Hon. Fabian Manning: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak at third reading of Bill C-233, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Judges Act regarding violence against an intimate partner. While I am speaking as the official critic, as I said at second reading, I support the bill and I believe it has the potential to make a significant impact in the adjudication of intimate partner violence cases and custody arrangements.

I want to also add my comments to welcome many people who have joined us here tonight who have been working on this piece of legislation for years. I offer my sincere thanks for your efforts, your resolve and your determination to seeing that this day finally comes to reality.

Intimate partner violence is an issue I have been working on since 2017. I have spoken with many victims and survivors and have heard harrowing stories, some of which I have shared with you in this chamber. As my honourable colleagues know, as a result of my consultations, I tabled Bill S-249, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence.

The statistics speak for themselves, and they paint a grim picture of the lack of seriousness with which intimate partner violence has been treated historically by all governments. It may be difficult to believe, but currently, Canada has no national plan or strategy to deal with violence against women. Announcements have been made, sympathies continue to be tweeted out on the anniversaries of tragedies like the Polytechnique shooting and consultations have reportedly begun for a new plan, but advocates for change have grown tiresome of the promises. The time is now.

Bill C-233 is one important tool in the toolbox, but I truly hope to see Bill S-249 advance expeditiously so we can begin implementing a comprehensive national strategy to tackle this complex societal problem.

To remind my honourable colleagues, Bill C-233 has two key provisions that seek to mitigate the prevalence and harm associated with intimate partner violence. First, it requires a justice, before making a release order for an accused who is charged with an offence against their intimate partner, to consider whether it is desirable, in the interests of the safety and security of any person, to include as a condition of the order that the accused wear an electronic monitoring device.

There has been some criticism of the electronic monitoring device provisions and the possibility of creating a false sense of security for victims. I had the opportunity to participate in the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee’s first meeting on this bill, and I asked the sponsors about this. They responded that, in their work with victims and women’s shelters, they have found that the monitoring option, while not perfect, does help ease the stress that a complainant will feel, and it can instill a sense of peace of mind in the victim.

While I believe the technology is likely not perfect, I also believe there is value in giving victims the opportunity to assess whether their abuser is in the vicinity. That way, they can take matters into their own hands and alert the police and find a safe place to protect themselves and their family. We know that regaining a sense of control for victims can serve as a powerful instrument in the rebuilding of their lives.

The second major provision is the amendment to the Judges Act. Bill C-233 adds the topics “intimate partner violence” and “coercive control” to the list of continued educational seminars for judges. This part of the bill is called “Keira’s Law,” named in the honour of Keira Kagan, a four-year-old girl from Ontario who is believed to have been killed by her father in a revenge-driven murder-suicide.

Keira’s father had been abusive toward her mother, yet the courts would not acknowledge that there was any increased risk for Keira’s safety. The evidence demonstrates that despite an overlap in risk factors for domestic violence and child abuse, judges often overlook this link when considering custody cases. Two weeks prior to Keira’s death, her mother, Jennifer Kagan-Viater, brought a motion to suspend or supervise Keira’s father’s access to their daughter because she worried that Keira was at risk. The judge dismissed the motion. Two weeks later, Keira and her father were found deceased at the bottom of a cliff in Milton, Ontario.

On February 9, 2023, the three-year anniversary of Keira’s death, a report was released by the Domestic Violence Death Review Committee following the conclusion of their review. The report confirms that Keira’s death was likely a murder-suicide at the hands of her father. The report further showed that despite repeated warnings, risk factors and multiple court hearings, the system failed to protect Keira. On the same day, the Office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario announced that an inquest will be held into Keira’s death. The inquest will examine the circumstances surrounding the death, and a jury will make recommendations aimed at preventing further deaths.

I have no doubt that these developments are the result of the tenacity of Jennifer and Philip Viater. The work they have done, in the face of tragedy, to advance this cause and bring public awareness to this dangerous lack of understanding is truly commendable and inspiring. They have spent three years pushing forward on legislative proposals and a public awareness campaign with the goal of ensuring no other family will have to endure such a senseless and preventable tragedy.

Jennifer and Philip testified on this bill at the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee alongside Jo-Anne Dusel, the Executive Director of the Provincial Association of Transition Houses and Services of Saskatchewan. Ms. Dusel has worked on the front lines with thousands of victims and survivors of intimate partner violence. In her testimony, she highlighted the problem, stating:

To this day, it appears that too many judges do not recognize the harms to children when one parent has abused the other. Yet, when victims of intimate partner violence raise this issue in family court, it can result in less parenting time for the protective parent. Even when judges accept the occurrence of abuse, they often see it as incident-based, as in a one-off that won’t happen again, as having been in the past, or they mutualize it as a high-conflict relationship.

Colleagues, while it may seem common sense to many of us that an abuser is an abuser, this is clearly not universally recognized. When I asked about this gap in understanding and why these critical risk factors have been traditionally ignored, Ms. Dusel pointed out that judges do not have an ongoing mechanism to receive information on new research or risk factors as they are being identified. Therefore, the risk factors are likely not being ignored as much as judges may not be aware of them.

Philip Viater, a family lawyer himself, added:

Judges don’t seem to be aware of the risk factors, and risk assessments are virtually non-existent. When I raise risk factors in court, I can tell you that I’m often met with pushback, saying, “Well, who is to say that we agree with these risk factors?” There seems to be a lack of training there.

