Status of Women Committee on Nov. 25th, 2024

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I would like to acknowledge that today is International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women.

I also want to thank all of the witnesses for sharing their knowledge with us today.

I want to ask my first questions of Ms. Zaccour.

Ms. Zaccour, right now, the term “femicide” has many definitions across different jurisdictions. If Canada were to add the offence of femicide to the Criminal Code, which definition has proven to be the most promising? Could you talk about that?

[Suzanne Zaccour]

Thank you so much for the question.

To answer it, I think I'll go back to what I said during my remarks and say that femicide cannot be repaired, cannot be cancelled, cannot be addressed after the fact, so I really believe that the preventative measures are key.

Often, some of the men who kill their partner, kill themselves immediately afterwards, so we're not convinced, given that murder is already criminal, that it's going to make a significant difference if the Criminal Code defines “femicide”.

What we think is that women need to be safe to leave, because that's when they're being killed, when they try to leave, when they try to access the family courts. Their separation is when they're most at risk.

We were asking earlier why people always say to women that they should go to the police when it's actually not safe for them to do it. There are risks of losing their kids in family court. However, people also say that women should leave, and again they're not safe doing so, because that's when they're most likely to experience femicide. That's where the prevention needs to be essential, enabling women to be safe after these relationships, and not be entrapped in them.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

Professor Dawson, I know that my colleagues asked about the data you mentioned in your opening statement and in your answers, but I want to ask about data specifically for newcomers, women with disabilities, members of the LGBTQ2 community and the racialized women community. Could you talk about them? You said that the data is lacking. What reform do you want to make? What type of data needs to be collected? You are collecting data. Can you explain that particularly? I know that my colleagues asked, but I still need to ask about racialized and disabled women.

[Prof. Myrna Dawson]

I didn't have much time to respond to that question, so I appreciate the follow-up. With respect to some of the groups that are made more vulnerable, we don't have that data covered by Statistics Canada. For example, if we look at the homicide survey, it collects only basic information. At the point of the investigation, the police fill out the report, and that's submitted to Statistics Canada. There is no follow-up with the data to add information that might have come out through the court process.

We do have domestic violence death review committees, which is one way to capture data, which has been an advance for us. But that data doesn't capture all types of femicides, but only those that occur in the context of intimate partner violence. Clearly, we don't have those across the country, so we still have a data gap.

They've been much better at collecting information on women with disabilities and racialized women, because they're extracting data from multiple sources, and it's a multisectoral group, which is quite representative of the public health framework that we support.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

My next question is for Ms. Joyal-Pilon or Ms. Richer.

You spoke about how quickly the reach of your services has expanded to reach over 60,000 people.

I want to talk about non-physical abuse. What legislative or policy changes do you think are urgently needed for women who experience non-physical forms of abuse, such as emotional, psychological or economic abuse? Would you like to talk about that?

[Marie-Claude Richer]

In terms of the policies that should be put in place, I have to say that the Criminal Code already contains a lot of measures to protect victims. Our problem right now is that they are not always applied.

One example is the breach of conditions. How is it that a person who breaches conditions is not arrested? Why not bring them back before the court so that the situation can be assessed? That person poses a risk. They are at risk of committing another offence.

In the current system, we are short of money and time, among other things. Cases involving domestic violence are often complex, and it is difficult to manage them. We need more police officers and more lawyers. There have to be Crown prosecutors who will have the time to work on the cases and properly analyze what they are going to ask the judge before the accused is released. For example, they can ask whether the wearing of an electronic monitoring bracelet or a risk assessment is necessary. So policies already exist.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you.

Andréanne, you have the floor for two and a half minutes, please.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses once again for joining us today. It's really unfortunate that we're running out of time.

I'll start by offering my deepest condolences to all those who have lost a woman to femicide, and I know there are some here in the room.

Ms. Richer and Ms. Joyal‑Pilon, your opening remarks were very relevant. You've summarized your ideas. You talked about the issue of first-degree murder. You also addressed the matters of breach of conditions, the selection of judges and training. So you've covered the issue.

I want to come back to something.

I also believe that, when it comes to violence against women, we really need to set up a whole system to work on those cases, as you said. We really need to see the system as a whole.

We need to ensure a continuum of services to really be able to help as many women as possible and to ensure that there isn't one more victim.

Could you tell us a bit more about the possibility of using emergency response experts who could provide advice?

[Élyse Joyal-Pilon]

This brings us back to a number of issues that have been raised today. I think training is key. We need professionals who are familiar with the evidence Ms. Dawson has shared with us. We need to be able to bring in professionals who know the policies, the best practices and the risk factors. Those people will be able to recognize these factors, and they will be able to refer cases to specialized organizations.

