Status of Women Committee on Sept. 23rd, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 47 of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

The committee will resume its study of women's shelters and transitional housing.

As usual, members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

Here are a few quick instructions. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike. Please mute yourself when you are not speaking. If you are in the room and wish to speak, please raise your hand. For members on Zoom, please use the “raise hand” function.

For those on Zoom, you can select the appropriate channel for interpretation at the bottom of your screen: floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

I would like to remind the witnesses that committee members may ask questions in either French or English. If they need interpretation, I would ask them to take a moment now to select their channel and adjust their earpiece. That way, when they are asked questions or need to speak, they won't have to mess with their device. Time flies in this committee.

Before we welcome our witnesses, I'd like to provide this trigger warning. We will be discussing sensitive topics that you may find distressing. If so, I encourage you to let us know through our esteemed clerk, and we can help you at that time. Indeed, the things we hear in this committee aren't always much fun.

I also have a question before I introduce our guests. Ms. Mary Hannaburg has distributed documents, some of which are in English only. They haven't been translated. In addition, not all the documents have undergone a language check. Can I still distribute them to you? The clerk will still make sure, as usual, to have the documents translated and revised. We will then email them to you. If that's okay with everyone, we'll do it that way.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

I also want to inform you that our colleague Ms. Larouche is currently busy in the House, so we agreed—I think it's the will of everyone—to give her the opportunity to take the floor a little later in the meeting.

I would now like to welcome all the witnesses.

First, we have Sandy Torres, researcher at the Observatoire québécois des inégalités. Next, from St. Felix Centre, we have Brian Harris, executive director. Finally, from Kanesatake Health Center, we have Mary Hannaburg, mental health support and trauma specialist.

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

[Mary Hannaburg, Mental Health Support and Trauma Specialist, The Kanesatake Health Center Inc.]

Good afternoon.

[Witness spoke in Mohawk]

Here's what I said.

I'm presenting myself. My name is Mary Hannaburg. I'm from the Kanesatake community, and I work in mental health and addictions for the Kanesatake Health Center.

I'm employed at the Kanesatake Health Center. This is my 30th year. I started working as a community health representative for a year and a half, and then the position of mental health support worker opened up and I took it. I've been doing that, and also intervention, crisis intervention, and mental health and wellness presentations and support for women who are in crisis. Part of this work is dealing with women who are victims of domestic violence and are experiencing family violence, as well as men with mental health issues and addictions, and homelessness. This is what I've been involved in.

Here are our community demographics. They're made up of the total number of people who are registered with the Mohawks of Kanesatake, which is 3,268. This is in the province of Quebec. We are in a federal territory, but it is the Mohawks who reside there.

We have a band council system at the administration level that is a bit neutral, because there is an imbalance that has to be rectified. Hopefully, it will be done soon. We have an administration right now. With all due respect, I will not talk about that difficulty, because it's at the political level.

What I would like to say is that we are living in a vacuum right now. There are not a lot of projects going ahead.

We have a crisis on our hands, because we have a need for housing. We have a need for shelters. We have a need for transitional homes. Also, our community is mixed. There are status and non-status people because of the Indian Act and the discrimination in the Indian Act, which is still ongoing to the present day. It has not stopped.

There is a bill in the House of Commons that had its second reading and has gone to the INAN committee. It's stalled there because the committee prorogued for the summer, and now it's coming back to it. This is now an obstacle for us, because women and their children who cannot have their status do not have access to services.

On one of the sheets I am distributing to you, there's a communiqué from Indigenous Services Canada, which has also been translated into French, that says you need the 10-digit number. If you need to see a psychologist and you don't have your band number, you cannot be seen. You cannot get services for certain things. You can come in for medical services, because the provincial doctors will treat you, but you cannot have access to all of the other services. It's sad to say, but this is going on today.

The people affected in that category right now total 1,194. They and their families cannot access services. That is 63.54% of people who are blocked. This is gender inequality. We talk about determinants of health, and Health Canada has signed on to that, but basically it has not.

I want to say there are many things that.... There's the distance from culturally appropriate shelters. I've given you a map of all the locations in Quebec, and they are far away. A lot of the time, victims of violence and domestic violence do not want to leave their communities, because they already have to leave their homes, and then they have to leave their families and their children have to leave their friends.

