Toronto Police budget freeze 2015,will Feds provide additional funds to police c-36 ?
- Thread starter Avatar
- Start date
reverdy posted this on merb and I thought it was worth quoting here. My research supports what he`s saying.
``The actual enforcement of the new laws is actually a matter that will be handled by local LE and the provinces, particularly the various Attorney Generals and their staff, who will guide LE. Not the federal government.
The Harper Government is at odds with some provinces (most notably Ontario) - and has hardly maintained a constructive dialogue with most of them. They`re not really in a position to dictate to them how the new law will be enforced. So I don`t see them picking fights with some provinces over this when they have more important things to worry about; for instance, getting ready for the upcoming elections and play up their economic record.
The new law was primarily written in a manner to please the Conservatives` political base - not to gain new votes. Over the past few years, the Cons have made concessions - despite the objections of their base - over the issues of gay marriage and abortion, for instance. They probably felt they couldn`t do this again, especially over an issue that is not on the immediate radar of most Canadians.
As for local authorities, already the City of Victoria and its LE have indicated that they won`t enforce large chunks of C-36, and the same with Vancouver.
Some weeks ago, the inspector in charge of the prostitution unit at the SPVM indicated on Radio-Canada that, C-36 or no C-36, their priorities were going to remain: underage sex workers, actual trafficking, and coerced prostitution. As for the rest, it would be up to the Directeur des poursuites crimi et pénales (DPCP), an independent appointment, to decide how to proceed. Given the DPCP helped SPVM design its new 3-year policy on prostitution even though they knew C-36 was in the pipeline, I believe this gives strong clues as to how it will be enforced in Quebec, and in Montreal specifically.
On the other hand, there are other places like Calgary and York Region, where it`s likely to be enforced fairly stringently - given the stance their chiefs of police took in front of the HoC Justice Committee this summer, and that they were directly consulted during the drafting of the Bill.
MacKay and his staff were very selective about whom they consulted while they were drafting the Bill, and whose opinion they listened to. For example, SPVM submitted a brief to the Department, and from what the inspector said on Radio-Canada, their take on the issue wasn`t taken into account. Other police forces and chiefs have publicly expressed doubts about parts of the Bill; for example, Chief Weighill from Saskatoon.
They haven`t really discussed any of this with the provinces, and haven`t given them additional resources to tackle this task. This is all quite different than what happened when the - now - old provision on communication (s213) was implemented with Bill C-49 back in the 1980s. Everybody was on board back to fully enforce it, and it ended up being a big mess instead, which made things worse - and eventually led to more relaxed enforcement of the prostitution laws.
I believe we`re more likely to see a patchwork of enforcement scenarios across the country - some places being more lenient than others - which will be dictated more by local contexts rather than what the Cons in Ottawa might want.``
http://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread...C-36-affect-your-hobbying&p=822913#post822913
``The actual enforcement of the new laws is actually a matter that will be handled by local LE and the provinces, particularly the various Attorney Generals and their staff, who will guide LE. Not the federal government.
The Harper Government is at odds with some provinces (most notably Ontario) - and has hardly maintained a constructive dialogue with most of them. They`re not really in a position to dictate to them how the new law will be enforced. So I don`t see them picking fights with some provinces over this when they have more important things to worry about; for instance, getting ready for the upcoming elections and play up their economic record.
The new law was primarily written in a manner to please the Conservatives` political base - not to gain new votes. Over the past few years, the Cons have made concessions - despite the objections of their base - over the issues of gay marriage and abortion, for instance. They probably felt they couldn`t do this again, especially over an issue that is not on the immediate radar of most Canadians.
As for local authorities, already the City of Victoria and its LE have indicated that they won`t enforce large chunks of C-36, and the same with Vancouver.
Some weeks ago, the inspector in charge of the prostitution unit at the SPVM indicated on Radio-Canada that, C-36 or no C-36, their priorities were going to remain: underage sex workers, actual trafficking, and coerced prostitution. As for the rest, it would be up to the Directeur des poursuites crimi et pénales (DPCP), an independent appointment, to decide how to proceed. Given the DPCP helped SPVM design its new 3-year policy on prostitution even though they knew C-36 was in the pipeline, I believe this gives strong clues as to how it will be enforced in Quebec, and in Montreal specifically.
On the other hand, there are other places like Calgary and York Region, where it`s likely to be enforced fairly stringently - given the stance their chiefs of police took in front of the HoC Justice Committee this summer, and that they were directly consulted during the drafting of the Bill.
MacKay and his staff were very selective about whom they consulted while they were drafting the Bill, and whose opinion they listened to. For example, SPVM submitted a brief to the Department, and from what the inspector said on Radio-Canada, their take on the issue wasn`t taken into account. Other police forces and chiefs have publicly expressed doubts about parts of the Bill; for example, Chief Weighill from Saskatoon.
They haven`t really discussed any of this with the provinces, and haven`t given them additional resources to tackle this task. This is all quite different than what happened when the - now - old provision on communication (s213) was implemented with Bill C-49 back in the 1980s. Everybody was on board back to fully enforce it, and it ended up being a big mess instead, which made things worse - and eventually led to more relaxed enforcement of the prostitution laws.
I believe we`re more likely to see a patchwork of enforcement scenarios across the country - some places being more lenient than others - which will be dictated more by local contexts rather than what the Cons in Ottawa might want.``
http://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread...C-36-affect-your-hobbying&p=822913#post822913
In canada? Of course! But what Manitoba does has zero to do with Toronto. Let's not confuse people further!
