Status of Women Committee on May 10th, 2022

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Dr. Paterson.

Cee Strauss, it's so nice to see you again as well.

There were a couple of recommendations that you made to strengthen the bill. One is developing the education and consultation with survivors and organizations that support them. The second one is ensuring that the education covers systemic inequalities in Canadian society.

I agree with you, especially on the second point, especially looking at the inequality and the issues with the justice system that were identified even in the national inquiry, but also the aboriginal justice inquiry a million years ago.

Could you speak to these recommendations for strengthening the bill?

[Cee Strauss]

Yes, absolutely.

In my remarks, we already recommended that social context be added in order to be accounting for these systemic inequalities. We also think it's important, when consulting with survivors and organizations, that this reflect the diversity of people in Canadian society, especially those who have lived through conditions of marginalization, such as systemic racism, and who directly understand how marginalization impacts their experiences of intimate partner violence.

Any added section about consultation should include meaningful consultation and input from individuals with lived experiences of oppression, particularly individuals or organizations that serve populations who are indigenous, Black, racialized, live with disabilities or live in poverty.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much for your response.

Madam Cross, you said that the bill could be made stronger if there were the ability to provide input in terms of the outline of the training that would occur.

I was really happy to hear you say that. One concern I have with this bill is the fact that judges have too much control over whether they take the training or not, and the content of that training. From what we've heard, usually the judges who don't want the training are the ones who need it the most.

Can you please expand on that?

[Pamela Cross]

Certainly. I'm happy to do that. Thank you for the question.

I'm going to build on what Cee Strauss already said rather than repeat her excellent comments.

It's critical that this education be developed outside of the judicial world, both for the reasons you mentioned, but also to ensure that real expertise is brought to the question of what the content should be. That was one thing that was so great about the legal aid training we talked about a few minutes ago.

That training has to look at all of the things that Cee talked about. It has to look at the gendered nature of intimate partner violence, especially coercive control and lethal intimate partner violence or it's not an accurate picture. We cannot have judges continuing to say, “Well, you know, it's a bit of this, a bit of that. Sometimes it's him; sometimes it's her. He said; she said. We don't know how to interpret this.”

There is clear, clear evidence that women are primarily the victims of coercive control and intimate partner homicide. That has to be part of the training, in addition to the many points that have already been made, in particular by Cee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you so much.

We're going to begin our second round.

For our second round, it will be five minutes for the CPC and the Liberals, and two and a half minutes for the Bloc and the NDP.

I'm going to pass the floor over now to Shelby.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you.

Ideally I'd be able to ask all of you questions, but I'm going to go through as many of them as I can.

I'm going to start quickly with Pamela Cross.

After Pamela Cross answers the question, the rest of you feel free to chime in as well, if you like.

The bill, as it stands, clearly does a lot to help keep victims of intimate violence physically safe, but I think that's only half of the equation. I cannot imagine the amount of trauma, emotional and mental trauma, that still exists, even though the partner and any children who witness the abuse may be physically removed from the situation.

Could you elaborate on the importance of mental and emotional supports in the immediate aftermath of these situations for the victims?

[Pamela Cross]

Thank you for the question.

I can't say enough about that, especially in the small amount of time we have, but you're absolutely right. Removing the physical danger is step one. Tied with that has to be access to supports, including supports like shelters for women and children, so that work can begin to address the trauma, which often can last for years and years, leaving that woman vulnerable to ongoing abuse by the partner even long after she's left the relationship.

That speaks also to what needs to be involved in judicial education. Judges need to understand that just because she moves out, or he moves out, that doesn't mean the abuse has come to an end. It continues. It often escalates. It becomes increasingly lethal, and it becomes more psychological.

The impacts of all of that on the woman—and as you said, on the children as well—have to be matters that judges understand clearly and that they take into account when they're making decisions about parenting arrangements that can find themselves in place for years and years if the children are very young.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you very much for that.

I'd be remiss if I didn't acknowledge all of you for your testimonies. I find many of them quite compelling.

My next question will be posed towards either Dr. Paterson or Ms. Strauss.

Have either of you experienced a situation where a judge was sitting on a case relating to a matter that wasn't their speciality?

[Cee Strauss]

Judges often sit on a case relating to a matter that isn't their speciality because judges hear a wide variety of cases. Often somebody who had been a real estate lawyer before they became a judge is all of a sudden hearing a family law case. This is a very common thing. It's why judges require training. It's why important institutions like the Canadian Judicial Council exist to provide that training.

Because of the immense, significant gap between what judges understand and what the reality is of intimate partner violence, this is one of those things, as with sexual assault law, that requires specification to judges that they undertake this training if they are to become a superior court judge.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you very much. That's disturbing.

Could all of you share your consensus that you believe judges require adequate training on domestic violence before they hear these cases?

[Pamela Cross]

A hundred per cent.

[Peter Marshall]

Yes.

[Dr. Corinne Paterson]

Absolutely.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

It's across the board. Fair enough, thank you.

Do I have time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

You have a minute left.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I'll switch gears and ask Peter Marshall a few questions. Just a yes or no to begin with will suffice.

Mr. Marshall, you have 20 years of experience in child protection and family law. Would you say that domestic violence plays a role in custody court hearings?

[Peter Marshall]

It's certainly raised as an issue in many cases, yes.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Would you then say that it's imperative that judges be accurately trained and educated on domestic violence before hearing the case?

[Peter Marshall]

Yes.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Does Recovery Science Corporation conduct research on the effectiveness of ankle monitoring?

[Peter Marshall]

We try to be aware of the research. I wouldn't say that we have done original research that would be of the same extent and quality as professors have done. We're really more closely connected with how courts are using electronic monitoring.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

That's fair.

Are there any statistics that you could provide the committee in regard to the effectiveness of ankle monitoring?

[Peter Marshall]

I think effectiveness is a really complicated issue to try to measure. When somebody's released with electronic monitoring, there are so many other variables.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you so much.

We're now going to pass it over to Jenna Sudds. Jenna is online and will have five minutes.

Go ahead, Jenna.

[Jenna Sudds, Liberal, Kanata—Carleton, ON]

I'm going to pass it to Ya'ara Saks in the room.