will now go to Madame Brière.

Mrs. Brière, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Collins, thank you so much for being here with us this morning.

I thank you both for the work you have done on Bill C‑332.

Of course, as women, we understand very well the importance of putting laws such as this one in place, so that violence against women is eradicated or, at the very least, diminished.

In Quebec, 2,700 women have had access to centres for abused women, shelter resources. That's not counting the 1,900 children who were also sheltered. In addition, more than 25,000 people requested related services, such as counselling or accompaniment. So we can see that this problem is very widespread.

You used the definition of “dating partners”. Why don't you refer to the definition of “common-law partner” already in the Criminal Code under section 2?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

One of the things we heard from frontline organizations was that dating partners might not be in a common-law situation—for example, people who are engaged to be married but who aren't actually dating in the traditional sense or in our cultural understanding of dating. There are arranged marriages. There is a wide spectrum of what can fall under “dating partners”, so we wanted to make sure that it was broad enough to include those situations.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Have you considered including children? There might even be an aggravating factor for children under 18.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Yes. I think the committee and the government should look into how we can best protect children.

I think the scope of this bill is really trying to address intimate partner violence, and that, of course, has an impact on children under 18. There's a lot of research out there on how children are impacted, even when they aren't on the receiving end of coercive control or physical violence, and how just witnessing it impacts them. It's important that those aspects be explored.

I would say the scope of this bill is not going to cover young children who are being abused by their parents.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Your bill stipulates that the victim must prove subjective fear. Would it have been preferable for the test used to assess whether the conduct was likely to cause harm to the victim to be that of a reasonable person placed in the same circumstances?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I'm sorry, but can you repeat the question? I didn't catch it completely.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

In your bill, you stipulate that the victim must prove subjective fear. Would it have been preferable for the test used to assess whether the conduct was likely to cause harm to the victim to be that of a reasonable person placed in the same circumstances?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

We did use the model the U.K. bill uses, which is to ensure that significant impact includes reasonable fear of violence. The impact could be a decline in physical or mental well-being or health, or alarm or distress. This is because of what we've heard about how people experience intimate partner violence.

If we just—and I didn't catch the exact language that you used in terms of a reasonable person—

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

It's a person placed in the same circumstances.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I think it's critical that we have a broad enough definition that we are acknowledging the impact of intimate partner violence and coercive control on victims and not excluding some of the ways in which that impacts them. This will be developed in case law. If we narrow that definition, we run the risk of excluding instances of coercive control and patterns of coercive control, and we risk leaving out some victims from the definition.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Don't you think there's a risk of revictimization and retraumatization?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I do think there's a risk of retraumatization anytime we have victims entering our criminal justice system. Right now our criminal justice system is flawed. It doesn't support victims and survivors adequately. Anytime we have people in these situations, I believe there is a risk of that.

I hope the government tackles this as a whole when it comes to sexualized violence, when it comes to intimate partner violence and when it comes to parents engaged in family court proceedings. We need to make sure we are better supporting all of these people in our criminal justice system.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Collins.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Mr. Fortin, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In two and a half minutes, I'm going to have to ask a simpler question.

With regard to the five-year sentence we're talking about, you are therefore proposing that a person guilty of this type of conduct should be liable to a five-year prison sentence.

In Scotland, among other places, I know that the sentence for this type of behaviour is 14 years. On the other hand, our criminal code provides a number of different penalties for all sorts of offences or criminal acts that may be related to or may be akin to controlling or coercive behaviour.

I'd like you to tell me about the exercise you did, your thoughts on the proposed sentence.

How did you come to decide that the Criminal Code should impose a sentence of 5 years rather than 1, 2, 10 or 14 years?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

It was based off best practices from other jurisdictions. I do know that Scotland has higher prison terms. As you mentioned, there are often other criminal offences that go along with coercive control that could potentially have people in jail for longer.

I think this is a really serious offence. I also think five years in prison is a very serious penalty that is significant. Of course, it will be up to this committee and to the House of Commons to decide on the final determination.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Did you give any thought to the possibility of including a minimum sentence?

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

That wasn't something I considered. I do think it's really important that judges have discretion when it comes to these cases and that there is adequate training for judges so they are very aware of the significant impacts of coercive control.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Collins.

I guess my two and a half minutes are up, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Yes.

Thank you very much, Mr. Fortin.

For the final two and a half minutes, we'll go to Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I want to return to the issue of training. One thing that appeared in a couple of speeches on this bill previously, in Parliament and at committee, was the idea that the bill needed to be delayed so there could be time for training. I wonder what your reaction to that argument is.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I urge this committee and the House of Commons not to listen to that argument. Training can happen once the bill is passed. Training can really only happen once the bill is passed. Prosecutors, judges and police officers will get trained in the current law. They won't get trained in a law that has not passed.

It's vital that we pass this legislation and it's vital that the government also engage and do the training necessary for all different employees within our criminal justice system.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

I have very little time, but I want to return to something that you and I have worked on together in the community. A number of women have contacted both of us personally in our offices to talk about the fact that one thing coercive and controlling behaviour does is cause the victim to blame themselves and to suffer in isolation. One of the impacts, which I've heard, is people saying thank you for making it clear to them that it wasn't their problem.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Yes, I've heard this again and again. One woman described coercive control as a web that was slowly constricting around her and she wasn't aware of it. When I spoke to my sister about potentially bringing this bill forward and she gave me permission to share her story, she said, “I didn't know what it was while it was happening to me. If I'd known, I might have left earlier.”

It's so essential that we pass this legislation so we have the tools in our criminal justice system and can change how people think about coercive control. We can make people aware of its significant detrimental impacts and how unacceptable it is.