Colleagues, this is why the continuing education portion of this bill is so imperative. The stakes could not be higher. We are talking about children being in the unsupervised care of a known abuser. I am looking forward to the swift passage of this bill, and appreciate the cooperation among the caucuses in both houses in order to move this private member’s bill through Parliament as quickly as we have. I believe it speaks to the urgency of these proposals.

When Ms. Kagan was at committee, I asked her if she could tell us a little more about her daughter Keira. To honour Keira and her family, I think it is important to share her words with you tonight:

Keira was a lovely child. In many ways, she was a normal four-year-old. She loved to play, loved to be with her friends and was very spunky and fierce. She had an opinion, and people were going to know it. She often said she wanted to change the world; she wanted to make an impact. We raised her with the values of helping those more vulnerable and really trying to make a difference in the world, as crazy as this world is right now.

She was a brilliant little girl, and I have no doubt that had she been given the opportunity, she would have reached her potential and done great things.

The spirit of Bill C-233 belongs to Keira, in my opinion. While it is sad and unfortunate that she is no longer with us, let us all come together and pass this bill so the impact and changes that Keira wanted to make in this world will be realized.

Thinking of Kiera tonight, I am reminded of a quote from another very special person, Mother Teresa, who once said, “I alone cannot change the world, but I can cast a stone across the waters to create many ripples.”

In Kiera’s memory, colleagues, I am pleased to support Bill C-233, and I hope you will do the same.

Hon. Fabian Manning: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to Bill C-233, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Judges Act (violence against an intimate partner). While I am speaking today as the critic of this bill, I should state at the outset that I support the legislation and its objectives. However, as I have said before, I believe that much more needs to be done at the national level to address the growing rate of violence against an intimate partner.

The topic of intimate partner violence has been discussed at length in this chamber over the past couple of months. It has been the topic of motions, amendments and new legislation amending the Criminal Code, as is the case with Bill C-233. The discussions have also been the impetus for my own private member’s bill, Bill S-249, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence. I look forward to your support on this very important and timely piece of legislation.

While the statistics on intimate partner violence are heartbreaking, the fact that we are simultaneously bringing forward multiple initiatives to target this heinous reality fills me with a sense of hope.

This legislation has two key provisions which seek to protect against domestic and intimate partner violence. First, it requires a justice, before making a release order for an accused who is charged with an offence against their intimate partner, to consider whether it is desirable, in the interests of the safety and security of any person, to include as a condition of the order that the accused wear an electronic monitoring device. I support this requirement.

In 2021, the Quebec government commissioned a study to examine the use of electronic tracking devices in domestic violence cases. Jean-Pierre Guay and Francis Fortin, professors of criminology at the Université de Montréal, found that:

. . . the bracelets increases victims’ sense of safety and spawn a “feeling” of empowerment and autonomy in victims, while “allowing for a more focused and optimized police response.”

An article in The Lawyer’s Daily pointed out some other important findings from this study. In particular, in Spain, where tracking devices have been used in domestic violence cases since 2009, there was some effectiveness, as there was a decrease in the number of women killed by their intimate partners: 45 in 2020, compared to 72 in 2004. However, the most conclusive evidence came from Australia, which demonstrated an 82% reduction of high-risk incidents. Of course, this is a relatively small tool in a judge’s tool box, but I believe it is an important one.

While I am certain the technology is not perfect, I do believe that anything that can improve the feeling of safety and control for abuse victims can serve as a powerful instrument toward the rebuilding of their lives.

The second major provision is the amendment to the Judges Act. Bill C-233 stipulates a continuing education requirement for judges on matters related to intimate partner violence and coercive control. This part of the bill is called “Keira’s Law” as it is named in the honour of four-year-old Keira Kagan, a girl from Milton, Ontario, who was tragically killed in what her family believes to have been a revenge-driven murder-suicide by her abusive father, Robin Brown. Keira’s mother, Jennifer Kagan‑Viater, described Brown as a controlling, violent man and a pathological liar who created a fictional existence.

The judge who presided over their divorce hearing when Keira was eight months old contended that Ms. Kagan-Viater was, in fact, leaving an intolerable situation. However, the judge who oversaw the custody hearing determined that the history of lies and abuse was of little relevance when it came to Keira. The judge acknowledged Mr. Brown’s propensity for lying and acknowledged at least one confirmed incident of physical abuse; however, he concluded, “I am of the view that there is no risk to Keira.” As a result, Mr. Brown received a very generous custody arrangement.

When Keira turned three, her mother remarried and had a baby boy with her husband. There were signs that Keira was being emotionally abused by her father. Judges had given Keira’s father warnings that his access would be curtailed due to his behaviour and failure to obey court orders. Two weeks prior to Keira’s death, Ms. Kagan-Viater sought a motion to suspend or supervise Brown’s access to their daughter because she was worried that Keira was at risk. The presiding judge said the evidence was “serious” and “persuasive and compelling,” yet said the motion was “not urgent.”

Jewish Family and Child Service was called in to investigate. They sent in a caseworker to meet with Mr. Brown on a Friday. According to the Viater family, the caseworker confirmed that Mr. Brown was in fact displaying behaviour consistent with someone who would harm or kill their child, but that her supervisor wanted to wait and talk about it on Monday. But Monday was too late; Keira died on Sunday.

While it may be baffling to some of us that a father with a proven history of domestic abuse and subsequent court warnings could have this level of unsupervised access to his child, family law experts say courts often look at custody cases with the belief that an abusive partner can still be a good parent, even though the evidence suggests children are at a greater risk.

