Status of Women Committee on Nov. 27th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 134 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

I would like to remind all members of the following points: Pease wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. All comments should be addressed through the chair.

Please raise your hand if you wish to speak. I will track time accordingly. I will provide a time signal when there is one minute left and again when there are 30 seconds left.

Thank you in advance for all of your co-operation.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Wednesday, September 25, 2024, the committee will continue with its study on gender-based violence and femicides against women, girls and gender-diverse people.

Before we welcome our witnesses, I’d like to provide a trigger warning. We will be discussing experiences related to violence and femicides. Indeed, this may be triggering to viewers with similar experiences. If any participants feel distressed or need help, please advise the clerk at any point. For all witnesses and for all members of Parliament, again, we need to recognize that these are very difficult discussions, and it's important for all of us to be as compassionate as we can.

For today's panel, from the Office of the Federal Ombudsperson for Victims of Crime, we have with us Dr. Benjamin Roebuck, federal ombudsperson for victims of crime.

We also have with us, from the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, Sergeant Lisa Harris, non-commissioned officer, criminal investigation division.

Joining us by video conference is Erin Griver, co-chair for the Woman Abuse Working Group.

At this point, we will begin with opening statements.

Dr. Roebuck, you have the floor for up to five minutes.

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck, Federal Ombudsperson for Victims of Crime, Office of the Federal Ombudsperson for Victims of Crime]

Thank you.

I appreciate the invitation. I'm grateful for how you've been holding space to listen to survivors. I think their courage demands some action from all of us.

We're on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. As we gather during the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, we're reminded of the disproportionate violence faced by indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people, a crisis rooted in colonial violence and systemic inequities. Now is the time for action, for justice and for reconciliation.

The office of the federal ombudsperson for victims of crime is an existing accountability mechanism at the federal level for survivors of GBV and the families of women and gender-diverse people whose lives have been ended by hate. We provide a direct service to resolve complaints about federal agencies connected to the criminal justice system. We're responsible to help policy-makers respect Canada's obligations under the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, which is quasi-constitutional, and to understand systemic issues that negatively affect survivors.

I do support LEAF's recent proposal to create a GBV commissioner in Canada—I saw many of you at the launch event—and request improved resourcing and legislation to support our mandate.

This year we launched a national systemic investigation into how survivors of sexual violence are treated in the Canadian criminal justice system. We've completed 80 interviews with survivors and consultations with more than 200 stakeholders. We're nearing completion of 40 virtual round tables. Two weeks ago we launched an online survey for survivors, and we already have about 400 responses. We're building a comprehensive understanding of systemic gaps and promising practices. What we've learned so far is sobering.

Today I'll focus on three areas where federal leadership can drive change.

First, the R. v. Jordan decision was intended to address unreasonable delays but created unintended consequences. In some cases, despite having adequate evidence, the police or the Crown will delay charges because they want everything prepared when the Jordan clock begins at the time of charge. This increases the risk for survivors and for public safety.

The ruling has incentivized the allowable use of motions in court. We've seen an increase in motions contesting testimonial aids and requesting survivors' private therapy records. We've heard about sexual assault charges proceeding as simple assault because it's faster and has a higher prospect of conviction. We've been hearing about serious sexual assault charges, including against women and children, being stayed.

In one egregious example—awful—a survivor was sexually abused by her stepfather for eight years while her mother condoned the behaviour. Both parents were charged. Her mother was sentenced to 42 months in prison. All charges against the stepfather, the abuser, were stayed, because his case was more complicated. That's not what justice looks like.

Section 278.1 of the Criminal Code was introduced to protect the privacy rights of survivors of sexual assault. In 2022 the Supreme Court affirmed its constitutionality. It also affirmed that judges must consider society's interest in the reporting of sexual offences and in survivors having access to treatment.

In practice, this provision has become a tool to intimidate and undermine survivors' credibility. Across the country, we've heard that subpoenas for counselling records have increased, that this creates allowable delays, that judges are hesitant to deny requests in case of appeal and that survivors feel unsafe seeking mental health support when they need it most. In our survey so far, 20% of survivors said they wanted to speak with a counsellor but felt like they couldn't, because their records could be subpoenaed. I believe 13% said they didn't report to police for the same reason. That's evidence of a chilling effect. Survivors should not have to choose between healing and justice.

Survivors of intimate partner violence and sexual assault continue to report that their safety is overlooked by the criminal justice system. One person in our investigation said, “I don’t want to be another woman in a body bag with people wringing their hands wondering how this happened.”

It's time for Canada to prioritize survivors' section 7 charter rights to life, liberty and security of the person. It's time to strengthen the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights with enforceable rights to information, participation and protection.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Excellent. Thank you for your testimony this afternoon.