We have violence. There are some stats. They are inaccurate, because not all cases are reported. We don't have a big trust level with the Sûreté du Québec and the provincial government because of the youth protection and the removal of children from their homes, so people do not do this reporting.

We have children with special needs. Sometimes, when they go to a shelter outside the community, they cannot accommodate them, whether it be because of their ADHD or autism, or just the fact that places are limited.

We need trained staff, policing and security. We have no police—

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

I'm very sorry to have to cut you off, Ms. Hannaburg.

[Mary Hannaburg]

—and no first line.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

Thank you for your speech. I have to be fairly strict on the time, since we have a number of witnesses to hear from.

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

[Sandy Torres, Researcher, Observatoire québécois des inégalités]

Thank you very much.

My name is Sandy Torres, and I am a sociological researcher at the Observatoire québécois des inégalités.

Before we begin, honourable members, Madam Clerk, on behalf of the entire team, I really want to thank you for this invitation to appear.

I would like to provide a bit of context for what I have to say.

The Observatoire québécois des inégalités is a non-profit organization based in Montreal, Quebec. Our team consists of a dozen people, and our mission is to produce and spread knowledge on various forms of inequality in Quebec to raise awareness among a wide audience and inform decision-making.

Today, I would particularly like to draw your attention to two points from a recent study conducted with my colleague Geoffroy Boucher, who is an economist. The project was carried out in partnership with six public health authorities in the province, as well as the Société d'habitation du Québec. Those partners wanted to shed light on the range of costs associated with the lack of sustainable housing action during a housing crisis.

The first point is the following: The lack of affordable and high-quality housing is associated with domestic violence, the victims of which are mainly women, as we know. For starters, financial difficulties put people at greater risk of experiencing domestic violence, although no socio-economic category is spared. Housing unaffordability adds on to that financial stress, which can create tensions. That means there's the issue of the cost being too high, but there's also the issue of a simple lack of housing, which can lead families to live in rundown housing or to cohabit in spaces that are too small.

In fact, overcrowding is a source of various health problems. It can lead to mental health disorders, sleep disruptions and tensions, which are all circumstances that are likely to lead to violent acts.

Based on this finding, our statistical analyses demonstrate that living in housing that is too small is associated with an added risk of experiencing domestic violence. We even estimated that the risk was 7.8% higher compared with people living in suitably sized housing.

The issue of housing is part of the solution for reducing intimate partner violence. That's the first point I would like to emphasize.

The second point that our work highlights is how important it is for women seeking to leave an abusive relationship to have access to a variety of accommodation and affordable housing options. Lack of access is a major barrier to leaving an abusive relationship, especially for low-income people.

I would like to share another statistic with you. Our analyses show that people who consider themselves to be very poor are 59% more likely to have thought about leaving home due to violence, but to have not done so. The data do not reveal why those individuals didn't leave, but it's fair to assume that a lack of financial means plays a significant role in the decision not to go.

For women leaving abusive relationships, the lack of affordable, high-quality housing is going to put them further at risk. Some will live in poor-quality or even unsafe housing. Others will experience housing instability to the point of hidden or visible homelessness. Experiences of domestic violence are a proven cause of homelessness among women.

In conclusion, I would like to briefly point out that housing policies are one of the key levers for improving living conditions across a number of areas at once. That said, it's still important to remember that domestic violence consists of a relationship where one individual has domination over another, which is overwhelmingly to the detriment of women. That means it's necessary to tackle the root causes, upstream, and address the persistent inequalities between women and men, for example by reducing income and wealth gaps, to ensure that every woman has financial independence.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

Thank you, Ms. Torres. Those will be your closing remarks for this first speech.

Good afternoon, Mr. Harris. You have the floor for five minutes.

[Brian Harris, Executive Director, St. Felix Centre]

Hello. I'm executive director at the St. Felix Centre in Toronto, Ontario.

Members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to participate in this meeting and to share the experience of St. Felix Centre in discussing the system that supports women and girls experiencing homelessness in Canada. I'm grateful to the committee and to the federal Liberal government of Canada for allocating time and resources to gathering more information about this extremely important subject.