Last year, the Department of Justice Canada studied and reported on the risk factors for domestic violence and child abuse and noted there is indeed an overlap in risk, meaning those who abuse an intimate partner pose an increased risk to their children. The risks are amplified when there is a divorce or separation, as the non-abusive parent is unable to monitor or intervene.

Despite these risk factors, judges, who are tasked with making weighty, life-altering decisions in custody cases, are not required to undergo intimate partner violence training. Bill C-233 seeks to correct that. In effect, the bill signals to the Canadian Judicial Council the importance of continuing education seminars for judges on matters related to intimate partner violence and coercive control in intimate partner and family relationships.

This provision builds on the work of our former colleague and former Conservative Party leader the Honourable Rona Ambrose. After identifying a disconnect between the experience of sexual assault victims and the societal assumptions and misconceptions often leading to an unjust outcome in trials, Ms. Ambrose worked tenaciously to advance her goal of enhanced judicial education. Her tireless efforts ensured the passage of Bill C-337, requiring the Canadian Judicial Council to establish seminars relating to sexual assault and social context, which will undoubtedly lead to more just and fair outcomes for sexual assault victims.

Given the risk factors that are statistically overlooked in cases of intimate partner violence, we too have an opportunity to give judges the tools they need to make the right decisions for families like Keira’s and to keep children safe from those who present serious risks.

Colleagues, while I support this legislation, I am hopeful that this is just the start of a broader reform and, indeed, a national strategy to protect victims of family and intimate partner violence. Please join me in moving forward this legislation and all initiatives seeking to prevent abuse. The further we force the truth about intimate partner and family violence out of the shadows, the closer we will be to putting an end to this shameful reality.

Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Duncan, debate adjourned.)

[Translation]

Hon. Fabian Manning moved second reading of Bill S-249, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence.

He said: Honourable senators, I welcome the opportunity this afternoon to say a few words to begin the second reading of Bill S-249, an act respecting the development of a national strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence.

For those senators who may not be aware, this is my second attempt, albeit with some minor adjustments, to have this piece of legislation become the law of the land. I first introduced a similar bill to this chamber on April 24, 2018. Yes, I did say 2018, so I am hoping for the chamber’s support to see this version of Bill S-249 cross the finish line in a reasonable time frame.

With that in mind, I once again want to begin my remarks today with a quote from Kofi Annan, the former UN Secretary-General:

Violence against women is perhaps the most shameful human rights violation. And, it is perhaps the most pervasive. It knows no boundaries of geography, culture or wealth. As long as it continues, we cannot claim to be making real progress towards equality, development and peace.

It is with mixed emotions that I stand before you today to talk about and seek your support for this piece of legislation. I will use my time to explain the origin and purpose of this bill, but even more importantly, I want to use my allotted time to put forward some of the reasons I truly believe this national strategy is needed more today than ever before — needed even more today, my fellow senators, than in 2018 when I first brought it forward.

On one hand, I am proud to be the sponsor of this bill, though at the same time I am extremely sad and disappointed that we still live in a world where this serious issue is continuing on its ugly path. The cloak of secrecy around intimate partner violence has created a travesty of justice that has prevailed because of fear, stigma and the absence of a law to protect the most vulnerable in our society. It is time for all of us to come together to lift that cloak of secrecy, and to create solutions that will give so many of our fellow Canadians an opportunity to have a choice, where neither one exists today. We are long overdue on seriously addressing this issue, and the fact that we live in the greatest country on earth does not mean that all our citizens live without fear. Many continue to be abused physically, mentally, emotionally, sexually, financially and in many other ways. We have much work to do in addressing the concerns and issues of intimate partner violence. I hope this piece of legislation is a solid building block to doing just that.

My work on this legislation began with a phone call I received in early 2017 from a woman who had summoned the courage to try to make a difference and who has become a very strong advocate for this cause. Through her efforts, she has given a voice to all those abused women who were and still are unable to speak for themselves.

With her permission, I am going to tell you her life story. Hopefully, you will then understand the origin of this bill and why I feel it is so important that we join forces to give a voice to those who have been battered and abused, and to provide them with an avenue where they feel they will have somewhere to turn when the need arises.

This is the story of a brave and courageous woman by the name of Georgina McGrath from the small town of Branch in St. Mary’s Bay, Newfoundland. While at the present time Georgina is experiencing a very peaceful solitude on her life’s journey, it has not always been that way.

Georgina grew up in Labrador City, and today, at the age of 53, she can honestly say that she is a survivor of intimate partner violence and a survivor of a suicide attempt. She has shared her story in the hope that she can help others who find themselves on the receiving end of a fist and the verbal abuse that often comes with it.

Georgina is a daughter, a sister, a niece, an aunt, a mother-in-law and a friend. Most importantly, she is the mother of two amazing adult children — her 33-year-old son Nathan and her 32-year-old daughter Kelty — and, today, she is the very happy and proud grandmother of 3-year-old Thomas. Georgina is the first to say that she will always be a victim of intimate partner violence, but she quickly follows up with this proud statement: She refuses to ever allow that period of her life define who she really and truly is. I have sat and talked with Georgina on many occasions. I admire her strength, her determination, her passion and her resolve to expose the abusers and have them pay for their crimes, as well as make this country a place where abused persons will have someone to reach out to in times of need.

Georgina had a life that most people would dream about. She owned her own company in Labrador City for eight years and had more independence than most people could ever wish for. At times, she employed up to 30 people, and her financial situation and future looked very bright indeed. She won national and international awards for her work, and she was enjoying life as a contributing member of our society.

