Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today in support of my colleague and his private member's bill, Bill C-225. He has done an extraordinary amount of work on the bill, demonstrating his sincere and unwavering commitment to standing up for people impacted by intimate partner violence and its devastating effects.
As I looked into the issue more, there was a word that kept on coming up again and again: “epidemic”. Universities, experts, provinces, organizations and, most importantly, victims themselves referred to intimate partner violence as an epidemic. When we use this word, we are not speaking in metaphors; rather, we are talking about a real crisis that is widely, rapidly and predictably spreading across our country. It is overwhelming our justice system; it is one of the things that, rapidly and predictably, overwhelm it to the greatest extent. It also puts strain on communities and leaves devastation in its wake.
Lives are being ruined. It is a pattern of harm so pervasive that it cannot be dismissed as an isolated incident. By every measure, intimate partner violence meets the definition of epidemic in Canada today. It seems that, for the last number of years, any time I have picked up my phone and looked at the news, there has been one tragedy after another unfolding: another woman harmed or even killed at the hands of her partner. It has become far too common a story in this nation.
Recently we were shocked by the story of Savannah Kulla-Davies. Savannah was a young mother from Ontario whose life was taken by her ex-partner, Anthony Deschepper. What made her death even more devastating was how many warning signs there were and the fact that those were documented leading up to her death. Sadly, they were ignored, which is why we are talking about this in the House today.
Anthony had a long history of violence and threats toward Savannah. In fact in 2023, he faced firearms-related charges for an attack on her. A court document even stated that he did in fact discharge a firearm while being reckless with the life of Savannah Kulla-Davies. He evaded police for a month before finally being arrested by Waterloo police, yet despite his history, which was well documented, he was released on bail. Once released, he continued his pattern of extreme violence until it became fatal, ultimately resulting in the death of Savannah. Savannah knew the risks she was facing, and she tried to draw attention to them. She told her mother, “If I stay with him, he’s going to end up killing me.”
Savannah pleaded for protection. She did everything she could, arguably did everything right, but the system that was meant to safeguard her, the system that was meant to protect her and that was meant to be on her side as the victim, did not listen and did not act, which ultimately resulted in Savannah's death. This is not isolated. Again, these cases occur far too often in our country.
Madisson Cobb, a 23-year-old from Calgary, Alberta, was murdered in July by her ex-boyfriend. He had been stalking and harassing her for months. Madisson repeatedly sought help, going to authorities and even signing an affidavit. She acquired a restraining order that was meant to protect her until 2026. Her ex-partner was already bound by conditions requiring him to stay away from her home and her workplace and to have no contact with her, but those things did not matter. He had even been charged twice with stalking and harassment; that did not matter either. Madisson put her fear into writing in the handwritten affidavit to the court, saying, “I live in fear every day from him, I want him out of my life.”
She describes shaking and having panic attacks when she went out or when her phone rang, in fear that it might be him. Despite all this, the documented history, the active restraining order, the repeated charges and her clear warnings to the people in a system that was meant to protect her, Madisson was killed by her ex-boyfriend in a parking garage near her workplace.
Bailey McCourt is the woman for whom the bill is named. Bailey was a 32-year-old woman in British Columbia, Canada, and a proud mother of two girls. Like Savannah and Madisson, Bailey lived in fear of her ex-husband. She felt frustrated, scared and unsupported, according to her uncle, and she had lost faith in the courts and the system that were supposed to protect her.
This past July, Bailey's ex-husband was convicted of choking and uttering threats to another victim. After a hearing for those charges, he was let out on $500 bail, despite his history of repeat violence. Three hours after having been let out on $500 bail, he hunted down Bailey McCourt, took a hammer to her head and ultimately killed her, leaving her dead and leaving her two daughters without a loving mother. This brutal attack shook a community and robbed a family of a dearly loved woman.
By naming the legislation “Bailey's Law”, we honour the memory of a mother, a daughter, a sister, a niece and a friend. We make a clear statement that the lives of women matter and that our justice system desperately needs correction. It is incumbent on us, as legislators in this place, to be the bridge between the change that is needed and actually creating that change. Through my colleague's private member's bill, we have that opportunity here today.
Though the women I have spoken about originate from different places in the country and from different backgrounds and ways of life, sadly one thing brings them together, and that is the fact that they were all victims of intimate partner violence. They are proof that intimate partner violence is not a series of isolated tragedies but rather a deadly epidemic spreading across the country. Their stories echo those of countless other women in every corner of this nation, women who are counting on us to make a difference in this place for them.
I believe it is incumbent upon us as legislators to honour their memory, their lived reality, their story and of course their living family members by moving forward with the piece of legislation that is before us. We must confront and cure the epidemic that is intimate partner violence.
Bailey's law would take real, concrete steps to save lives. If passed, the bill would do a few things. First, it would treat the murder of a current or former intimate partner as first-degree murder, regardless of whether it was planned or deliberate. Second, it would create specific offences, including assault of an intimate partner and criminal harassment of an intimate partner. Third, it would require that anyone convicted of an intimate partner violence offence within the preceding five years can be released only by a judge, thereby creating greater accountability.
The bill would also empower courts to detain persons accused of intimate partner violence at any time for a risk assessment reviewed by a judge, which is so crucial in terms of protecting a victim from potential harm leading to death. Last, the bill would modernize the detention of seized evidence, which is also needed.
The bill is not just legislation; it is a moral imperative on this place. Given what we know, given the stories that have come to light, it is incumbent upon us to take action. By passing the bill, we could honour the memories of individuals whose lives have been taken. It would not simply be legal reform; it would be a commitment to protect lives, to prevent violence and to restore justice. It is to make things work for victims rather than putting the perpetrator first, which is so important.
We know that the issue is not a partisan one but rather an issue that should concern all Canadians and therefore all members of the House. It is therefore my hope that my colleagues from all parties will come together, support the bill and stand with victims.