Opposing Bill C-36: Things You Can Do

[DigitallyYours]

This information is spread out over several threads. I wanted it in one place. Please add to it.

FOR EVERYONE

1. Attend National Day of Action
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...action-Criminalization-costs-sex-worker-lives

TORONTO - Saturday, June 14th at 2 PM.
At the North-West corner of Sherbourne and Gerrard for a public demonstration followed by a picnic.

2. Donate to a Sex Worker advocacy group, such as (but not limited to):

Maggie`s
http://maggiestoronto.ca/

POWER (Prostitutes of Ottawa/Gatineau Work, Educate and Resist)
http://www.powerottawa.ca/

SPOC (Sex Professionals of Canada)
http://www.spoc.ca/

MEMBERS OF THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE
http://www.parl.gc.ca/committeebusi...spx?Cmte=JUST&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2

3. Write and send articles to your MP
Find Your Member of Parliament

Tell your MP how you feel.
How to lobby without outing yourself

If you`re not sure what to say, you can also read this thread:
Recent articles on prostitution, related laws, opinions and comments
then send an article that summarizes your concerns to your MP.

FOR SEX WORKERS

After watching the debates this week, it is obvious that the discussion is entirely about sex worker safety. I am willing to bet that most Members of Parliament only know what is spoonfed to them and most have probably never met or spoken to an actual sex worker. I am very saddened that some women are trafficked and coerced into the industry, but I know that does not represent every sex worker.

So, regardless of what area of the industry you are in, whether you are an SP, MPA or work in a strip club, please tell your stories and voice your concerns. You could do this to:

1. Your MP, who will vote on the bill.
Find Your Member of Parliament


2.MEMBERS OF THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE
http://www.parl.gc.ca/committeebusi...spx?Cmte=JUST&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2

3. A journalist or blogger.
Read Recent articles on prostitution, related laws, opinions and comments and contact someone whose writing you support.

4. A sex worker advocacy group.
(see above)

TWITTER

Follow the discussion of Bill C-36 on Twitter, using the hashtag: #C36
Twitter #C36

USEFUL LINKS

Text of Bill C-36
Status of Bill C-36
House of Commons Debate on Bill C-36
Government Backgrounder on Bill C-36

 

[legmann]

Great post.

 

[Ace88]

You forgot "vote Conservatives out next year".

 

[CUPID]

I would suggest that Sex-Workers, agencies and spas also get in contact with the places that they advertise and ask what they are doing about C-36. If we also get businesses involved; like Now, Backpage, Eros, P411 and others, they can speak up and help challenge this bill.
I have contacted a number of places that I advertise, most have ignored me. I am currently trying to speak with Gina of P411 who is offering support and suggestions as much as she can. I am disappointed that others haven't responded; this effects their venues and business. I would suggest that all of us contact these places and add pressure for them to help fight C-36, the more people and businesses we have, the more we will be heard.

 

[AlannaJohnson]

PLS. Write to Your MPs and to Members of the Justice Committee!

My sweets, the Conservatives are throwing quite the curve-ball at us with their proposed Bill C36. As you may already know, if adopted in its current form, this bill will criminalize the purchase of sexual services (that's so broadly defined that one has to wonder if massage parlours and strip clubs will also be included!); it will also criminalize escort agencies, and the advertising of sexual services by a third party (such as an agency advertising on behalf of those they represent.) We all hope that the Conservatives will know better than to push through this legislation in its current form, though they do seem pretty set on pushing it through way before the December deadline set out by the Supreme Court for them to come up with a legislative response to the Bedford decision (a legislative response which btw is optional, but of course, they don't see it that way.) Time is of the essence my sweets! The second reading of Bill C36 is continuing in the House of Commons THIS MONDAY, JUN 16TH. You still have time to write to your MP expressing your disapproval of this bill. I'm sure they all get emails on their phones. If the Conservatives only knew how revolted people were about this idiotic bill, and how many votes they will lose as a result, they would think twice about trying to push their moralistic agenda on all of us. Re: writing to your MP. I should let you know that it was a local companion who emailed a very concerned and well-articulated letter to all MPs. Lo' and behold, the Liberal Justice Critic, the MP for Charlottetown, read her letter out-loud almost word-for-word during the debate. We Still Can influence this debate. Let's do it my sweets! Our civil liberties depend on it!

Beyond addressing our own MPs or even mass-emailing all, or a number of them, I do believe we should especially make our views known to members of the Justice Committee (see the original post above.) That doesn't have to happen by Monday, but the sooner the better. Thank you btw to DigitallyYours above for the excellent post!!