That all changed when she met a man who would become her first abuser. From that relationship, she received constant emotional, mental and physical abuse, and, in the end, it was a gun to her head that was the last straw.

Following that relationship, Georgina was diagnosed with PTSD and fibromyalgia. She picked up the pieces of her life and, with the help of friends and family, continued to work at building her company. She had to provide for her two children, and the rewards of motherhood are what gave her the energy and determination to keep going.

She soon became good friends with a man from Ireland who had come to live in Labrador. He spoke in a nice manner, treated her well at the beginning and seemed to be genuinely concerned about the well-being of Georgina and her children. Their friendship grew into a relationship, and eventually they became a couple. She felt comfortable and happy again, let go of her insecurities and was willing to spend the rest of her life with this man. She wanted the relationship to work because failure was not something that she wanted to accept for her private life. They were working away, enjoying life and having fun — and Georgina felt that she had made the right decision this time, and was on track to a lifetime of happiness and security.

About a year later, in September 2013, Georgina and her partner travelled to Las Vegas for a holiday. Sadly, and unfortunately, that is the place where she received her first punch from this man who then became her second abuser. This time, however, she did strike back. The next morning, he looked at her and said, “You know, the best thing about you, GMac?” — that was the nickname he had given her — “You can get up and just forget that anything happened.” At that particular time in her life, that is exactly what she did, because she had become a pro at hiding what was happening to her.

She hoped things would get better, but, sadly, that was not to be. Her abuser continued his reign of terror over the next few months by giving her a black eye, cracking off a tooth and head‑butting her so hard that it resulted in a goose egg on her forehead. The increased physical abuse came with a torrent of emotional and mental abuse as well. Georgina strongly believes that all types of abuse go hand in hand.

On August 9, 2014, the night before her forty-fifth birthday, they were both out with some friends when her partner became verbally abusive with her. When they returned home later that evening, he went to the garage, drank a beer and then threw the beer bottle at Georgina’s head. Thank God, he missed. The next day, he sent her flowers and a note expressing his love for her — he signed the card “Yours truly.” Georgina told me it was incredible how good he was at manipulating her, and showing the rest of the world that he was this great and charming guy. In Newfoundland and Labrador, we refer to these types of individuals as “street angels and house devils.” Later that night, he told her that if he really wanted to hit her in the head with the beer bottle, he could have easily done so. It was all about his continuing efforts to have her in his total control.

September 25, 2014, could have been Georgina’s last day on earth, but somehow, through it all, she survived. The night started out with a movie and a glass of wine but quickly turned into a night of horror. A verbal argument was followed by a punch that quickly turned into a life-threatening beating. He pushed her to the floor, got on top of her and began to choke her. As she lay there on the floor, she could feel the life slowly draining from her body. When he pushed his face close to hers, she instinctively took the opportunity and bit him on the nose. He immediately released his grip and ran into the washroom to inspect the damage Georgina had inflicted on him. She somehow managed to get up from the floor, and then she ran and locked herself in the bedroom, but, in a blinding rage, he put his fist through the door, reached in and unlocked it. He pushed her to the floor again and started to repeatedly hit her on the side of the head. She managed to push him off, but he was stronger and pinned her to the floor once again and started hitting her on the other side of the head.

Unable to fight back any longer, Georgina lay there, waiting for that one punch that would end her life. He then turned her over and continued hitting her. He told her she was fat, ugly and wrinkly — and that nobody would ever want her. He then got up, went downstairs, grabbed a knife and went into the bathroom. Georgina, once again, somehow managed to get to her feet and, with her mind racing, put her body up against the door while he pushed and pushed. Eventually, he just gave up and, thank God, for some reason or other, he gave the knife to Georgina.

Georgina went downstairs and called her sister while he kept shouting obscenities at her, continuing to call her fat, ugly and wrinkly. During her time on the phone with her sister, Georgina just wanted all the abuse to stop, so she attempted to take her own life by overdosing on prescription medication. She swallowed six times the legal dose. Her sister could clearly hear the desperation in her voice. When she hung up the phone, she lay down on the couch to die. Georgina felt she could not continue any longer. Fortunately, her sister had the fortitude to call 911.

The next thing Georgina remembers is waking up in the hospital and seeing her two beautiful children at the foot of the bed. The abuser came to the hospital and told her that he did not understand why he did what he did to her. He did not acknowledge the fresh bruises on her face and body from the beating she had received from him just hours before. He just wanted her to come back home.

When her children asked the abuser several times what happened, he said it was in self-defence. Georgina’s daughter — who works in the field of child, youth and family services — told him that no one uses self-defence on someone else’s head. The only mark on him was where Georgina had bitten his nose. Georgina had severe trauma, including two ruptured eardrums, damage to both her temples, nerve damage to her face and bruises that took seven weeks to finally fade away. The mental and emotional trauma was unmeasurable.

On that September night in 2014, there was no one to protect Georgina. Basically, across this country of ours, there is no mandatory reporting of intimate partner violence. No person has the legal obligation to notify the proper authorities — not doctors, nurses, counsellors and not even employees of women’s shelters. The police did not investigate Georgina’s case because it was ruled a medical call — not intimate partner violence. There was no investigation into the fact that this man tried to take Georgina’s life before she tried to take her own.

After leaving the hospital and living with the fear of future abuse, Georgina finally took control of her life. It was not easy to take the giant step that would change her life forever. As a matter of fact, it took several weeks for Georgina — with the encouragement, once again, of family and friends — to find the courage to go to the police and press charges. By the time an arrest warrant was issued, the man was on a plane back to Ireland. The coward skipped the country before he could be brought to justice. Today, there is a Canada-wide arrest warrant for him if he ever sets foot on Canadian soil again. I highly doubt that will ever happen.

