I am pleased to rise today to participate in this debate on private member’s motion 19. Certainly this is a motion that the official opposition is pleased to support. It calls on the government to promote and ensure the availability of continuing education seminars for professionals in Ontario’s Family Court system.

Now, in saying that this is a motion that we can support, I want to point out the contrast between the contents of this motion that was tabled since the election and the recommendations that were made by the coroner’s jury to the province of Ontario following the murders of Carol Culleton, Anastasia Kuzyk and Nathalie Warmerdam in Renfrew county several years ago. In particular, I want to highlight recommendation 8, recommendation 28, recommendation 29, recommendation 31, recommendation 42 and recommendation 57, that all dealt extensively with training in our justice system.

Recommendation 8 requires “that all justice system participants who work with” intimate partner violence “survivors and perpetrators are trained and engage in a trauma-informed approach to interacting and dealing with survivors and perpetrators.”

Recommendation 28: “Review existing training for justice system personnel.”

Recommendation 29: “Provide professional education and training for justice system personnel ... which should include”—and then there’s a long list of content recommendations for what the training must include.

And then recommendation 31 is to “track whether mandated” intimate partner violence-related “professional education and training is completed by all justice system personnel.”

It’s one thing to promote and ensure the availability of training; it’s quite another to mandate training for all those who are involved in the Family Court system.

I just want to remind members—I think it was about a year and a half ago or so—that we debated in this place Bill 207. That was amendments to the Children’s Law Reform Act legislation that was brought forward by the Attorney General to recognize the fact that many of the cases that come before the family courts involve families where one partner, typically the woman, has been experiencing violence at the hands of the other partner, typically the man, and so the Family Court system is involved in making custody decisions.

At the time, Luke’s Place from Durham region presented to the committee and they made some recommendations to this government that were endorsed by a long list of women’s shelters and sexual violence agencies and gender-based violence agencies. One of those recommendations that was endorsed by all of these agencies involved in the violence against women sector was that “family law services, courts, and legal advisers must complete family violence and family violence assessment training and practice requirements.”

Unfortunately, at the time that Bill 207 was debated the government chose to ignore the recommendation to make that training mandatory. It appears that in the motion that is before us today, the government still wants to leave it up to the professionals involved in the court system to decide whether they’re going to participate in this training. We know from the inquest that was conducted in Renfrew that making the training mandatory is critical.

I also wanted to highlight a couple of other recommendations that were included in the coroner’s report, and in particular, recommendation 18, that says, “Recognize that the implementation of the recommendations from this inquest, including the need for adequate and stable funding ... will require a significant financial investment,” and they call on the government to commit to providing such funding.

Unfortunately, Speaker, we have not seen this government commit to coming to the table to provide the stable funding, the ongoing funding, that organizations that provide intimate partner violence support services need to help survivors navigate the justice system. In fact, we see an exemplary program, the Family Court Support Worker Program, which provides assistance to survivors as they navigate the Family Court system. We have seen that program—that funding is provided year after year. Agencies have to reapply. They never know whether the minimal dollars that are allocated are going to be there.

So providing the supports, making the training mandatory: That is what is going to have a meaningful difference for survivors of intimate partner violence in Ontario.

Further debate?

I would like to start my remarks by thanking the member for Oakville North–Burlington for bringing this motion forward. It is a motion that deals with a very serious issue, the issue of domestic violence, and it deserves full support from all of us.

I understand that this motion is inspired by Keira’s Law, a federal bill that passed in the House of Commons on June 1 of this year, with unanimous support of the whole House of Commons. The bill is currently at the second reading stage before the Senate.

The bill requires a justice to consider whether someone charged with intimate partner violence should be required to wear an electronic monitoring device, but more on point with the current motion, the bill also provides for continuing education seminars for judges on matters related to intimate partner violence and coercive control in intimate relationships.

The story behind this legislation is unfortunately one that is too common. Thanks to the determination of Keira’s mom, Jennifer, we now see Parliament taking action, and we need to do the same.

