Asia Studios Massage
Toronto Escorts

Ontario finds that c36 / PCEPA to be constitutional.

krazyplayer

Member
Jun 9, 2004
485
0
16
Kathleen win feared for the safety of sex workers but says that C36 is not clearly unconstitutional:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...aw-constitutional-wynne-says/article23734478/

Ontario will uphold Canada’s new prostitution law after a review by the province’s Attorney-General found it to be constitutional, Premier Kathleen Wynne said Wednesday.

Wynne issued a statement the day after the law came into effect in December, saying she had a “grave concern” that it would not make sex workers safer, and asked the Attorney-General to review the law and advise her on the constitutional validity.

The Premier said Wednesday that the review found the law to be constitutional so Ontario will be taking no further action “at this point.”

“We will uphold the law,” she said. “We’ll obviously monitor and determine the impact of the law, but there’s no clear unconstitutionality in the law.”

The sweeping new changes to the way prostitution is regulated in Canada follow a Supreme Court decision that found the old laws violated the rights of prostitutes.

Attorney-General Madeleine Meilleur said her senior staff concluded that the new law answers concerns that the Supreme Court had about the previous law, but she would not divulge their reasoning.

“The legal opinion that was provided to me is privileged, so I’m not going to express every single detail that was in the legal opinion, but the importance to you is that it’s constitutionally sound,” she said.

Meilleur said there are approximately 26 cases being prosecuted in Ontario under the new law.

A coalition of sex-trade workers and their supporters said Wednesday the new law, which criminalizes paying for sex, communicating for sex or advertising sex services, is extremely similar to the old one, and called on Ontario to not enforce it.

“[We are] profoundly disappointed that the province appears to be turning its back on sex workers and Ontarian communities, despite Premier Wynne’s own ‘grave concerns’ with the new sex work law,” said the group that includes the Sex Professionals of Canada, the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and the sex-trade workers who launched the original court challenge.

“Sex workers have consistently articulated the many ways in which criminalizing them, their clients and their work settings does nothing to protect them, but instead undermines their ability to control their conditions of work to protect their health and safety. The law ensures that harms to sex workers will continue, and is a terrible step backwards.”
 
Jan 24, 2012
2,332
0
0
Ontario Governments have a history ... more so than any other Province to SUCK UP to the Federal Government.... This ONCE AGAIN is A classic example. P.S. It is the chief reason historically why other Provinces Government & the local people hate Ontario ..... they see Ontario as a Kiss Ass Province gutless to the Feds.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,094
2,592
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
https://nowtoronto.com/news/features/are-cops-turning-their-backs-on-feds-new-hooker-law/

Toronto According to Chief Bill Blair's spokesperson, Mark Pugash, the new law hasn't changed the way the force is dealing with prostitution. They continue to rely on complaints. Pugash says public safety is the force's "highest concern," but he seems to be talking more about residents' concerns than the safety of sex workers. "If the complaints we get require us to use tools we didn't have before, then we will do that."

Ottawa Acting Inspector Mike Laviolette of the Ottawa Police Service's Central District, where most of the city's sex work takes place, says police were already conducting semi-regular sweeps for johns before the new law came into effect. The new law has empowered them to go after johns in new ways, he says. Where before they used offences like "impeding traffic" to stop johns, they're now charging them with communicating for the purpose of procuring sex. He says johns, not sex workers, have always been the focus of his department. As for the new law: "There's some good things in there, some things we'd like to see different. But we work with the law we have. We can suspend operations, but my phone doesn't stop ringing from residents calling to complain about condoms on their driveway."
 

waynward

Active member
Oct 24, 2008
717
52
28
Smurf Village
This is really dissapointing.

I'm hoping this won't change things. As ultimately seems like LE is not enforcing it anyways. And my thought is that it won't change anything. Since it seems like the Feds had everything stacked against them with this law. Including non-compliance from LE, Joy Smith stepping down, Now magazine telling the Feds to fuck off. This is one loss of support against C-36.