If you have never experienced the type of abuse that Georgina and many others, especially women, have endured, it may be easy to say, “Why doesn’t someone in that position just get up and leave?” There are many reasons why a woman does not get up and leave. In most cases, finances may not be available to do so, or perhaps there is nowhere to go, or no one to turn to for support and protection. Perhaps those who have been abused believe that, in some strange way, it is their fault. They are led to believe that they may have provoked the abuse, and that the stigma related to the abuse may be too much for some people to deal with on their own. There is always the fear that it could happen again, that the law does not protect the innocent and that the next time may be the last time.

Judith Lewis Herman, author of Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence — From Domestic Abuse to Political Terror, explains the situation quite well:

The guarantee of safety in a battering relationship can never be based upon a promise from the perpetrator, no matter how heartfelt. Rather, it must be based upon the self‑protective capability of the victim. Until the victim has developed a detailed and realistic contingency plan and has demonstrated her ability to carry it out, she remains in danger of repeated abuse.

My fellow senators, that is the story of the abuse that Georgina McGrath endured and lived to tell us about. The sad reality, though, is that there are many others who were not so fortunate. Georgina told me several times that she cannot change what happened to her, but if her efforts to address this very serious issue can help another abused person, it will have been worth all the time and effort she has given to this cause. Georgina truly believes there is a reason she survived, and it is to change how we deal with the issue of intimate partner violence — to change the laws or to create new ones so that women, children, men and all abused people in our country will know they do have somewhere to turn to when it seems like the world has turned against them.

Since I began this legislative journey in the Senate, I have met with a large number of victims of intimate partner violence, families of those who have lost a loved one to intimate partner violence, police services, advocates seeking justice for victims, representatives of women’s groups and shelters and several community leaders throughout my home province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I have also talked with several health care professionals, especially those in emergency rooms, who have told me repeatedly of the frustrations they feel about being constrained by privacy laws when they have to deal with the victims of what they know is intimate partner violence. I have held several round tables where the opportunity has been provided for those who want to share their story.

Through it all, I have discovered a very sad reality. Many of the women I have spoken to want to do so privately, and after hearing their stories, I fully understand why. I have witnessed first-hand the fear in their eyes as they continue to look over their shoulders as they talk to me in whispers. I have respected their wishes for privacy whenever and wherever possible, and I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of these women for trusting me with their life stories. It has an incredible experience and has truly opened my eyes to the suffering and loneliness so many have had to endure. It has given me the resolve to ensure we adopt this piece of legislation so that we can begin the process of finding avenues to address this blight on our society.

I will not stand here today, fellow senators, and in any way pretend to have all the answers to deal with this sad reality that surrounds us, but I truly believe that by working together, we can and will make a difference. Colleagues, there is no other choice.

With the onset of COVID-19, my plans to travel, meet and talk with other concerned individuals and organizations throughout Canada were derailed. I am looking forward to doing just that when time permits me to do so. In my discussions throughout the past several years, I have become much more aware and indeed much more alarmed at what is happening in our country when it comes to the treatment of the victims and the families of the victims of intimate partner violence. I strongly believe that many of our citizens are not familiar with the overwhelming statistics that are available regarding this scourge here in our country. Allow me to bring some of those statistics forward while, at the same time, keeping in mind that there is much more information available, and I encourage my fellow senators and others to take the time to familiarize yourselves with the data that is easily accessible.

In this free and democratic country, on any given night, 4,600 women and their 3,600 children are forced to sleep in emergency shelters as a result of violence. On a single day, 379 women and 215 children are turned away from shelters in Canada, usually because the shelters are full to capacity.

Intimate partner violence has been identified as a widespread public health issue. In 2021, police in Canada reported that 114,132 people were victimized by an intimate partner. That is 344 victims per 100,000 population. It marked the seventh consecutive year of gradual increases for this type of violence, during which 8 in 10 — 79% — of the victims of such violence were women and girls. Specifically in 2021, there was a large increase in the rate of level one sexual assault, which is sexual assault violating the sexual integrity of the victim. In 2021, it was 22% higher compared with 2020. Level two sexual assault in intimate partner relationships, which is committed with a weapon or causes bodily harm, also increased by 6% compared with 2020. Intimate partner violence reported to police most often involved a current partner — 36% of cases — or, in 29% of cases, a spouse, followed by former partners at 21% and ex‑spouses at 12%. And 79% of the victims of intimate partner violence were women.

In 2021, 90 homicide victims in our country were killed by an intimate partner. Three quarters — 76% — of these victims were women and girls. The number of victims of intimate partner homicide in 2021 was higher than that of 2020, when there were 84 victims, and higher again than that of 2019, when there were 77 victims.

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, increased attention has been focused on the issue of family violence and intimate partner violence. With many individuals having to spend more time at home with household members, often living, working and studying in isolation during those uncertain and stressful times, there was and, in many cases, remains ongoing concern about the safety of individuals living in abusive relationships. This issue has been at the forefront of victim services such as shelters for victims of abuse for quite some time. Some recent reports allude to major increases throughout Canada as it relates to intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 shutdown. Statistics are still being compiled for that period on many different fronts. I am looking forward to receiving that information soon, which I do believe will assist my efforts in having Bill S-249 become law.