I have posted a number of updates and relevant articles on my Twitter feed @AlannaJohnsonSP and will continue to do so. If you're not sure quite what to write to your MPs, feel free to just send them the links to any of the articles or blog posts opposing this bill (again, I've posted a bunch of them on my Twitter feed), and to copy & paste some of the people's disapproving comments found in the Comments sections of said articles. That should tell the Conservatives where the people are at. It may also be good to remind them that the recent results of the Ontario election are no accident

I urge you all to send emails to your MPs and emails/letters to members of the Justice Committee. They need to know just how displeased we all are with this bill.

Thank you all in advance! And thanks to everyone who's already written letters and tried to mobilize others!

~~~Much love to you all, along with peace, justice, and prosperity! ~~~

 

[DigitallyYours]

A few more thoughts:

1. Please feel free to plagiarize this thread and spread the word to other boards/forums you visit.

2. SPs, encourage people to write to their MPs and the Justice Committee in your advertisements. Agencies and SPs, please consider adding a Bill C-36 awareness area to your websites encouraging people to oppose the bill.

3. MPAs and exotic dancers, you may be asking yourself why/what you should write to your MP or the Justice Committee. Here's the gist of what you could say: "Dear Member of Parliament: I am a licensed, law-abiding, and tax paying exotic dancer/body rub attendant who works in a licensed and legal establishment. I am not, in any way, trafficked, pimped or coerced to do this work. I am concerned that the vague way 'sexual services' is defined in Bill C-36 will negatively impact my work. Neither my boss nor my customers are criminals nor do they deserve to be considered as such. Please re-word your bill so that we are not caught in your proposed law."

 

[DigitallyYours]

Someone with graphic design skills should design a stop bill c-36 banner that people can use on their websites.

Could link it to the petition.
http://www.change.org/en-CA/petitio...es-to-decriminalization-of-sex-work-in-canada

 

[celerystick]

FYI - below is my email to the Chair (David MacKenzie) and the official opposition critic and member (Francoise Boivin) of the Justice Committee reviewing Bill C-36.
Francoise.Boivin@parl.gc.ca ;
Dave.Mackenzie@parl.gc.ca

I've also sent a copy to my local MP.

Dear Ms Boivin and Mr MacKenzie;

I would like to register my strong opposition to criminalizing the purchase of sexual favours provided voluntarily from the many escort / service providers with whom I have become friendly. The act criminalizes paying for PLAYFUL sexual activities between consenting adults. I believe the committee should interview a broad selection of professional escorts, most have made a well paid life-style choice, and enjoy the intimacy with multiple gentleman partners. Why is this victimless behaviour being criminalized when carried out in private ? There is no place for government in the bedrooms of adult Canadians, when the activities are mutually acceptable.

Please refocus the committees concerns toward non adults / children, and those being victimized by violent pimps, or those sexually coerced. However, in my personal experience, they are an small minority and the majority of consenting adults who wish to trade money for sexual fun should NOT be victimized ourselves.

Thank you for considering my views.

I included my real name / address

Common guys, lets get involved before you lose more of your personal freedoms to the religious right i.e. Conservatives !!!!

 

[legmann]

^ Have done, and will be doing more this week.

 

[bugsbunny]

With all due respect, I believe that the members of the Justice committee that is posted above is wrong.

You may want to redirect emails to the current members.




Current Membership List


Chair
Mike Wallace

Vice-Chairs
Françoise Boivin
Sean Casey

Members
Patrick Brown
Bob Dechert
Robert Goguen
************ Jacob
Ève Péclet
Kyle Seeback
David Wilks

Clerk of the Committee
Jean-François Pagé


http://www.parl.gc.ca/committeebusi...spx?Cmte=JUST&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2

 

[DigitallyYours]

With all due respect, I believe that the members of the Justice committee that is posted above is wrong.

You may want to redirect emails to the current members.




Current Membership List


Chair
Mike Wallace

Vice-Chairs
Françoise Boivin
Sean Casey

Members
Patrick Brown
Bob Dechert
Robert Goguen
P i e rre Jacob
Ève Péclet
Kyle Seeback
David Wilks

Clerk of the Committee
Jean-François Pagé


http://www.parl.gc.ca/committeebusi...spx?Cmte=JUST&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2

Thanks for this. I tried to find the Committee membership on the Parliament website and couldn't find it. So I stupidly went to wikipedia. I can't edit the OP anymore, so I can only hope that people scroll down to read this. Thanks again!

 

[bugsbunny]

No problem. Glad to assist.

FWIW, Sean Casey (Liberal) is already onside with the issues. He made a great speech in the house the other day and it almost sounded like he was (is??) one of us.

Pressure on Wallace will be pretty well ignored by him as he ALWAYS goes with the party line (But it can't hurt to try)

 

