Welcome, minister.

I want to focus on the B.C. First Nations Justice Strategy in the context of Bill C-48. I’m impressed with the aims, the objectives and the overarching goal, namely, reducing the number of First Nations people who become involved with the criminal justice system. Further aims would be improving the experience of those who do, increasing the number of First Nations people working within the justice system and supporting First Nations to restore their justice systems and infrastructure. Does Bill C-48 complement these aims and objectives? What impact will Bill C-48 have on those aims and objectives? Will any adjustments to the strategy be required?

Thank you for that. I wish you all the best with the strategy. I hope it goes well.

I have a question of Ms. Owens, but our panel that’s with us in attendance can also jump in if there’s time permitting.

So far, I haven’t been able to get at this. Maybe you can land it. To get a better idea of those affected by Bill C-48, do you have any statistics into the number of accused discharged, conditional or absolute, following an intimate partner violence charge?

Maybe I can put another spin on that. Can you opine on how Bill C-48 will or will not end gander-based violence or make survivors of intimate partner violence safer?

Thank you.

Ms. Niman, you mentioned in an article you wrote entitled The healing power of Gladue reports that Gladue reports are severely underused. Can you elaborate further as to the status of the Gladue reports in our criminal justice system, especially at the bail stage? How do you explain this performance?

A common concern as it relates to Indigenous detainees is their lack of access to a surety. It seems as though if a detainee does manage to satisfy a reverse onus, a judge may be more likely to impose — as a lower rung in the ladder principle — a surety as a bail condition. Will Bill C-48 exacerbate this issue?