Protection orders and peace bonds have proven time and again to fail to protect victims from someone enraged and intent on inflicting harm on them. Along with others, this is one of the main reasons that many incidents of intimate partner violence are never reported to the police. Statistics tell us that only about 10% of intimate partner violence abuse is reported. That is very unfortunate, and we need to create a way for that to change and to see an increase in that number.

While physical assault leads the way, victims are subjected to abuse in so many other ways such as criminal harassment — also referred to as stalking — sexual violence, emotional and psychological abuse, financial and spiritual abuse, reproductive coercion and coercive control. As well, more prevalent than ever before, today we have technology-facilitated violence, also referred to as cyberviolence.

The damage inflicted on the victims of intimate partner violence is best summed up by a woman I met with earlier this summer who told me:

There are many acts of abuse I have endured that have never left a mark on my body but indeed have left scars on me that I can never erase.

Approximately 50% of women over the age of 16 in Newfoundland and Labrador will experience at least one incident of sexual or physical violence throughout their lifetime. This information is found on the website for the Western Regional Coalition to End Violence, an organization based in Corner Brook, Newfoundland. Their website also states:

This epidemic of gender-based violence is fostered by a society rooted in an oppressive discourse of patriarchal domination, authority and control. Gender inequality is both reflected in and reinforced by our social, economic, and political institutions as well as our ideologies and the culture of silence that surrounds violence against women and girls. . . .

We recognize that to address gender-based violence, it is essential to highlight the voices of women who have been silenced by marginalization. It is through their experiences of oppression and violence that we can recognize and comprehend the need for improvements and reform of legal, medical and other supportive service delivery for victims of gender-based violence.

Senators, there are three very important statistics that I want to reiterate to you today and ask you to please remember. The first is that in Canada, one in four women will be assaulted in their lifetime. The second is that only about 10% of sexual assaults are ever reported to the police. Third, very tragically, intimate partner violence costs lives: In Canada, a woman is killed by an intimate partner approximately every six days. The reality of these numbers is staggering and should be of grave concern to everyone listening today.

Findings from the 2019 General Social Survey – Canadians’ Safety (Victimization) show that there were approximately 432,000 women and 279,000 men in Canada who experienced spousal violence in the five years preceding the survey.

Due to the complexities of intimate relationships, spousal violence is particularly susceptible to under-reporting to police. As a result, self-reporting experiences of violence are an important complement to police-reported data.

Intimate partner violence tends to happen repeatedly for some victims; about 3 in 10 women victims of intimate partner violence report experiencing at least one type of violence —

Hon. Fabian Manning: Honourable senators, intimate partner violence tends to happen repeatedly for some victims. About 3 in 10 women victims of intimate partner violence recorded experiencing at least one type of violence — physical, sexual or psychological — repeatedly, either on a monthly basis or more often in the previous 12 months.

Overall, one in five, or 20% of women who experienced sexual violence committed by an intimate partner in the past 12 months said it happened monthly or more often than that in the past 12 months. The frequency in which women experience this kind of intimate partner violence is notable, as this type of violence is often also considered to be the most severe.

Certain segments of the population are at greater risk of experiencing intimate partner violence. In addition to gender, other individual and socio-economic characteristics intersect to impact the likelihood of experiencing intimate partner violence.

According to the Survey of Safety in Public and Private Spaces, or SSPPS, the prevalence of intimate partner violence over the last 12 months and over a lifetime was notably higher among Indigenous women, LGBTQ2S+ people and women with disabilities. The following groups of people were more likely than their respective counterparts to have experienced intimate partner violence at least once in their lifetime: LGB+ women at 67%, Indigenous women at 61% and women with disabilities at 55%. It is noted that Indigenous women are more likely to experience each form of intimate partner violence and do so multiple times.

The Labrador portion of my province is home to just about 5% of the province’s population, which in 2020 was approximately 27,674 people, with about 43% of those being Indigenous. The latest data from Newfoundland and Labrador’s two police services covers the period from 2016 to 2020. It shows the rate of sexual assault in Labrador was between four to six times higher than on the island during that time.

Deirdre Connolly had seen enough. She opened the Labrador office of the Sexual Assault Crisis and Prevention Centre in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, where she works with survivors, in March 2020. She says the level of resources provided to the region with such a high prevalence of sexual violence is unacceptable.

In 2019, across Canada, approximately 800 victim service programs helped approximately half a million victims of crime. Among all females assisted, 84% were victims of a violent offence, 30% were women receiving services related to sexual assault, and 61% were victims of violent offences by a spouse, ex-spouse, intimate partner or other family member.

Police-reported data provided by Statistics Canada for the 2019 to 2021 reporting period showed that approximately 52% of victims of crimes reported to the police were female. The most common offence perpetrated against females was common assault, which represents approximately 48% of all violent incidents reported to police.

A recent report by the World Health Organization states:

Intimate partner violence has been identified as a major global public health concern, linked to intergenerational violence and detrimental physical, emotional and economic impacts on victims, witnesses and society as a whole.

More than 7 out of 10 victims (71%) of police-reported intimate partner violence experienced physical force. Physical assault was the most common offence experienced by victims of police-reported intimate partner violence at 77%, followed by uttering threats at 8% and criminal harassment at 6%.

Police-reported data show that spouses, current or former, and other intimate partners committed approximately 42% of violent crimes involving female victims. Other family members and acquaintances accounted for another 43%.

Police-reported family violence is defined “as all types of violent crime perpetrated by a family member that was reported to the police.”

Colleagues, while it may be difficult for some people to understand, studies have shown that 70% of any type of spousal violence is not reported to police. Many victims of spousal violence experience severe forms of violence; specifically, 25% of all spousal violence victims are sexually assaulted, beaten, choked or threatened with a gun or knife, and 24% of all spousal violence victims are kicked, bitten, hit or hit with something.

