Status of Women Committee on Oct. 29th, 2025

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON]

Excuse me, Monsieur Michel. I have very limited time.

I'd like to get your thoughts on the question I posed to you. Are you disappointed, as a director of public prosecutions in the province of Ontario, that the Liberal government did not afford protections to victims whose matters proceed by summary conviction, which allows their abusers to serve a conditional sentence? Are you pleased with that or displeased with that?

[Patrick Michel]

With all due respect, as I said in my presentation, I'm not commenting on my assessment of the legislative measures.

I can still explain that if—

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON]

Okay. Thank you, sir.

I'll move on to Monsieur Brochet.

Could I have your thoughts, sir, on that gap?

[Pierre Brochet]

As police officers, we deal with victims of sexual assault on a daily basis. We know how traumatic it is for women—it's mostly women who are affected—and how much they need to be supported in every way. We think the measures need to be strict and that Bill C‑14 should really help us keep women safe. The stricter the measures, the more it will help us in our work, and the more we'll be able to keep victims safe. Some victims of sexual assault sometimes take several years to file a complaint. When the sentence is underwhelming, when the perpetrator has a conditional release or serves a sentence at home, the victim suffers further trauma.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you very much.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Ms. Nguyen, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to ask my question in English because my French isn't very good.

I want to thank all the witnesses for spending some time with us on this very important conversation. I know that there is important legislation in front of the House in looking to ensure we have the right tools in our system to address the epidemic and the realities of the gender violence we have in our communities.

I want to dig into some of the elements in what we're looking to move forward on. We are thinking about how the justice system can better integrate more community-based prevention measures, alongside prosecution, to address intimate partner violence before it escalates and getting to some of that work in the front end so that we can try to address this at an earlier stage.

Madame Riendeau, you spoke to some of this in the conversation. I'm wondering if you could reflect a bit more on some of the measures we should be thinking about.

[Louise Riendeau]

In terms of preventive measures that the justice system itself can take, I think creating a coercive control offence would make it possible to intervene much earlier, upstream, and send a clear message. We know that preventing coercive control also helps prevent more serious crimes, such as femicides, so that step could also certainly be taken.

Any measure that builds trust among victims and the public also helps to prevent such acts.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thank you very much for that reflection.

I wonder if you could speak to the role of the sector—women's shelters and organizations—in preventing violence and making sure that we are doing all of this work before the criminalization occurs. I want to ask about how our federal policies could better support frontline services in that prevention work and in the role we can play in terms of a partner in responding here.

[Louise Riendeau]

Prevention can happen at different levels. The workers in our network of shelters and support centres go and speak in schools, with young people, to help them understand what an egalitarian relationship is. That's one way of doing it.

We also speak in workplaces to help with recognizing victims of domestic violence and, above all, supporting them when they disclose it.

We also work with female newcomers to inform them of their rights and the resources available.

Those are all measures that help with preventing violence or acting very quickly when it happens.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Brochet, if you could recommend one key change to section 810 or other bail and sentencing measures that would meaningfully enhance public safety for women and children, can you speak to what that could look like?

[Pierre Brochet]

As police chiefs in Quebec and Canada, our view is that section 810 of the Criminal Code is often used with events that aren't defined as an assault or an offence under the Criminal Code. We think that going back to a coercive control law is going to solve a large part of the problem and clarify unacceptable behaviour. The federal government would be sending a clear message that would help us out.

It's important to get back to coercive control. That won't strengthen section 810, but replace it, in a sense. Instead of not having a criminal offence, we'll be able to act on the basis of a criminal offence.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

I have 30 seconds left, so I don't know that I have another question to throw in there, but I want to thank you all for your time and your incredible work to support victims and survivors of gender-based violence. It's really critical, so thank you for what you do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I think that Mr. Deramond's connection might be strong enough now.

Mr. Deramond, do you want to give us a few comments?

[Didier Deramond]

Can you hear me okay?

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

No, unfortunately. We'll keep working on that.

We'll go to Madam Larouche for two and a half minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minimum sentences are another topic that was addressed in the opening remarks. Mr. Brochet has already talked about this, so I'd like to hear from the other two witnesses on the matter.

My question is for Ms. Riendeau and the DPCP.

Do you think introducing minimum sentences would be effective for repeat offenders of domestic violence? Could this tool be used to deter people from committing domestic violence?

[Louise Riendeau]

I'll start.

We aren't big fans of minimum sentences. As we said earlier, we think each situation should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Still, minimum sentences may have to be considered when it comes to recidivism, but care has to be taken to consider to whom they apply and what's involved.

For example, I wouldn't want all intimate partner crimes to be subject to minimum sentences, because I wouldn't want those sentences to be served by women charged with assault or other types of offences committed against an intimate partner when they were defending themselves and were sometimes poorly defended in the justice system.

I think those sentences have to be given very carefully, and every situation has to be assessed to determine the sentence.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Michel, do you have anything to add on the matter?

[Patrick Michel]

I agree with Ms. Riendeau on the importance of properly adapting, on a discretionary basis, the intervention or sentence to each situation.

That said, minimum sentences still send a message of deterrence. If the sentence and the circumstances are clearly defined, that message of deterrence might be helpful.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Yes, I think you have only five seconds, so we'll move along to Ms. Cody for five minutes.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My question is for Mr. Brochet.

First off, I'd like to thank you for your long service in protecting our communities.

Earlier this month, I got the privilege to go on my first ride-along with our police in Cambridge. It was quite an eye-opening experience. I saw first-hand the frustration the officers had chasing after the same criminals they had just released.

I saw, back in April, that during an interview, you said that there had been decisions in terms of laws that had been made in recent years that were of great concern to you. I was wondering if you could please expand on what recent decisions the government has been making that make it difficult to protect Canadians, and what changes in these laws you see as being effective to protect victims of IPV.

[Pierre Brochet]

Thank you for your question.

Obviously, we were really concerned about Bill C‑5, which abolishes mandatory minimum sentences. In fact, I testified about this before a House of Commons committee.

We think that mandatory minimum sentences should remain. In the case of certain types of offences, particularly violent repeat offenders, particularly those who use firearms. We believe that we've taken a major step backwards by completely eliminating this possibility. I know that we're currently thinking about finding other avenues that would improve the situation.

Bill C‑75 is another element that has an even greater impact on bail in domestic violence cases and in police work as a whole across Canada. These are concerns that we've discussed at the boards of police associations across Canada and Quebec. This is a really important issue, because we're dealing with situations where inmates who are released…. In some cases, there is even extreme caution on the part of police officers across Canada, who, under this principle, are inclined to release certain people quickly, even for crimes for which they could have argued and forced the detention of suspects.

I would say those are the two main things that have marked the history of the last three or four years in terms of changes.