Keira was her four-year-old daughter, and she was found dead with her father on February 9, 2020, at the base of a cliff at Rattlesnake Point conservation area in Milton, Ontario. It is believed that this was a murder-suicide. The father, Robin Brown, had been abusive for years previously. The mother, Jennifer, sought protection for Keira through the courts. She expressed concern with her ex-husband’s violent behaviour. Unfortunately, like it was mentioned before, she was not taken seriously, with the judge saying that the domestic violence and coercive control of Mr. Brown were actually not relevant to Keira’s custody.

When I say this kind of story is too common, I mean that 30 to 40 kids are killed by their own parents every year in Canada. Some of the responsibilities fall with the courts, because they are failing the victims, because judges don’t have the proper training. Without the science of domestic violence, judges are ignoring clues that could help avoid such tragedies. Science cannot be infused, even for judges; it needs to be learned by those who have the power to make a difference.

All judges understand that in any domestic dispute, the interest of the child needs to be the priority. However, the interpretation of what this interest is can be wrong if the judge is thinking that the child must be able to see both parents and that fact supersedes any consideration of domestic violence. Domestic violence is not necessarily visual physically, and that’s why training is important. Training is not only important, it is critical.

I had the opportunity to speak to Jennifer just two days ago. She’s a brave mother who has shown great determination in bringing forward a proposed solution, not for her, because for her it’s too late, but to protect other children and parents from the infinitely tragic situation she has endured and the pain she continues to suffer. There is no more terrible loss than losing a child. We cannot let Jennifer down, no more than we can let down the children and parents who are at risk every day in this province.

The motion is a great first step. When I spoke with Jennifer, she said she’s grateful and she’s encouraged by this, so I’m totally supportive of this effort by the government. But we need to go further. We need to have conversations with the judiciary and the chief justices about the importance of making this a priority.

I spoke to the member for Oakville North–Burlington and to the Attorney General earlier this week, and I want to reiterate my offer to help and to collaborate with the government on moving this forward, to see concrete changes in our legislation.

Again, I want to thank the member for Oakville North–Burlington for bringing this motion before the assembly of Ontario.

The member from Ottawa–Vanier.

Janet Desormeaux, 43, of Sudbury, was killed on October 30. Janet will be remembered for her smile and her love for her family, a staple within her community and hockey arena.

Katherine Zollerano, 43, of Toronto, was killed on November 2. Katherine will be forever remembered and missed by many family members, friends and loved ones.

Danielle Strauss, 38, of Hamilton, was killed on November 10. Danielle enjoyed spending time with her neighbours on outings or playing bingo, and loved to laugh.

Jane Doe, eight years old, of Oshawa, was killed on November 12. The victim was like a daughter to many in her small community, and she had a bright future ahead of her.

Jane Doe, 41, of Kitchener, was killed on November 15. The victim will be deeply missed by her family, friends and community members. Two other victims, a 51-year-old woman and a seven-year-old girl, were also injured in this attack but are expected to survive.

Jane Doe of Milton was killed on November 22. The victim will be forever remembered and missed by her children, other family members, friends and community members.

Speaker, these are the victims of femicide in the last month alone. I rise today to honour and remember these women, as well as the many others who have been killed by those they knew well. Our thoughts, our prayers and our sorrow continue to be with their families and their friends.

Madam Speaker, every young woman, every girl, has the right to live in safety and with dignity, free from intimidation and violence. It is so important that the women in our communities who are affected by violence and exploitation receive the support they need, while offenders are held accountable through our justice system.

I am speaking today in support of this motion from the member from Oakville North–Burlington. Continuous education courses for our partners in the Ontario Family Court system will help to better inform those involved in the early warning signs of gender-based violence and will lead to preventive measures being put in place before it becomes too late.

This motion builds on our government’s many actions to address gender-based violence. Last year alone, we invested $11 million in violence prevention initiatives and nearly $200 million in services and supports for survivors of violence. The investment provides critical services, such as crisis lines, sexual assault centres and emergency shelters for women and their children. It also funds programs that connect women who have experienced violence with a wide range of supports; supports like safety planning, counselling, mental health services, supportive housing and culturally responsive healing programs.

I’d like to acknowledge the release of Canada’s first National Action Plan to End Gender-Based Violence earlier this month and our government’s endorsement of that plan. The plan is a historic milestone in fulfilling a lifelong plan and a lifelong standing commitment of all levels of government to work towards a Canada free of gender-based violence.