A 2017 Statistics Canada information site, Women in Canada: A Gender-based Statistical Report, states:

Females were over-represented among victims of sexual assault (88% of total incidents) and victims of “other sexual violations” (83% of total incidents). Other offences reported to police that were committed primarily against females included forcible confinement and related offences (79%), criminal harassment (76%), and making threatening and harassing phone calls (71%). All of the victims (100%) of offences under the “commodification of sexual activity” category were female.

Statistics Canada also reported that:

Rates of almost all types of violent victimization were higher for Aboriginal people . . . . Specifically, the sexual assault rate of Aboriginal people (58 incidents per 1,000 people) was almost three times that of non-Aboriginal people (20 per 1,000), while the physical assault rate of Aboriginal people (90 per 1,000) was nearly double that of non-Aboriginal people (47 per 1,000).

Furthermore:

Aboriginal females reported experiencing violent victimizations at a rate . . . 2.7 times higher than that reported by non-Aboriginal females.

And we can never forget that 1,181 Indigenous women went missing or were murdered between 1980 and 2012.

Half of Aboriginal victims of spousal violence reported experiencing among the more severe forms of spousal violence, such as having been sexually assaulted, beaten, choked or threatened with a gun or knife. This compares with just one quarter, or 23%, of non-Aboriginal victims of spousal violence.

I believe I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to talk about and promote the Moose Hide Campaign. For those of you who may not be aware of the campaign, the inspiration for it came to the co-founders, Paul Lacerte and his daughter Raven, in 2011 during a moose-hunting trip on their traditional territory along the Highway of Tears in British Columbia, where so many women have gone missing or have been murdered.

The Moose Hide Campaign is a grassroots movement of Indigenous and non-Indigenous men and boys who are standing up against violence toward women and children. Wearing the Moose Hide pin, such as I am doing today, signifies one’s commitment to honour, respect and protect the women and children in your life and speak out against gender-based domestic and intimate partner violence.

Since the start of the campaign, in excess of 1 million Moose Hide pins have been distributed throughout Canada, which has generated as many conversations about ending the violence against our women and children. I encourage all of you to support the campaign and take a strong stand against the violence.

Another disturbing statistic is that 60% of women with a disability experience some form of violence. Given that only approximately 10% of assaults are reported, the actual number is much higher.

Almost two thirds of spousal violence victims, or 63%, said they had been victimized more than once before they contacted the police. Nearly 3 in 10, or 28%, stated that they had been victimized more than 10 times before they contacted the police.

The total cost of intimate partner violence in Canada has been estimated at $7.4 billion per year, amounting to $220 per capita. The most direct economic impact is borne by primary victims. Of the total estimated costs, $6 billion was incurred by victims as a direct result of spousal violence for items such as medical attention, hospitalization, lost wages, missed school days and stolen and damaged property.

The justice system bore 7.3%, or $545 million, of the total economic impact: $320 million was borne by the criminal justice system, and $225 million was borne by the civil justice system.

While family violence is a concern for all Canadians, women report intimate partner violence to police nearly four times more than men, and are almost three times more likely than men to be killed by a current or former spouse. Almost half — 48% — of women reported fearing for their lives as a result of post‑separation violence.

Numerous intimate partner violence death reviews, inquiries and coroners’ reports have cited the lack of coordination among officials operating in the family law, child protection and criminal justice systems as a contributing factor in tragic family homicides.

Without mechanisms in place to ensure coordination and communication among these systems, families can be faced with potentially inconsistent or conflicting orders, which may in turn have implications for the safety of family members, including the most vulnerable — the children. This, in turn, can undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.

While there is no universally accepted definition of family violence, the definition developed by the federal Family Violence Initiative describes family violence as:

. . . a range of abusive behaviours that occur within relationships based on kinship, intimacy, dependency or trust.

These abusive behaviours include physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and financial victimization as well as neglect.

When I first contacted the Library of Parliament to develop this legislation, my goal was to develop a law to address intimate partner violence in Canada. I quickly learned it is not that easy to do. At the present time, there is no federal statute nor provincial statute that obliges physicians to report cases of domestic violence to third parties. There are national, provincial and territorial jurisdictions that have to be dealt with as well. The delivery of health care is a provincial or territorial matter.

While some provinces have codes of conduct regarding the regulation of physicians and other health care professionals and most provinces require physicians to report cases of violence when children are involved, no province has made it mandatory to report cases of intimate partner violence.

Tonight, if a woman arrives at a hospital anywhere in our country with a gunshot wound or has been stabbed, it is mandatory to call the police. Currently, hospitals and health care facilities in some provinces — namely British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador and the Northwest Territories — must report gunshot wounds to the police. Although the reporting obligation in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador and the Northwest Territories also includes stab wounds, the legislation in all these provinces is similar. The obligation to report typically falls to the institution or facility, not the individual physician. In some jurisdictions, the obligation placed on facilities to report could also include physicians’ private medical offices and walk-in clinics.

However, honourable senators, if that same woman arrives at a hospital tonight with two black eyes, a broken nose, her front teeth missing or evidence of choking or strangulation from the physical abuse of her partner, there is no obligation or law to call the police.

During the time I have been working on this piece of legislation, I have learned that patient privacy and a victim’s fear of what may happen if a police report is made are important factors that need to be thoroughly discussed as we proceed. I accept that these are not easy conversations, but in order to find possible solutions to this increasing problem of intimate partner violence in our country, we need to begin exploring avenues to find a way to assist those who so desperately need our help.

