I want to congratulate my colleague the member for Toronto Centre on her very thoughtful comments on Bill 157. She talked about the changes to the coroner’s inquest rules in schedule 5; she has advocated, as have I, for the government to implement the findings of the Renfrew county coroner’s inquest on the murders of Carol Culleton, Nathalie Warmerdam and Anastasia Kuzyk several years ago.

So my question is, do the changes that are included in this bill require the government to implement any recommendations that may come out of a coroner’s inquest? Because we have certainly seen the government refuse to implement the number one recommendation out of the Renfrew inquest, which is to declare intimate partner violence an epidemic.

Thank you very much to the member for that significant question. No, there is absolutely nothing in this bill that speaks to the recommendations that came from the Renfrew inquest. Not only is recommendation 1 from the inquest free of monetary obligations, declaring IPV an epidemic allows us to address it with the same type of urgency. But I would draw the government’s attention to recommendation number 4 in the Renfrew inquest, which is to create an implementation framework to make sure that everything in that inquest report can be implemented as quickly as possible. That can go into Bill 157; it would strengthen the access to justice bill.

I did say in my remarks that it is positive. There is some merit, but it doesn’t address the core issues that we have that are failing the justice system. By ensuring that there is not a requirement to meet the emotional duress, including those three categories, what it doesn’t do is actually remove the cost or additional charge in time that a victim of crime would have to go back to court for and have the resources to sue through another civil court system in order for them to access justice. That is why that section falls too short.