Ontario led the approach in forwarding the national action plan to the FPT forum of justice ministers with a written request that they commit to taking further action to improve justice system responses, including by holding perpetrators and offenders accountable.

In closing, I want to express my sincere gratitude to the professionals who are working on the front lines to support and comfort survivors of domestic and sexual violence and help them redirect their lives. It is difficult and often unsung work, but it is life-saving and life-changing.

Further debate?

I rise today to say thank you and to also add my support to the motion from the other member: intimate partner violence continuing education in Family Court. We absolutely need to continue education for everyone who is within an inch’s length of being associated with intimate partner violence, gender-based violence etc.

What I want to start by saying is, violence against women and children is about a power imbalance. It’s about someone wanting to use their power to diminish another. I think what we have to do is use legislation to build up women and children so they can feel safe, so they can feel empowered to get help, to be able to access help to get out of the situation. Now, it can’t just be on the women’s and children’s shoulders. It has to be on the system’s shoulders. We have to address this systemically.

I had a conversation with many members—a couple of dozen members, it felt like—from OAITH, staff members and board members, and it stuck out to me when one member of OAITH said that in their organization, there is one Family Court worker for 260 clients—one Family Court worker. Another person in this group of warriors who are doing Herculean work on a shoestring budget said they had lost funding for their child care respite worker, which creates a huge barrier for women, whether they’re trying to get to a job interview or if they have to get to court. The bottom line is, we have to fund the selfless people, the organizations, the community-based resources that are literally helping women and children out of intimate partner violence, out of gender-based violence.

And I will say this to the government: I understand that there have been years where there has been a bit of latitude that’s been given to shelters and organizations to use their budget as they see fit. I want to stand here and say that that worked and that allowed organizations to be able to use the money where it was necessary: an extra staff person, not having to pay for transportation if that’s not what they need. What they need is important and they are the experts of what they need in their sector, and of course the lived experience of survivors—they are the ultimate experts, as well.

So we need to ensure that there’s annualized funding to support organizations. We need to ensure that this government isn’t cutting any more from legal aid, as they have in the last recent years. But most importantly, we need to listen to survivors.

I want to share with you some excerpts from N.M. She gave me permission to read it, but I’m just going to keep her name confidential. N.M.’s story: “I have an 11-year-old boy now, and I spent about 10 years of his life in court. Just this week, I received yet another threat from his dad.

“I’m honestly not sure how many court orders I have at this point, but I can say for certain that none of them have been particularly useful, and all it does is cost me money. The courts only recognize overt physical abuse as abuse. Anything else is insignificant, which is hugely problematic.

“Time and time again I was told that my experience of abuse is ‘irrelevant’ and that I need to put that behind me and put my child’s interest first.

“Continuing on the above point, as a woman who left an abusive relationship, having authorities ... push that message continuously is very demeaning/diminishing ... I have put my child first by leaving the relationship, and from my perspective, exercising caution with an abusive man is another way of putting my child first....

“I have several court orders demanding him to release his financial disclosure, and not once did he release his financial disclosure....

“There is no way for me to enforce him paying child support, without paying additional legal fees, and even if I do go that route, there’s still no promise that he’ll have to pay....

“If I get upset in court (and what kind of emotionless monster wouldn’t feel emotion when talking about the fate of their child)”—when one is escaping violence—“I’m seen as irrational and weak, while the ... ‘cool as a cucumber’ dad can smirk at me from across the courtroom and win the judge’s favour.”

We need “gender sensitivity training for all Family Court staff, lawyers, and judges, domestic abuse training for all of the above, as well as children’s aid workers and police.

“I have ideas on what can be done to address this massive systematic and invisible problem, and they include ... more awareness of narcissistic abuse” and emotional abuse as abuse.

The last thing I want to say: These organizations need more staff. They need more angels to do this work, because, as one member said, they don’t want to have to call the police. That is a last resort. It’s about having the counsellors. It’s about having the mental health supports and the staff there who can take a trauma-informed approach. That is the way to go, but all of that requires funding. You all are in power. You all have the dollars. Spend them where it counts: on women and children’s lives.

The member from Burlington.

Ms. Triantafilopoulos has moved private member’s notice of motion number 19. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? It’s carried.