Women in Canada face unique challenges when it comes to homelessness. Women are more likely to be subjected to physical and sexual assault. Much more frequently, they also bear the responsibility of caring for their children at the same time. The unfortunate reality is also that the number of women in need is likely far higher than our system data tells us. Due to systemic failures, women are less likely to report abuses and seek support. Women are also disproportionately in situations where they have to choose between their physical safety, and the safety of their children, or homelessness. The ongoing toxic drug crisis exacerbates all these other challenges and creates additional barriers to their connecting with services.

Our heritage as an organization is women-focused. The Felician Sisters created what would become the St. Felix Centre over 85 years ago. It was originally started to address the needs of women in the late stages of the Great Depression. While our service delivery scope has expanded over time, addressing the unique needs of women has remained at the forefront of our organization's mission.

We operate shelters, as well as a transitional housing program, in addition to permanent supportive housing. While we would specifically advocate for most of the focus and investment to be made in permanent housing, it is also true that there should be more dedicated space for women and girls in shelters and transitional housing. Our shelters are coed. We have certainly seen how this can create concerns around safety and accessibility for women. Our transitional housing program, on the other hand, is women only. It allows for a different kind of focus in our service delivery.

While I understand that the focus of this committee is on shelters and transitional housing, I want to share that St. Felix Centre was also fortunate to be able to participate in the successful federal Liberal housing program, previously referred to as the rapid housing initiative, which was introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. We brought land into the development project, but the federal government provided key capital dollars to make a housing project possible. In partnership with the municipality and the provincial government, we were able to build 31 units of rent-geared-to-income supportive housing for women and women with children. The availability of capital funds and the urgency designed into the RHI program allowed us to go from demolition of the existing building to welcoming our first tenants in just 24 months.

With Build Canada Homes, there's an opportunity to expand upon the success achieved by the federal government in creating additional housing for women. We're hopeful that our experience and demonstrated success in delivering housing quickly can encourage this government to continue to make meaningful investments in all types of housing options. We would like to see the federal government also work with the provincial government to ensure that as units are delivered through Build Canada Homes, the equally important resources are provided for the supportive programming. Rent-geared-to-income housing with supports is the best way to move marginalized women out of homelessness and to help ensure that they have the resources they need to stay housed.

The problems facing our communities are complex. The scale at which various supportive services are needed across the spectrum is definitely significant. Shelters and transitional housing can and do play an important role. However, we've seen first-hand that when resources in the form of capital funding are provided and barriers such as restrictive zoning are removed, permanent housing projects—projects that are the true solution to homelessness—can be delivered quickly and efficiently.

Thank you again for inviting St. Felix Centre to attend this meeting and join in this discussion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

You're very disciplined, Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.

It's now time to speak with the members. We'll start with the Conservatives.

Mrs. DeRidder, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Kelly DeRidder, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is an incredibly important conversation that we're having today, and I look forward to contributing with some questions in the second round here.

However, I'd like to use my time today to put on notice two motions, both relating to the policies that have an impact on the safety, rights and opportunities of women and girls. I want to be very clear that these motions are about examining the policies themselves and the impacts, and about ensuring that the experiences of women and girls are a part of the discussion and the evidence obtained here in this committee.

The first motion deals with biological males in women's sports.

Women and girls have fought for generations for equal opportunity in sport. For many female athletes, participation in competitive sport involves years of training, huge financial investment, and personal sacrifice. It's so much more than just showing up to compete. It's team selection, awards, advancements, athletic funding, scholarships and opportunities to pursue sports at a higher level.

I believe this committee has a unique opportunity to hear from those affected and to examine what these Canadian policies mean for women and girls. This includes competitive fairness, physical safety, and the potential emotional and psychological impact on athletes who believe their opportunities are being affected. There needs to be a balance among inclusion, safety, competitive fairness and equal opportunity.

With that, I will read the first motion into the record.

