Domestic violence is a serious issue. Because of this, a special meeting of the House of Commons Status of Women Committee was held on July 31, 2024. The major witness at this hearing was Nick Milinovich, Deputy Chief of Police, Peel Regional Police Emergency Services. He testified that his department had difficulty in enforcement of the laws regarding domestic violence because of: (1) ready access to illegal firearms; (2) release of repeat offenders on bail or parole; (3) the blatant disregard for release conditions by the offender.
Two other witnesses at the committee were Megan Walker, a victim of domestic violence, who flew from California to testify, and Cait Alexander, from London, Ontario, who is the founder of “End Violence Everywhere”.
During his testimony, the Deputy Chief of Police stated that in 2023, there were 14 homicides in his region and that 20% of the victims were women. This means that 80% of the homicide victims in Peel Region were men.
Statistics Canada reported (2024) that there is a low level of sexual assault that does not cause bodily harm, and that this type of assault represented 90% of sexual assaults in 2022 and is steadily increasing. More serious offences remain stable and decreased by 4% during that year.
However, it seems that the feminist MPs on this committee had higher priorities than domestic violence. This was apparent during the evidence provided by the two female witnesses who were interrupted by Liberal MP, Anita Vandenbeld (Ottawa West-Nepean), who stated that she would like to resume debate on a motion on abortion presented to the committee on May 13, 2022. She said she hoped “that the committee could vote quickly on this motion, hopefully unanimously”, so that the committee could go back to studying the domestic violence issue right away. Further, she said, “We’d only lose five minutes in this meeting”. However, the motion was contentious in that it included a provision that abortion become a Charter right, and that ready access to, and availability of, “reproductive health services” be available to all women and transgender and non-binary people for any reason, anywhere in Canada. This motion raised the question of whether the expression “reproductive health” includes taxpayer funded uterus transplants or extensive cosmetic reconstructive surgery to make a desired male or female appearance as part of transition. Also, it demanded that every remote town in Canada be obliged to provide abortion and transgender cosmetic surgery, which is quite sweeping to say the least. MP Vandenbeld’s motion was immediately followed by a statement from NDP MP Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre), who gave a long monologue stating, “I have to share how devasted I am. I can tell you that, as an Indigenous woman in this place, who decided to run … I live in ground zero for murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls … No Indigenous women were asked to speak today, nobody from the LGBTQ community was asked to speak today and nobody from the trans community was asked to speak today about violence when we are the ones who are on the front lines of being disappeared and murdered.”
MP Gazan followed this statement stating, “I have never in my time, since being elected, seen greater efforts to perpetrate state control on women’s bodies.” She particularly objected to the granting of charitable status to pregnancy care centres.
At this point, the two women witnesses fled the meeting in tears as the meeting had degenerated into confusion and chaos and was no longer on the topic about which they were testifying. There were many points of order and challenges to the Chair, Conversative MP, Shelby Kramp-Neuman (Hastings-Lennox and Addington). The latter, however, managed to call for a vote on a motion by Conservative MP, Tracy Gray (Kelowna-Lake County) to adjourn the debate on abortion. This was passed by a 6-4 vote. The motion on abortion will now be debated at a future meeting of the Status of Women Committee. Following further chaotic discussion, the meeting was adjourned.
The Uncertainty of the Definition of Domestic Violence
The federal government department of Women and Gender Equality (WAGE) defines gender-based violence as not limited to physical violence, but also includes words that degrade, control, humiliate, or intimidate another person. WAGE gave a grant of $1.4 million for gender-based violence to the feminist group Canadian Women’s Foundation for 2022-2023. This organization defines gender-based violence as including name-calling, blocking, control, and manipulation. These uncertain definitions are not preventing the Trudeau government from providing $539 million in the 2022 budget for a five-year national action plan on gender-based violence. Is this money to be used to prevent withering remarks from a partner who does not like a casserole (degrading and humiliating the partner?); does it include complaints that a partner has gained weight or is wasting money (controlling and manipulation?); or does it mean violent physical harm and death to a woman? It is astonishing that these behaviours are not differentiated and are regarded as similar behaviour encompassing violence against women.
Perhaps the Status of Women Committee should have a meeting to define exactly what gender-based violence means, and perhaps examine the current funding programs for domestic violence to determine whether these taxpayer-funded government programs are providing any measurable benefit.