“I want the House to pass this bill and send it to committee. Violence against women is a national crisis. This bill requires the federal government to work with provinces and Indigenous partners each year to stop partner violence, and report its progress to Parliament every two years.”

“moved that Bill S-242, An Act respecting national action for the prevention of intimate partner violence, be read the second time and referred to a committee. She said: Mr. Speaker, we have discussed some very poignant issues today, social issues that affect us all. I would like to add another point this evening. I am going to address a subject that is sensitive, difficult to hear and, of course, difficult to describe. I will be talking about violence against women, particularly violence against women in the context of domestic violence, which is becoming increasingly common. Even one incident is one too many. All too often, this violence claims its victim’s life. Despite the sensitive nature of the subject, I am pleased to rise today as the sponsor in the House of Commons of Bill S‑242, introduced by Senator Fabian Manning, who is close by here this evening. My hope is that everything we do as politicians will help build a safer society for our women and girls. We must break the silence surrounding this violence. We must strip this violence of the shame that often falls over the victims, and cast it over to the other side, as we learned from a French woman who was a victim herself, who is known for her immense courage. This is Mr. Manning’s third attempt to get a bill passed that would require the federal government and all provincial governments to stand shoulder to shoulder, with better coordination nationwide, in addressing violence against women. The idea of introducing this bill came to him after a meeting with Georgina McGrath, a Newfoundlander who survived many years of domestic violence. Georgina’s story is the product of a system that fails to protect our women and girls, a system that sadly appears to protect abusers more than the victims, whose numbers are constantly rising to frightening levels. I will share some statistics that illustrate my point. Here in Canada, the surge in violent crime since 2015 has been alarming. Overall, violent crime has increased by 57%. Firearm-related crime, in particular, has risen by 103% since 2015. Extortion, meanwhile, has increased by 300% over the same period. Homicides are up by nearly 10% since 2015. Intimate partner and gender-based violence is usually directed at women. It can be physical, psychological or sexual in nature. Since 2015, sexual assaults in this country have surged by 74%. The reality of sexual violence and abuse against young women is that over six in 10 women aged 15 to 24, or 61%, experienced unwanted sexual behaviour in a public place, the highest rate of any age group. To fully grasp the gravity of the situation, and the national crisis we are facing when it comes to violence against women, we need only consider that, since the start of this year, some 19 femicides have reportedly been committed in Quebec alone. According to the Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability, 147 women and girls were violently killed across the country last year. The Government of Canada even states plainly on its own website that, in this country, a G7 nation, a woman is killed every 48 hours. Is anyone paying attention? Is anyone not turning a blind eye? Is anyone not simply moving on, convinced that there are more pressing matters to address? We must act because the next victim is alive tonight. She is still alive. In the section on 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, which will be held from November 25 to December 10, we note that a woman is killed every two days in Canada. The Government of Canada’s website states: GBV [gender-based violence] continues to affect women, girls, and 2SLGBTQI+ communities at alarming rates. Every 48 hours in Canada, a woman or girl is killed in an act of gender-based violence. In 2024, 240 women and girls were murdered, primarily by men, a 54% increase over pre-COVID rates. Victims and survivors of GBV often face lasting personal, social, and economic impacts with consequences that can echo across generations. GBV carries a high economic cost, with Canadian governments spending billions annually on healthcare, justice, and social services to respond to it. I will now share some more numbers that show that women are right to be constantly hypervigilant, which, of course, is not normal. The number of female victims of police-reported domestic violence is up 39%. Since 2018, intimate partner violence has increased by 14% nation-wide. Furthermore, in Canada, 28% of all violent crimes are committed by an intimate partner. This represents nearly one in three crimes. Lastly, 79% of victims of intimate partner homicide are women. That is why Senator Manning wants all governments in Canada to sit down together