I doubt it would for outcall. Even in the U.S. what arrest have you heard of where police came to someone's hotel room or residence? U.S. arrests seem to always be clients of streetwalkers or guys who answer ads for incalls.
It would be both expensive and run physical risks (for them) for police to attempt to set up outcall stings.
Remember that the cops can generate more income for stuff like speed violations. So expect those enforcement to increase. It is rare to know of any drivers these days who have not been ticketed for not only speed violations, but even running traffic lights. You may think that this is not a lot of revenue, but I am informed that it is a real good source of income that is generated.
Police in the US have indeed set up outcall stings. They operate by getting a new outcall SP listed who is well reviewed by trusted clients. Of course the trusted clients are cooperating to get their own charges reduced, perhaps from an incall bust, and the trusted SP is an undercover.
In Canada there is the added wrinkle that the SP can be subpoenad and forced to testify as she faces no prosecution herself. Some SP's will refuse to cooperate but you never know which one will admit something either cooperatively or in response to a police interrogation tactic.
You mean did I read part where York Region intends to persecute the new law vigorously?
Clearly some jurisdictions, like York, will enforce it a lot more then others, like Victoria. I expect Toronto to alternate between vigorous and lax enforcement depending on whether we have a Blair or a Fantino style police chief.
Ford Nation types do sometimes get their moral majority social conservative guys into office there in Toronto.
Clearly some jurisdictions, like York, will enforce it a lot more then others, like Victoria. I expect Toronto to alternate between vigorous and lax enforcement depending on whether we have a Blair or a Fantino style police chief.
Ford Nation types do sometimes get their moral majority social conservative guys into office there in Toronto.
Personally I've never even read about one let alone heard about it on the legal grapevine. I'm not saying that it has never happened, but I suspect that its as rare as snow in August.
Yes ! But isn't that the asian area ?? Just wondering, if there might not be a problem there !!
What are you talking about? Manitoba? The RCMP already works with the OPP and TPS all the time on things like major drug busts, counterfeit merchandise and currency, uncovering weapon caches, financial fraud, and human trafficking. I'm sure the RCMP and the OPP can spare some officers to help any police force in Ontario that says they want to make a big splashy prostitution bust.
This is really not the same as giving a few schmoes a 500$ fine for buying sex from a consenting adult. Asking the RCMP to address simple clients is like asking them to address petty shoplifters. If you happen to hire an underage or trafficked girl, even unknowingly, that could be a serious matter, but otherwise local LE doesn't care, even less so the RCMP.
Who said anything about "a few schmoes"? I'm sure they can devise ways to arrest dozens if not hundreds of guys without much effort. Multiply that number by however often they feel like doing sweeps. I guess some people are going to find out just how much the police are interested in enforcing these laws in relatively short order, and many will wind up with a criminal record in the process.
Even if they arrest 500 of us, we are still 500 useless schmoes. If the RCMP reassigned all their effectives on arresting shoplifters, jaywalkers and massage parlors clients, they could arrest thousands of them. But they're not going to do that. This law is already so contentious, even before being in effect, they are not going to waste resources applying it to arrest people that half the taxpayers doesn't even perceive as criminal. I'm not saying it won't happen at all, but it will only happen to a limited extent in limited parts of Canada. In fact, I'm saying it won't happen more than before, so those who were careful but not worried before should remain the same.
If you see the post I quoted, the poster said it was not unreasonable to see a showcase bust somewhere in Canada. My point was that of course somewhere in Canada there will be something. Obviously. But just because one city or province does something doesn't mean anything for other cities. Each city will handle things how they choose. Manitoba being an example of a police force who's all for c36. That has nothing to do with us here.
hobbyists in Manitoba can just fly over to Vancouver where the cops don't give a shit.
We won't really know for a year which police departments will enforce the law vigorously in some misguided moral crusade, and which will stick to hunting down real abusers.
Once the law comes into force there will be a lag before police chiefs and boards make budget decisions and policy decisions that will determine how many officers are assigned.
Some may start right away but I would expect most to take some time deciding what to do.
Once the law comes into force there will be a lag before police chiefs and boards make budget decisions and policy decisions that will determine how many officers are assigned.
Some may start right away but I would expect most to take some time deciding what to do.
While I know York Region has been historically very anal about sex work, I did read the transcript of the testimony of a Vice detective to the house committee. It does seem somewhat promising to see that you can tell the focus will be for underage and traffiked girls and not for consensual sex work. He says:
The gist of everything he said seemed to be a focus around arresting those that support exploitation (i.e. pimps and consumers of exploited women). The most interesting thing I thought was that during questioning, he said that C-36 will be make his job much more difficult than before as pimps will just say he is a "bodyguard" to evade the police. He admits he would be powerless to intervene without some kind of hard evidence to the contrary.
From: http://openparliament.ca/committees/justice/41-2/38/detective-thai-truong-1/only/
The gist of everything he said seemed to be a focus around arresting those that support exploitation (i.e. pimps and consumers of exploited women). The most interesting thing I thought was that during questioning, he said that C-36 will be make his job much more difficult than before as pimps will just say he is a "bodyguard" to evade the police. He admits he would be powerless to intervene without some kind of hard evidence to the contrary.
no heat there everything legal