Status of Women Committee on Nov. 17th, 2025

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Oh, I'm sorry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

You can ask her the question and she could send an answer to the clerk.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Okay.

[Laio Auger]

I checked my connection. Maybe we can try and I can answer in English, if it's easier.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Yes, let's try it again and I'll add some time.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Okay, thank you very much.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

No, it is still not possible for the interpreter to do their job properly, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Apparently it's still not good enough, so you can ask your question, but we'll get an answer in writing, I think.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

All right.

Could you respond in writing to what the deputy chief said earlier about GPS monitoring and having a false sense of security? What would you tell the families of survivors and victims listening to us today about how we can better defend them given the stats that GPS monitoring is not safe?

If you could send us that, I would appreciate it very much.

My next question is for the deputy chief.

We talk about people being released on bail. How many times does an individual have to breach that bail in order for us to detain them?

[Jennifer Davis]

That all depends on the facts of each individual case. We know that people are breaching, and then they're being re-released on a new order with new conditions.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

I'm going to stop you there because, in my riding, a man was killed in a home invasion protecting his children. The York Regional Police did a fantastic job; they arrested four out of the five criminals. I call them criminals. One of them was on bail four times, and one was on bail twice.

I go back to my original question. Let's take this particular case. That man would have been alive today. What do I say to their family? How many times do we have to let them out on bail?

[Jennifer Davis]

That is a question that's hard for me to answer. That's a court decision at that point. That's up to the justice system.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

The justice system has failed a family, and now this family is without their father because our bail system failed to protect the innocent victims.

[Jennifer Davis]

I would reiterate that you need to look at the individual facts of each case, and it is up to that court to make the determination at that point.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Would you then say that the judges need to understand that an individual who breaches bail that many times should not be trusted?

I'm just using common sense. Someone breaches once, twice, three strikes, you're out. What about four times?

[Jennifer Davis]

It is a cyclical problem sometimes, when we are not seeing that someone is taking their conditions seriously, and they're being breached repeatedly. It is a frustration, and we do know that it is putting the victim and family potentially at increased risk because of a release. We do everything we can in those cases to try to ensure compliance with bail conditions to try to protect the victim. That is our role in those cases.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

Now we're going to go to Ms. Nathan for five minutes, please.

[Juanita Nathan, Liberal, Pickering—Brooklin, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Through you, thank you to you all for being here and being witnesses. It's a very important study, and we want to really understand the premise.

My first question is going to be for Deepa. The same question could be for Jackie as well. I'm sorry I'm using your first names, if that's okay.

I know the Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic very well. I worked in the sector for many years.

I want to understand how section 810 affects victims from all backgrounds. Black, indigenous and racialized communities usually face compounded legal and social barriers when seeking protection. Based on your clinic or the victim service experience, what specific measures should federal legislation include to ensure that these survivors are meaningfully protected? From your experience, what has fallen through the cracks, and what kind of recommendations can you give?

[Deepa Mattoo]

Thank you so much, MP Nathan. I'm really glad to see you in this role.

In terms of the cultural and intersectional responsiveness of the system, we see very generalized conditions that are imposed in these systems of peace bonds and bail conditions. We don't see tailored, structured conditions. We don't see response to the experiences.

I think Ms. Davis has been saying, from her experience, that there are lots of survivors who do not want to leave the abuser. They want to maintain the household that they have. They have the complexity of being part of the community, and they want the abuse to stop. We need tailored conditions for indigenous, racialized and newcomer communities. We require evidence-based interventions.

Something that is really important to think through is that, in the last 40 years, the number of people in our country living in pretrial detentions has doubled. That has not necessarily reduced the crime of domestic violence and gender-based violence. Knowing that the stats are so high of people who are already in pretrial detentions, I think the situation has come to a point of an epidemic, and we need to have community interventions and wraparound services for everyone involved, not only for the survivor but also for the person who's charged.

Importantly, I want to highlight that a lot of survivors of coercive control get charged in the system, and they are also put under the same scrutiny of law. We don't want to make any unintended changes to law and harm society and the communities as well.

[Juanita Nathan, Liberal, Pickering—Brooklin, ON]

Can you also talk a bit about what kinds of recommendations you would make for the police as a system?

I know different police units from different cities operate differently when it comes to domestic violence and how they approach victims. Are there any recommendations you could give for that?

[Deepa Mattoo]

One of the biggest recommendations is what we have found in some of these really good community interventions models from abroad. I think it's really important that we look at those models very closely. These models have a really great, nuanced understanding of danger and risk where they are working with the communities closely. The cops need to really understand their communities and work with the wraparound services in the community.

I also think there is responsibility that needs to shift to the cops. Do they understand the survivor's risk? There's so much focus on the perpetrator that the survivor in the equation is completely missed at times. That trauma-informed practice we all keep talking about means they would actually focus and centre on the needs of the survivor and see what she wants in the process.

Currently, because of the mandatory charging policies, at times cops take the stance that they actually cannot focus on the survivor. They have to come up with charging one of the two parties. When the survivor insists on getting heard, they charge both of them or, in fact, they charge survivors sometimes.

[Juanita Nathan, Liberal, Pickering—Brooklin, ON]

Thank you for that.

I would like to hear from Jackie and Karine as well on the same question. I'll ask a different question of law enforcement and they could send in the answers as well.

From your perspective on section 810, you've talked about how it doesn't really do a lot of prevention and education. Can you make some recommendations on how it could be changed so that's incorporated into that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

That's your time.

If you can send your answers in to the clerk, that would be wonderful.

Ms. Larouche, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

For this round, my questions will be directed to Deepa Mattoo.

You just touched on the subject of my question, but I would like to learn more.

In your opening presentation, you talked about models in the United Kingdom, Scotland and Australia, among others. You just repeated that there are good models abroad that we could examine. You mentioned that good models have one thing in common: They demonstrate a good understanding of the various risks.

Can you tell us what other elements you see in these good models abroad?

[Deepa Mattoo]

The advantage of the overseas models, especially the one in Scotland and the U.K., is mandating behaviour-change programs for people on bail. There is a need for them to be enrolled in substance misuse treatment if they are abusing substances. They are referred for mental health counselling. All of these decisions are made with a survivor-centric risk assessment.

I think this mandatory social work engagement and trauma-informed practice for offenders under bail supervision is the piece that we are completely missing. We are also missing integrated bail support that links offenders to housing, mental health, addictions and therapeutic jurisprudence for coercive control cases. We have focused a lot on either punitive measures or diversions. I think the time has come when we need to look at the paradigm shift. The paradigm shift asks for support for everyone.

I don't want the supports for survivors to be taken away. I want more supports for the perpetrators. I think that is a confusion that sometimes happens. Survivor supports need to stay and perpetrators need to have their own set of supports made available to them.