and coordinate their actions. The senator has long called on the government to implement a national plan to address intimate partner violence. Since this plan now exists, he is now asking, through this bill, for the federal government to support this national strategy and show leadership by sitting down at the same table with all the provincial governments to develop a clear vision of the situation and take joint action to address violence against women. Georgina’s Law contains four sections and sets out the following for the Minister of Women and Gender Equality to consider. First, it says that the “Minister must continue to lead national action to prevent and address intimate partner violence.” What is interesting is the ongoing nature the wording of the bill adds to any national action or strategy. The government can call it whatever it wants. The goal here is a national initiative that will outlast all governments. Second, it states that the Minister of Women and Gender Equality must “engage annually with other federal ministers and with provincial ministers responsible for the status of women and regularly with Indigenous partners, victims and survivors, and stakeholders with respect to: (a) the adequacy of current programs and strategies aimed at preventing intimate partner violence and at protecting and assisting victims of intimate partner violence”. We want to ensure that the measures put forward are effective and provide an appropriate response to any situation involving violence. Allow me to continue: “(b) partnerships in the prevention of intimate partner violence and the protection of victims of intimate partner violence”. The idea is that ministers across Canada will discuss “the financial and other costs of action to prevent and address intimate partner violence”. Finally, of course, discussions must be held on “any constitutional, legal or jurisdictional implications of action to prevent and address intimate partner violence.” The bill also states that “the engagements...must begin within one year after the day on which this Act receives royal assent.” Of course, we hope that it will be adopted as soon as possible. With respect to accountability, as this is an important element, the bill provides that, within two years of the day on which the bill receives royal assent and every two years thereafter, the minister must prepare a report setting out progress on national action to prevent and address intimate partner violence. That report must then be tabled in each House of Parliament. In other words, is it possible to share our best practices? Could we not avoid reinventing the wheel and improve how we talk to each other? Let us talk about Georgina’s law for Georgina McGrath. This woman knew cowardly men who beat her. The last one that fit this profile almost killed her. The following is an excerpt from her testimony in the Senate on April 11, 2024. I need to give a little warning, because it is not easy to hear. The mental and emotional abuse followed hand in hand with the physical abuse. Everything was my fault, of course, and I was crazy for questioning him on anything. His reign of terror continued over the next few months. I had black eyes, a broken-off tooth, a concussion and a tiring amount of emotional and mental abuse. Later in her testimony, she went on to say the following: On September 25, 2014, I received the biggest beating of my life.... He...started strangling me.... He...started punching me on the side of my head.... I just lay there waiting for the final punch. That day she managed to reach her sister. After attempting to commit suicide, in the end, thankfully she woke up in the hospital. She continued by telling the senator the following: The next thing I remember is waking in the hospital and seeing my two children. That’s when I knew I was in for the fight of my life. I had ruptured ear drums, temporal and facial damages and bruises all over my body that took seven weeks to fade away. These women, like Georgina, are broken inside. They will bear the scars for the rest of their lives. They are forever marked by these experiences. Georgina McGrath encouraged Conservative Senator Fabian Manning to take action. This is a relay race. Now, it is up to us to take the baton and say yes to Mr. Manning, yes to Georgina and yes to all the women who do not feel safe and who fear for their lives. This evening, we need to say yes to them. Let us also do our part and pass this bill, which is a reasonable, common-sense piece of legislation. I think that the Liberals, the Bloc Québécois, and the New Democrats can easily join me and the Conservatives in supporting this bill without hesitation. Let us take inspiration from the bipartisan consensus among the three provincial parties in Newfoundland and Labrador that support this initiative. Let us take inspiration from the National Assembly of Quebec, which unanimously passed the Gabie Renaud Act in a bipartisan effort in June 2026.”

