SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 198

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 16, 2023 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 198 - May/16/23
Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)
  • May/16/23 11:34:05 a.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-21 
Madam Speaker, I do not know whether my colleague is aware, but on May 16, 2022, the National Association of Women and the Law sent a letter to the Minister of Public Safety on behalf of dozens of women's associations, including the YMCA of Greater Toronto, the Canadian Women's Foundation, Women's Shelters Canada, and the Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale, to name but a few. In this letter, they tell the government that they do not want the red flag measure, that they are afraid that it will put women at greater risk and that law enforcement will shirk its responsibilities when it comes to removing a gun from a licence holder whose spouse is a victim of domestic violence. Can my colleague explain to me why the government, despite the advice of all these women's groups, has nevertheless decided to introduce this red flag measure?
156 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 198 - May/16/23
Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)
  • May/16/23 7:29:24 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-21 
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I would like her to talk more about the red flag provision. We know that an impressive number of women's groups in Canada have said that they are against such a measure. These women have said that this will take responsibility away from law enforcement and put victims of domestic violence in danger if they have to go to court to try to get a gun taken away from a potentially violent licence holder. I named some of those groups earlier. They include the Canadian Women's Foundation, Women's Shelters Canada, the Regroupement des maisons pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale, the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, the National Association of Women and the Law, and PolyRemembers. Dozens and dozens of women's groups have said that they are against the red flag provision. That is why the Bloc Québécois voted against this measure. However, the government decided to go ahead with it anyway with the support of the NDP. As the critic for status of women, how does my colleague see the government's refusal to listen to women's groups?
199 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 198 - May/16/23
Ms. Andréanne Larouche
  • May/16/23 7:30:47 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-21 
Madam Speaker, that is what I was saying earlier when I was talking about the good work done by the Bloc Québécois. We need to listen to what is happening on the ground. As I was saying earlier, on the one hand, the Conservatives are unfortunately spreading disinformation about hunting rifles and on the other hand, I get the impression that the Liberal government is practising fake feminism again. They are trying to ease their conscience. A red flag provision looks good and is impressive. It gives the impression of concern for the issue of violence against women. However, if they had listened to the groups who work with women every day, if they had done the in-depth work, they would have realized that the red flag provision does not actually meet the needs of women who are victims of violence. I am thinking about PolyRemembers and all the groups my colleague named. This only contributes to giving the government the image of fake feminism, when it could have proposed real measures to protect women who are victims of violence.
185 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border