[Sniper Jr.]

You forgot "vote Conservatives out next year".

Anyone who lives in Scarborough-Agincourt or Trinity-Spadina can at least help keep the Conservatives from making gains in the byelections next week. The Conservative candidate finished second in Scarborough-Agincourt last election, and low voter turnout and a resigning Liberal incumbent may help them this time. It's fair to say they have no chance in Trinity-Spadina, but a vote for Adam Vaughn who is running for the Liberals might help the cause, as he would likely be a staunch opponent of Bill C36 (if his past comments on Toronto strip club bylaws are any indication).

Of course there'll be the general election next year, but the final vote on C36 will come up in the meantime.

 

[new paradigm]

I stumbled onto an excellent book yesterday at Chapters: "Selling Sex: Advocacy and Research on Sex Work in Canada" (2013), published by UBC Press. Of particular interest and relevance to the current discussion is Chapter 15, "Crown Expert-Witness Testimony in Bedford v. Canada, Evidence-Based Argument or Victim Paradigm Hyperbole?", by John Lowman, Professor in the School of Criminology at Simon Fraser University. Prof Lowman clearly exposes the serious flaws the "expert's" survey design, data interpretation and arguments, which ultimately led to their erroneous conclusions. Unfortunately, the Government has accepted these erroneous claims as fact - and keeps repeating them.

I contacted Prof Lowman and told him about the discussion on TERB. He emailed me a pdf copy of his paper and said that if anyone else is interested in a copy they should email him. He asked that the paper not be posted on TERB (it's very detailed and quite long). If you PM me with an email address, I'll send you a copy. He is preparing a brief for the Justice Committee which he hopes to present at the review. http://users.uniserve.com/~lowman/ jlowman@shaw.ca

These three claims, reproduced below are critical to the government's rationale for adopting and promoting the Nordic model. I urge you to read Prof Lowman's paper and then ask how and why the government has been able to get away with this campaign of misinformation and manipulation? Answer: spineless and secretive politicians who won't risk votes or party standing for the truth and incompetent, ideology-driven academics who will sell their minds to anyone who supports their agenda - in this case the prohibitionist Harper government.

All this suggests another avenue of attack. Challenge and expose the shaky science and then paint the government as either unethical (they don't actually believe what they're saying) or purely driven by a moral agenda (facts don't matter). As long as the Government is permitted to repeat their ridiculous claims, they can and will shamelessly argue that they are simply protecting the exploited and vulnerable. And who could possibly be against that? This is may be one time when you don't want MacKay to stop talking.

I've written letters to the Justice Committee (skipping a few key Harper yes men) asking them to carefully consider the Government's justification for Bill C-36. I've written key liberal and NDP members and asked that they advocate strongly for Prof Lowman's appearance before the committee. I suspect the the Cons will do everything in their power to prevent him from speaking. I intend to write letters to the Senate as well. With governments like this, we may just need the Senate. www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/08/22/why_canada_needs_the_senate.html

It's a long shot, but I think the Cons and Peter MacKay are vulnerable on this point. It will take a concerted attack by the opposition and a Senate that looks at the evidence with some measure of reason and objectivity.

***********************************************************

Key Claims by Crown expert-witnesses in Bedford v. Canada:
1) The average age of entry into prostitution in Canada is 14 years (i.e. not yet adults)
2) The "vast majority" of Canadian prostitutes were sexually abused as children
3) Prostitution is inherently "violent" because of the psychological and physical harm it inflicts on "prostituted women" and the "power imbalance" it involves

The government keeps repeating these claims (and variations) as though they were established fact when they are in fact, nothing more than poorly supported opinions. e.g. MacKay's comments during Second Reading:
"I would suggest that throughout the bill we find ample evidence of the intent and the purpose of the bill to protect that group of individuals, to protect those who, in the vast majority of cases, find themselves involved with prostitution because of coercion, because of violence, because of experience early in life, in many cases when they were children. The empirical evidence and anecdotal evidence we have looked at indicates quite clearly that the vast majority of prostitutes today, men and women, were exploited, were victimized, often through violence and addiction, and brought into the life of prostitution, arguably through no fault of their own, at a vulnerable early age, at an early stage in their lives when those who were victimizing them should have been counted on to protect them."

 

[DigitallyYours]