“All parties should work together on this bill instead of fighting. Our goal must be to keep women safe.”

“Mr. Speaker, some issues call for co-operation. By their very nature, they do not lend themselves to partisan debate or political point-scoring. This year marks 20 years since I entered politics. On several occasions, I have seen parliamentarians recognize that certain issues simply cannot be subjected to partisan battles. There are indeed several bills in the works. People listening to us at home will be happy to hear that, in committees or in other areas of Parliament, we are able to engage in parliamentary debate, reach agreement, and be on the same page. I am convinced that, when it comes to this particular bill, we will be able to work hand in hand, because ultimately, the goal is to ensure that when women wake up in the morning, they wake up happy and safe, and that, when they go to bed at night, they remain safe.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 41 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“I support this bill. It creates a national plan to stop violence against women. Passing it into law will make sure the plan lasts, no matter which political party is in power.”

“Mr. Speaker, Senator Manning’s initiative is very much in keeping with the various measures that can be undertaken, be they strategies, national initiatives or legislation. In this case, we have legislation that provides a framework for a national effort to prevent violence against women. I commend the Government of Canada for having put that effort in place. Senator Manning called for it, and that request has been answered. Now comes a second request: that this national effort survive the various governments that eventually sit on the other side, regardless of which party sits on the government side. The aim is precisely to ensure that this strategy has staying power. I think that is the goal: to reach the kind of consensus that will bring about real change.”

“All parties need to work together to stop intimate partner violence. I want my colleague to explain how this bill protects women and helps them leave abusive partners.”

“Mr. Speaker, as the shadow minister for the status of women, I find this to be an incredibly important topic: ensuring that it remains non-partisan and that we work together to advance a national framework. That being said, I am going to ask my colleague if she could just quickly state how this will move toward protecting women from intimate partner violence and how we can better ensure that they can get out of these situations and be supported in building their own futures.”

“We need national coordination to stop violence against women. Partners from every province should meet to see what works and share the best programs across Canada.”

“Mr. Speaker, this is a national initiative designed to bring together all the partners from across Canada, from every province, to sit down and discuss the situation. We need a clear picture of the current situation. We need to approach this issue objectively. What programs are in place? How is violence against women being addressed? Are there initiatives in the west, the Maritimes, Quebec, Ontario or elsewhere that have proven effective and could be replicated in other regions? It really is about establishing national coordination to ensure that we are all working from a common understanding and pursuing shared objectives in addressing violence against women.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 45 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“I want Parliament to pass this bill to keep a national plan against partner abuse going. Leaving an abusive partner is hard and dangerous. Victims often cannot leave because they lack money, housing, or child care. This bill will help us track what support victims actually need and fix the gaps in our system.”