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Standing Committee on the Status of Women undertake a study on the impact of policies governing the participation of biological male athletes in women's and girls' sport, with particular consideration to:

(a) the fairness and competitive integrity of women's and girls' sporting categories;

(b) the impact on women and girls who have dedicated years of training and financial resources to competitive sport, including their opportunities for advancement, awards, team selection, athletic funding and scholarships;

(c) the potential physical, emotional and psychological impacts on women and girls who perceive that their opportunities for competition, recognition or advancement may be affected by the participation of [biological male] athletes in female sporting categories;

(d) the experiences of women and girls who have raised concerns regarding competitive fairness, privacy, safety or access to female-only sporting spaces;

(e) the impact of current policies on the participation, retention and long-term development of women and girls in sport;

(f) the perspectives of female athletes, coaches, parents, sport organizations, medical and mental-health professionals, researchers and transgender athletes; and

(g) international and Canadian approaches to balancing inclusion, safety, competitive fairness and equal opportunity in sport;

and that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House.

The second motion I have today concerns biological males in federal women's institutions.

Women who are incarcerated are already in vulnerable positions, and the decision of who can be housed in a women's institution can have a major consequence for their safety, security and privacy. I'm sure we've all seen the headlines in the news recently. We're asking the committee to investigate if these institutions consider the offenders' previous convictions and offence history and the nature of the circumstances surrounding the approval. The committee needs to also examine incidents involving violence, sexual assault, harassment, threats or other safety concerns, as well as the experiences and concerns of women who are incarcerated in institutions where biological males are present.

I think it is important that we have a real understanding of how our current policies are being applied and that women who are directly affected and impacted have an opportunity to have their experiences heard in this committee.

With that, I will read the second motion into the record.

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the Standing Committee on the Status of Women undertake a study on the safety, security, privacy and rights of women incarcerated in federal correctional institutions, with particular consideration to Correctional Service Canada's policies and practices concerning the placement and transfer of offenders who identify as women in women's institutions; that the study examine:

(a) the criteria and decision-making process used by Correctional Service Canada when determining whether an offender is placed or transferred to a women’s institution;

(b) the health, safety, security and privacy considerations applied in making such decisions;

(c) whether an offender’s previous convictions, offence history and the nature of circumstances that those offences are reviewed and considered before approving a placement or transfer to a women’s institution;

(d) the number of requests for placement or transfer to women’s institutions, the number approved, denied or withdrawn, and the number of offenders subsequently transferred out of women’s institutions;

(e) incidents involving violence, sexual assault, harassment, threats or other safety concerns involving transgender offenders housed in women’s institutions;

(f) the experiences and concerns of women incarcerated in institutions where transgender offenders are housed, including their access to appropriate complaint, reporting and grievance mechanisms;

(g) the government’s interpretation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Human Rights Act as they relate to the rights, safety, privacy and security of incarcerated women—

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

I have to interrupt you, Mrs. DeRidder, since the six minutes are already up.

We're going to move over to the Liberals now.

Ms. Ménard, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Marie-Gabrielle Ménard, Liberal, Hochelaga—Rosemont-Est, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome, Mr. Harris, Ms. Torres and Ms. Hannaburg. I'm sorry: Our colleagues claim that this issue is important to them, but they're using their time to talk about other things. Thank you very much for being here today. Shelters and transition homes are an important matter. In Quebec, we call them MH1s and MH2s. We're almost done with gathering testimony.

I'll start with you, Mr. Harris.

You mentioned certain barriers to speeding up the construction of shelters and transition homes. With the creation of Build Canada Homes, the federal agency that's invested in this area—let us see if you think these are the right approaches—do you think this is one of the avenues worth exploring, from a government perspective, to speed up the construction of shelters, particularly for women?

[Brian Harris]

Yes, having additional dedicated spaces for women who are currently experiencing homelessness to be able to access would be an incredibly important way to allocate resources from Build Canada Homes while not losing sight of the fact that we want the priority to be on permanent housing and permanent options.

There are thousands and thousands of unhoused women in the city of Toronto right now. I'm sure that if they had the choice and could pick between a coed space and a space that was dedicated for women, they would choose a space dedicated for women.

Yes, I believe that would be an important investment.

[Marie-Gabrielle Ménard, Liberal, Hochelaga—Rosemont-Est, QC]

There isn't anything that currently exists under this name, but let us dream bigger: There are shelters and transition homes—MH1s and MH2s—but if we imagined an MH3 solution, what would do the most to support women who, with great courage, decide to flee domestic violence, so that they can envision a more stable future?