Her response at this point almost seemed unneccesary / forgotton. I'm guessing she just did this to save public face since the heat off the issue seemed to died down.

https://nowtoronto.com/news/features/are-cops-turning-their-backs-on-feds-new-hooker-law/

Toronto According to Chief Bill Blair's spokesperson, Mark Pugash, the new law hasn't changed the way the force is dealing with prostitution. They continue to rely on complaints. Pugash says public safety is the force's "highest concern," but he seems to be talking more about residents' concerns than the safety of sex workers. "If the complaints we get require us to use tools we didn't have before, then we will do that."

Ottawa Acting Inspector Mike Laviolette of the Ottawa Police Service's Central District, where most of the city's sex work takes place, says police were already conducting semi-regular sweeps for johns before the new law came into effect. The new law has empowered them to go after johns in new ways, he says. Where before they used offences like "impeding traffic" to stop johns, they're now charging them with communicating for the purpose of procuring sex. He says johns, not sex workers, have always been the focus of his department. As for the new law: "There's some good things in there, some things we'd like to see different. But we work with the law we have. We can suspend operations, but my phone doesn't stop ringing from residents calling to complain about condoms on their driveway."
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
Attorney General Madeleine Meilleur said her senior staff concluded that the new law answers concerns that the Supreme Court had about the previous law, but she would not divulge their reasoning. "The legal opinion that was provided to me is privileged, so I'm not going to express every single detail that was in the legal opinion, but the importance to you is that it's constitutionally sound"
Methinks there is something rotten in the state of Denmark!
 

krazyplayer

Member
Jun 9, 2004
485
0
16
Ontario Governments have a history ... more so than any other Province to SUCK UP to the Federal Government.... This ONCE AGAIN is A classic example. P.S. It is the chief reason historically why other Provinces Government & the local people hate Ontario ..... they see Ontario as a Kiss Ass Province gutless to the Feds.
TF, Ontario was the ONLY province to offer opposition to C36 and even explore the constitutionality of this law.
Kathleen Wynne does not suck up to Harper or Mackay. I'm no fan of hers, but your claims are false.

Vote NDP in the next election everyone!
 

Moviefan-2

Court Jester
Oct 17, 2011
10,489
170
63
“The legal opinion that was provided to me is privileged, so I’m not going to express every single detail that was in the legal opinion, but the importance to you is that it’s constitutionally sound,” she said.
I take that to mean their polling data showed this is a losing fight for them.

Quite possibly, the people who support the law are more likely to see it as an issue that could determine how they vote, while it may not be a top issue for many of the people who oppose it.

It should be noted, of course, that Ontario has pretty much been in lockstep with the feds ever since the constitutionality of the previous law was first challenged.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,094
2,592
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
TF, Ontario was the ONLY province to offer opposition to C36 and even explore the constitutionality of this law.
Kathleen Wynne does not suck up to Harper or Mackay. I'm no fan of hers, but your claims are false.

Vote NDP in the next election everyone!

BC opposed Bill C 36
 

krazyplayer

Member
Jun 9, 2004
485
0
16
British Columbia has not opposed C36.

Some groups (PACE, PIVOT & sex worker groups) and the police of a city (vancouver) or 2 in BC are opposed to it but the province has done nothing to interfere with it.
 
Jan 24, 2012
2,332
0
0
TF, Ontario was the ONLY province to offer opposition to C36 and even explore the constitutionality of this law.
Kathleen Wynne does not suck up to Harper or Mackay. I'm no fan of hers, but your claims are false.

Vote NDP in the next election everyone!
Ontario Politicians talk out of both sides of their mouths but ultimately side with FEDS. Unlike B.C. , Quebec & others who have historically told Feds to SHOVE IT!!
 

d_jedi

New member
Sep 5, 2005
8,765
1
0
Attorney-General Madeleine Meilleur said her senior staff concluded that the new law answers concerns that the Supreme Court had about the previous law, but she would not divulge their reasoning.

“The legal opinion that was provided to me is privileged, so I’m not going to express every single detail that was in the legal opinion, but the importance to you is that it’s constitutionally sound,” she said.
Umm.. what?!
This is ridiculous. Why not release the opinion? What are they trying to hide?!

