Thank you, Minister Sharma, for joining us today on this important topic.

In a recent statement regarding the progress of Bill C-48, you expressed your intention to advocate for further changes concerning bail reform. Could you please tell us what changes you want to see implemented at the federal level?

Okay.

In a letter, the 13 premiers of Canada’s provinces and territories expressed their desire for the federal government to conduct a comprehensive review of the bail system. Obviously, Bill C-48 is very limited and quite targeted. It doesn’t really go to the extent that the premiers were asking for. On that point, what do you think the federal government should do? Are you in agreement with your premier that this is something you want to continue to see?

Years ago, when I used to be the Saskatchewan’s Justice Minister’s Chief of Staff, I recall that our FTP meetings used to be in the fall. I don’t know if that is still of the case or whether COVID interrupted that. When is your next FTP meeting, and is this an issue on the agenda?

Thank you.

Thank you very much to all of you for being here.

First of all, on the dual charging issue, I have to say I agree with Senator Jaffer. I had not heard about this practice before, and it isn’t that many years since I practised law actively. In the province of Saskatchewan, it was not something that I saw happening with any frequency whatsoever, yet this morning I note that Ms. Coyle used the word “frequently” to describe this.

Ms. Owens, you have highlighted in your submission that many individuals can be both victims and perpetrators of domestic violence, and it seems to me that perhaps this argument is at the core of your opposition to that provision in the bill. You were talking about data earlier, and I’m wondering if there’s any reliable statistical data that accurately quantifies the number of cases of domestic violence where individuals are both victims and perpetrators, particularly with the number of men and women listed in that, and to what extent does that data vary depending on factors about perhaps the definition of domestic violence or different data-collection methods.

Yes, that is quite a bit broader than that. I thought maybe it was an Ontario thing, or maybe it’s a policing issue, which frankly it seems to be. The few practitioners I have spoken to from here also did not see this. They said, yes, certainly they have seen it, but they would not describe it in any way as frequent. If there is any actual data or evidence that any of you can provide to our committee about that, I would be very interested to see that.

Also, Ms. Owens, in your submission to this committee, you recommended the removal of the provision in Bill C-48 that applies that reverse onus in cases where the accused has previously been discharged from an offence involving intimate partner violence and now is accused of a similar offence. Obviously, you are dealing with vulnerable women in your capacity at LEAF, and given the increase in prevalence of domestic violence in Canada, you don’t think it’s essential to have that type of a stricter legislative measure to protect potential victims, even if it means imposing those types of stricter conditions on acts of domestic violence, like is provided in Bill C-48?

Lastly to you, also because you are here with LEAF today, are you concerned about the fact that the predecessor minister on this bill had introduced this bill back in May or early June, and generally the Trudeau government puts forward a gender-based analysis on a bill and we still don’t have one. Are you concerned about that, given that could be the type of thing that would provide us with some answers?

Especially when we’re almost to go to a clause by clause and we still don’t have it, it’s not acceptable.