With your expertise, how can you enrich the committee's study? What should be considered?

[Brian Harris]

I would advocate for the model that we completed in partnership with the federal government last year, in July 2025, through the former rapid housing initiative, which fast-tracked the construction of units specifically for women and women with children. That came with rent-geared-to-income supplements, as well as supportive services. This allows us to have a building that is dedicated to women and staffed 24 hours a day, where they can have stability. It's their permanent space, it's safe and it's where they can really focus on their recovery and rebuilding their lives after they've been fleeing all of these horrible circumstances that they've been exposed to.

Replicating that type of program as frequently as we possibly can would be my recommendation.

[Marie-Gabrielle Ménard, Liberal, Hochelaga—Rosemont-Est, QC]

Thank you.

You touched on this, Ms. Hannaburg, but from a cultural sensitivity standpoint, what must be taken into account when developing resources on the territory you represent?

[Mary Hannaburg]

Yes, absolutely. This can happen. There is a model that was given, and it comes from the city of Plattsburgh, where they have incorporated a full, holistic approach. They put religion in there, but we could take that out and put the cultural aspect in it. We could have trained personnel from the community.

People from our community can stay within the community, but we do not have security at the present time. We are living in a no man's land. Anything goes, there. There have been murders there. We are living without any police. We have no security. We're in a gap right now.

We have to be very careful, but at the same time, we need these resources. People are reluctant to go outside the community, because sometimes they say, “We can take only two children. Do you have three? We're sorry, but you have to leave one with a relative.” No, the mother will not. These are the choices that we have to make.

On being culturally relevant, we have traditional people who work with the medicines, who understand the families and who understand the dynamics of multi-generational traumas, such as the removal, the DYP or the invasion in Kanesatake in 1990. Whatever was going on, these are things that have come on and have passed on to the generations.

We also need help for the men to heal, along with the families, all together. Not only do we need the focus on the women and their safety, but we need help for whole families with that holistic approach. That's what we need.

[Marie-Gabrielle Ménard, Liberal, Hochelaga—Rosemont-Est, QC]

Do I have any time left, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

You have 43 seconds left.

[Marie-Gabrielle Ménard, Liberal, Hochelaga—Rosemont-Est, QC]

That may not be enough, but let us get started.

Ms. Hannaburg, you mentioned the lack of choice that women sometimes face. If they decide to flee domestic violence, that means leaving their community, so we understand that there are women who choose to remain in a violent situation.

[Mary Hannaburg]

Some of them will not talk about it, because they think youth protection is going to come in and remove their children. It happens. We've seen it in the past. The question is where they will go. They have to go to Akwesasne, which is quite far, or to a shelter in Montreal when they come from a rural area, abstracting their children from their circle, their school and everything. It disrupts their whole....

It's really difficult to make that choice.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dominique Vien]

Those will be your closing remarks, Ms. Hannaburg. The role of chair is a very thankless one. I have to cut off some very good discussions.

Ms. Larouche, you're back. We're very pleased to have you here with us. Things are moving quickly for you.

You have the floor for six minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I'd like to thank my colleague from Mirabel, Jean‑Denis Garon, for kindly being here while I was giving a speech in the House.

I'd also like to thank the witnesses for being here. I have read a bit about the work they do. It's a bit unusual. In all transparency, I admit that I didn't hear all of their opening remarks, but I had still done some research beforehand.

Thank you very much, Ms. Hannaburg, for being here with us.

I'm going to start my questions with Ms. Torres.

Thank you for all the work you're doing while this study is ongoing, which explains the study's importance. I'm very happy to be able to return to the topic of today's meeting, because it's a particularly hot topic right now.

Some figures came out in July, between when Parliament recessed and when it resumed. The figures showed that there had been an increase in homelessness, particularly among senior women, who simply can't make ends meet anymore. We could come back to the specific issue of senior women, but this study also talks a lot about shelter capacity. However, as we know, a shelter is not permanent housing, by definition.

Does part of the intake capacity problem stem from the fact that women who would be ready to leave a shelter have no other affordable housing to go to?

If you also have anything specific to say about the situation of senior women, I would leave you to speak to those issues.