I contacted Prof Lowman and told him about the discussion on TERB. He emailed me a pdf copy of his paper and said that if anyone else is interested in a copy they should email him. He asked that the paper not be posted on TERB (it's very detailed and quite long). If you PM me with an email address, I'll send you a copy. He is preparing a brief for the Justice Committee which he hopes to present at the review. http://users.uniserve.com/~lowman/ jlowman@shaw.ca

I've written letters to the Justice Committee (skipping a few key Harper yes men) asking them to carefully consider the Government's justification for Bill C-36. I've written key liberal and NDP members and asked that they advocate strongly for Prof Lowman's appearance before the committee. I suspect the the Cons will do everything in their power to prevent him from speaking. I intend to write letters to the Senate as well. With governments like this, we may just need the Senate. www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/08/22/why_canada_needs_the_senate.html

That's amazing. Thanks for your hard work. I've read on twitter that some academics (including masters students) are preparing briefs for the Committee, so I can only hope that the people who actually know something about this topic will be able to testify.

 

[krazyplayer]

Sniper, it is Justin Trudeau who on the day the laws were struck down by the supreme court said that prostitution was a form of violence against women. Justin has indicated support for the nordic model.
The only reason he is tap dancing now is because the conservatives agreed with him. They (cons) also went a step further by continuing to criminalize sex workers in bill c36.
The NDP supports sex workers' rights and is against criminalizing clients - and that was before c36. Vote NDP.

 

[lovelatinas]

Sniper, it is Justin Trudeau who on the day the laws were struck down by the supreme court said that prostitution was a form of violence against women. Justin has indicated support for the nordic model.
The only reason he is tap dancing now is because the conservatives agreed with him. They (cons) also went a step further by continuing to criminalize sex workers in bill c36.
The NDP supports sex workers' rights and is against criminalizing clients - and that was before c36. Vote NDP.

Yes but will the NDP win enough seats to oust Adolf Harper?

 

[italianguy74]

Its a shame the ppl forgot who is incharge of this country...the old days we would say jump and parliament would ask how high. They should be sweating bullets and shitting their pants when they sneak a bill in. But sometimes parliament forgets who is in charge and their confidence grows and they do it anyways. That is until ppl start to notice and say wtf do you think your doing?

 

[trtinajax]

It may not take Bill C-36 years to get to the SCC - Could someone follow this process?

Toronto lawyer Rocco Galati is suing Gov. Gen. David Johnston, Immigration Minister Chris Alexander and Justice Minister Peter MacKay over changes to Canada's Citizenship Act.

In documents filed Wednesday morning in Federal Court, Galati asks the court to invalidate key provisions included in a new law that gives the government the power to revoke the citizenship of Canadian-born citizens convicted of "terrorism, high treason, or spying offences" or "who take up arms against Canada" if they hold dual citizenship.

The provisions passed into law last Thursday when Bill C-24, the government's Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, received royal assent.

​Galati has already successfully challenged Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s appointment of Marc Nadon to the Supreme Court of Canada.

In the court documents filed Wednesday, Galati argues it was beyond the Governor General's "constitutional authority" to pass Bill C-24.

The bill itself, Galati argues, goes well beyond Parliament's own reach.

The Toronto lawyer had asked parliamentarians and the Governor General to refer key provisions of Bill C-24 to the Supreme Court for a legal opinion.

In a phone interview with CBC News on Wednesday, Galati said he received a reply from the Governor General's office on June 16 simply acknowledging the content of his original letter.

Nevertheless, Bill C-24 passed into law three days later.

"It is unconstitutional," Galati said.

Marie-Êve Létourneau, a spokeswoman for the Governor General, said they could not comment as the matter is now before the courts.

The office for MacKay, who also serves as the attorney general, referred all comment to the minister of immigration.

A spokeswoman for Alexander would not comment directly on the lawsuit, saying only that "Canadians gave us a strong mandate to protect and strengthen the value of Canadian citizenship."

Galati filed the legal challenge on behalf of a group of lawyers including Manuel Azevedo and the Constitutional Rights Centre.

 

[DigitallyYours]

It may not take Bill C-36 years to get to the SCC - Could someone follow this process?

This legal challenge will still take years to reach the Supreme Court. It needs to argued in federal court. Then federal court of appeal and only after that to the Supreme Court.

A challenge to c-36 could be launched immediately after royal assent but it would need to pass through superior court, court of appeal before the Supreme Court.