“Mr. Speaker, one of the hardest things to imagine is being afraid of the person one lives with: the person who is supposed to care about them, the person they share their home with, and the person who may know exactly how to make them feel trapped, isolated and afraid to leave. For some people experiencing intimate partner violence, getting out is not always as simple as walking through the front door. There may be children or pets involved. There may be nowhere else to live. There may be financial barriers, threats or even a real fear of what happens when an abusive partner finds out that they even want to leave. We have to keep these things in mind when we talk about preventing intimate partner violence. In 2024, police recorded more than 128,000 victims of intimate partner violence in Canada. Nearly eight in 10 were women and girls. That same year, 81 women were killed by a current or former intimate partner. Those numbers are devastating, and behind every one of them is a person, a family and a life that is forever changed. As the shadow minister for women and gender equality, I take this issue seriously. It is also something we have been hearing about through our work in committee. We have just wrapped up a study on women’s shelters, and we look forward to finalizing the report and putting forward recommendations that reflect what we have heard. During that study, we heard from amazing witnesses. Some of them work on the front lines, helping women navigate the difficult times and these difficult moments in their life. Others have survived abuse and have since dedicated their life to helping other women find safety and rebuild. There is something important about hearing from people with lived experience. They understand what it takes to leave. They understand the fear, the uncertainty and the challenges that come with starting over, and they know that getting someone out of immediate danger is only a part of their journey. A woman also needs somewhere safe to go. She may need help finding housing, supporting her children, accessing counselling or getting back on her feet financially. She needs to know that when she asks for help, there will be someone there to help her walk through her very next steps. A common theme that kept coming up during committee was the need for practical supports that meet women where they are at, along with coordinated resources to make support accessible. Telling a woman to leave an abusive situation is one thing. Making sure she has somewhere safe to go when she does it is another. We need to be honest about that difference. That is why Bill S-242, Georgina’s law, is worth talking about. The bill is about continuing a national action plan to prevent intimate partner violence. We can announce funding and study the issue, but what matters most is where we do the work. We need to ask the right questions. Where are women having trouble getting help? What happens when a shelter is full? What options does a woman have if she decides to leave tonight? How do we make sure that women in smaller communities have access to supports too? How do we make it easier for the organizations helping these women to collaborate and work together? These are not hypothetical scenarios. They are the real kinds of work and what a women thinks about before they leave. It helps her determine if there is an actual safe way out. We cannot expect someone who is already dealing with fear and uncertainty to spend days calling different organizations, repeating her story and trying to figure out which services might be able to help her. We need to make it easier for women to find all the available support, and we need to be honest about where that support is falling short. That is where the experiences of the witnesses we heard from become so important. They have seen what works. They have seen where women get stuck. They know what happens when women are ready to leave but do not have the money, housing or support to make that possible. When survivors dedicate their life to helping other women, we should listen to what they have learned. Their experiences cannot be something we listen to and acknowledge just during committee but forget the moment we walk outside those doors. They should help shape decisions we make. One of the things I want to see from this kind of national work is a clear focus on prevention. Far too often, we have this conversation only after the tragedy has occurred. A woman is seriously hurt, or a family loses someone they love, and everyone asks, “How could this happen?” We need to ask those questions before we reach that point. Did someone recognize the warning signs? Was there help available? Did the person experiencing abuse know where to turn? What barriers were in place that left them feeling that leaving was impossible? IPV does not always begin with physical violence. It can start with controlling behaviour, threats, isolation or financial abuse. A person may gradually lose contact with friends or family or become increasingly dependent on a partner causing them harm. By the time we reach out, they may have been dealing with the situation for a very long time. We need to make sure that people take the warning signs seriously. We need accessible support and people who know how to respond to services and can help prevent the situation before it escalates. We need to remember that leaving an abusive relationship can become one of the most dangerous periods for the victim. That makes safety planning and access to knowledgeable support all the more important. Prevention is not simply telling people that abuse is wrong. It is making sure that people recognize they are in an unsafe situation and know that they have support to turn to and a way to move forward. I would also like to take a moment to acknowledge and thank the people who work in women’s shelters and support organizations every single day, like a few in my riding such as Women in Crisis, the YWCA, Safe Families, the Sexual Assault Service Centre and many more. These people sit with women in crisis, help them make difficult decisions and work with them to give their children and themselves a chance to move forward, sometimes to the point of burnout. Their work matters tremendously, but we cannot rely on them to make up for every gap in the system. They need resources to be able to do their jobs, they need to be able to connect women with the services they require and they need us to take their concerns seriously when they say that something is not working. That is one of the reasons I look forward to finalizing our committee’s report on women’s shelters. We have heard from people with lived experience and from survivors who turned some of the hardest moments of their lives into a commitment to helping others. We owe it to them to take their testimony seriously and consider what changes would make a real difference in their lives. There is not a one-size-fits-all approach, but there should be a common expectation that women who need help immediately can find it, and they should be treated with dignity and respect as they do. I want to be clear about what Georgina’s law can accomplish. On its own, this bill would not create more shelter beds or frontline organizations. What it would do is require continued national action, engagement with those affected by IPV and regular reporting. If a woman cannot find a safe space to stay, we need to address that. If services are difficult to navigate, we need to look at how to make them more accessible. If organizations are identifying gaps in support, we need to hear about them and respond. That is how we keep this work grounded in the lives of the people it is meant to help. No woman should feel like her options are to stay in the abusive relationship or leave without knowing where she stands or where her children will sleep. No woman should have to navigate a maze of services all the time in trying to get herself to safety. No survivor should come forward to tell us what needs to change and feel their experience has gone unheard. Georgina’s law is an opportunity to keep prevention on the agenda and bring the right people together to identify what is working, what gaps remain and how we are going to fix them. At the end of the day, we can have meeting after meeting and create endless programs to help, but that is not success. We measure it by whether a woman needs help and can get it, whether she can find a safe place to go, whether she and her children can begin to rebuild their lives and whether we are doing everything we can to prevent another family from losing a loved one. That is the responsibility we have and it is the work we must continue.”