Status of Women Committee on Nov. 17th, 2025

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I have 30 seconds left.

You just mentioned victims. In your experience, does the Criminal Code adequately reflect the reality experienced by victims in terms of coercive control and psychological abuse?

[Deepa Mattoo]

I don't think so. The Criminal Code doesn't talk about psychological abuse, but there is enough language in the Criminal Code that psychological abuse and coercive control can be read into it.

For many years, the clinic's position has been that expanding the Criminal Code definition is not what the problem is. Expanding our policies on the ground and changing our training practices are where the solutions lie.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to Ms. Cody for five minutes.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Through you, I want to talk about something that doesn't get enough attention and was mentioned by the deputy chief: financial coercion. It's another damaging form of control because it can trap survivors long after a relationship ends. I'm hearing about situations where a partner refuses to sell a home or blocks asset separation. Right now, the burden often falls on the survivors to initiate legal action and bear the bulk of the burden.

I'd love to hear some thoughts on it, so I'd like to direct that question to Ms. Huet. How well do you think law enforcement courts currently recognize financial control as a part of coercive behaviour? Does it need more consideration so that it doesn't lead to potential intimate partner violence?

[Jackie Huet]

I’m not sure I understood the question correctly.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

I was wondering if the law enforcement courts should recognize financial control as part of coercive behaviour and give it more consideration so that it doesn't lead to potential intimate partner violence.

[Jackie Huet]

Coercive control is not a form of violence in itself. Rather, it is a set of violent acts, and financial violence can be one of them. So, if we criminalize coercive control, financial violence could be part of the evidence used to prove coercive control.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

This question is also for Ms. Huet. In the past, we heard witnesses say that Canada still lacks a legal definition of intimate partner violence in the Criminal Code. Do you believe that in creating a legal definition, it could be used for better clarity that would benefit survivors and their protection?

If so, could you please explain why? What do you see as being pertinent in this legal definition?

[Jackie Huet]

You say there is no definition, yet it is already mentioned in section 810.03 of the Criminal Code. I think it refers to violence in a family context and in a context between intimate partners. So, should there be a definition within the meaning of the law? I think the context is more important than the definition.

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

I'd like to ask the deputy chief some questions on financial coercion as well, if I might.

How does financial coercion intersect with other forms of abuse, and what does that mean for how we design the interventions and enforcement?

[Jennifer Davis]

If we go back to what Bill C-332 had with respect to coercive control, that was one of the elements identified in the bill. Specifically, it was “controlling or attempting to control the intimate partner’s finances or other property or monitoring their finances”. It fit in as one of the things that could be evaluated with the prior legislation under coercive control.

Can you repeat your question one more time for me, please?

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

How does financial coercion intersect with other forms of abuse, and what does that mean for how we design the interventions and enforcement?

[Jennifer Davis]

That would bring me back to the part where I mentioned having support in place around that early intervention and how we're supporting our victims and families, because that might be where it comes up, especially when we're referring to an immigrant, a refugee or someone who is financially dependent on their abuser to be able to have access...and report the abuse that is going on. It's only at that point that we'll be able to help provide support and give them other opportunities.

It is a civil matter. I can appreciate the frustration with the examples you were speaking of when it came down to the financials and the sale of a house, but trying to prove the criminality of that part is sometimes tricky in defining what clear criminal offence has occurred. Is it a civil matter at that point?

[Connie Cody, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Deputy Chief, you are the co-chair on the crime prevention, community safety and well-being committee of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. Combatting coercive control is one of your key priorities. We heard from a previous witness, Pierre Brochet, that he believes criminalizing coercive control could not only reinforce section 810 of the Criminal Code, but replace it.

What are your thoughts on this, and do you agree?

[Jennifer Davis]

I don't know about replacing section 810 of the Criminal Code, because I think of many other situations where a peace bond may be a good remedy to a situation. I would think that the addition of coercive control as a stand-alone criminal offence would make more sense to address these matters, not replacing the benefits that section 810 can still have in other situations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you very much.

Now we'll go to Ms. Khalid for five minutes.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much.

I really appreciate the conversation that we're having today.

Deputy Chief Davis, can we talk about reverse onus and what that means for bail and bail reform?

[Jennifer Davis]

I would say that we've started to see some improvements, especially with what has come out with Bill C-14.

It's clarifying the fact that with reverse onus situations—where violence or a pattern of behaviour has happened over a duration of time or where you've seen multiple offences happening over a duration of time—it speaks to the fact that the responsibility should shift from the courts to the offender to demonstrate why they should be released.

I think some of the changes we've seen under Bill C-14 will actually address some of the challenges we've previously seen around reverse onus.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Are you in support of Bill C-14, then?

[Jennifer Davis]

I am in support of reverse onus shifting to the responsibility of an offender, absolutely, instead of the Crown, and for sure for a repeat instance.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I appreciate that.

Reverse onus has gone all the way up to the Supreme Court, etc., and it's always challenging in terms of balancing the crime and its implications within our communities.

How do you think the different levels of government should be stepping up? I know that there have been allegations made that, in Ontario at least, there's not enough space in jails to house people on that reverse onus basis.

What do you think all levels of government can do to make sure our communities are kept safe?

[Jennifer Davis]

I think strengthening legislation is a very good place to start. Bail reform is a very good place to start.

At the provincial and municipal levels, I appreciate the fact that funding is going to be required to invest in a probably increasing capacity in our existing jails to house perpetrators who have committed crimes or patterns of crimes. I appreciate also, though, that we should be doing what we can to leverage opportunities when diversion is an option, when earlier intervention is an option.

I don't think it's one or the other. I think it's trying to ensure that there's support at all levels and knowing that things may escalate to the point where custody is required, but the problem is ensuring that we actually have capacity in our jails right now to deal with an increase in persons who may be held in custody.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I appreciate that, Deputy Chief.

We see a lot of mental health challenges in how people react to a lot of the issues we're talking about right now. Our police are front and centre and at the front lines of dealing with a lot of that. Can you also make some recommendations on how we, at the federal level, deal with mental health challenges in terms of supporting police as they're dealing with them?

[Jennifer Davis]

I think one significant option that we've really been advocating for is around justice centres. I've mentioned our Family Violence Project, that hub of wraparound supports, and we see similar programs in justice centres, where you also have supporting agencies working together with the courts to provide the necessary supports.

For an individual with mental health suffering, going through a court system and holding them in jail is not the best treatment method for them. How do we actually provide the right supports they require in order to ensure their safety, the safety of the victim and the safety of the public in general? That would probably be one significant one: How are we investing in actually providing wraparound supports and different avenues for individuals as well? Police should be active partners at the table for that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you so much.

We have about 13 minutes left. Is it the will of the committee to have one question for each party?