Next, I would like to welcome Sergeant Harris.

You have the floor for up to five minutes.

[Sergeant Lisa Harris, Non-Commissioned Officer, Criminal Investigation Division, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary]

Thank you, Chair, members of the committee and distinguished guests. I would like to express my gratitude for the opportunity to address the committee on the critical and deeply personal subject of gender-based violence, and specifically on intimate partner violence and femicide.

My name is Sergeant Lisa Harris. I am a member of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, the provincial police service of Newfoundland and Labrador. I have been serving with the RNC for almost 20 years, during which time I have had the privilege of working in both urban and rural settings. I've served in operational patrol services, responding to emergency calls as a first responder; the Internet child exploitation unit; the child abuse and sexual assault unit; and the intimate partner violence unit under the major crime unit of the criminal investigation division. Currently, I oversee all of these investigational units as the criminal investigation division supervisor. I manage major investigations, most notably homicides.

This past summer, my colleagues and I had the opportunity to speak with MP Michelle Ferreri about my experiences working in the intimate partner violence unit. I would like to thank her personally for providing me with a platform to bring a voice to the many women who are unable to speak for themselves, especially those who are no longer with us.

Among these women is Cortney Lake, whose story I will share with you today. Cortney Lake was a 24-year-old mother. In April of 2017, she reported being assaulted by her ex-boyfriend, Philip Smith.

Smith was arrested and charged with the assault in May. He was placed on conditions to remain away from Cortney and her family, yet on June 5, 2017, Cortney reported that Smith had breached these conditions by contacting her and showing up at her home. She also disclosed that Smith had shared intimate images of her without her consent.

Philip was arrested again and charged with distributing intimate images and breaching his conditions. He was released from custody on June 7, 2017.

Less than 24 hours later, Cortney's mother Lisa reported her daughter missing. The investigation revealed that after his release, Philip contacted Cortney, who agreed to meet him to exchange personal belongings. Tragically, Cortney was never seen alive again. As the RNC investigated Cortney's disappearance as a homicide, Philip was located deceased. His death was ruled non-suspicious by the RCMP. He was the only suspect in Cortney's disappearance. Cortney Lake disappeared hours after her abuser was released from custody. She is believed to be a victim of homicide.

The death of Cortney Lake highlights the tragic consequences that can happen when those accused of intimate partner violence are allowed to remain free on bail, with few repercussions for breaching court orders. Her story is one of many that demonstrate the urgent need for stricter bail conditions for those accused of intimate partner violence.

In IPV cases, where power and control imbalances overwhelmingly affect female victims, most police forces take the choice to charge an offender away from the victim. If there are reasonable and probable grounds to lay a charge, the police must act, regardless of the victim's co-operation.

The use of electronic monitoring systems such as ankle bracelets to monitor offenders and ensure compliance with court orders would assist police investigations, especially in relation to the compliance of court orders. They would also serve as deterrents to offenders. Furthermore, this would remove the burden from victims, who may fear retaliation or feel isolated from the justice process.

In Canada, we have mandatory reporting laws for child abuse, which apply to everyone, including teachers, doctors and politicians. The Public Health Agency of Canada recognizes that children who witness family violence suffer the same emotional and psychological consequences as those who are directly abused. However, public awareness of the impact of witnessing intimate partner violence is lacking. Mandatory reporting laws for intimate partner violence and greater public education about the harm done to children who witness violence, I believe, are areas in need of urgent attention.

Canada already has mandatory reporting for health professionals regarding certain injuries, such as gunshot and stab wounds. Strangulation is an extreme form of coercion and control. Its presence in an intimate partner relationship is one of the strongest indicators for future intimate partner femicide. Mandatory reporting to police of non-fatal strangulation in health care facilities would allow law enforcement to take action to ensure the safety of the victim and the possible prevention of a femicide.

Coercive control is a serious and pervasive form of domestic violence that impacts the victim's safety, well-being and mental health. It involves a repeated pattern of behaviour used by an abuser to establish and maintain power over the victim, often through tactics such as intimidation, threats, manipulation and isolation, making it extremely difficult for the victims to escape the cycle of abuse.

The effects of coercive control can be long-lasting, often leading to severe psychological trauma, depression, anxiety and, in some cases, physical harm. This pattern of abusive behaviour is not just an isolated incident of violence but an ongoing and calculated effort to dominate and harm the victim. Adding coercive control to the Criminal Code is necessary to hold the offender accountable and to protect the victim from further harm.