From a client's perspective, I see a few constitutional issues:
1) What constitutes a "sexual service" is not defined in the law, and too vague to be enforceable.
2) The government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation, and outlawing sexual acts between consenting adults cannot be justified in a free society.
3) It's fundamentally inconsistent to be legal to sell a certain thing, but illegal to buy it.

That said, I've been on the sidelines since the law came into effect, and for the time being I will remain so. I really wonder if this will cause some LE to take action, while before they may have been holding back, awaiting this opinion on the constitutionality of the law..
 

krazyplayer

Member
Jun 9, 2004
485
0
16
One other unfortunate thing is that the 20 million that came along with the bill is finally being dispensed.
Police forces will be getting (or just got) 10 million $ specifically to enforce this law.
Those who get the $ must then do enforcement.
 

d_jedi

New member
Sep 5, 2005
8,765
1
0
They might have found that since prostitution was made illegal for the first time in Canadian history, the sex workers now have no constitutional right for safety when they are involved in illegal activity
Providing a sexual service for consideration is legal (or maybe "not illegal" is the better term). Only buying it is..
 

SkyRider

Banned
Mar 31, 2009
17,572
2
0
Doubt LE will go after gays considering the power of the Gay Lobby. The only victims will be straight males who pay for consensual adult sex in private.
 

kippy

Active member
May 3, 2010
110
58
28
> Meilleur said there are approximately 26 cases being prosecuted in Ontario under the new law.

Well that's not good, does anyone have info on those cases?
 

anotherwebguy

Active member
Sep 23, 2004
204
40
28
Shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What now?????????????
"What now you ask?" The only thing left is for Bedford, Young, et al to try to grind their way through to the supreme court with another challenge. Only problem is another challenge will take many years, and aren't these are the same naive fools that kicked the sleeping dog, which got us into this mess in the first place?

Why is anyone surprised by this? don't forget, Ontario was one of the parties that opposed the previous court challenge, Wynne is just being consistent.

Look for plenty of election goodies heading to this province from the feds come election season.

the only hope is that perhaps LE will display common sense in this situation (as they seem to be doing) and focus their attention where real harm is occurring, and leave consenting adults to their own privacy.
 

stay

New member
May 21, 2013
906
2
0
judge's laughing
I really fail to see what is different between the old laws and the new one. You are still put squarely in the bullseye of the law. The only change is that the Grey zone that existed due to the court challenge has now become black and white. Escort services remains the same. Maybe SC and MP will be forced to have their employees dial back their menu/service but these establishment should never have gotten into the business of BJ/FS in the first place.
As for enforcement, it is usually complaint based although a complaint can come from anywhere and if there is merit, LE has to investigate. So a complaint can literally come out if left field.
As for SC/MP, the likely charges will be directed toward management/owner.
Since I have no experience in the escort world I can't even play out the scenario in my head.
 

d_jedi

New member
Sep 5, 2005
8,765
1
0
I really fail to see what is different between the old laws and the new one. You are still put squarely in the bullseye of the law. The only change is that the Grey zone that existed due to the court challenge has now become black and white. Escort services remains the same. Maybe SC and MP will be forced to have their employees dial back their menu/service but these establishment should never have gotten into the business of BJ/FS in the first place.
Not true. Under the old law, the only thing clients could be charged with was under the "found in" law (or communicating in public, if you're dumb enough to do that). And there were a whole bunch of reasons why those types of charges simply didn't happen.

Now, there is still a grey zone - particularly for licensed MPs - in the sense that where do you draw the line between a "sensual/erotic massage" or "body rub" (presumably legal, at least in a de facto sense, since the city licenses the MPs) and an illegal "sexual service for consideration" under C-36? As more time goes by, it seems like LE is taking a reasonable course under the new law, and targeting the truly exploitive "dark side" of this industry. But all it takes is one unreasonable cop (and, of course, there are absolutely none of those, right?!) to make your life a living hell.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts