Thank you for inviting me here today.

The Association des familles de personnes assassinées ou disparues was established in 2004 and now represents 750 families that have each had a member who has been murdered or who has disappeared as a result of a criminal act. Four fathers of murdered daughters created the association so that violence against women would also become a male issue.

Today I am speaking for thousands of women who have been neglected by our justice system. I'm also speaking for thousands of police and correctional officers who no longer view themselves as part of a public safety system that has become lax and bases its decisions on the criminals not the people who work hard to combat violence.

As you know, the safety of all Canadians has been the central focus of my life's mission for more than 22 years, since my daughter Julie was murdered by a repeat offender who had been released from prison. My priority during all those years has been to make elected representatives across Canada aware of this scourge of violence against women and, all too often, against their children. The experience I have acquired in the Senate over the past 14 years has convinced me that this awareness approach is the only way to make legislative changes that will make life safer for women in our communities.

As I said in my parting speech in the Senate this past February, steps have been taken in that direction. They include the adoption of the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, which recognizes the fundamental rights of victims, particularly the right to protection. Despite that fact, the number of women murdered in Canada rose 60% from 118 in 2019 to 184 in 2022. That's equal to the number of women murdered in France, the population of which is twice that of Canada.

Why, in 2024, do women have to work so hard to be heard, understood and protected? Why was my bill, Bill S-205, under which violent men on release are required to wear an electronic bracelet and to undergo therapy to reduce the incidence of repeat violent acts, butchered here in the House of Commons? That bill was the minimum measure that thousands of women had been demanding from the Parliament of Canada for years. It was unconditionally supported by all provincial justice ministers, first nations groups, the Fédération des maisons d'hébergement pour femmes and by therapists.

I can't understand why, in 2024, when we have effective, modern tools to ensure women's safety, it is still so hard to convince the country's legislators to take action in this matter. For example, I've been working for years with a business and some 100 women in Quebec to guarantee their safety because they have received death threats and threats of assault. This system works: Women feel safe, and some of them have used the alarm to avoid being assaulted. The Quebec government even reimburses them for the costs associated with this security system. What makes no sense is that it won't officially acknowledge the fact, something that would undoubtedly expand its use and guarantee the safety of many more women.

Here's a more recent example of how poorly women are protected in Canada. In Candiac 10 days ago, a 27-year-old woman, a distinguished engineering researcher, was murdered by her spouse. The latter had a history of abuse, was awaiting trial and was back in court because he had threatened to kill his spouse. He was released by the court and murdered his spouse an hour later. However, last year, you passed Bill C-233, which authorized courts to require defendants to wear an electronic bracelet in such cases, something that would have saved that woman's life. Why was the court so passive?

Although we now have these significant legislative changes, I see that they are hard to introduce. When it comes to the safety of female victims, we still act as we did 20 years ago by assuming that merely reporting incidents to the police is enough to ensure women's safety. The reality is quite different, and offenders know it. When the courts order 40% of offenders to serve their sentence at home, the most serious consequence is that police officers disengage.

That disengagement is the worst threat to women's safety because Bill C-5 has trivialized violence against women. Quite a win for them, isn't it?

Consequently, this Parliament, or the next one, must take tougher action if society wants to combat violence against women by amending Bill C-5, for example, which completely counteracts the efforts that most of the provinces have made to prevent every form of violence against women. The Criminal Code must provide for harsher action on femicides. Today, murderers in such cases can be released after four or five years in prison. In the Senate, I have introduced Bill S-255, which would be a step in that direction, and I hope it will be taken up soon.

As you can see, our laws alone won't protect women; our justice system has to enforce them.

Thank you, and I'll be pleased to answer your questions.

Transcript

Discussions (0)