Motion agreed to.

The House adjourned at 1718.

I am grateful for the opportunity to rise today to support this important motion put forward by my colleague.

Domestic abuse can take many forms and is almost always related to power and control in the relationship.

Knowledge is power, and by knowing more and educating ourselves on the signs of intimate partner violence and coercive control, we put ourselves and our judicial system in a better position to help protect women and children in abusive relationships.

Gaps in education can have devastating and painful repercussions, as was the case with Keira Kagan, who was killed by her father. Keira’s mother, Jennifer, repeatedly warned judges of the danger Keira’s father posed to them. Keira’s Law, Bill C-233, is currently in the Senate. If there was sufficient training of court officials to identify violent tendencies and the dangers of coercive control, Keira’s case may not have had such a tragic ending. It’s imperative that lawmakers, enforcement officers and judicial powers recognize and know the signs. In order to do this, training is required.

To become an accredited mediator in Ontario, a person would have to do 21 hours of domestic violence training. This is mandatory training, which is required to be updated every year for five years. However, judges do not have to complete this training, and this is where the gap is.

Families put their trust in the court system, hoping that those making the decisions have the knowledge and the understanding it takes to identify violence and abuse in a family situation, because abuse is not always physical and violence doesn’t always present physically. Coercive control can look different in each and every case and can include things like isolating one from friends or family, monitoring communications or tools and depriving one of basic needs. For children, this can look like yelling, rejecting them, brainwashing, thought reform or turning one parent against another. These behaviours can also lead to challenges for children in their adult lives. Victims and survivors of coercive control often struggle with their own mental health, including PTSD, stress, anxiety, eating disorders, substance and alcohol abuse or even repeated cycles of violence and coercion.

The judicial system needs to start recognizing that abuse isn’t just physical; it can be subtle, humiliating, through intimidation, threats, control over finances and liberties. It’s power over the victim. We need to do more and do right by victims and children escaping these situations. Long after the abuse has ceased, the effects on families remain, and the trauma outlives the actual violence and the abuse. We need to make sure that judges, justices of the peace, social workers, mediators and decision-makers are helping to end the cycle of abuse with the appropriate training to handle difficult family cases.

Yesterday, Minister Fullerton spoke about November being Woman Abuse Prevention Month and how the purple scarf is a symbol of the courage it takes for women to leave their abuser.

To protect women and children, all levels of the system need to be trained on intimate partner violence and coercive control. Together, we can make a difference in the lives of victims and in the lives of survivors. Thank you to my colleague from Oakville North–Burlington for bringing intimate partner violence and coercive control to light.

I’d like to thank all of my colleagues in the House who have spoken on this important motion: the members for Brampton Centre, Burlington and Whitby; the members for London West, Ottawa–Vanier and Toronto–St. Paul’s. Thank you for your commitment to opposing gender-based violence.

Thank you also to all the organizations in my own community who support the victims of violence and who work selflessly to make sure women and children are safe: Halton Women’s Place, Zonta Club of Oakville, SAVIS of Halton and the Women’s Centre of Halton.

I’d like to recognize the many people who have worked to promote Keira’s Law provincially and federally, including the municipal councils in Oakville and Burlington, who passed resolutions in support. Thank you to federal member of Parliament Anju Dhillon and my federal counterpart in Oakville North–Burlington, Pam Damoff, for their leadership.

In the gallery today, we have some great supporters of this initiative: Marlene Ham from the Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses, Silvia Samsa from SAVIS of Halton, my friend Sonia Robinson from Oakville North–Burlington and my friend Kristin Demeny. For their insights and advocacy, I thank you.

Most importantly, my gratitude to Jennifer Kagan-Viater and her husband Philip Viater for their courage and leadership. Because of the work they’ve done, I believe that lives will be saved.

On a personal note, I would like to offer my profound gratitude to the women who courageously came forward and shared their personal stories of trauma and abuse with me. In my research, I came across a quote from Grant Wyeth in a recent article saying, “How societies treat women and children is the true reflection of their social health—and the behaviour of justice systems provides the legal framework to these values.” As members of this House, we can lead how our society treats women and children—and I welcome your involvement in the consultation with justice partners as we move forward.