To be clear, I believe stricter bail conditions, the implementation of mandatory reporting of intimate partner violence and strangulation, and criminalizing coercive control are crucial to enhancing the protection of victims and to holding abusers accountable. These measures recognize the insidious and often invisible nature of intimate partner violence, including psychological abuse and the dangerous escalation to physical abuse. Together, these measures would create a more robust legal framework that prioritizes victim safety, promotes early intervention and ensures that perpetrators of intimate partner violence face justice, helping to break the cycle of abuse and prevent further harm.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you very much, Sergeant Harris.

Ms. Griver, you have the floor for up to five minutes.

[Erin Griver, Co-chair, Woman Abuse Working Group]

Thank you and hello. I want to thank you for your time and for the invitation to attend today.

My name is Erin Griver, and I've been working in the gender-based violence, intimate partner violence, and violence against women sector for 30 years. I'm the director of Inasmuch House, the first women's shelter to open in Canada. We're a 40-bed shelter for women and children. I'm also co-chair of the Woman Abuse Working Group in Hamilton, which is also known as WAWG.

WAWG is a violence against women coordinating committee consisting of organizations and individuals who are the subject matter experts committed to supporting survivors of gender-based violence, intimate partner violence and sexual violence in the city of Hamilton.

WAWG is the only multisector table that focuses on gender-based violence and intimate partner violence in Hamilton, and it holds the necessary experience and expertise to propel change. This table has been in existence for 30 years.

Femicide describes the intentional killing of women, girls and other gender-diverse individuals by men. The most common perpetrators of femicides are men who are either a woman's current or former intimate partner, a family member or someone known to them.

Gender-based violence has been called the shadow pandemic. Few people realize how widespread the problem is because the stories rarely receive more than local attention. Indigenous, Black and 2SLGBTQ+ women, girls, gender-diverse individuals, and women with disabilities are at increased risk and experience disproportionate levels of gender-based violence.

Every life lost to femicide tears a hole in the fabric of our communities. We honour those lives and commit to making change to prevent future femicides. Naming men's violence as the problem is part of the change we need to make as a society. We can't change it if we can't name it. For every femicide, there are more survivors who are not safe in their homes, workplaces and communities. We can do more to reach out and support them. We can engage their intimate partners, family members, friends, co-workers and acquaintances to end the violence.

There's no commitment to prevention in Ontario or Canada. For 20 years, domestic homicide death reviews have provided recommendations that can move us forward towards prevention. It is time to review our progress and invest in the evidence to see stronger social returns.

There are successes to build on. There are experts and advocates in every community who can help. Most femicides are preventable. There are clear warning signs and indicators of escalating risk in 99% of cases. We can take the steps to reduce risk before it escalates. The Ontario domestic violence death review committee provides strong evidence and recommendations that can guide us. We ask that you do everything in your power to protect all citizens from gender-based violence. Your influence and—

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

I'm sorry to interrupt you just for a moment. We've had a translation issue, so I'll just stop your time for a minute.

I'll continue to speak in English, and we'll see if we can get the translation back in sync.

Okay. What I'm understanding, Ms. Griver, is that I need you to slow down a little bit.

[Erin Griver]

Sure.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Do we need to go back a little bit?

I'm looking at the group for advice here.

Do you want her to start from the top, or do you want her just to start at the last bit?

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Perhaps she could repeat the last two sentences.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Okay. If you could go back a phrase or two, we'll restart your time.

Thank you.

[Erin Griver]

There is no commitment to prevention in Ontario or Canada. For 20 years, domestic homicide death reviews have provided recommendations that can move us toward prevention. It is time to review our progress and invest in the evidence to see stronger social returns. There are successes to build on. There are experts and advocates in every community who can help.

Most femicides are preventable. There are clear warning signs and indicators of escalating risk in 99% of cases. We can take steps to reduce risk before it escalates. The Ontario domestic violence death review committee provides strong evidence and recommendations that can guide us.

We ask that you do everything in your power to protect all citizens from gender-based violence. Your influence and leadership can help us develop an effective community response. We need your commitment to prioritize prevention before the next murder.

So far in 2024, there have been 59 confirmed cases of femicide in Ontario. We need you to recognize the urgent need to help us move forward towards prevention and at the same time increase funding to stabilize services for survivors and their families. Over $100 million has been invested in trying to reduce the backlog in the courts since 2021, but $100 million doesn't seem to have made a dent.

We continue to fund the wrong end of the problem. There is not enough money in the world to reduce the backlog when our only response to violence is after the fact. It is a simple equation: If you intervene earlier to reduce risk and prevent the escalation of violence, fewer offenders will enter the justice system. There will be a reduction in cases, costs and femicides.

To change our current state, there have to be strategic and long-term investments in prevention that span affordable housing and poverty. For that, we need vision and collective leadership at all levels of the system.