We really think that all organizations that work with victims should be able to bring together resource people, specialists who maintain knowledge, and write and disseminate checklists and decision-making aids. This would enable professionals in all organizations to be better equipped, to be aware of and better understand the relevant data to make informed decisions and manage cases that are often very urgent because of existing risk factors.

These professionals could also maintain an up-to-date network of resource people and quickly direct victims who are at high risk to the experts who can weave the famous safety nets we talked about. These are very important when a victim leaves an environment and is in a period where separation is imminent or very recent.

Therefore, we must act quickly and take the appropriate measures in a timely manner. That is why we are thinking of all the organizations that work with victims, not just the specialists. For example, in Quebec, there are rapid response units made up of groups of experts. These cells have been set up over the past two or three years in a number of regions.

We need to set up teams that manage the cases, disseminate knowledge and information and bridge the gap between these groups of experts and the professionals.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you.

MP Gazan, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much.

Building on Bill C-21, I agree with you. I think there was a lot of misinformation, particularly with first nations communities and our right to hunt and fish, something that Bill C-21 actually never impacted.

Going back, Madam Zaccour, you spoke about how it's been a year out. The provisions of Bill C-21 have not been implemented. I know that's the responsibility of the government. How urgent is it that we implement it?

[Suzanne Zaccour]

Earlier today, we were doing a news conference with family members of victims of femicide. We discussed the femicides that have happened since the passing of Bill C-21 and these measures still not being in place. We can't know for sure what would have happened or what could have happened, but we can ask this question: Would some of these women, from the numbers we've heard today, still be alive?

This is a bill that came as a surprise to no one. We've been working on this exact bill for over two years, and the rest of the bill is in place. The measures that received the most input from the women's groups and were amended with work from all parties are the ones that are.... It seems as if they're treated a little bit as secondary, because they're still not in force. We are very concerned. Even if they were to be put into force today, it's already too late. It's extremely urgent. Lives are at stake.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I want to be really clear that this is a personal opinion, but I think part of the reason things are stalling and why we're seeing changes even to immigration laws placing migrant women more at risk from gender-based violence and not being protected is misinformation campaigns by different parties.

I want to ask my last question of Madame Richer or Madame Joyal-Pilon—

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

I'm sorry, but the time—

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Oh, it's been.... I asked for 40 minutes. I want to have that on the record, please.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

I would like to acknowledge, at this point, that we are moving right along. We're through our first panel, but I know we do have two speakers left.

Is it the will of the room and the witnesses to remain for eight extra minutes, if we allow, for the last two members to have four minutes each instead of five?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Witnesses, are you comfortable with staying an extra eight minutes?

[Voices]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Okay, we'll finish up.

We have MP Ferreri.

You have the floor for four minutes.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you Madam Chair.

Again, thank you to our witnesses for being here. You do incredible work.

There's so much I have to ask. I wish we had hours.

Ms. Dawson, your comment about sons killing their moms was pretty shocking. If you want to, please table with the committee any longitudinal research you have on that or issues that are happening in the home. I think that's the key component when we look at prevention. What could we be doing better in those formative years?

I do want to talk about Bill C-75. Since the passage of that bill in 2019, there have been 84,923 female victims of intimate partner violence. This bill was supposed to reduce that number. However, by 2023, the number increased to 96,415, an increase of almost 14%.

I guess I would ask the lawyers in the room—and I believe those are the two lovely ladies at the end—how do you feel about this bill and the connection between the increase in intimate partner violence and this legislation.

[Marie-Claude Richer]

Unfortunately, there are still way too many femicides and much too much violence.

As for what should be done, I would say we need time. We need people on the ground to enforce the measures in place. The weak link right now is the lack of time.

If the Crown attorney's office wants to do a good job, it needs enough prosecutors. Crown prosecutors need to be able to fully examine the case so they can put forward the right arguments in court. They don't have time to do that work fully, because they are inundated with cases.

It's the same for all the groups that work with victims. Again, the key is to be able to provide that safety net to victims. Unfortunately, we don't have the resources to do that.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

I'm sorry, but I want to give a bit of time to my colleague here.

Of the victims you're working with, how many of their attackers, their abusers, are out on bail?

[Marie-Claude Richer]

We don't keep track of that kind of information at our organization.

The attacker is out on bail in a number of cases, but not in the majority of cases, I think it's fair to say.

Of course, we talk about the justice system, because we are lawyers, but many victims are too afraid to go through the system. Although we try to reassure them and restore their faith in the justice system, it can be difficult.