Let us not lose hope of a better way forward. I have been around the political arena for 30-plus years now, and I fully understand that every journey begins with a single step. That is the way I — with the support of people like Georgina McGrath — through Bill S-249, will begin this journey. I hope I have your support.

Bill S-249 calls on the federal government to provide for the development of a national strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence following consultations between federal ministers and representatives of the provincial and territorial governments responsible for social development, families or public safety, as well as other relevant stakeholders.

We have to begin somewhere, and I truly believe that Bill S-249 is an important first step. We need consistency across and within jurisdictions in both policies and legislation that address violence against women. We need shared understanding of the root causes of violence against women. We need high‑level commitment, leadership and accountability from government at all jurisdictional levels. We need clearly defined, time-bound goals measured against detailed, baseline data, and we need adequate human and financial resources to support these processes. We need new commitments and clear targets, and we need national standards with equality of access for all women that respect and respond to diversity. We need to consult with all stakeholders, including front-line workers and survivors.

Ongoing and unchecked intimate partner violence can escalate and produce devastating consequences. The people of my home province of Newfoundland and Labrador are all too familiar with the tragic story of a beautiful little girl by the name of Quinn Butt. Quinn’s parents were separated at the time of her death.

In 2019, Trent Butt was found guilty of first-degree murder and arson after the body of his 5-year-old daughter, Quinn, was found in their burned-out home in Carbonear on April 24, 2016.

We also have the incredibly sad story of Chrissy Predham-Newman, who was found murdered in her apartment in St. John’s in January 2007. Her throat had been slashed, and she was stabbed 53 times.

Following a lengthy investigation, her estranged husband, Ray Newman, was charged two years later with her murder. Three years following that charge being laid, a judge ruled Newman’s rights had been violated during a police interview, Newman was found not guilty and walked away a free man. Later in 2018, Ray Newman was back in the courtroom again, and this time was found guilty of assaulting his girlfriend. She testified that Newman punched, choked and dragged her. He was sentenced to 60 days in jail.

No one has ever been brought to justice for the horrible death of Chrissy Predham-Newman.

Then, we have still have the unresolved mystery in my home province of the disappearance of Courtney Lake, who was last seen on June 7, 2017. She had been involved in a toxic relationship with a man named Philip Smith, who was charged on April 15 of that same year with assaulting Courtney. Despite a peace bond obtained by Courtney, Smith continued in his attempts to contact her.

On June 7, 2017, Smith appeared in court where he admitted to the assault on Courtney for which he received a suspended sentence. Along with numerous other charges he was convicted of that day in court, Smith was sentenced to two days’ time served. Upon leaving the courthouse, Smith was given a probation order to stay away from Courtney and her mother.

Courtney was last seen four hours after Philip Smith left the courthouse on June 7. On June 30, 2017, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary announced they had classified Courtney’s disappearance as a homicide and had referred her case to the Major Crimes Unit. Numerous searches by police services, search and rescue units as well as family and friends have failed to find Courtney Lake.

On October 31, 2017, Smith contacted his family saying he was going to kill himself. Concerned, the family contacted the police, and at 3 a.m. on November 1, 2017, they located the body of Philip Smith in the Bellevue Beach area of our province. The families are left with so many unanswered questions.

Under international law, every nation has an obligation to address violence against women. Currently, Canada has no national plan or strategy to deal with violence against women. With your support, Bill S-249 can be the vehicle that changes the way we deal with intimate partner violence in this country.

If you feel the need to do so, I invite you to offer suggestions on how we can improve this piece of legislation. Canada needs a national strategy to ensure all women are able to live free from violence. We owe it to women like Georgina McGrath and the thousands of others who have felt the pain of physical abuse, suffered the anguish of mental abuse and endured the agony of loneliness and despair.

Canada is a wonderful country in so many ways. We have so much to offer, and we are the envy of the world. Let us work together and support this bill, so that all people who have suffered or are still suffering from any form of intimate partner violence or abuse will have hope for a better and safer future.

Honourable senators, I end my speech today the way I began it, by repeating the quote of Kofi Annan:

Violence against women is perhaps the most shameful human rights violation. And, it is perhaps the most pervasive. It knows no boundaries of geography, culture or wealth. As long as it continues, we cannot claim to be making real progress towards equality, development and peace.

Thank you for listening.

Senator Manning: Thank you, Senator McPhedran. As I met with different groups and individuals and talked to different health care professionals, there doesn’t seem to be any plan in place. While we have recommendations made from different studies that have been conducted across the country and different provinces, there doesn’t seem to be a holistic approach to how we deal with intimate partner violence in the country. I stand to be corrected with regard to exactly what is out there in some areas. We live in a big country.

What I’m hoping to do with my bill is to bring all the players to the table. If the bill is adopted and becomes law, the government would have a certain amount of time to build a national strategy to address some of the concerns I have raised today, as well as concerns I didn’t have the opportunity to raise. Hopefully, through it all, we can develop a strategy that addresses issues that we’re dealing with right across the country.

As I said in my remarks, I welcome all suggestions, whether from fellow senators here in the chamber, different groups and organizations or individuals across the country. My strongest belief is that it is only by working together and bringing all players to the table that we can find a way to address this very serious issue in our country.

(On motion of Senator Duncan, debate adjourned.)

Hon. Fabian Manning introduced Bill S-249, An Act respecting the development of a national strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence.

(Bill read first time.)