The 2019 missing and murdered indigenous women and girls final report and calls to justice provide a vision and a framework for working towards transformation. Gender-based violence and violence against women are rooted in gender inequality, the abuse of power and harmful norms. They refer to harmful acts directed at an individual based on their gender. GBV disproportionately impacts women and girls, and especially marginalized and indigenous women, as well as two-spirit, trans and non-binary people.

It's important to look at the reality of what is happening here in Canada and within our community. In Canada, 44% of women reported experiencing intimate partner violence in their lifetime. That's from Stats Canada 2021. On any given night in Canada, 3,491 women and their 2,724 children sleep in shelters because it isn't safe at home. Approximately every six days, a woman in Canada is killed by her intimate partner. Indigenous women and girls are 12 times more likely to be murdered or missing than any other woman in Canada, and 16 times more likely than white women.

Violence against women infiltrates every level of society—our communities, our schools and our workplaces. The City of Hamilton was the 34th municipality in Ontario to make a declaration of intimate partner violence and gender-based violence as an epidemic. Today more than 95 municipalities and counties have declared gender-based violence and/or intimate partner violence an epidemic in Ontario. Hamilton has shown a deep commitment to this work, not only by making that declaration but also by agreeing to develop recommendations with WAWG that will further address gender-based violence and intimate partner and sexual violence in Hamilton.

As evident in our WAWG “Snapshot 2023”, which outlines statistics gathered by over 20 member agencies, gender-based violence, intimate partner violence and sexual violence are urgent matters to be addressed. In 2023 there were over 5,993 shelter crisis helpline calls, 1,735 calls to the sexual assault centre's crisis support line, 1,130 women and children who accessed shelter, and over 5,644 requests for VAW shelter beds that were turned down due to a shortage of beds. There is a six-month wait-list to receive counselling services from the sexual assault centre and a six-month wait-list for supervised access program services.

These stats represent only those who were able to reach out for services. As we know, reporting intimate partner violence and sexual violence is vastly under-reported for reasons that include fear of police, court system intervention, lack of trust in the criminal justice system and fear of shame and stigma. We can only imagine the number of people experiencing violence and needing support.

Indigenous women, BIPOC women, newcomers, refugees, immigrants, sex workers and the 2SLGBTQIA+ plus community are disproportionately affected. Rural women in Hamilton are also affected. Even though 43% of Hamilton is considered rural, many of Hamilton's resources are only accessible in urban areas, which creates many barriers for women experiencing violence to access key supports, which would enhance their safety.

Gender-based violence and intimate partner violence intersect with many other experiences, requiring Hamilton to provide further support for equity-deserving groups, including women experiencing homelessness, living in encampments, and needing more robust mental health and additional support. The knowledge and the experience that are represented within the sector are critical, moving forward, to address the real risks, to identify priorities for prevention and to determine meaningful solutions that leave no one behind. Meaningful engagement must begin with a foundational commitment to work in collaboration with individuals and organizations that have long served women and gender-diverse individuals experiencing violence within our community.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you.

[Erin Griver]

Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you to all witnesses for your opening remarks.

At this point, we'll start with MP Ferreri.

You have six minutes.

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

Thank you so much, Chair.

Thank you so much to our witnesses. That was powerful testimony.

Did I get it right, Ms. Harris? Is it Cortney Lake?

[Sgt Lisa Harris]

Yes.

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

Thank you. I'm sure Cortney's family is is very grateful to you for sharing her story. One of the things I hear most often is to say their names. I hear that from moms and dads who have lost children or from the moms and dads of victims of crime. Thank you for sharing Cortney's story.

Mr. Ombudsman—can I call you that?

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

You can call me Ben.

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

Ben, thanks for being here, and thanks for what you do.

Right now, the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, which was created in 2015, is coming up to its 10-year anniversary.

Are those rights enforceable? If I come to you, and if I'm a victim of crime and I want my rights enforced, are they enforceable right now?

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

They're not. We negotiate as a federal complaints mechanism, but if agencies don't want to comply with those rights, there's not a solid mechanism to make sure that they're followed.

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

Why are they not enforceable?

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

The law itself has so many disclaimers in it. There's no right to appeal and no right to standing. There's too much emphasis on discretion, even though that was trying to be protected. We need to strengthen it.

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

There have been significant asks from your office, from MPs and from victims. I have a letter here, written to the Minister of Justice in July, and nothing has been done to enforce these rights.

Have you been given a reason or a response to that?

[Dr. Benjamin Roebuck]

We've been asking for involvement across government to say we all have a role in responding to these things. I think victims' rights aren't opposed to the rights of the accused. It's a non-partisan issue. We all want to do better and want to support survivors.